• 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 AE911T's Experts Speak Out Tour

I heard a rumour there might be a live stream. Does anyone know if this is true? And if it is, can someone get one of their signs onto the stream?
 
Gage pretty much lost my interest with his inability to do more than university speeches. His campaign would have better served doing more to get into the political system and to confront the professional bodies with influence to get his crap published; of course his pseudo-professional quack work obviously inhibits him from doing it, he's shown no personal initiative. He's now going to waste his donor's money going on speeches that'll accomplish nothing. He likes reliving this cycle over and over.

If that's all his efforts still accomplish it's no wonder I rarely if ever feel a need to comment on him anymore
 
Last edited:
Richard Gage said:
Sponsor a Student Attendee - Donate $10 to AE911Truth Now (100 needed)
Many of the students that come to our events request free tickets - and we will not turn anyone away from the education of the crime of the century that has manipulated millions of people across the country and around the world to go to war. Your $10 donation enlightens a soul. THIS IS A DONATION ONLY, NOT A TICKET FOR ENTRY.
Click to expand...

Apparently, not only can you get in for free, but you also drain ten bucks from someone who wanted it to be used for a potential true believer. This is from his schedule, where the first three items are fund-raising gimmicks. Sponsor a Student $10, Sponsor an advert $100 (with 10 sponsors needed) and Sponsor a City $1000, where they can hire people to print up leaflets and post signs and stuff. They even mention that this is for weaker cities (like NYC and Chi, for instance) where there's an insufficient following.

So, just trot along to your local venue. Richard Gage says you won't be turned away. (But wanna bet there's some serious pressure to "contribute"?)
 
I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Myriad said:
I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...

I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues.
Click to expand...


Sure, that's understandable, at least as far as turn-out is concerned. And it would fit into the aforementioned category of serious research or reporting of the situation. As long as such goals aren't conflated with fantasies of turning the lectures into impromptu debates.

Is there some other way besides turn-out to assess desperation? Arguably, desperation set in years ago. If there are any major changes in message or tone I'd expect to see them echoed on the Web site.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Myriad said:
I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...

I've never paid anything to these cretin. If I were trying to crash one of their events, I'd go there and say I was reporting for a student newspaper. I'd say something like I am not a supporter, but the paper asked me to write a report, so I'm not donating anything. Ask them if them want coverage in your paper.

Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't.
 
Last edited:
I didn't mean to imply that you'd paid for admission, Scott. Just that you're someone with a legitimate journalistic interest in such events. They should let you in free as press, even knowing exactly who you are (though knowing who they are, they wouldn't).

Your advice would certainly work (though not the specifics; I don't think I could pass for a student reporter). However, if I did go to one of the lectures, even though I would report what I observed including a head count, my main reason for attending would be for entertainment. And since I'm morally opposed to both enriching Truthers and stealing entertainment, it would be a bit of a dilemma.
 
I understood that...or at least I didn't mean to imply that's what you meant. I'm just passing on advice to someone trying to get into these things...or I'm trying to anyway. I'm not feeling very well this morning. I think it's caffeine withdrawal.

Anyway, I agree with your general sentiment that these things are a waste of life. I suppose if you want an authentic feeling, you have to go. My feeling now after spending so much time with these guys is that it really wasn't worth it. They are dumb as a pile of rocks. The smart ones are here on the JREF, if you can believe that. I can suggest things to look for while someone is in such an event, but it would be more like suggesting ways to kill time in prison than intellectual guidance.
 
Scott Sommers said:
Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be dishonest? You don't even have to say that either, if you have a blog, you can be considered a journalist.

I'll be in NYC when they are so I wanted to go, but Myriad made me feel bad cause I do totally want to go to debate. I've had my question I would ask since 2010, I wanted to ask it when he debated Dave Thomas on C2C:

"Mr Gage, in your ppt you claim 118 people witnessed explosions and saw flashes on 911 during the WTC7 collapse and then proceed to show several quotes from the eye-witnesses. In your debate with Mark Roberts in 2008, Roberts pointed out that in your presentation you took only two eye-witness quotes about the flashes and split them up over several slides, not citing every single quote, in order to make it appear like more than just two of witnesses said they saw flashes. You did not respond to that claim in 2008 and 4 years later, you're still doing this in your ppt.

If you're going to ask well intentioned folk to donate money to your cause, don't you feel that you owe it to them the try and honestly represent the events and the eye-witness accounts? Did you feel that only two witnesses describing flashes wasn't sufficient enough to support your claim? If you didn't, then why?"

I might trim it down a little. But if no one else from the boards is gonna go to the NYC event (on the 23rd of June?) then yeah, I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand.
 
fourtoe said:
I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand.
Click to expand...

As someone that has been to his "shows", you will not be in a debate with Gage. He runs the shows, he is not doing these to debate. He is making his pitch and is not interested at all in debating his stance. If you have a friendly question that he can answer and make himself look knowledgeable, his staff will allow it to happen. If you want to stand up and look like a "shill" he will also help you to make that happen.

You might notice I refer to his appearances as "shows". That is what they are.

Go if you want but, don't expect to change the minds of anyone there. He really is only preaching to the choir (that's how he wants it).
 
Controlled demolition on 911

The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are conducting a world wide tour to premier their new documentary, "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out".
The program begins with a 30 minute introduction by Founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, then the 90 minute Documentary, followed by a Q&A session.
I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd.
I don't have a lot of time for discussion in this thread until after the show because we still have a lot of work to do to get ready.
I will be shooting video but I'm pretty slow at editing. I will try to do up some segments of individual questions from this forum as a priority.
Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science.

Thank you!

Sorry, I can't do URLs here yet but please do watch the pre-release version of the documentary on YouTube. "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out"
 
I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum.
 
I've yet to see a really detailed explanation that has not been refuted by some sort of architect or scientist that fully explains the natural "progressive" collapse of WT7.

Likewise, I've yet to see any sort of scientific architectural argument in favor of "controlled demolition" that has not been refuted by skeptics that debunk the conspiracy theories.

But, I've yet to see any sort of reason (vague, substantial or co-incidental) given by any conspiracy theorist that gives a good motive, reason or purpose to take down WT7 in a controlled demolition. The idea that the twin towers were a CD is even more ludicrous, and even though you can point to all sorts of evidence that can be construed as some sort of evidence in support of CD (that, on closer inspection, nearly all break down under scrutiny), it's just impossible to fit any sort of controlled demolition idea into any sort of coherent conspiracy that fits in with reality.

Its not something that either side is going to able to ever prove to the other beyond all reasonable doubt.

The people advocating this controlled demolition theory I see as comparable to a group of conspirators in possession of a magic unicorn in a boat arguing with people on land who insist that before they are allowed to moor they prove the length of the coastline. Each side is going to better the others arguments nearly indefinitely[wp], but the burden of proof lies with the people making the extraordinary claims. Occam s Razor.

No unicorn.

The conspiracy theorists are left lost at sea where they will likely drown in their own sea of delusions.
 
Last edited:
tntruther said:
The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are
Click to expand...


..... Scientists that have controversial views.

This is the science and technology section, if you have a particular science argument to put forward then state it. I'm not watching a video from these people, seen most of them already, but you need to mention specifics, else you'll just get post after post of ridicule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom