Statistical Analysis of AE911Truth Technical Articles

[ref]

This is a small statistical analysis of AE911Truth technical articles. I don't know if this deserves its own thread, but here goes.

There are a total of 46 technical articles, that are currently presented by AE911Truth on their website. These 46 articles are authored or co-authored by a total of 28 different people. Here is a summary of the authors, how many articles they have authored/co-authored, and what percentage of these 46 papers has this person authored/co-authored. 1 of the articles is the comment paper to NIST, which is signed by 16 people. I have not included that article in the author statistics, since I have no way of knowing how many of those people actually participated in writing that.


Total: 46 articles

Author/co-author:

Crockett Grabbe 9 Articles 19,6% Includes the same paper "Response to Keith Seffen" twice
Kevin Ryan 5 Articles 10,9%
Jim Hoffman 5 Articles 10,9 %
Gordon Ross 3 Articles 6,5%
Steven Jones 3 Articles 6,5%
Chuck Thurston 3 Articles 6,5%
Frank Legge 3 Articles 6,5%
Tony Szamboti 2 Articles 4,3%
"Winter Patriot" 2 Articles 4,3% 2 non-technical blog posts commenting on Keith Seffen
David Ray Griffin 1 Article 2,2%
Anders Björkman 1 Article 2,2%
Vesa Raiskila 1 Article 2,2%
Jonathan Cole 1 Article 2,2%
Kenneth Kuttler 1 Article 2,2%
Jerry Lobdill 1 Article 2,2%
Eric Douglas 1 Article 2,2%
Gregg Roberts 1 Article 2,2% Trancript of a Jones-Robertson debate with added comments
William Rice 1 Article 2,2%
"Shoestring" 1 Article 2,2% A 911Blogger post compiling different links, non-technical
Terry Morrone 1 Article 2,2%
Joseph Smith 1 Article 2,2%
Lenny Charles 1 Article 2,2%
Jeffrey Farrer 1 Article 2,2%
Gregory S. Jenkins 1 Article 2,2%
James Gourley 1 Article 2,2%
Daniel Farnsworth 1 Article 2,2%
Mick Meany 1 Article 2,2% Short and general criticism towards Keith Seffen, non-technical
RICHARD GAGE 0 ARTICLES 0,0% Founder of the site AE911Truth.org


There are a total of 15 websites hosting the "technical articles" presented by AE911Truth. Here is a compilation of the hosts.


Websites hosting the 46 articles:

Journal of 9/11 Studies 16 Articles 34,8%
Different Jim Hoffman Sites 7 Articles 15,2%
Sealane 4 Articles 8,7%
AE911TRUTH 3(2) Articles 6,5%(4,3%) 2 identical Crockett Grabbe articles
Truememes 3 Articles 6,5%
911Blogger 3 Articles 6,5%
Winterpatriot Blog 2 Articles 4,3%
Visibility911 1 Article 2,2%
Vermont Guardian 1 Article 2,2%
Heiwaco 1 Article 2,2%
Rinf 1 Article 2,2%
Informationclearinghouse 1 Article 2,2%
Gordonssite 1 Article 2,2%
Opednews 1 Article 2,2%


Is this a mirror site for JONES? Over third of the articles are directly linked to journalof911Studies.com. Some articles are nothing but short blog posts. Some articles are written by such technical experts as a Theologian, or a Social Scientist. Many of the articles presented here have no technical content, mainly same repeated truther claims.

AE911Truth itself hosts a total of 3 articles. Which is actually 2 articles, since they present one article by Crockett Grabbe twice, once under the name "Discussion of 'Progressive Collapse of the World Trade Center: A Simple Analysis' by K.A. Seffen" and once under the name "Response to 'Progressive Collapse of the World Trade Center: A Simple Analysis' by K.A. Seffen" Grabbe has participated in almost fifth of all articles.

So what new technical perpective is Richard Gage and AE911Truth offering? Nothing. 0 (zero) of the articles are authored by Gage. They don't even host more than 2 different papers (about 5% of the articles). None of the papers are exclusively written for AE911Truth. They are just linked from their original website, be it JONES, 911review, or even 911blogger.

This "technical articles" page is nothing more than a compilation of 9/11 Truth movement links.

 

[funk de fino]

Gage is a clown and a fraud and some morons have been fooled by him.

It should be a criminal offence to tell as many lies as a lot of the truthers do.

 

[Baylor]

Good work ref, I'll note this. Also note 'heiwaco' is on that list.

 

[ref]

Good work ref, I'll note this. Also note 'heiwaco' is on that list.

Thanks. That heiwaco is Heiwa's site. Anders Björkman in the authors list is Heiwa. I believe it can be said, since its quite common knowledge. If not, then my post shall be censored

 

[Brainster]

I wonder how many of those "technical" "articles" are written by actual architects and engineers. Ross and Szamboni, Rice, Cole, and Douglas, that's it, right?

 

[Heiwa]

Good work ref, I'll note this. Also note 'heiwaco' is on that list.

Thanks for the PR! 9.11.2001 I was peacefully restoring my old (500+ years) house in Sachsen, when my daughter phoned and suggested I put on the TV! TV? We didn't have one! Later, when I could see videos of the WTC 1/2 destructions, I thought they looked very strange. Gravity does not work like that. Many years later I was asked to explain the collapses to some children that could not sleep having seen the same videos. Do towers collapse like that (and people die) they asked? And the result was that gravity does not work like that. Having done steel (and wood) structural intact and later structural damage analysis for 40 years it is quite easy to explain. So I put the result on my web page http://heiwaco.tripod.com ... and there we are. No conspiracy! Just public service. Otherwise my business is safety at sea but the objective is the same. A safer world. And Peace - Heiwa - to all.

 

[JamesB]

Gravity does not work like that? As best as I can tell troofers don't seem to think gravity works at all.

 

[GodisEnergy]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

 

[dtugg]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

The NWO pays me 10,000 Ameros a month for spreading disinformation about 9/11.

 

[JamesB]

Well I make 12,000 Ameros a month, but then again I have to pay my own Social Security taxes.

 

[DGM]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

As far as "discrediting" the "truthers" I would say it's people like you that would be on the pay roll. After all you make arguments with no evidence and never support your conclusions. How much more "dis-info" (damaging to a movement) could you be?

 

[beachnut]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

911Truth; evidence free for 7 years. When the claims border on science, it is educational to expose the anti-intellectual attempt by 911Truth to mislead others with fake evidence and failed science. It is comical as the 911Truth expert scramble to see who can make up the dumbest ideas for those who lack knowledge to fall for.

They dumb down their books and sell them to those who have no clue.
The idiots who spew 911Truth are not political enemies they are gullible fools. It is good you have knowledge and sound judgment so you are not gullible and fall for the delusions of 911Truth.

 

[Brainster]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid

Too late.

but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?

Yes.

How many of you are on the payroll really?

All of us. Including the "Truthers" on this board. It's all a giant psy-op to distract people from noticing that all their rights have been taken away by the Patriot Act. Keep up the good work!

 

[Hokulele]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?

Um, yeah. The U.S. government decided to use a free, public, on-line forum, started by a professional magician, to discuss how to discredit a group of people with already very limited credibility.

How many of you are on the payroll really?

Classified.

 

[dudalb]

As far as "discrediting" the "truthers" I would say it's people like you that would be on the pay roll. After all you make arguments with no evidence and never support your conclusions. How much more "dis-info" (damaging to a movement) could you be?

The first thing that Twoofers do when they fight among themsleves...and the movement is falling apart into dozens of splinter groups who hate each other...is accuse the other splinter of being "DisInfo agents".

 

[Bell]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

I work with the police, so yes, I'm on the payroll. And even though my government is not the US government, in the end it's really the NWO who controls everything. And according to their internal memo, if anyone asks, NO, 9/11 was NOT an inside job.

 

[BigAl]

As To why people spend so much time trying to discredit 911 truth.I dont want to sound paranoid but is this a place for the government to come up with methods for discrediting there political enemies?
How many of you are on the payroll really?

Where to start.

I know as an eyewitness to some of what happened on 9/11 that the
claims from the "Truth Movement" that I was witness to are silly.

I know from my professional and University education that other claims
from the "truth movement" are false. None of the people that make
these claims will speak in public where I can ask them for
clarification and to show me in what way I am wrong.

I know that when the "Truth Movement" offers a quote in support of
a claim, the quote when read in full frequently contradicts the claim.
Based on this, I know that no claim from the "Truth Movement" should
be accepted without checking sources. I know from reading the
transcripts that "Truth Movement" citations to firemen's quotes to
allege the existence of man-made explosions at WTC are fiction
when the full transcript is read.

I know first responders at WTC and people that were in the WTC
buildings on 9/11 None of them believe the claims of the "Truth
Movement. They laugh at them.

I knew one of the passengers on Flight 93 who made a phone call. I
know his wife thinks the "truth movement" people are sick.

I know that some of the video used by the "truth movement" to show
sounds of explosions near WTC are fake because I know the streets of
Manhattan and know how loud the sound would have to be to be heard
from WTC.

I'm in NYC, home to thousands of first responders, many thousands of
families of victims and hundreds of thousands of eyewitnesses. I know
there is nobody here that believes the claims of the "Truth Movement"
as far as man-made demolition and 4 commercial jets causing all the
death and destruction on 9/11 or "inside job" sillyness.

I know there is no "eyewitnesses for truth" group. Hundreds of
thousands of people were eyewitnesses to some aspect of 9/11. They
don't seem to care about the "Truth Movement".

I knew prior to 9/11/2001, that bin Laden had declared war on us and
had attacked us at least 3 times. Anyone that read the news in the 90s
knew it.

 

[Sunstealer]

The NWO pays me 10,000 Ameros a month for spreading disinformation about 9/11.

Well I make 12,000 Ameros a month, but then again I have to pay my own Social Security taxes.

Damn, I want a pay rise.

 

[GodisEnergy]

Where to start.

I know as an eyewitness to some of what happened on 9/11 that the
claims from the "Truth Movement" that I was witness to are silly.

I know from my professional and University education that other claims
from the "truth movement" are false. None of the people that make
these claims will speak in public where I can ask them for
clarification and to show me in what way I am wrong.

I know that when the "Truth Movement" offers a quote in support of
a claim, the quote when read in full frequently contradicts the claim.
Based on this, I know that no claim from the "Truth Movement" should
be accepted without checking sources. I know from reading the
transcripts that "Truth Movement" citations to firemen's quotes to
allege the existence of man-made explosions at WTC are fiction
when the full transcript is read.

I know first responders at WTC and people that were in the WTC
buildings on 9/11 None of them believe the claims of the "Truth
Movement. They laugh at them.

I knew one of the passengers on Flight 93 who made a phone call. I
know his wife thinks the "truth movement" people are sick.

I know that some of the video used by the "truth movement" to show
sounds of explosions near WTC are fake because I know the streets of
Manhattan and know how loud the sound would have to be to be heard
from WTC.

I'm in NYC, home to thousands of first responders, many thousands of
families of victims and hundreds of thousands of eyewitnesses. I know
there is nobody here that believes the claims of the "Truth Movement"
as far as man-made demolition and 4 commercial jets causing all the
death and destruction on 9/11 or "inside job" sillyness.

I know there is no "eyewitnesses for truth" group. Hundreds of
thousands of people were eyewitnesses to some aspect of 9/11. They
don't seem to care about the "Truth Movement".

I knew prior to 9/11/2001, that bin Laden had declared war on us and
had attacked us at least 3 times. Anyone that read the news in the 90s
knew it.

You know to much , or at least you think you do .

I dont know if you have personally speaked to all these witnesses who heard explosions, im sure you know of firefighters who helped the cleanup and were possibly in the building ,
But are you saying that what the firefighters said they heard (at the time) didnt happen.
Have you read the firefighters transcriptions because they dont seem at all out of context to me ! Flashes of lights going around the building explosions going off over 100 cases.

Im not interested in Firefighters Opinions, Opinions are biased and i dont think most of them can handle the CD truth

Some can such as william rodriguez, Barry Jennings john shroeder , They were the last to leave the buildings .

So i dont care how many sheeple survivors you know, i dont care if your friend the firefighter says there nothing to worry about,
There is-
WTC7 barry jennings said he heard explosions before the two towers collapsed .
And If they took down building 7 ,then IT MEANS THAT THEY KNEW TWIN TOWERS WOULD COLLAPSE INTO BUILDING 7

--- Which is impossible unless you also implose wtc 1 and wtc 2 .

 

[332nd]

You know to much , or at least you think you do .

I dont know if you have personally speaked to all these witnesses who heard explosions, im sure you know of firefighters who helped the cleanup and were possibly in the building ,
But are you saying that what the firefighters said they heard (at the time) didnt happen.
Have you read the firefighters transcriptions because they dont seem at all out of context to me ! Flashes of lights going around the building explosions going off over 100 cases.

Im not interested in Firefighters Opinions, Opinions are biased and i dont think most of them can handle the CD truth

Some can such as william rodriguez, Barry Jennings john shroeder , They were the last to leave the buildings .

So i dont care how many sheeple survivors you know, i dont care if your friend the firefighter says there nothing to worry about,
There is-
WTC7 barry jennings said he heard explosions before the two towers collapsed .
And If they took down building 7 ,then IT MEANS THAT THEY KNEW TWIN TOWERS WOULD COLLAPSE INTO BUILDING 7

--- Which is impossible unless you also implose wtc 1 and wtc 2 .

1. Things explode in fires.

2. Are you calling every FDNY member who doesn't agree with you a coward?