Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

Status
Not open for further replies.
Marokkaan said:
A nice story, but you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives....
Click to expand...

So you hand wave his arguments by asking if he is an expert in explosives, then he tells you he is actually an expert and even shows you his qualification.

Yet, you're still have waving that? Why dont you go back to his points and actually address them?
 
Marokkaan said:
A nice story, but you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives....
Click to expand...

I fail to comprehend how a human being could survive so long without a brain .....
 
Marokkaan said:
A nice story, but you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives....
Click to expand...

And just as expected you completely ignored what I said. Even after you have seen a part of my service record that clearly states what I did in the military you just cannot accept the basic fact that I do indeed have broad hands on experience with several types of explosives and incendiaries and that that experience was a key part of my job for several years or that that experience can be applied to discuss and point out the flaws in your fantasies.

Let me ask you this. Now that I have shown you mine, why don't you show me yours. Show us what qualifies you to even question what I have said?
 
Sam.I.Am said:
And just as expected you completely ignored what I said. Even after you have seen a part of my service record that clearly states what I did in the military you just cannot accept the basic fact that I do indeed have broad hands on experience with several types of explosives and incendiaries and that that experience was a key part of my job for several years or that that experience can be applied to discuss and point out the flaws in your fantasies.

Let me ask you this. Now that I have shown you mine, why don't you show me yours. Show us what qualifies you to even question what I have said?
Click to expand...

you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives

You are just lying.
 
Marokkaan said:
you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives

You are just lying.
Click to expand...

How do you know he is lying? Unless you're going to present some evidence that YOU know what the hell you're talking about what does this dick measuring contest meant to achieve?
 
Marokkaan said:
you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives

You are just lying.
Click to expand...

So, because you don't like his answer, and the fact that it shows you to be completely clueless and that your arguments of "you don't know what you're talking about" to be utter rubbish, you're now going to claim he is lying? You are the most pathetic life-form it has been my misfortune to encounter in my brief time on this board. You truly should be ashamed of yourself. You deny all facts and truth, and instead fall back on fantasy, calling others liars for daring to show you to be just that.
 
Marokkaan said:
you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives

You are just lying.
Click to expand...

I just reported your post because you are completely out of line. You continue to show no respect for anything that is presented to you, which is why I put you on ignore a while back.

Stop attacking people without cause.
 
Marokkaan said:
you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives

You are just lying.
Click to expand...

And I rest my case. Clearly there is nothing that I or anyone else can do to convince you of just how wrong you are. I didn't really expect any other outcome with you in particular but at least in the future other people can see a good example of just how mule headed truthers can be when faced with simple and basic facts that go against their delusions and fantasies.

Go eat your shoe like you promised you sad, sad excuse of a man.
 
chrismohr said:
Alienentity and others,

Following through on my earlier inquiry about the "lateral ejection" of the big steel beams sticking out of the buildings, I at first asked in essence, can we show evidence that all the beams we see sticking out of the buildings were directly above parts of the debris pile, therefore NO EJECTION? Conversely, another question: come to think of it, in all the WTC collapse videos I've watched, I don't remember ever seeing huge beams soaring horizontally through the air. I have of course seen huge panels break off and tip over and away from the building, but no beams shooting like arrows horizontally.

I need to wrap my mind around this new information; does anyone have answers to either of these questions? Thanks, Chris
Click to expand...

Hi Chris,

Yes, I believe the word 'ejection' is incorrect. As others have pointed out, as the exterior structure came apart, large sections of it fell outside the footprint, it wasn't just a few steel beams here and there being flung out.

So yes, if you look at the picture of the Winter Garden (that's the one that caught my eye) you can see large swaths of tower debris, and a few miscellaneous beams embedded in the adjacent tower.
Here's a better picture I just found which shows the embedded fragments which AE911Truth claims were flung there by high explosives...
I believe the building in question is 3 WFC, American Express Tower. According to Wiki, it wasn't just a few scattered beams that hit the building, either!
'Three World Financial Center was severely damaged by the falling debris when the World Trade Center towers collapsed on September 11, 2001. The building's southeast corner took heavy structural damage, though the effects were not enough to create a threat of collapse. The building had to be closed for repairs from September 11, 2001 until May 2002 as a result of damage sustained in the terrorist attacks.'

financial_ctr.jpg


speared_bldg.jpg
 
I don't know, alien.

Surely they will just say of course it wasnt isolated pieces the whole building was exploding outward by these massive explosives, so of course other debris landed around there.
 
Edx said:
I don't know, alien.

Surely they will just say of course it wasnt isolated pieces the whole building was exploding outward by these massive explosives, so of course other debris landed around there.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, many truthers will deny whatever evidence is presented. I don't think Chris or anybody else is going to change that fact.

Surely they won't argue that a majority of the building mass was ejected by explosives though? Yet an awful lot of the tower structure ended up well outside their footprints.

When has this ever happened in a controlled demolition??? (never, if memory serves)

ETA plus, viewing the pics again, it seems very hard to imagine that a multi-story segment of exterior columns seen on the Winter Garden, was flung there by an explosion. Wouldn't a gigantic series of explosions break apart the steel into lethal fragments, or shrapnel?
Why didn't we see ultra-high-speed shrapnel? (Ryan Mackey pointed this out ages ago)
 
Last edited:
Chris, one other point is that I've more or less avoided dwelling on the tower collapses where possible because I just find it a disturbing subject; so many people lost their lives, I find it difficult to view the footage.

I'm more comfortable with building 7 for that reason.
 
I know that I have seen early photos (from around the 13th or so i think) from above where you can see a section that stretched roughly from the NW corner of the north tower to the winter garden. Due to the smoke at the time it was kind of hard to tell between the building segments and what remained of the pedestrian bridge although a bit of common sense says that if the pedestrian bridge collapsed then clearly something large fell on top of it.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Nothing to wrap your mind around Chris. The towers were 1300 plus feet high and when they fell the outer columns were pushed out and peeled back. 600 feet is less than half the height so if some of them went that far is not at all surprising.
Click to expand...
What's surprising to me is that after years of research this is the first time I have heard this. Remember, I first got all my "information" about 9/11 from 9/11 Truth friends. "Facts" like: no steel structure ever collapsed due to fire; rivers and pools of molten steel everywhere (with bogus photos to prove it); thermites absolutely proven in the dust; buildings brought down by CD always go at freefall and CD is the only explanation for freefall collapse; barely any fires in WTC 7 etc etc etc. I accepted most of these as true and it took many hundreds of hours of research to see how incredibly false they are. You have to be a nonscientist like myself to appreciate that this stuff looks good at first glance, and you don't even know what questions to ask (eventually I figured out that asking, "is this true?" about every claim they make is a good first question to ask). Plus, for three years it seems all I read about was arguments that there was lateral ejection of big steel beams. I summarized three explanations in part 5 of my YouTube series but never questioned the core premise: did it really happen at all?
 
chrismohr said:
What's surprising to me is that after years of research this is the first time I have heard this. Remember, I first got all my "information" about 9/11 from 9/11 Truth friends. "Facts" like: no steel structure ever collapsed due to fire; rivers and pools of molten steel everywhere (with bogus photos to prove it); thermites absolutely proven in the dust; buildings brought down by CD always go at freefall and CD is the only explanation for freefall collapse; barely any fires in WTC 7 etc etc etc. I accepted most of these as true and it took many hundreds of hours of research to see how incredibly false they are. You have to be a nonscientist like myself to appreciate that this stuff looks good at first glance, and you don't even know what questions to ask (eventually I figured out that asking, "is this true?" about every claim they make is a good first question to ask). Plus, for three years it seems all I read about was arguments that there was lateral ejection of big steel beams. I summarized three explanations in part 5 of my YouTube series but never questioned the core premise: did it really happen at all?
Click to expand...

What a great description of the way these things are presented to the uninitiated. Amazing to think that after all this time you're still uncovering useful new information. Great to have someone like you around, Chris!

btw, I dug up a video clip where Leslie robertson, Chief SE of the towers, talks about molten steel. He mentions it in passing, as it was presented, but it still is clearly attributable to him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjmHqES_lto

 
Last edited:
Marokkaan said:
A nice story, but you still can not proof, you have the expertise about these incendiaries, about the thousand different explosives....
Click to expand...
You don't need to be an expert to understand

Fe2O3 + 2Al --> 2Fe + Al2O3

which is the thermite reaction. That's all thermite is. Infact a school child will understand this, but a truther can't. And a if a truther can't understand that then they certainly aren't going to understand reaction rates, particle size, the manufacture process, difference between incendiary and explosive, etc, etc.

In a truthers mind thermite is magical. Nano-thermite is even more magical, it can do anything.

Marrokaan - get an education with some chemistry before you spout off about things you know nothing of.
 
chrismohr said:
Alienentity,

This is completely new information to me. Are you saying there was no 600 foot ejection of these steel beams, that these parts of the building were part of a tower collapse that went out 600 feet and some of the collapsing debris just got stuck in the buildings? I don't really know where all the beams went to, in which directions and into which buildings. Is this a consistent pattern for all these beams? Can you say this explains all the beams lodged into buildings?

My video part 5 doesn't even mention any of this. Ryan Mackey's white paper doesn't have this, if I recall. I never saw this on any of your videos, at least not one I've seen. We all had other hypotheses, like wind, bow and arrow effect, pinball effect of beams hitting other collapsing material and bouncing outward, etc. I would have pursued this before developing part 5 if I had known! Is this really true?
Click to expand...


The perimeter columns toppled after the floors collapse passed them.
You can see the wall assemblies , attached like a ladder, reaching the Winter Garden Chandler claims were exploded to 500 feet.

columns.jpg

BasqueArch said:
.....


3C. From this video of WTC1 stop it two seconds after failure (at 33sec). The plumes on the right side are about 60 feet from the building. Stop the video two seconds later (at 35 sec). The plumes are about 120 feet from the building.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVDaAufKnLc

3D David Chandler calculates that at this failed floor WTC1 (96th floor), the explosive velocity of the columns propelled 600 feet horizontally onto the Winter Garden would be about 50 mph. At two seconds after failure, this would put the exploded columns at 73 fps x 2 seconds = 146 feet away from the building, outpacing the dust plume (60 feet) and should have been visible in the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUKLOlIhang

At four seconds after failure, this would put the exploded columns at 73 fps x 4 seconds = 292 feet away from the building, outpacing the dust plume (120 feet) and should have been visible in videos.

3E. But since the expelled columns ahead of the dust plume are not visible, the columns could not have reached 600 feet by the use of large explosive charges in the ceiling plenum, or elsewhere for that matter, they reached 600 feet by toppling, David Chandler and the CTs are wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4

....

​
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom