AE911Truth and the actual # of engineers in America...

The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they support the 'official story', then they are assumed to NOT support it. Even if the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support, unless every member writes a personal letter to HI declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do not.

This is utter garbage and nothing more than a childish debate technique.
 
Argumentum ad numeram isn't a guarantee, of course, but remember it was AE911Truth that started it.

And they can't finish. There are more degreed and practicing engineering or science professionals posting at the JREF Forum as "debunkers," than there are in AE911Truth, even if we don't clean their roster for fake names, those who signed on years ago and never did another single thing, or those who basically agree with us but want more accountability (like Arthur Scheuerman).

And JREF Forum posters have personally published more reviewed journal papers on the subject than the entire Truth Movement. (Benson of BLGB is an infrequent poster).

I believe kids these days refer to this as "Epic Fail."
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
I asked for independent endorsement of the official version. Not the official version trying to confirm the official version.
Click to expand...

Why should I answer your questions when you won't answer mine? Time and time again, you've asked for one name out of ten million architects and engineers who has come out against the "official story". I dare say Shyam Sunder thinks truthers are full of it. So does David Simon. Ask the rest of the project leaders on the NIST report, they'll agree. Now you're just wrapping yourself up in denial and moving goalposts because it's the only thing holding your fantasy conspiracy together.

And of course, you didn't answer my question. I knew you wouldn't before I even asked it.
I'm applying for the million. Thanks, HI!
For my next prediction, I predict some standoffish non-sequitor that allows you to continue living in your state of denial, followed by me putting you on ignore.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what 'independent endorsement of the official version' even means to HI.
 
twinstead said:
This is utter garbage and nothing more than a childish debate technique.
Click to expand...

its not even debating. its just useless typing in order to pass the time. nothing is being accomplished. none of this will bring a 15th investigation, a revolution, or any of the "perps" to justice. its just shootin the xxxx.
 
twinstead said:
The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they support the 'official story', then they are assumed to NOT support it. Even if the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support, unless every member writes a personal letter to HI declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do not.
Click to expand...

Very good. I can say the same thing. I think I will.

The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they DON'T support the 'official story', then they are assumed to support it. If the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support then every one of them must also be in support, even if they don't write a personal endorsement to anyone in seven years declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
The same kind of independent endorsement against the official version pointed out in the op.
Click to expand...

I'm not as concerned with numbers as I am with quality of facts, and so far AE911 has done a good job at getting just about everything wrong.

It's a pity you aren't reading up on your architecture and engineering references...
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
Very good. I can say the same thing. I think I will.

The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they DON'T support the 'official story', then they are assumed to support it. If the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support then every one of them must also be in support, even if they don't write a personal endorsement to anyone in seven years declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do.
Click to expand...

The point is that Richard Gage has been actively trying to get the support of industry and scientific professionals for several years.

I defy you to present any organization anywhere trying to elicit support for the official version and failing as spectacularly as Gage.
 
Last edited:
I see no evidence that any other Architects and Engineers, besides the ones who have attached their names to the A&E for 9-11 Truth group, disagrees with the NIST investigation's findings. There is no evidence whatsoever of any intimidation, overt threats, assumed threats, against architects or engineers who come out against the NIST findings.

Therefore, it is very fair and logical to assume, that most if not all architects and engineers, who have not actively signed up with the truthers, accept NIST's findings.

can anyone logically and rationally argue with this statemant?

you know what, I will take this one step further. I will ask AIA certified architects that I work with, in NYC, whether or not they have heard of ANY threats, intimidation, anything...that would suggest that openly disagreeing with the NIST findings are frowned upon by the association or any other groups.

I just sent the following email to the AIA:

"Good evening. My name is XXXX XXXX. I frequently have debates and arguments with individuals within the USA, who argue that NIST's findings regarding the WTC collapses are flawed, and that these buildings most likely came down as the result of a "controlled demolition". I am sure your organization has received one or two emails and phone calls from such fascinating individuals.

My question is, and hopefully you can simply direct me to a link of some sort, is whether or not the AIA released an official response or statemant regarding NIST's findings? Or has there been any emails or letters sent out to AIA members regarding how to respond to questions regarding the NIST and other investigations into the WTC collapses?

Thank you very much for your time,

-XXXX




"Great men are like meteors...giving light to the world as they are consumed"
~John Fitzgerald Kennedy

i will post their response as soon as it arrives.
 
Last edited:
When your the leader of your group is going around dropping cardboard boxes to "prove" that the towers couldn't have come down without explosives/thermite that is not a good sign for the legitimacy of said group.
 
twinstead said:
The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they support the 'official story', then they are assumed to NOT support it. Even if the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support, unless every member writes a personal letter to HI declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do not.
Click to expand...
Actually even that wouldn't work. That is, if they did the truthers would just tell us it was a stunt, that anyone who took part only did so because they were frightened of losing Government contracts, and so all these engineers standing up for the NIST reports was actually very good evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. There's nothing, and I do mean nothing that the truthers can't find a way to ignore.
 
Homeland Insurgency said:
Very good. I can say the same thing. I think I will.

The same old crap. Unless every expert on Earth explicitly, in writing (probably in triplicate), states they DON'T support the 'official story', then they are assumed to support it. If the organizations they are a member of explicitly state support then every one of them must also be in support, even if they don't write a personal endorsement to anyone in seven years declaring they support the 'official story', it can be assumed they do.
Click to expand...
What's idiotic about your statement is that most people don't proclaim endorsements for the generally accepted facts. Can you produce millions of endorsements from the scientific community that state that the Earth is round? Are the millions of websites dedicated to the roundness of the Earth? Yet there are web sites dedicated to the theory that the Earth is flat. So, according to your standard, the Earth must be flat.
 
Homeland Insurgent, have you ever thought to contact engineering professionals yourself? Maybe try your local universities engineering department and ask if they endorse NIST's findings?

If you want to prove that there is major doubt about the official version in engineering circles, this is how you can do it. You're wasting your time with AE911 engineers and debunker engineers. You'll find the truth elsewhere**. Best of luck.



** Not saying that our great JREF engineers are wrong...just looking at things from his perspective.
 
The father of a friend of mine from high school is a college professor specializing in forensic architecture. He is even editor of one of the journals in the field. He said that Gage and the idiots are always sending them stuff but they just throw it away. I sent him the video of Gage and his cardboard box, he thought that was hilarious.
 
There is also no large organization for people who believe the Moon landings were NOT fakes. I guess that means the Moon landings were therefore, faked.
 
TexasJack said:
Oh my, and here I was thinking that Charles "The Towers Were Brought Down by Nukes" Pegelow was the brains of the outfit. Funny part is she writes the number down about 7 times without ever catching on, plus the number is too long.
Click to expand...

I wonder if she knows how to read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom