Merged AE911T's Experts Speak Out Tour

[cjnewson88]

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.

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

 

[Drudgewire]

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

There was a macro going around fB yesterday which listed all the offices in WTC-7 the NWO obviously wanted to destroy. It ended with "9/11: The More You Know, The Less You Sleep." I had to comment that pointing out sleep deprivation causes trutherism might be counter-productive.

 

[Travis]

Hmmm, some questions he won't answer might include:

Why is fireproofing required in steel skyscrapers?
What would arrest the falling block?
Who did he sell his soul to?

 

[timhau]

Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science.

The what?

 

[Quad4_72]

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.

Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

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.

Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs.

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

 

[Quad4_72]

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

Yes that makes much more sense now. This post belongs as far away from science as possible.

 

[timhau]

This post belongs as far away from science as possible.

He/she did mention the word. Along with the usual whining for respect instead of trying to earn it, of course.

 

[uke2se]

What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work?

 

[Quad4_72]

What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work?

I would feel more comfortable if he didn't...

 

[Bell]

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.

Why? Gage doesn't do science.

 

[Horatius]

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.

Here's a serious question I'd like to hear him answer, from a thread I started last year:

I notice that none of this is actually related to Gage's work as an architect. It's all pretty much just "raising awareness". Can anyone point to any aspect of Gage's presentations that are directly attributable to Richard Gage's professional work as an architect? I don't believe I've ever seen him do or say anything that wasn't copied from someone else's work.

The "evidence" that Richard Gage presents is, so far as I can tell, taken entirely from other peoples' work. Those other people are not architects or engineers. So I'd like to know what Dickie Gage has actually done.

This question really has two sides*:

1) What new evidence or analysis has Gage produced? Has he pointed out any aspects of the events of 9/11 that support the CD hypothesis, which no one before him ever pointed out?

2) Has he ever specifically refuted any evidence or analysis from earlier, untrained people? That is, has he ever said to a layman, "Sure, you might think that Feature X was important, but based on my experience, I can tell you that it's not a feature that could distinguish a CD from a fire-induced collapse"?

As it stands now, no one has ever been able to point out any new work Gage has done that directly relates to the science or engineering of the collapses. This leads us to the unlikely situation that untrained laypeople did two amazing things: 1) They spotted all the relevant evidence, and conducted all the relevant analyses, so that there was nothing new for Gage to do; and 2) In doing the above, they made no mistakes at all; they went down no blind alleys, they found no red herrings, they made no calculation errors.

If that was possible, then why do we need A&E9/11 at all? If laypeople can do all the needed work, flawlessly, then why should the endorsement of A&E9/11 carry any weight?




*It's interesting to note that, in the case of the NIST reports, we can say "Yes" to both these questions.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

 

[Dash80]

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

Hehe, even my nine year old daughter found that ridiculous.

 

[Horatius]

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

Nope....

Well he made them all look like morons with this.......

[qimg]http://i643.photobucket.com/albums/uu158/thesmith1_photos/BoxBoy.jpg[/qimg]

Which is noting more than re-enacting the sorts of experiments truthers were doing with things like chicken wire models years before.

Just a stupider remake of the original, like Rollerball.

 

[Sabrina]

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

I swear to FSM, if someone makes one more attempt to bring up that stupid meme that WTC7 was demolished to destroy the documents and papers it contained, I will hunt them down and do very bad things to them.

It's called a freakin' SHREDDER... Geez...

 

[Scott Sommers]

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

That's because he is a Truther pretending to not be one. In his previous 6 posts, he appeared much more interested in members knowing what he really believes. I guess he changed his mind.

Truthers actually put their own reputation and safety at risk for the betterment of society when they stand up to the government's official conspiracy theory of 911.
I'm a truther, but I'm not trying to exploit anyone. I just want to get to the truth about how those 3 buildings fell. And my major motivating factor is the tragic fate of the victims. So please, don't hate truthers for simply digging in to the science for the sake of justice.

 

[Quad4_72]

I swear to FSM, if someone makes one more attempt to bring up that stupid meme that WTC7 was demolished to destroy the documents and papers it contained, I will hunt them down and do very bad things to them.

It's called a freakin' SHREDDER... Geez...

We dispose of our secret documents by blowing our offices up, allowing any papers inside the building to be ejected onto the street for everyone to see

 

[DGM]

We dispose of our secret documents by blowing our offices up, allowing any papers inside the building to be ejected onto the street for everyone to see

What's wrong with this? No true American would dare throw their leaders under the bus. If someone found something they would burn it, don't make waves, that's our motto.

 

[Quad4_72]

What's wrong with this? No true American would dare throw their leaders under the bus. If someone found something they would burn it, don't make waves, that's our motto.

Exactly. That's why you noticed Ground Zero looked similar to how New York City looks during New years eve. All of those documents thrown about everywhere looked like confetti. But we knew our citizens would be too afraid to look at any of them for fear of us putting them in our patented FEMA DEATH CAMPS.