Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[Sunstealer]

U really think, Kevin Ryan, is filming his self and lie to people ? LOL.

Just tell me why u cant use micron sized alumium particles.

If you use micron sized particles then the particles are not nano-sized are they? Or do you consider a metre to be nanosized because a metre is a billion nm?

 

[Marokkaan]

'

Are there any interesting Truth sites in Holland ? Do you have some links ?

Do u understand dutch?

We dont have a website with experts.

But we have a one nice truth site.

Thats www.waarheid911.nl

 

[Sunstealer]

'Lie' is a strong word. I'd use 'mislead' instead.

This is always a recurring one with truthers - they see everything in black and white. No one is ever mistaken it's either lie or truth.

 

[grandmastershek]

if you use micron sized particles then the particles are not nano-sized are they? Or do you consider a metre to be nanosized because a metre is a billion nm?

***** lol!

This is always a recurring one with truthers - they see everything in black and white. No one is ever mistaken it's either lie or truth.

Very typical in psychosis.

 

[bill smith]

It appears that the world's scientific and engineering communities are pretty much unimpressed with your "science research". Do you have an explanation for that?

They are largely part of the establishment Twinstead and know on which side their bread is buttered. That's just an unfortunate fact. Like Danny Jowenko said to Jeff Hill when he confirmed the controlled demolition of WTC7. 'Those companies have to work in America. If they don't play ball they are history in business' .(Paraphrased)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QajDxF9uEf4&feature=player_embedded Hill/Jowenko

 

[tsig]

Its simple for me, go to the website of ae911truth.

Do u have a big list of names who are independent researchers and wrote peer-reviewed articles that refutes the researches from ae911truth experts.

Im curious man!!!



I would like to say that, but there are experts that found nano-thermite.

So we want to know, how its possible, nanothermite is found in the wtc dust.

It wasn't.

 

[grandmastershek]

They are largely part of the establisment Twinstead and know on which side their bread is buttered. That'as just an unfortunate fact. Like Danny Jowenko said to Jeff Hill when he confirmed the controlled demolition of WTC7. 'Those companies have to work in America. If they don't play ball they are history in business' .(Paraphrased)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QajDxF9uEf4&feature=player_embedded

Nice, so basically an unfounded claim. Yeah we know all the Iranian, Chinese, ad infinitum professional organizations have nothing but love for the US. Sorry its a global problem. Your hand waving has no effect on reality no matter how many times you practice the Jedi mind trick.

 

[twinstead]

They are largely part of the establishment Twinstead and know on which side their bread is buttered. That's just an unfortunate fact. Like Danny Jowenko said to Jeff Hill when he confirmed the controlled demolition of WTC7. 'Those companies have to work in America. If they don't play ball they are history in business' .(Paraphrased)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QajDxF9uEf4&feature=player_embedded

Yea, you like to quote Jowenko of course until it's brought up that he doesn't accept that WTC1 and 2 were CD. Then he's just some guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. But, you already know that.

You'll notice I said the WORLD'S engineering and scientific organizations.

So what about foreign engineering and scientific organizations? Where are the Chinese, the Russians, Iranians, etc.

 

[bill smith]

Do u understand dutch?

We dont have a website with experts.

But we have a one nice truth site.

Thats www.waarheid911.nl

Thanks

 

[grandmastershek]

Originally Posted by Marokkaan
Its simple for me, go to the website of ae911truth.

Do u have a big list of names who are independent researchers and

No, we don;t bother with appeal to authority or popularity. We enjoy science & logic instead.

wrote peer-reviewed articles that refutes the researches from ae911truth experts.

Im curious man!!!

You must mean the "peer reviewed articles" reviewed by other truthers and published in fake journals; the subject you repeatedly dance around.

 

[triforcharity]

One incident, so what. The article about nano-thermite is peer reviewed.

Not just one incident. Bentham is known for printing junk science.

You dont understand the meaning of peer-review?

We do, but Bentham's peer-review is "Did the check clear?"

Is there any peer-reviewed article that refutes the nano-thermite peer reviewed article?

Nope. There isn't a properly peer-reviewed paper on nano-thermite.

 

[Marokkaan]

Paint. Thermite nano or not does not contain kaolin particles which is what is observed in the paper.

Primer paint? No it does not contain magnesium. So its not primer paint.

No you are lying there is no kaolin found.

This is primer paint

And this is nano thermite

 

[bill smith]

Yea, you like to quote Jowenko of course until it's brought up that he doesn't accept that WTC1 and 2 were CD. Then he's just some guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. But, you already know that.

You'll notice I said the WORLD'S engineering and scientific organizations.

So what about foreign engineering and scientific organizations? Where are the Chinese, the Russians, Iranians, etc.

I am content with just WTC7. We will work it back to the Towers I can assure you. You know it.
It's a Global world Twinstead.America has a long reach in business and in other ways. Therefore companies in other countries would likely find themselves having similar difficulties with their own governments.

 

[triforcharity]

Its simple for me, go to the website of ae911truth.

Do u have a big list of names who are independent researchers and wrote peer-reviewed articles that refutes the researches from ae911truth experts.

Im curious man!!!

Sure. Here you go. A BIG list.

Performance based structural fire engineering for modern building design
Rini, D., Lamont, S. 2008 Proceedings of the 2008 Structures Congress - Structures Congress 2008: Crossing the Borders 314

Engineering perspective of the collapse of WTC-I
Irfanoglu, A., Hoffmann, C.M. 2008 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 22 (1),

Collapse of towers as applied to September 11 events
Cherepanov, G.P. 2008 Materials Science 44 (4), pp. 489-499

Modeling pre-evacuation delay by occupants in World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 on September 11, 2001
Kuligowski, E.D., Mileti, D.S. 2008 Fire Safety Journal

World Trade Center building disaster: Stimulus for innovations
Kodur, V.K.R. 2008 Indian Concrete Journal 82 (1), pp. 23-31

A collective undergraduate class project reconstructing the September 11, 2001 world trade center fire
Marshall, A., Quintiere, J. 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

"A new era": The limits of engineering expertise in a post-9/11 world
Pfatteicher, S.K.A. 2007 International Symposium on Technology and Society, Proceedings, art. no. 4362228

Progressive collapse of the World Trade Center: Simple analysis
Seffen, K.A. 2008 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 134 (2), pp. 125-132

Scale modeling of the 96th floor of world trade center tower 1
Wang, M., Chang, P., Quintiere, J., Marshall, A. 2007 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 21 (6), pp. 414-421

Failure of welded floor truss connections from the exterior wall during collapse of the world trade center towers
Banovic, S.W., Siewert, T.A. 2007 Welding Journal (Miami, Fla) 86 (9), pp. 263-s-272-s

The collapse of the world trade center towers: A metallurgist's view
Gayle, F.W. 2007 MRS Bulletin 32 (9), pp. 710-716

Building code changes reflect world trade center investigation
Hansen, B. 2007 Civil Engineering 77 (9), pp. 22+24-25

Fire load in a steel building design
Razdolsky, L. 2008 Proceedings of the 4th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, ISEC-4 - Innovations in Structural Engineering and Construction 2, pp. 1163-1167

The structural steel of the World Trade Center towers
Gayle, F.W., Banovic, S.W., Foecke, T., Fields, R.J., Luecke, W.E., McColskey, J.D., McCown, C., Siewert, T.A. 2006 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 6 (5), pp. 5-8

Progressive collapse of structures: Annotated bibliography and comparison of codes and standards
Mohamed, O.A. 2006 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 20 (4), art. no. 001604QCF, pp. 418-425

A simple model of the World Trade Center fireball dynamics
Baum, H.R., Rehm, R.G., Quintiere, J.G. 2005 Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 30 II, pp. 2247-2254

Impact of the Boeing 767 Aircraft into the World Trade Center
Karim, M.R., Hoo Fatt, M.S. 2005 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 131 (10), pp. 1066-1072

High-fidelity simulation of large-scale structures
Hoffmann, C., Sameh, A., Grama, A. 2005 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3515 (II), pp. 664-671

Collapses of the world trade center towers
[No author name available] 2005 Indian Concrete Journal 79 (8), pp. 11-16

Industry updates: Fireproofing, staircases cited in World Trade Center report
[No author name available] 2005 Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 5 (4), pp. 34

September 11 and fracture mechanics - A retrospective
Cherepanov, G.P. 2005 International Journal of Fracture 132 (2), pp. L25-L26

Structural responses of World Trade Center under aircraft attacks
Omika, Y., Fukuzawa, E., Koshika, N., Morikawa, H., Fukuda, R. 2005 Journal of Structural Engineering 131 (1), pp. 6-15

Impact of the 2001 World Trade Center attack on critical interdependent infrastructures
Mendonça, D., Lee II, E.E., Wallace, W.A. 2004 Conference Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 5, pp. 4053-4058

Use of high-efficiency energy absorbing device to arrest progressive collapse of tall building Zhou, Q., Yu, T.X. 2004 Journal of Engineering Mechanics 130 (10), pp. 1177-1187
Progressive analysis procedure for progressive collapse
Marjanishvili, S.M. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 79-85

Lessons learned on improving resistance of buildings to terrorist attacks
Corley, W.G. 2004 Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 18 (2), pp. 68-78

Anatomy of a disaster: A structural investigation of the World Trade Center collapses
Abboud, N., Levy, M., Tennant, D., Mould, J., Levine, H., King, S., Ekwueme, C., (...), Hart, G. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 360-370

World Trade Center disaster: Damage/debris assessment
Thater, G.G., Panariello, G.F., Cuoco, D.A. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 383-392

How did the WTC towers collapse: A new theory
Usmani, A.S., Chung, Y.C., Torero, J.L. 2003 Fire Safety Journal 38 (6), pp. 501-533

Microstructural analysis of the steels from Buildings 7, & 1 or 2 from the World Trade Center
Biederman, R.R., Sullivan, E.M., Sisson Jr., R.D., Vander Voort, G.F. 2003 Microscopy and Microanalysis 9 (SUPPL. 2), pp. 550-551

Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

Analysis of the thermal exposure in the impact areas of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks
Beyler, C., White, D., Peatross, M., Trellis, J., Li, S., Luers, A., Hopkins, D. 2003 Forensic Engineering, Proceedings of the Congress, pp. 371-382

Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.
Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y. "Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.
Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.

"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103

Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.

Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.

Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.

Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
The print copy has 3-D images.

Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.

Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.

The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.

"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.

 

[twinstead]

I am content with just WTC7. We will work it back to the Towers I can assure you. You know it.
It's a Global world Twinstead.America has a long reach in business and in other ways. Therefore companies in other countries would likely find themselves having similar difficulties with their own governments.

Yea. I call spin, bill, but whatever floats your boat. So every single nation trembles under the red, white, and blue jackboots of the evil American empire. LOL

Oh and I'll take just WTC1 and 2, we'll work it back to WTC7 I can assure you.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

' It's been contested in many fora ' Like the jref maybe.What a load of rubbish.

Nonsense I've seen it desputed in every 911 forum that allows debate.

If you want to contest it publish your own peer reviewed paper. That hasn't happened in- how many years is it now ? [

Nor will it until twoofers do it first.

I]Therefore the paper is uncontested on it's proof and is the official definitive work on the subject .[/I] End-of-story.

Really? so if i get a peper saying the moon is made of green cheese and pay to have it published in a vanity journal it will become the offical difinative work on the subject. LOL you are utterly delusional.

The paper was peer reviewed at Bentam (see attached website) Still a highly successful peer review journal with Nobel laureates published there I believe.
http://www.benthamscience.com/ Bentham Website

No it wasn't the &*^$%^$ edititor said it wasn't!!!!!

Point three..I can't be bothered

LOL not able either

Watch the video (above) from Mark Basile if you want to know about the paint.

I have, its simply a statement. Its worthless as evidence of anything

'that confirms that the chips in the WTC dust are thermitic material'

stpo lying, it does no such thing.

You quoted me as saying in my last post but it is of course a shabby forgery as any poster can see at a glance. Not that I neccessarily disagree with the content but I stand on my right to say it myself..

????? what did I forge?

 

[tsig]

No it isnt. Its your opinion

.

Again you are using you're own opinion. The fact is. It is a peer-reviewed article. If it wasnt it would not stay at the bentham website.


.I just only want to say, that NIST with experiment could not show, that fire alone could cause failure.

So there is no proof. Fire could cause failure to the buildings.

p.s. for the next time, pay a little bit attention to quoting a poster. I had to copy paste your sentences

So we know it's peer reviewed because it's at the website and it wouldn't be there if it wasn't peer reviewed?

 

[Marokkaan]

If you use micron sized particles then the particles are not nano-sized are they? Or do you consider a metre to be nanosized because a metre is a billion nm?

Its a product to make nano thermite. If u dont understand it, dont sit there, make action and email kevin ryan or an other expert, why he did it.

But tell me, you really think kevin ryan is misleading people by saying in the beginning he has nano alumium and micron sized aluminum.

 

[Edx]

If you want to contest it publish your own peer reviewed paper. That hasn't happened in- how many years is it now ? Therefore the paper is uncontested on it's proof and is the official definitive work on the subject . End-of-story.

How can we know it was peer reviewed if its well known that they spam scientists to become editors of journals in subjects they aren't even trained in?

Its not the first time Bentham has had editors quit over having no control either.Bottom line is you cannot prove it was peer reviewed and we have plenty of reasons to think it wasn't. Why do you have to use a journal with such a bad reputation and poor practices? Go to a legitimate respected journal and we won't have to have this conversation.

 

[bill smith]

They all seem to be 2001 or 2002 Tri. Surprising that nobody technical seems to be writing stuff to support the government story since then. Bar NIST of course who are to all intents and purposes the government.
Not much confidence out there any more I think. We will no doubt revisit the subject with the authors come the day.