Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[WildCat]

I told him about landfill fires several posts ago. He kept asking questions. I don't know when and if the Molten steel was found. If the steel was still liquid weeks later it could have been un-reacted thermite.

How many times in thisw tread have you written "I don't know"? Yet you have no problem at all jumping to crazy conclusios based on things you admit you don't understand.

 

[Disbelief]

Why was no unreacted thermite found?

 

[Edx]

I told him about landfill fires several posts ago. He kept asking questions.

I dont know what conversation you're talking about but you asked where the heat came from, yet you've been told all about landfill fires. Same answer. Originally you claimed such things were impossible on 911 because oxygen wouldnt be able to get there, yet then we showed you they have a tremendous amount of problems actually stopping oxygen fueling these fires and that a landfill fire can burn for months, even years.

You look for the least likeliest scenario and whenever you show you dont know what you're talking about you just move the goal posts.

I don't know when and if the Molten steel was found. If the steel was still liquid weeks later it could have been un-reacted thermite.

Much like Richard Gage's amazing quiet explosives or Steven Jones' magical high explosive nano-thermite paint... this thermite you talk about does not exist. What you are calling thermite does not describe thermite since thermite cannot work the way you claim it works. And as we have told you, your entire basis for claiming there was molten steel is invalid.

If you're going to theorise about a substance that doesn't work like any material known to science, then you better have a damn good reason for doing so. You've moved the goal posts so many times its not even in the same playing field anymore, all because you just HAVE to believe there was thermite.

Perhaps the reports of molten steel weeks later were more like appendix C of the FEMA report. It wasn't in it's liquid form.

Except you have been told that this actually is the opposite of thermite since it occures are much lower temperatures. You don't even know what it means or why they only found it on this beam (if they were covering it all up by destroying all the steel quickly as possible, why save this beam? They saved it because it wasn't a coverup) All you did is hear "melting" and you get all excited thinking it has to be thermite. The same way truthers get excited about anyone talking about an explosion. You dont really care about the details, thats what the truth movement taught me about themselves.

Why is it every professional outside the tiny irrelevant fringe group of 911 Truth that has looked at this see the complete opposite to thermite damage? Why is that true for every single claim you have? You have no choice but to argue they must all be insane, incompetent or in on the coverup. This in totality of your arguments would require millions of people to be involved, I am not exaggerating.

A section of an A36 wide flange beam retrieved from the collapsed
World Trade Center Building 7 was examined to determine changes in the
steel microstructure as a result of the terrorist attack on September
11, 2001. This building was not one of the original buildings attacked
but it indirectly suffered severe damage and eventually collapsed. While
the exact location of this beam could not be determined, the unexpected
erosion of the steel found in this beam warranted a study of
microstructural changes that occurred in this steel. Examination of
other sections in this beam is underway.


ANALYSIS

Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with
oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence
of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron
sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel.
This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel
beam approached ~1,000ºC, forming the eutectic liquid by a process
similar to making a “blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge.

http://www.wpi.edu/academics/Research/MPI/News/aninit697.html

Thermite to me is only one possibility. You however are stuck with one and one scenario, and must jump through hoops to defend it.

You're talking about yourself here.

I used to be a truther, I told you that already, I am already prepared to accept it was an inside job. Its just that in all this time I havent seen any valid evidence or valid arguments whatsoever and truthers have been shown be liars and ignorant and will ignore the most basic logical consequences of their arguments, such as with you and Boeing.

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one and yours is absurdly complicated and convoluted but you are so blind to how ridiculous it all is. You simultaneously think that Boeing have nothing to do with the conspiracy yet are covering up the conspiracy at the same time. This is because you know that your arguments require hundreds of thosuands of people to be covering up the truth, yet you realise this makes your claims absurd so you deny they are involved in the coverup. For some reason you cant see its a completely contradictory stance.

*Here is the best site with info on where the steel went.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html

Why does this site not tell you that over a thousand people were involved in the clean up and that they sifted through all the debris with a fine tooth comb? Where do they tell you about them taking pictures of the debris and cataloging everything of relevance? Why doesnt it tell you that it was actually available to independant investigators like Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl?

They don't want to tell you the facts because they want to give you a false picture of what really happened. Why do you think they have to leave all these facts out in order to make their case? So your link is nothing more than a tiny deceptive summary of truther meme's so I have no idea in what way do you consider it the "best site" for this information.

This is the main reason I realised that the truth movement was such a load of nonsense, when I started looking at refutations of truther arguments I was pissed off that I had been deliberately lied to by people like Jim Hoffman, Alex Jones, David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones etc etc, but leaving out all the critical information because it makes their case look worse, and thats just that aspect, not to mention the fact that they can be shown to have literally made things up out of absolutely nothing. The truth movement talk about truth as if they care about it, yet it has been my experience that they don't really care about truth because if they did they would want to be ruthlessly honest about the information they provide. Yet we see them acting exactly like Creationists, making things up, lying, verifiably twisting the facts, quote-mining etc. I am not just being insulting, I am telling you this is all demonstrable. Unlike truthers I can prove it if I say that they made things up. You trust people that have as much scientific integrity as a Creationist.

Now , here what is inarguably a more thorough website with information on the clean up. I suggest you read it and consider why 911Research decided they should leave it out.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/groundzerocleanup,freshkillssortingopera

 

[tmd2_1]

I dont know what conversation you're talking about but you asked where the heat came from, yet you've been told all about landfill fires. Same answer. Originally you claimed such things were impossible on 911 because oxygen wouldnt be able to get there, yet then we showed you they have a tremendous amount of problems actually stopping oxygen fueling these fires and that a landfill fire can burn for months, even years.

You look for the least likeliest scenario and whenever you show you dont know what you're talking about you just move the goal posts.



Much like Richard Gage's amazing quiet explosives or Steven Jones' magical high explosive nano-thermite paint... this thermite you talk about does not exist. What you are calling thermite does not describe thermite since thermite cannot work the way you claim it works. And as we have told you, your entire basis for claiming there was molten steel is invalid.

If you're going to theorise about a substance that doesn't work like any material known to science, then you better have a damn good reason for doing so. You've moved the goal posts so many times its not even in the same playing field anymore, all because you just HAVE to believe there was thermite.





Except you have been told that this actually is the opposite of thermite since it occures are much lower temperatures. You don't even know what it means or why they only found it on this beam (if they were covering it all up by destroying all the steel quickly as possible, why save this beam? They saved it because it wasn't a coverup) All you did is hear "melting" and you get all excited thinking it has to be thermite. The same way truthers get excited about anyone talking about an explosion. You dont really care about the details, thats what the truth movement taught me about themselves.

Why is it every professional outside the tiny irrelevant fringe group of 911 Truth that has looked at this see the complete opposite to thermite damage? Why is that true for every single claim you have? You have no choice but to argue they must all be insane, incompetent or in on the coverup. This in totality of your arguments would require millions of people to be involved, I am not exaggerating.




http://www.wpi.edu/academics/Research/MPI/News/aninit697.html



You're talking about yourself here.

I used to be a truther, I told you that already, I am already prepared to accept it was an inside job. Its just that in all this time I havent seen any valid evidence or valid arguments whatsoever and truthers have been shown be liars and ignorant and will ignore the most basic logical consequences of their arguments, such as with you and Boeing.

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one and yours is absurdly complicated and convoluted but you are so blind to how ridiculous it all is. You simultaneously think that Boeing have nothing to do with the conspiracy yet are covering up the conspiracy at the same time. This is because you know that your arguments require hundreds of thosuands of people to be covering up the truth, yet you realise this makes your claims absurd so you deny they are involved in the coverup. For some reason you cant see its a completely contradictory stance.





Why does this site not tell you that over a thousand people were involved in the clean up and that they sifted through all the debris with a fine tooth comb? Where do they tell you about them taking pictures of the debris and cataloging everything of relevance? Why doesnt it tell you that it was actually available to independant investigators like Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl?

They don't want to tell you the facts because they want to give you a false picture of what really happened. Why do you think they have to leave all these facts out in order to make their case? So your link is nothing more than a tiny deceptive summary of truther meme's so I have no idea in what way do you consider it the "best site" for this information.

This is the main reason I realised that the truth movement was such a load of nonsense, when I started looking at refutations of truther arguments I was pissed off that I had been deliberately lied to by people like Jim Hoffman, Alex Jones, David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones etc etc, but leaving out all the critical information because it makes their case look worse, and thats just that aspect, not to mention the fact that they can be shown to have literally made things up out of absolutely nothing. The truth movement talk about truth as if they care about it, yet it has been my experience that they don't really care about truth because if they did they would want to be ruthlessly honest about the information they provide. Yet we see them acting exactly like Creationists, making things up, lying, verifiably twisting the facts, quote-mining etc. I am not just being insulting, I am telling you this is all demonstrable. Unlike truthers I can prove it if I say that they made things up. You trust people that have as much scientific integrity as a Creationist.

Now , here what is inarguably a more thorough website with information on the clean up. I suggest you read it and consider why 911Research decided they should leave it out.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/groundzerocleanup,freshkillssortingopera

While there may be some "truthers" that lie, the vast majority of them are simply trying to do the right thing. Take http://911research.wtc7.net/ the site I referenced before. To my knowledge he makes no money from what he does, he doesn't even have ads on his site. Why would he lie? People like Jon Cole that fork over a good amount of their own money and he certainly doesn't make any money from it why would he lie? People that are putting their careers and professional life in jeopardy. These are people that would lie?

If you really were a "truther" you should take a step back. Realize there are people on this site and else where who are doing the exact same things you are accusing "truthers" of doing. Who are these "experts" you speak of? Really think about it. I assume some of what you are referring to is NIST, but as I said about this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY it is a disgrace. Complete and total disgrace, these are the guys you want to put your faith in? An 8 year old can see the model doesn't match reality. You have statements like (paraphrasing) the fires weren't based on what was observable. You have John Gross caught red handed lying. These are your experts you want to believe?

Also another common tactic used, is to focus and fixate on one little aspect, and say "look the whole thing is debunked", while creating an illusion that their is all this "evidence" for the official story. I started a thread called evidence for the official story, you should look at it....there is almost no evidence. All they have is some video tape found under dubious circumstances. You have a leading swiss voice analysis company saying they have serious doubts as to whether or not that is Bin Laden speaking in one of the videos. Did you notice that more and more videos were released without sound? Coincidence I'm sure. You have one of the hijackers ID cards found in Pittsburgh that looks nothing like the guy the FBI says it is. The guy in the "martyr" video You have the 9/11 commission saying an ID belonging to a hijacker found at the pentagon is likely fraudulent. All of this if referenced in that other thread.

You have all this and you want to get hung up oversmall details? Boeing was not asked to officially investigate anything, NIST was, NIST would involved in the cover up. Boeing probably couldn't be sure what that was and issued the statement they did, it could be that simple. So lets take the thermate, here's a scenario for you. Theremate is used to help cause the collapse. The collapse causes regular landfill type fires. These fires ignite some un-reacted thermite from time to time causing molten steel. This could explain the reports of molten steel later in the clean up. How's that? Is it perfect? Probably not, but it's a lot better than what I described above, in terms of evidence for the official story.

Those thousands of people taking the steal away, you claim would have been in on it, were just guys trying to make a buck. I mean really it would have been the few directing everything.

As I said if you really were a "truther" really look within yourself, read the words I wrote. Ask yourself what evidence is there really? Try not to fall for all the BS that "debunkers" try to promote. As Greening said, many members here come across as dogmatic followers. There is one and only "story" that is acceptable and you must jump through hoops to defend it. On the other hand if there is compelling evidence I change my thoughts. That would also include evidence for the official story. The dogmatic followers here will not do that.

 

[George 152]

I told him about landfill fires several posts ago. He kept asking questions. I don't know when and if the Molten steel was found. If the steel was still liquid weeks later it could have been un-reacted thermite. Perhaps the reports of molten steel weeks later were more like appendix C of the FEMA report. It wasn't in it's liquid form.

Thermite to me is only one possibility. You however are stuck with one and one scenario, and must jump through hoops to defend it.

Here is the best site with info on where the steel went.


http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html

It takes a LOT of energy to melt steel and it takes a lot more to keep it molten.
Go along to any foundry and watch them do a 'pour'
Notice how quickly the steel goes from molten to ingot/bar once its away from the pot...

Thermite burns hot quickly, that's what it does, that's all it does.

 

[beachnut]

...
You have all this and you want to get hung up oversmall details? Boeing was not asked to officially investigate anything, NIST was, NIST would involved in the cover up. Boeing probably couldn't be sure what that was and issued the statement they did, it could be that simple. So lets take the thermate, here's a scenario for you. Theremate is used to help cause the collapse. The collapse causes regular landfill type fires. These fires ignite some un-reacted thermite from time to time causing molten steel. This could explain the reports of molten steel later in the clean up. How's that? Is it perfect? Probably not, but it's a lot better than what I described above, in terms of evidence for the official story.

... As Greening said, many members here come across as dogmatic followers. ...

You have no clue what temperature it takes to ignite thermite. Lack of knowledge in chemistry leads to fantasy. Fantasy is easy, reality is work. You took the easy path to repeating failed claims.

Boeing? lol, you make up nonsense based on ignorance and can't let it go.

NIST, you have no clue what the goal of NIST was so you make up a fantasy. You act as if NIST was working to resolve your issues due to your lack of knowledge.

Thermate was not used. Thermate/thermite leaves evidence; iron would be fused to the WTC steel. Do you try to gain knowledge or celebrate spreading nonsense and failed fantasy?

Dr. G is playing you. He likes to mislead fantasy minded 911 truth Followers, it is his hobby. He does not share your delusions on 911.

 

[triforcharity]

Take http://911research.wtc7.net/ the site I referenced before. To my knowledge he makes no money from what he does, he doesn't even have ads on his site.

Incorrect.
http://911research.wtc7.net/about/contribute.html#donations

Cash contributions will help us build on our already successful effort. Each day the main website, 911Research.wtc7.net, receives more than 10,000 unique visitors. We need to build on this model to break more into the mainstream. Money will help us to buy bandwidth (as of early 2006 we use over 500 gigabytes per month) and avoid interruptions in service.

 

[000063]

How many times in thisw tread have you written "I don't know"? Yet you have no problem at all jumping to crazy conclusios based on things you admit you don't understand.

In the Missile thread, he said he thinks that no one else has presented viable possibilities.

No one.

He's either an excellent troll, or the essence of Dunning-Kruger.

 

[tmd2_1]

Incorrect.
http://911research.wtc7.net/about/contribute.html#donations

Cash contributions will help us build on our already successful effort. Each day the main website, 911Research.wtc7.net, receives more than 10,000 unique visitors. We need to build on this model to break more into the mainstream. Money will help us to buy bandwidth (as of early 2006 we use over 500 gigabytes per month) and avoid interruptions in service.

Interesting how you left off the first sentence that appears on that site. "9-11 Research is an entirely volunteer effort." Also interesting how you made sure when the link is clicked it goes right to the donation section, ensuring that someone will have to scroll up to see the opening paragraph. Show me even the slightest bit of evidence, that the money is not being used for anything other than what he says it is being used for.

To add to this you also have thousands of people completely doing this on their own time and money...who have no reason to lie.

 

[tmd2_1]

In the Missile thread, he said he thinks that no one else has presented viable possibilities.

No one.

He's either an excellent troll, or the essence of Dunning-Kruger.

I don't want to mix threads, so I'll just answer this. No one has. That simple.

 

[triforcharity]

Interesting how you left off the first sentence that appears on that site. "9-11 Research is an entirely volunteer effort."

But, you said , and I quote "he doesn't even have ads on his site." An ad for donations is absolutely an ad. Which means that he pays for the site, then takes any donation money, and puts it into his own fund.

But, here's the kicker. There is no way to track how much he brings in, and where it goes after that, because the site is not a 501(c)(3) orginization.

So, there is no telling where the money goes.

Also interesting how you made sure when the link is clicked it goes right to the donation section, ensuring that someone will have to scroll up to see the opening paragraph.

Well, except for the fact that when you are at the home page, and click on donations, it automatically takes you right there. Nothing that I did to alter that.

Show me even the slightest bit of evidence, that the money is not being used for anything other than what he says it is being used for.

He doesn't say exactly what it is used for, other than bandwith. So, there is no telling where the money goes.

My speculation is part of it goes for things other than paying for the website.

To add to this you also have thousands of people completely doing this on their own time and money...who have no reason to lie.

Oh, you mean like Gage? Who, BTW, makes about $75,000 per year?

Yeah, no reason to lie there. He get's to travel the world, conspiraspank, and make $75k per year. Must be nice.

 

[000063]

Interesting how you left off the first sentence that appears on that site. "9-11 Research is an entirely volunteer effort."

Yes, and?

Also interesting how you made sure when the link is clicked it goes right to the donation section, ensuring that someone will have to scroll up to see the opening paragraph. Show me even the slightest bit of evidence, that the money is not being used for anything other than what he says it is being used for.

Yes, it's suspicious that someone talking about donations would link to the section about donations. You've cracked the case, detective TMD. We can all rest easy in our beds.

To add to this you also have thousands of people completely doing this on their own time and money...who have no reason to lie.

Yet they do it for free.

You also leave out just plain incompetence, like Judy Woods' space lasers.

I don't want to mix threads, so I'll just answer this. No one has. That simple.

I'm sorry, you willingly admit to not knowing things about 9/11 all the time. You do not have any right to determine what is viable or not over people who actually know what they're talking about, any more than some guy who says he knows very little about the legal system is more qualified to defend one in a murder case than, say, Johnnie Cochran. Or even to assess a murder case than Mr. Cochran. He may be hampered by being a zombie, but he'd still be a better lawyer than you. You can't even settle on whether Boeing was complicit or not.

 

[tmd2_1]

But, you said , and I quote "he doesn't even have ads on his site." An ad for donations is absolutely an ad. Which means that he pays for the site, then takes any donation money, and puts it into his own fund.

But, here's the kicker. There is no way to track how much he brings in, and where it goes after that, because the site is not a 501(c)(3) orginization.

So, there is no telling where the money goes.



Well, except for the fact that when you are at the home page, and click on donations, it automatically takes you right there. Nothing that I did to alter that.



He doesn't say exactly what it is used for, other than bandwith. So, there is no telling where the money goes.

My speculation is part of it goes for things other than paying for the website.




Oh, you mean like Gage? Who, BTW, makes about $75,000 per year?

Yeah, no reason to lie there. He get's to travel the world, conspiraspank, and make $75k per year. Must be nice.

Yes, and?

Yes, it's suspicious that someone talking about donations would link to the section about donations. You've cracked the case, detective TMD. We can all rest easy in our beds.

Yet they do it for free.

You also leave out just plain incompetence, like Judy Woods' space lasers.

I'm sorry, you willingly admit to not knowing things about 9/11 all the time. You do not have any right to determine what is viable or not over people who actually know what they're talking about, any more than some guy who says he knows very little about the legal system is more qualified to defend one in a murder case than, say, Johnnie Cochran. Or even to assess a murder case than Mr. Cochran. He may be hampered by being a zombie, but he'd still be a better lawyer than you. You can't even settle on whether Boeing was complicit or not.

Come on now, I said the where is evidence that he is spending money on anything other than what he says. There is none...none what so ever.
As far as Gage goes....I mean 75K a year is nice, but I'm pretty sure he would be making at least that should he have just stayed an architect. Traveling around the world is a perk he may not have gotten otherwise. But I mean I would hardly say he is a high roller. Not someone like Peter Popoff, who James Randi rightly exposed. That guy was a multi-millionaire purely by taking advantage of people, and lying.

But your missing the general point that, the vast majority of people involved in the "truth" movement have no reason to lie. Some may be crazy (ie Judy Woods) but have no reason to lie. People like Jon Cole, who's forked over lots of his own money, and never got or expected anything in return. Many of thousands of people like that.

One other thing to consider, and this is something I really don't like to bring up, is that there could be "shills". Now this is a term in my opinion thrown around way to much I don't like using it at all. But I think you can agree if there was a conspiracy there would be an effort to have some sort of shills and disinfo would there not? You only have to look at Cass Sunstein's Conspiracy Theories to see how it might be used.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

500gb a month? Even at 10k unique visits per day (and that was in 2006, pretty much when the 9/11 truth idiots topped out, today it's going to be substantially less than that) that's ~16mb per unique user. The average web page is right around 100kb (right now this page that you are reading is 64 kb) so that's at least 100 pages per user visit maximum (and very unlikely).

Not only don't his numbers really add up but he used what was probably his "Best" month ever to inflate his sites apparent worth. Right now according to Alexa in the last 3 months the average user read 3 pages and left.

All of that aside you can get 500 gb worth of hosting (bandwidth) with 50 gb of storage included for less than $10.00 a month if you shop around for more than 2 minutes.

Not only are his costs minimal even at his inflated numbers but he's running a scam against people like you (using very old data at best) who have no clue as to what it costs out of pocket and assume that he must be spending a lot of money.

Suckers.

 

[jaydeehess]

Yes Jones hasn't, but you've got a lot of nerve touting NIST around. You saw this video right? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY Their model is a disgrace (that may not be a strong enough word for it) at one point they have the sides of the building almost touching each other. Something that clearly did not even come close to happening. I would be embarrassed to show that model, but I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you right?

Link to the NIST explanation of that FEA animation please. Not one originating from a conspiracy site please.

That was illustrating framing and IIRC there was explained exaggeration of lateral movements.

So once again, If NIST's FEA was so balls'd up then why hasn't anyone of that opinion done an FEA of their own?

You say that Gage might well be earning $75K a year even if not spearheading AE911T. That would seem to agree with my point that the professionals in AE911T, Lf911T and PfT would easily be able to pitch in and donate as well as use other private donations and DO AN FEA of their own to refute NIST>

Not done though, gotta wonder about that.

WTC 7 to me resembles a classic CD, that is all I can really say to that.

Yes so far that is all you have said about that. I dispute and disagree with it.

Thermate. I told you I'm not sure what to make of it. I know something was burning hot enough to keep the top of the pile hot enough o melt aluminum on Sept 16th. Why it kept burning if it did? I don't have an easy answer for you, it could have been some un-reacted thermate, but as I said I don't have an easy answer.

I could hold "unreacted thermate" in the palm of my hand with no worry about being burned. It is not exothermic until it does react and thus supplies no heat until it is reacting much less enough to melt any metals.

[As far as not finding it on top of the pile, I'm not sure what we found or not, as the evidence was taken away in record time.

Hundreds of workers were on that pile of debris many more sifted through teh reamains at 'Fresh Kills'. No evidence of thermate. Once more though, you seem to ignore this fact, if thermate was supplyiong heat to the underground for weeks then it was reacting(burning) and oddly enough doing so ONLY underground rather than on the surface(at any time following collapse, from the moment the rubble stopped bouncing to weeks later).
The reason you have no easy answer is because there is no answer
other than the burning of office and garage components in a highly insulated volume.

Yes you did mention other underground fires and yes they do get extremely hot. What of it, other than that it illustrates that no exotic incindiary is needed to explain the underground heat at the WTC?

 

[jaydeehess]

I told him about landfill fires several posts ago. He kept asking questions.

You brushed aside the other underground fires.

I don't know when and if the Molten steel was found. If the steel was still liquid weeks later it could have been un-reacted thermite. Perhaps the reports of molten steel weeks later were more like appendix C of the FEMA report. It wasn't in it's liquid form.

Soooo, there was not actual molten anything weeks after the collapses or there was?

Thermite to me is only one possibility.

List the others.

You however are stuck with one and one scenario, and must jump through hoops to defend it.

We are 'stuck' with a scenario that best fits the known conditions and available knowledge from many deacdes of fire research. You are 'stuck' with imagining magical materials with self ascribed properties.

 

[jaydeehess]

500gb a month? Even at 10k unique visits per day (and that was in 2006, pretty much when the 9/11 truth idiots topped out, today it's going to be substantially less than that) that's ~16mb per unique user. The average web page is right around 100kb (right now this page that you are reading is 64 kb) so that's at least 100 pages per user visit maximum (and very unlikely).

Not only don't his numbers really add up but he used what was probably his "Best" month ever to inflate his sites apparent worth. Right now according to Alexa in the last 3 months the average user read 3 pages and left.

All of that aside you can get 500 gb worth of hosting (bandwidth) with 50 gb of storage included for less than $10.00 a month if you shop around for more than 2 minutes.

Not only are his costs minimal even at his inflated numbers but he's running a scam against people like you (using very old data at best) who have no clue as to what it costs out of pocket and assume that he must be spending a lot of money.

Suckers.

Does the cost of bandwidth come from the $75K Gage receives for himself or from donations, before Gage gets paid?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Come on now, I said the where is evidence that he is spending money on anything other than what he says. There is none...none what so ever.

Where does he give a detailed account of his spending?

As far as Gage goes....I mean 75K a year is nice, but I'm pretty sure he would be making at least that should he have just stayed an architect.

He was an unemployed architect in a housing slump and now he is an unemployable architect in a housing slump. he would be on welfare if he was not running his scam.

" Traveling around the world is a perk he may not have gotten otherwise. But I mean I would hardly say he is a high roller."

Really?, his expenses seem high to this world traveler.

Not someone like Peter Popoff, who James Randi rightly exposed. That guy was a multi-millionaire purely by taking advantage of people, and lying.

he was simply better at his scam.

But your missing the general point that, the vast majority of people involved in the "truth" movement have no reason to lie.

Then why do you and they? Is it because you do not even know you are doing it?

Some may be crazy (ie Judy Woods) but have no reason to lie. People like Jon Cole, who's forked over lots of his own money, and never got or expected anything in return. Many of thousands of people like that

.

crazy people do crazy things.

One other thing to consider, and this is something I really don't like to bring up, is that there could be "shills". Now this is a term in my opinion thrown around way to much I don't like using it at all. But I think you can agree if there was a conspiracy there would be an effort to have some sort of shills and disinfo would there not? You only have to look at Cass Sunstein's Conspiracy Theories to see how it might be used.

I'd just arrange for the twoofers to have "accidents" or to be convicted of unpleasant crimes, then take over their IDs and make it look like they are complete idiots and then have them fade away. Its working rather well don't you think.........

 

[Grizzly Bear]

You say that Gage might well be earning $75K a year even if not spearheading AE911T. That would seem to agree with my point that the professionals in AE911T, Lf911T and PfT would easily be able to pitch in and donate as well as use other private donations and DO AN FEA of their own to refute NIST>

Brought the idea up to him before... supposedly he "doesn't have the funding." Then again, the one model they did do of the fire illustrations was so severely malformed and lacking accurate inputs, they ****'d up their entire model. I don't have much optimism for them with as sloppy as their methods have been, and personally doubt their capacity to do anything right even if they made their own models

 

[jaydeehess]

Does the cost of bandwidth come from the $75K Gage receives for himself or from donations, before Gage gets paid?

Disregard that post. I see the topic on bandwidth was not about Gage.