• 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.

AE911truth "debate challenge"

jakesteele said:
... the Gage challenge. ...
Click to expand...
Gage claims CD, thermite, and high explosives destroyed the WTC; not sure how he ignores the kinetic energy impact equal to 1300 and 2093 pound of TNT, or the heat energy from the fires before collapse were equal the heat from 2,700 Tons of thermite; how does Gage ignore reality. Which failed fantasy is debatable? How can we debate liars (or nuts) who have a fantasy dumbed down to fool a fringe few 911 truth followers who can't figure out 911 after 13 years.

Where is 911 truth evidence hidden? Which fantasy topic can we pick to debate Gage? In the Debate, Gage will Gish Gallop everyone to death. Like debating Santa, or Bigfoot, 911 truth claims are an order of magnitude dumber.

I guess we could start the debate with, "where do we find silent explosives", or "how do you get thermite to leave no products behind". Or, "why is 911 truth evidence free". Yes, the answer is 911 truth claims are BS, fantasy, and lies. oh my
 
That wouldn't surprise me. And they'll probably say they had no "qualified applicants," which is a slightly less confessional way of saying they disqualified all the applicants on grounds they likely won't reveal.
 
JayUtah said:
That wouldn't surprise me. And they'll probably say they had no "qualified applicants," which is a slightly less confessional way of saying they disqualified all the applicants on grounds they likely won't reveal.
Click to expand...

How many qualified applicants would you estimate they had? More than ... zero?
No qualified applicants more realistically means Rhett Butler's closing words.
 
OK, the debate challenge is going into its second year. Here's the information I just received:

March 15, 2015 is the 2nd Annual 9/11 Physics Debate.
It will be broadcast on Dr. Kevin Barrett's No Lies Radio Show.

Here is last year's debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m8XaLdGKBw

Please see if JREF can come up with a PhD in Physics.
We lowered the Hirsch Index score to 40, to make it easier.

The honorarium for the winner, to be determined by an email
survey to 30 university physics departments is .911 Bitcoin.
www.911Debate.org

Thanks,

Rick Shaddock
Association for Nine Eleven Truth Awareness
 
Lol, here we go again.

What sort of audience would one expect to be listening to Dr Kevin Ryan's No lies radio show ? Would it only be people with a Hirsh index score to 40 ?

The winner to be determined by and email survey to 30 university physics departments:confused:

Is this really how 911 truth expects to prove 911 was an inside job ?

This is nothing more than delusional fantasy created by people who feel they have a superiority complex.
 
chrismohr said:
OK, the debate challenge is going into its second year. Here's the information I just received:

March 15, 2015 is the 2nd Annual 9/11 Physics Debate.It will be broadcast on Dr. Kevin Barrett's No Lies Radio Show.

Here is last year's debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m8XaLdGKBw

Please see if JREF can come up with a PhD in Physics.
We lowered the Hirsch Index score to 40, to make it easier.

The honorarium for the winner, to be determined by an email
survey to 30 university physics departments is .911 Bitcoin.www.911Debate.org

Thanks,

Rick Shaddock
Association for Nine Eleven Truth Awareness
Click to expand...


"2nd Annual 9/11 Physics Debate" = 2nd annual bout of pointless online posturing from a fixated dipstick.

"No Lies" = No impact, reach or relevence.

"JREF" = who's that then? Keep up, Rick.

"We" = "I"

"honorarium" = imaginarium.

".911 Bitcoin" = a less corporeal iteration of that which wasn't won by (or awarded to) Mark Basile (or anyone else) last year.

"Association for Nine Eleven Truth Awareness" = "Me on My Computer"

I'd pick this drivel apart further, but what would be the point?




Spanx said:
What sort of audience would one expect to be listening to Dr Kevin Ryan's No lies radio show ?
Click to expand...


This sort:

SherlockShaddock__zpsd9822881.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ape of Good Hope said:
".911 Bitcoin" = a less corporeal iteration of that which wasn't won by (or awarded to) Mark Basile (or anyone else) last year.
Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence Shaddock actually paid the prize. It was initially noted on Mark Basiles site (owned by Shaddock) but then it disappeared.

If he did, so much for the Basile study being open on finance. :rolleyes:
 
chrismohr said:
Here is last year's debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m8XaLdGKBw
Click to expand...

I don't see any debate. I see them crowing over having had no one rise to their challenge -- so they say. And I see them pounding up against a set of straw man in a clearly amateur video. Did I miss where any actual debate occurred?

I'm serious about the "PhD in physics" comment. The previous challenge was for a licensed engineer or two, who also had academic credentials. We know MileHighMadness applied. Now, suspiciously they only want academics. And they only want academics in physics, very few of whom would have any sort of qualification in forensic structural analysis, which is the governing science here.

So it seems they keep narrowing the criteria in order to make sure they stay unopposed.
 
JayUtah said:
I don't see any debate. I see them crowing over having had no one rise to their challenge -- so they say. And I see them pounding up against a set of straw man in a clearly amateur video. Did I miss where any actual debate occurred?

I'm serious about the "PhD in physics" comment. The previous challenge was for a licensed engineer or two, who also had academic credentials. We know MileHighMadness applied. Now, suspiciously they only want academics. And they only want academics in physics, very few of whom would have any sort of qualification in forensic structural analysis, which is the governing science here.

So it seems they keep narrowing the criteria in order to make sure they stay unopposed.
Click to expand...
There are actually two (not real) challenges. The engineering one was advanced by Richard Gage. This one is Rick Shaddocks scam.

Gage, I think dropped after people started questioning if they had a team that met their requirements. Funny thing, Gage himself couldn't be on the team(unless he cheats).
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
I don't see any debate. I see them crowing over having had no one rise to their challenge -- so they say. And I see them pounding up against a set of straw man in a clearly amateur video. Did I miss where any actual debate occurred?

I'm serious about the "PhD in physics" comment. The previous challenge was for a licensed engineer or two, who also had academic credentials. We know MileHighMadness applied. Now, suspiciously they only want academics. And they only want academics in physics, very few of whom would have any sort of qualification in forensic structural analysis, which is the governing science here.

So it seems they keep narrowing the criteria in order to make sure they stay unopposed.
Click to expand...

I never formally applied. I requested the names of the 9/11 debate team, and if the rules of the debate could be negotiated. Of course, I never got a direct response from AE Truth. Wayne Coste did response back to me thru his personally email account, after he had left AE Truth.
 
Last edited:
MileHighMadness said:
I never formally applied. I requested the names of the 9/11 debate team, and if the rules of the debate could be negotiated. Of course, I never got a direct response from AE Truth. Wayne Coste did response back to me thru his personally email account, after he had left AE Truth.
Click to expand...
Who would they field as a team (a question I also asked)? Gage and Szamboti are out.
 
MileHighMadness said:
... Wayne Coste did response back to me thru his personally email account, after he had left AE Truth.
Click to expand...

Say what? When did he leave them? :confused:
On the old website format (whch was current just a month ago), under Take Action, he is still listed as team leader of several teams:
  • Library Access
  • Congressional Outreach
  • Primary and Secondary School Outreach
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom