Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

[sheeplesnshills]

Can YOU show me 1,000 structural engineers?

can you show me the list of 1000 astronomers who insist that the earth goes around the sun.

Or 1000 geologists that insist the earth is an oblate spheroid?


why is there no such list, because everyone in the field knows that the evidence is overwhelming and no one in any power opposes the theory.

This is not always the case in science. Take "intelligent design", this is regularly opposed publicly by scientists because of the dangers such idiocy presents to our education system (in the US). but even in such a situation they don't go around assembly lists of evolutionists although individuals have stated the position very forcibly eg Dawkins.

The Truth movement does not come anywhere close to that of the Creationist one.......its essentially in the same place as the flat earthers or the Ptolemaic astronomers. Demonstrably wrong but not worth the effort to try to persuade mad people that they are wrong and knowing that anyone mad enough to believe in a flat earth or the Ptolemaic system is likely not capable of understanding the proof even if it was present.

 

[mrkinnies]

I will bet that none of them are truthers.

Who knows but that makes no difference at all.

 

[mrkinnies]

can you show me the list of 1000 astronomers who insist that the earth goes around the sun.

Or 1000 geologists that insist the earth is an oblate spheroid?


why is there no such list, because everyone in the field knows that the evidence is overwhelming and no one in any power opposes the theory.

This is not always the case in science. Take "intelligent design", this is regularly opposed publicly by scientists because of the dangers such idiocy presents to our education system (in the US). but even in such a situation they don't go around assembly lists of evolutionists although individuals have stated the position very forcibly eg Dawkins.

The Truth movement does not come anywhere close to that of the Creationist one.......its essentially in the same place as the flat earthers or the Ptolemaic astronomers. Demonstrably wrong but not worth the effort to try to persuade mad people that they are wrong and knowing that anyone mad enough to believe in a flat earth or the Ptolemaic system is likely not capable of understanding the proof even if it was present.

In your opinion, but backed by no facts whatsoever.

Actually, your last paragraph is very good and can equally be applied to those who believe the official story too.

 

[Edx]

Who knows but that makes no difference at all.

If they arent truthers why would you want to use a structural engineer to help you work on a building that according to truthers doesn't understand that laws of physics?

Also, if you are going to be treated by a doctor doesnt believe in a germ theory is that irrelevant to you as well?

 

[Edx]

Actually, your last paragraph is very good and can equally be applied to those who believe the official story too.

Except the TM is demonstrably fringe and demonstrably irrelevant. Creationism is too, its just scientists are more likely to speak out against them because they have been trying to get their brand of idoiocy taught in schools for decades.

All you claim is that everyone who doesnt agree with you is brainwashed, which is presumably how you justify AE911's pathetically miniscule figure on their website.

 

[mrkinnies]

If they arent truthers why would you want to use a structural engineer to help you work on a building that according to truthers doesn't understand that laws of physics?

Also, if you are going to be treated by a doctor doesnt believe in a germ theory is that irrelevant to you as well?

You are suggesting that all truthers view all structural engineers as being liars. That is simply not the case.

My wife is a doctor and works alongside a female doctor who is Catholic and doesn't believe in contraception. That doctor will administer contraception if required but does her best to advise patients of the ethical consequences as she sees them, much to the annoyance of my wife who is not religious at all.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I use structural engineers too. They know far more than I about detailing, Eurocodes and health & safety requirements since they deal with this stuff everyday. Most of the time all I get from them is detailing for code compliance since the principles of the structure have already been given to them by me.

That because you do simple work. WTC 1, 2 and 7 was not simple work.

The principles of structures are very simple, the hard part is proving mathematically that a structural design can withstand the necessary tolerances for safety and to meet building codes. I can't do the latter nor have any interest in doing so.

[/QUOTE]

so why are you on here claiming to be an authority on the subject, claiming what should and should not have happened??????

 

[mrkinnies]

Except the TM is demonstrably fringe and demonstrably irrelevant. Creationism is too, its just scientists are more likely to speak out against them because they have been trying to get their brand of idoiocy taught in schools for decades.

All you claim is that everyone who doesnt agree with you is brainwashed, which is presumably how you justify AE911's pathetically miniscule figure on their website.

If you took a random sample of people walking down one street and asked them about the details of 9/11, I very much doubt whether even one percent of those people could tell you what plane was meant to have hit the Pentagon, who was allegedly flying the planes, which of the twin towers fell first, what FAA protocol is for planes which unexpectedly change course or that WTC7 even collapsed. Yet they believe in the story anyway because the powers that be and the media told them it happened.

 

[Edx]

You are suggesting that all truthers view all structural engineers as being liars. That is simply not the case.

You say you work with structural engineers, yet you say whether they are truthers or not is irrelevant. Yet, you think that to believe the buildings collapsed from fire with no demolition means you dont understand basic physics, you claim experts are brainwashed like CTBUH. Why would you trust a structural engineer that according to you doesnt understand basic physics and is brainwashed incompetent?

My wife is a doctor and works alongside a female doctor who is Catholic and doesn't believe in contraception. That doctor will administer contraception if required but does her best to advise patients of the ethical consequences as she sees them, much to the annoyance of my wife who is not religious at all.

What relevance is that? If your wife's doctor colleague believed that contraception would give someone cancer, then yes it is quite relevant, because that would be incompetence. But the doctor presumably understands how contraception works and what the benefits and negatives are biologically. According to what you said, she only disagrees with it ethically. How is that a relevant comparision to what we are talking about? I gave you an example. Would you or would you not feel awkward about getting treated by a doctor that did not accept germ theory of disease?

 

[Edx]

If you took a random sample of people walking down one street and asked them about the details of 9/11, I very much doubt whether even one percent of those people could tell you what plane was meant to have hit the Pentagon, who was allegedly flying the planes, which of the twin towers fell first, what FAA protocol is for planes which unexpectedly change course or that WTC7 even collapsed. Yet they believe in the story anyway because the powers that be and the media told them it happened.

I find it hard to believe you could misunderstand me by accident.

Im not talking about random people in the street, Im talking about in the professional scientific/engineering community. Now with that in mind, go read my post again.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

In your opinion, but backed by no facts whatsoever."

typical twoofer hand wave.....
Ok please show me a list of scientists that have gone on record opposing the falt eath theory or the ptolomaic system (Galileo? ) I cannot find any after a search.

Actually, your last paragraph is very good and can equally be applied to those who believe the official story too.

How? building codes world wide have been changed because of it, wars been started and continue to be fought because of it, aircraft cockpit doors reinforced, airport security procedures changed, the rules regarding what to do in the event of a hijack etc etc ie its accepted in the same way that evolution and the heliocentric system is.

twooferism has affected nothing of any import at all.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

If you took a random sample of people walking down one street and asked them about the details of 9/11, I very much doubt whether even one percent of those people could tell you what plane was meant to have hit the Pentagon, who was allegedly flying the planes, which of the twin towers fell first, what FAA protocol is for planes which unexpectedly change course or that WTC7 even collapsed. Yet they believe in the story anyway because the powers that be and the media told them it happened.

a big chunk of them probably believe in gods and fortune telling too....so what?
As we've repeatedly stated, science isn't a democracy. If something is proved wrong, all but the insane, move on to the new reality.

 

[mrkinnies]

That because you do simple work. WTC 1, 2 and 7 was not simple work.

so why are you on here claiming to be an authority on the subject, claiming what should and should not have happened??????

Can I remind you that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were designed by architectural firms, or do they not count as building experts in your eyes?

I have never claimed to be an authority, that is a fallacy spread by you and a few others on this thread. I have my opinion and can only express it as I see things. I admit I have weakness in explaining the principles and engineering complexities but that doesn't mean I am wrong. I certainly cannot do it using mathematics. Then again NIST doesn't explain them either and NIST is full of clever bods who should know how to do just that. They used their own models to develop the likely scenarios and tweaked them until they gave a best fit although we'll never know what data they used in their tweaking because they won't release it for National Safety reasons. Yet despite all that, their models don't fit.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

My wife is a doctor and works alongside a female doctor who is Catholic and doesn't believe in contraception. That doctor will administer contraception if required but does her best to advise patients of the ethical consequences as she sees them, much to the annoyance of my wife who is not religious at all.

How is this relevant? please explain...........

 

[mrkinnies]

a big chunk of them probably believe in gods and fortune telling too....so what?
As we've repeatedly stated, science isn't a democracy. If something is proved wrong, all but the insane, move on to the new reality.

Exactly, and when the truth movement proves the official story is wrong, everyone except the insane will move on to the new reality.

 

[mrkinnies]

How is this relevant? please explain...........

It's relevant to the principle you gave. Doctors don't just deal with germs you know, they deal with all sorts of matters including giving out contraception and associated advice. The point I was making is that my wife is happy to offer contraceptive advice based on a patients needs and my wife's medical knowledge. Her colleague on the other hand factors in her own religious beliefs too. In other words, her medical advice maybe somewhat distorted by her beliefs which is akin to visiting a doctor who gives germ advice but who's underlying beliefs differ from normal medical knowledge.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Can I remind you that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were designed by architectural firms, or do they not count as building experts in your eyes?

I said you were unqualified to comment, not that all architectural firms were unqualified. They have the structural engineers with the experience and training to design such buildings, you do not. It is noticeable that they do not dispute the reasons why the buildings failed......

I have never claimed to be an authority, that is a fallacy spread by you and a few others on this thread. I have my opinion and can only express it as I see things.

By saying you were an architect, you (like Gage) are doing just that so you are being disingenuous claiming otherwise.

I admit I have weakness in explaining the principles and engineering complexities but that doesn't mean I am wrong.

No, it merely shows that your opinion is worthless as it is baseless.

I certainly cannot do it using mathematics.

Do you admit that the people employed by NIST can and did?

Then again NIST doesn't explain them either

Yes they did, you simply could not understand what they did.

and NIST is full of clever bods who should know how to do just that. They used their own models to develop the likely scenarios and tweaked them until they gave a best fit

What else could they do? there are too many unknowns and unknowables for them to do anything else. And they say that from the start.

although we'll never know what data they used in their tweaking because they won't release it for National Safety reasons.

Are you saying you cannot work out what those might be?

Yet despite all that, their models don't fit.

They fit well enough for the purposes they were made. If they fitted exactly it would be more suspicious We have a hurricane approaching the east coast of the US and the models all differ from each other and all differ from what happens in reality, why do you think that is and why do you think modeling the WTC7 should be any different?

 

[Marokkaan]

I said you were unqualified to comment, not that all architectural firms were unqualified. They have the structural engineers with the experience and training to design such buildings, you do not. It is noticeable that they do not dispute the reasons why the buildings failed......




By saying you were an architect, you (like Gage) are doing just that so you are being disingenuous claiming otherwise.



No, it merely shows that your opinion is worthless as it is baseless.



Do you admit that the people employed by NIST can and did?

Yes they did, you simply could not understand what they did.



What else could they do? there are too many unknowns and unknowables for them to do anything else. And they say that from the start.



Are you saying you cannot work out what those might be?



They fit well enough for the purposes they were made. If they fitted exactly it would be more suspicious We have a hurricane approaching the east coast of the US and the models all differ from each other and all differ from what happens in reality, why do you think that is and why do you think modeling the WTC7 should be any different?

Then why they did need a highschool teacher to change the report?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

It's relevant to the principle you gave. Doctors don't just deal with germs you know, they deal with all sorts of matters including giving out contraception and associated advice. The point I was making is that my wife is happy to offer contraceptive advice based on a patients needs and my wife's medical knowledge. Her colleague on the other hand factors in her own religious beliefs too. In other words, her medical advice maybe somewhat distorted by her beliefs which is akin to visiting a doctor who gives germ advice but who's underlying beliefs differ from normal medical knowledge.

again you fail to grasp an issue. Are you always this mushy headed? beliefs are not facts. germs are. I don't care if my doctor is religious or not, I do care that they know about bacteria. One might refuse to treat me because of their religion, all I'll do is find another, but they might kill me if they are ignorant about germs!

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Then why they did need a highschool teacher to change the report?

And that change had what effect on the report? Thats right, none at all. It wasn't important to NIST because its not important to anyone but twoofers.
No one cares how fast a building falls once its falling 1g or 1.3g doesn't affect the result. The building is toast and so are the folks in it.
What caused the failure is the important bit not what happened once it had.

Someone pointed out a minor error in the description of the fall, and they corrected that minor error. Thats all.