• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
DGM said:
Bill:
Do you think it's "interesting" that Gage (an architect) didn't see anything odd about 9/11 until he listened to a Dr. of Theology?

Just asking questions
Click to expand...

Absolutely I do. Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day.

Note that when Richard was led into the detail of the events he quickly realised that he was looking at cases of controlled demolition.

This is why 90-plus percent of of engineers and architects who see his presentations have their eyes opened and opt for controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC7 on 9/11.
 
bill smith said:
Absolutely I do. Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day.

Note that when Richard was led into the detail of the events he quickly realised that he was looking at cases of controlled demolition.

This is why 90-plus percent of of engineers and architects who see his presentations have their eyes opened and opt for controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC7 on 9/11.
Click to expand...

How many architects and engineers have heard his presentations? Where do you get this number "90%"? You do understand now that the RIBA conference wasn't attended by RIBA members, with the exception of the person who leased the premises?
 
bill smith said:
Absolutely I do. Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day.
Click to expand...

But, the laymen in the "truth" movement say it "obvious". Is it not "obvious" to people in the industry?
bill smith said:
This is why 90-plus percent of of engineers and architects who see his presentations have their eyes opened and opt for controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC7 on 9/11.
Click to expand...
I think I'll need to see evidence of this. If true, why only 0.06% sign his petition?
 
DGM said:
But, the laymen in the "truth" movement say it "obvious". Is it not "obvious" to people in the industry?

I think I'll need to see evidence of this. If true, why only 0.06% sign his petition?
Click to expand...

Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day

This is why such a small percentage of engineers and architects are signed up to Richard's cause. That would change- massively- if they were fully informed of the salient details.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day

This is why such a small percentage of engineers and architects are signed up to Richard's cause. That would change- massively- if they were fully informed of the salient details.
Click to expand...
Nice story but, this is what they do for a living. You really don't think structural engineers took notice that the buildings failed and would wonder why? You don't actually know any engineers, do you?
 
DGM said:
Nice story but, this is what they do for a living. You really don't think structural engineers took notice that the buildings failed and would wonder why? You don't actually know any engineers, do you?
Click to expand...

That's one of the reasons that the planes were so neccessary. Without that point of confusion vastly more engineers and architects would have seen the demolitions for what they were. Traumatised minds do not work clearly. 'Shock and Awe' creates this effect.

The same reason that normally intelligent Americans were running around saying '' They are coming to take our freedom'
 
Last edited:
Considering that the NIST analysis is actually used to teach engineering and architecture, I'd say they're looking at it.
 
bill smith said:
That's one of the reasons that the planes were so neccessary. Without that point of confusion vastly more engineers and architects would have seen the demolitions for what they were.
Click to expand...
Again, nice story. I personally know people that saw the planes with thier own eyes. I don't actually think you're stupid enough to believe in "no planes" so why do you say this? Are you bored?
 
bill smith said:
That's one of the reasons that the planes were so neccessary. Without that point of confusion vastly more engineers and architects would have seen the demolitions for what they were.
Click to expand...
Yet a theologian is able to piece the veil, even with the smokescreen.
 
bill smith said:
That's one of the reasons that the planes were so neccessary. Without that point of confusion vastly more engineers and architects would have seen the demolitions for what they were. Traumatised minds do not work clearly. 'Shock and Awe' creates this effect.

The same reason that normally intelligent Americans were running around saying '' They are coming to take our freedom'
Click to expand...
What did the planes have to do with WTC7? Are you now going to claim the worlds engineering community got bored of watching coverage that day and did know it collapsed?
 
DGM said:
Again, nice story. I personally know people that saw the planes with thier own eyes. I don't actually think you're stupid enough to believe in "no planes" so why do you say this? Are you bored?
Click to expand...

You are pulling your old tricks again DGM. I saw through you long ago.
 
Bill:

This is really easy. Do you expect us to believe that almost all of the world structural engineer believed in the "official story" because they saw it on TV?

Sounds really stupid when I put it that way, huh?
 
Craig4 said:
Maybe I'm not being clear. The people who see Gage are predisposed to irrational beliefs so therefore it's not a representative sample. You cannot draw any conclusions from your data and apply them to the general population. It's like going to a schizophrenia ward and asking the patients if they hear voices and saying based on the responses 99% of the population hears voices (I'm assuming paranoid schizophrenia here). You need a truly random sampling if you want to apply your findings to the entire population.
Click to expand...

The people who don't see Gage don't even know THREE freaking buildings collapsed on 9/11. That's your MSM playing hide the 9/11 for you.
 
uke2se said:
How many architects and engineers have heard his presentations? Where do you get this number "90%"? You do understand now that the RIBA conference wasn't attended by RIBA members, with the exception of the person who leased the premises?
Click to expand...

Maybe bill smith after his long absence can explain how not a single person I know in my academic years in college came to believe in the controlled demolition fraud despite the topic coming up several times,
 
Last edited:
The people who don't see Gage don't even know THREE freaking buildings collapsed on 9/11. That's your MSM playing hide the 9/11 for you
Click to expand...

Lie. Totally, fabricated lie.

I've never seen Gage in person and I knew about WTC 7 about oh, when it happened.

Stop being a liar. Start being a truther.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom