cmcaulif
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 405
Yea, thats why I thought it was weird he said that. Or maybe I just heard wrong
Richard Gage to debate CD on Toronto radio show
- Thread starter LashL
- Start date
Yea, thats why I thought it was weird he said that. Or maybe I just heard wrong
Mr.Herbert
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2007
- Messages
- 1,449
Did you say Jim Hoffman boned Jenny Craig? 
Last edited:
Arus808
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,204
I now listening to the debate...
... and Jim Hoffman just owned Ron Craig.
in what world? Craig whipped Gage and hOffman and he's one man against two woo's. All it took is one man to prove both of them wrong about their claims.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
"Just schooled"? What are you 15?I am now listening to the debate...
... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.
Someone who believes the towers were brought down via controlled demolition just said that Hoffman owned Craig...yup, now I'm convinced.
the weakness of the ignore function is it does not prevent you from seeing their comments when they are quoted.
TAM
the weakness of the ignore function is it does not prevent you from seeing their comments when they are quoted.
TAM
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
OK Bofors. Tell us how to rig up a 110 story skyscraper with bombs so that flying a plane into the set-up wouldn't screw up the whole thing.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
bofors
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2007
- Messages
- 579
I just heard this...
Ha... that's it, John? Eh?
Dude, you're a genius.
Ya, the buildings made absolutely no noise coming down at all.
Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough.
Congratulations, you win the "Bofors-Debunking/Denial" prise de jour:
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
Oh look, another strawman
No bofors, I said the collapses didn't make the noise of a demolition.
You know...this kinda thing:
That moron Gage then claimed thermite wouldn't make explosions...but then went on to claim that the FDNY heard "explosions!"
Can you make sense of that, Bofors?
Last edited:
boloboffin
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 4,986
Also as in this clip:
This is a CD that Richard Gage uses to demonstrate what a controlled demolition looks and sounds like. The explosions in this clip have been taken out of the clip Gage uses.
ETA: He then uses Hoffman to explain how explosions meld together into a rushing sound. But the only rushing sound apparent on his clip is the simple sound of the building collapse, the only sound actually present in the 3 WTC buildings that collapsed on 9/11.
This is a CD that Richard Gage uses to demonstrate what a controlled demolition looks and sounds like. The explosions in this clip have been taken out of the clip Gage uses.
ETA: He then uses Hoffman to explain how explosions meld together into a rushing sound. But the only rushing sound apparent on his clip is the simple sound of the building collapse, the only sound actually present in the 3 WTC buildings that collapsed on 9/11.
Last edited:
I am now listening to the debate...
... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.
If you are really an engineer, why are you so scientifically illiterate? Hoffman's faulty calculations were exposed by Dr. Greening long ago.
Even the first rebuttle smashes Gage. Gage sounds like a bumbling idiot trying to recite the same crap for about 3-4 minutes and Craig responds with a 10 seconds tirade that gets straight to the point.
Ron, get this walking record on a debate with Mark or even Ryan M! (that would rule)
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha he is dropping pearlers! The kinetic energy of the impact is not important???
Ron, get this walking record on a debate with Mark or even Ryan M! (that would rule)
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha he is dropping pearlers! The kinetic energy of the impact is not important???
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 8,746
OK, I listened to it on my way home tonight. Let me start by echoing a sentiment expressed earlier in this thread. Gage is an idiot.
Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials.
The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally.
Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials.
The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally.
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 8,746
Gage makes a number of mistakes that clearly illustrate his lack of knowledge of his own profession.
1) Gage refers to the Parke Plaza building in Caracas as a steel framed building that survived a catastrophic fire. Wrong. It was a combined structure. It had a concrete “macro frame” every five floors with the intermediate infill floors steel framed (one of which did indeed suffer a partial collapse).
2) Gage implied that the massive size of the core columns at the base of the structure meant that the core of the building was so strong that even if the floors of the towers collapsed, the core would have remained standing 1000 feet high. In this he ignores a number of crucial facts. A) The airplane impacts damaged the core columns as well as the exterior columns. B) The core columns became progressively lighter and smaller the farther up the building you went. C) Photographic evidence indicates that, in fact, both cores did indeed survive for a few seconds longer than the rest of the structure. And most importantly, D) the lack of any diagonal bracing in the core structure (other than a few well defined locations) meant that the entire core was incapable of existing as a stand alone structure. This is a key fundamental principle of structural engineering that should be understood by architects.
3) I am not an architect, nor am I a professional engineer (although I have studied graduate level environmental engineering). I have spent many, many years in construction and buildings, especially in high rise buildings.
Gage is ignorant of the basic operational practices of construction in the private and public sectors. His insistence that to compromise building security is the only thing that would be required to access the core area for the surreptitious placement of demolition charges indicates to me that he has never ever done any design work more complicated than remodeling Auntie Annie’s Pretzels at the local mall. I mean seriously, what’s up with that? Even if you have never been involved with building construction/ remodeling it doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate the layers of bureaucracy and management that even the most minor construction project is saddled with.
Does he seriously think that the security department could dream up a bogus construction project impacting a major life safety system like the elevators without any practical oversight? This is so fundamental to the construction process that it totally boggles the mind that he would seriously present this as an argument.
1) Gage refers to the Parke Plaza building in Caracas as a steel framed building that survived a catastrophic fire. Wrong. It was a combined structure. It had a concrete “macro frame” every five floors with the intermediate infill floors steel framed (one of which did indeed suffer a partial collapse).
2) Gage implied that the massive size of the core columns at the base of the structure meant that the core of the building was so strong that even if the floors of the towers collapsed, the core would have remained standing 1000 feet high. In this he ignores a number of crucial facts. A) The airplane impacts damaged the core columns as well as the exterior columns. B) The core columns became progressively lighter and smaller the farther up the building you went. C) Photographic evidence indicates that, in fact, both cores did indeed survive for a few seconds longer than the rest of the structure. And most importantly, D) the lack of any diagonal bracing in the core structure (other than a few well defined locations) meant that the entire core was incapable of existing as a stand alone structure. This is a key fundamental principle of structural engineering that should be understood by architects.
3) I am not an architect, nor am I a professional engineer (although I have studied graduate level environmental engineering). I have spent many, many years in construction and buildings, especially in high rise buildings.
Gage is ignorant of the basic operational practices of construction in the private and public sectors. His insistence that to compromise building security is the only thing that would be required to access the core area for the surreptitious placement of demolition charges indicates to me that he has never ever done any design work more complicated than remodeling Auntie Annie’s Pretzels at the local mall. I mean seriously, what’s up with that? Even if you have never been involved with building construction/ remodeling it doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate the layers of bureaucracy and management that even the most minor construction project is saddled with.
Does he seriously think that the security department could dream up a bogus construction project impacting a major life safety system like the elevators without any practical oversight? This is so fundamental to the construction process that it totally boggles the mind that he would seriously present this as an argument.
Last edited:
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2007
- Messages
- 8,746
one more point:
Gage’s insistence that the so called chemical signatures of thermite as supposedly detected by Jones has any validity is just plain annoying and insulting. What, does he think we are as stupid as he is?
Gage’s insistence that the so called chemical signatures of thermite as supposedly detected by Jones has any validity is just plain annoying and insulting. What, does he think we are as stupid as he is?