• 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.org to Ryan Mackey: "Debate our Rocket Scientist"

Mr.Herbert

Graduate Poster
Mr.Herbert
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
1,449
Yes, you read it correctly. The charlatan camp that calls themselves AE911Truth finally responded to my e-mail. I was simply asking Richard Gage why he forwarded Mr. Mackey's white paper to Dr. Griffin. Mr. Gage did not respond. I decided to forward my e-mails to other members of his staff. The response I received is asking for Ryan Mackey to debate them publicly, or write a white paper.

Below are the brief e-mail exchanges:

MY Original E-mail to Richard Gage:

----Original Message-----
> From:xxxxxxxx (Mr. Herbert)
> To:xxxxxxxxx (Mr. Gage)
> Sent: Wed, Oct 28, 2009 2:00 pm
> Subject: New England Presentation Tour
>
>
>
> Greetings Mr. Gage,
>
> On October 12th, I was in attendance at your presentation in Harvard
> Square. I presented you with a 3 ring binder. It was explained to
> you that it's contents was a white paper written by NASA scientist,
> Mr. Ryan Mackey and that it refuted all statements regarding NIST,
> made by Dr. Griffin in his book "Debunking 911 Debunking". I then
> explained to you that Dr. Griffin has failed to respond to Mr.
> Mackey since the paper was e-mailed and hand delivered to him. The
> reason why I brought it to you was so that you and your team would
> be able to read and refute the work done by Mr. Mackey. You stated
> at the beginning of your presentation, that while listening to Dr.
> Griffin on the radio, it was like getting hit by a 2 x 4. That it
> was Dr. Griffin that got you on your way to becoming interested in
> 911 Truth. Dr. Griffin has been proven wrong on all of the points
> he makes in his book. All of the points raised against the NIST
> report by Dr. Griffin have been proven incorrect by Mr. Mackey's
> white paper.
>
> It was brought to my attention that you posted on your website that
> you will be forwarding the binder I gave to you to Dr. Griffin.
> Although I am not surprised by this deflection, I did expect you to
> at least read it. Why not have some of your own members read it?
> Being "busy" is not an acceptable reason. Your life is now spent
> searching for the truth. Well, Mr. Gage, this white paper is sound
> science and has yet to be refuted. Science does not lie. It is the
> truth.
>
> I ask that if you have not forwarded this to Dr. Griffin, to please
> read it and then pass it along to your engineers. If you have sent
> it along, I ask that you download it from the internet.
>
> Here is a link to the PDF file:
> http://911guide.googlepages.com/drg_nist_review_2_1.pdf
>
> I eagerly await your response.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mr. P. Herbert

With no response from Gage, I forwarded the letter to several member of the AE911Truth staff. Although their addresses are not exactly public, it was quite easy to obtain them.

AE911 Truth Staff Member said:
Dear Mr. Herbert:It is curious that you seem to think it is the duty of AE911Truth to rebut Ryan Mackey's arguments against David Ray Griffin's book. When Ryan Mackey wants to rebut our evidence, via a white paper, or in a public debate with our rocket scientist, then we will respond. Meanwhile, may I suggest you look at Maintaining the Mirage: A Foray Into the Fallacy Factory of the Demolition Deniers, The Short Reign of Ryan Mackey and My Response to Ryan Mackey and the Self-Crushing Building Theory, "On Debunking 9/11 Debunking" .
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXX
AE911Truth
Click to expand...




I wrote this person back explaining that a debate with Ryan would be redundant since Mark Roberts has already refuted all of Gage's claims in a recorded debate. I also brought up Mr. Urich's open letter that has yet to be answered along with a link to it.


No, I don't expect Ryan to agree to donating any more of his time to debate with charlatans like him..... but it would be fun to watch. :)
 
I assume "our rocket scientist" refers to Dwain Deets.

Mr. Deets has produced absolutely nothing that I've seen. Thus, there is no debate.

Needless to say, I had no part of this "discussion," nor has anyone from Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth contacted me about this matter on any channel, despite the fact that my e-mail is on the cover page of my whitepaper. I should also add that I tackled and refuted all of the listed "responses" in later drafts of that whitepaper.

The words "epic fail" spring to mind.
 
Last edited:
When Ryan Mackey wants to rebut our evidence, via a white paper, or in a public debate with our rocket scientist, then we will respond.
Click to expand...

As if there's any difference between AE911's "evidence" and that of DR Griffin.
 
R.Mackey said:
I should also add that I tackled and refuted all of the listed "responses" in later drafts of that whitepaper.
Click to expand...

I addressed that as well in my response to them. ;)

add:

Please keep in mind that Griffin is sort of idolized by Gage. Gage states in the beginning of his presentation that listening to Griffin woke him to the TM. "Like I was hit with a 2x4 upside the head"

This is the reason why I presented the white paper to Gage. This was to show once again the failure of the TM in not listening to sound science.
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
I assume "our rocket scientist" refers to Dwain Deets.
Mr. Deets has produced absolutely nothing that I've seen. Thus, there is no debate.
Click to expand...

Correct! The only thing I could find was a brief presentation at the University of San Diego a few weeks ago.

6 minute video of his presentation:

 
patchbunny said:
Rocket scientist? Can't Gage find a licensed Structural Engineer or a licensed specialist in explosive demolitions?
Click to expand...

Hey! C'mon. Everybody knows that rocket scientists are the just about smartest people on earth. If a rocket scientist says 9/11 was an inside jobby job, that's good enough for me.

That is, of course, assuming a brain surgeon doesn't say otherwise
 
Which guy is it on AE911 that believes in Beam weapons and no planes?
 
Mr.Herbert said:
Please keep in mind that Griffin is sort of idolized by Gage. Gage states in the beginning of his presentation that listening to Griffin woke him to the TM. "Like I was hit with a 2x4 upside the head"
Click to expand...

See that mirrors my take. Listening to Griffen, I had assumed *he* had been hit on the head with a 2 x 4.
 
Mr.Herbert said:
Please keep in mind that Griffin is sort of idolized by Gage. Gage states in the beginning of his presentation that listening to Griffin woke him to the TM. "Like I was hit with a 2x4 upside the head"
Click to expand...

He listened to Griffin, he felt it was like a 2-by-4 to the head... the logical conclusion, folks, is that listening to Griffin induces brain damage. ;)
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
1 maroon springs to mind: Jim Fetzer!

Another 1 is: Judy Wood!
Click to expand...

Uh they arent on AE911 Chewey.

They have some credentialed person on there that believes in no planes and someone that believes in space beams, as you can see written in their profile. I have it written down somewhere.
 
Edx said:
Uh they arent on AE911 Chewey.

They have some credentialed person on there that believes in no planes and someone that believes in space beams, as you can see written in their profile. I have it written down somewhere.
Click to expand...

Wasn't Jim Fetzer part of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth with Steven Jones before they split it into 2 groups consisting of A&E For 9/11 Truth?
 
Not to drail the thread but.....

Why is it that "rocket science" has this prestige about it as if it is more difficult than other areas of science?

I can think of several topics within electrical engineering that are easily as difficult as the science and engineering of designing a functioning rocket....
 
I don't think it has any particular significance. You will note that I have never argued on the basis of my authority. Only reason it ever came up is because people asked me what I did for a living, and how I came to understand the basics of science. But I can imagine literally hundreds of professions that would provide an equally useful grounding.

However, in this case, it's obviously meant to respond to me personally. Which tells you just how misguided, and how petty, AE911T is.
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Wasn't Jim Fetzer part of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth with Steven Jones before they split it into 2 groups consisting of A&E For 9/11 Truth?
Click to expand...
Yes, Jim and Steven were dumb and dumber of Scholars, the ironic name for pure stupid.

They had to split when thermite and beam-weapon were not compatible like moose and squirrel, ...
 
Mr.Herbert said:
Gage states in the beginning of his presentation that listening to Griffin woke him to the TM. "Like I was hit with a 2x4 upside the head"
Click to expand...

[Truth] Gage admits he has been assaulted by evil ageing professor!

"Like (conveintly ignored) I was hit with a 2x4 upside the head" [/Truth]

It would explain a lot.

Woof!
 
This is pretty amusing, since Gage and the Truthers have often claimed that this is not "rocket science".
 
Mr.Herbert said:
(...)

I wrote this person back explaining that a debate with Ryan would be redundant since Mark Roberts has already refuted all of Gage's claims in a recorded debate. (...)
Click to expand...

I have the impression, that we live in parallels-worlds. I saw no "refuting" in Roberts tergiversations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom