• 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.

FAO Gravy

You are sooooo doing it wrong: The raquet is supposed to be gripped. By the handle. And you're supposed to be hitting the ball with it. :D;)

:duck:

Actually, that's how this stunt begins - juggling three balls using a tennis racket instead of a hand. The fun begins when a ball drops, but you still have three items in your hands. Then it's on to two rackets/no hands/three balls, and then three rackets.

Dave
 
The Troofers are not generally aware when they are making fools of themselves. Sofia (creator of 9-11 Mysteries) sent us into gales of laughter when she came up with her famed "Clunkety-Clunk" voice experiment (people were challenged to say those words 110 times and see how long it would take; apparently she believed that this was how long it should have taken the towers to collapse) and we named it the quote of the year for 2006. She still ended up using it as an example in the History Channel special in 2007. Box Boy Gage is the same way; he included "the demonstration that changed the world" in the trailer--the trailer!--for Blueprint for Truth, the Researchers Edition.
 
I thought I'd share an interesting observation one of our commenters at SLC made on Gage's "conversion rate". Gage was at a financial scam conference in Jamaica recently and did his usual numbers game:

Before the presentation to 250 attendees, 55 believed the Official Conspiracy Theory, which believes that the planes and fires brought down the towers, and 40 were unsure. Afterwards none believed the OCT and only 7 were unsure.

Gage would like you to assume that he converted 88 out of the 95 "OCTers" and fence-sitters. But suppose those 88 had listened for a few minutes and decided that it was all a bunch of BS and walked out? He would still be able to report that only 7 remained unsure.
 
Last edited:
I thought I'd share an interesting observation one of our commenters at SLC made on Gage's "conversion rate". Gage was at a financial scam conference in Jamaica recently and did his usual numbers game:



Gage would like you to assume that he converted 88 out of the 95 "OCTers" and fence-sitters. But suppose those 88 had listened for a few minutes and decided that it was all a bunch of BS and walked out? He would still be able to report that only 7 remained unsure.
I attended Gages "show" in Boston (Cambridge) last year (along with Mr Herbert). On his site he claimed 180 (IIRC) attended. I emailed him and told him I was there and counted 85. He adjusted his numbers accordingly although I produced no proof that I actually did count the attendees. Gage does not actually count "hands" he just makes it up as he goes along. Considering the fact he's always "preaching to the choir" I'm surprised he doesn't claim 100% conversion.
 
Last edited:
I attended Gages "show" in Boston (Cambridge) last year (along with Mr Herbert).

Did he charge admission?

How long was the presentation? I don't know I could sit through 2 hours of the crap.

Was there a no-cameras/no recording policy?
 
Did he charge admission?

Yes, although if you claimed poverty you could get in for free. We felt pity and didn't deem it worthy to try to explain so we paid the 10 bucks and went in.
How long was the presentation? I don't know I could sit through 2 hours of the crap.

It was about 2 hours. The funny part came after when he asked if there was any questions. Mr Herbert and I were "screened" and our questions were never heard by the "congregation". We did talk to Gage personally after where he dodged and waved and promised things he never intended to do. Mr Herbert gave him a copy of Ryan Mackey's paper that he said he would respond to and Greg Urichs letter that he claimed he had "been too busy" to respond.
Was there a no-cameras/no recording policy?

Not that I noticed.

There was a "block party" going on with thousands of people outside and all he could draw was 85. Connect the dots to the impact his presents created.

:o
 
Last edited:
Yes, although if you claimed poverty you could get in for free. We felt pity and didn't deem it worthy to try to explain so we paid the 10 bucks and went in.


It was about 2 hours. The funny part came after when he asked if there was any questions. Mr Herbert and I were "screened" and our questions were never heard by the "congregation". We did talk to Gage personally after where he dodged and waved and promised things he never intended to do. Mr Herbert gave him a copy of Ryan Mackey's paper that he said he would respond to and Greg Urichs letter that he claimed he had "been too busy" to respond.


Not that I noticed.

There was a "block party" going on with thousands of people outside and all he could draw was 85. Connect the dots to the impact his presents created.

:o

Well DGM I must say that it all looks very encouraging..
 
There was a "block party" going on with thousands of people outside and all he could draw was 85. Connect the dots to the impact his presents created.

:o


Obviously the NWO hastily organized a big party to distract people away from Gage's presentation.

If they were serving free Soylent Green and it wasn't even a Tuesday, it's a dead giveaway (no pun intended).

Respectfully,
Myriad
 

Just the general lack of confidence you guys are projecting. I particularly liked this piece from Brainster..

'' Gage would like you to assume that he converted 88 out of the 95 "OCTers" and fence-sitters. But suppose those 88 had listened for a few minutes and decided that it was all a bunch of BS and walked out? He would still be able to report that only 7 remained unsure.''
 
Obviously the NWO hastily organized a big party to distract people away from Gage's presentation.

If they were serving free Soylent Green and it wasn't even a Tuesday, it's a dead giveaway (no pun intended).

Respectfully,
Myriad

OK maybe I should set the stage for how pathetic his turn-out was.

Gages "show" was in a church smack dab in the middle of Harvard square, Cambridge, Massachusetts. That should be enough (with a little investigation into the significance of the area, without local knowledge) to ensure the crowd would be open to ....frankly just about anything. At the end of the night the only ones holding signs were two guy's on our side.

Cambridge is refereed to as the "Peoples Republic of Cambridge" by us locals. We've seen all sorts of protest dating back a hundred years or so (Google investigate if you want). Gage has been in the area a couple of times (in Harvard square and MIT) and never has he raised even the slightest stir in this very "open" neighborhood.

One thing that was clear (to me at least) was there was little or no effort to promote this event outside of the "truth" movement. If I didn't follow this sort of thing there would be no way I would have known about it. Gage clearly only wants "receptive" audiences. We raised our hands when he asked if there was any questioned and there was "staff" there within seconds asking us what we wanted to ask. When we told them, they immediately engaged us in conversation assuring that our questions would not be heard by the "congregation". Imagine if this was done at a NIST press conference. Talk about your double standard.
 
Just the general lack of confidence you guys are projecting. I particularly liked this piece from Brainster..

'' Gage would like you to assume that he converted 88 out of the 95 "OCTers" and fence-sitters. But suppose those 88 had listened for a few minutes and decided that it was all a bunch of BS and walked out? He would still be able to report that only 7 remained unsure.''
Have you been to one of his "shows"? I have (you can ask Gage if you want, he know who I am) and I can say he does not actually count hands.
 
OK maybe I should set the stage for how pathetic his turn-out was.

Gages "show" was in a church smack dab in the middle of Harvard square, Cambridge, Massachusetts. That should be enough (with a little investigation into the significance of the area, without local knowledge) to ensure the crowd would be open to ....frankly just about anything. At the end of the night the only ones holding signs were two guy's on our side.

Cambridge is refereed to as the "Peoples Republic of Cambridge" by us locals. We've seen all sorts of protest dating back a hundred years or so (Google investigate if you want). Gage has been in the area a couple of times (in Harvard square and MIT) and never has he raised even the slightest stir in this very "open" neighborhood.

As I recall, the MIT presentation was on a Friday evening that happened to be the last day of classes with final exams to begin on Monday. Fat chance getting any MIT students to show up.
 
As I recall, the MIT presentation was on a Friday evening that happened to be the last day of classes with final exams to begin on Monday. Fat chance getting any MIT students to show up.
Unless you followed the happenings of the "truth" movement you would not know it ever happened.

Their idea of publicizing a important event (as they see it) is to put-up a couple hand written signs next to the other hand written signs for guitar lessons that have been there for years.

When it comes to getting their message out to the masses they suck (and I think it's on purpose).
 
Last edited:
Actually, that's how this stunt begins - juggling three balls using a tennis racket instead of a hand. The fun begins when a ball drops, but you still have three items in your hands. Then it's on to two rackets/no hands/three balls, and then three rackets.

Dave

Ahhhhh, ya pansy...

I saw a guy at the Calgary Olympics juggling 3 chain saws.

RUNNING chain saws.

I think his name was "Stumpy" something-or-other...


tom

PS. True about the running chain saws, btw.
 
Ahhhhh, ya pansy...

I saw a guy at the Calgary Olympics juggling 3 chain saws.

RUNNING chain saws.

I think his name was "Stumpy" something-or-other...


tom

PS. True about the running chain saws, btw.

I think it's only the engine that is running, not the chain itself.
 
I thought I'd share an interesting observation one of our commenters at SLC made on Gage's "conversion rate". Gage was at a financial scam conference in Jamaica recently and did his usual numbers game:



Gage would like you to assume that he converted 88 out of the 95 "OCTers" and fence-sitters. But suppose those 88 had listened for a few minutes and decided that it was all a bunch of BS and walked out? He would still be able to report that only 7 remained unsure.

I think it's just more likely that people who are paying good money to believe they're being let in on incredible knowledge which will make them filthy rich are simply gullible and will believe anything. Particularly if they are having their vanity appealed to.

Carl Sagan talked about the way in which magazines which cater to UFO believers would also be full of adverts that clearly preyed on gullible losers with similar get-rich-quick scams, how-to-pick-up-chicks books and how-to-grow-your-hair-back tonic (though even Truthers might not be gullible enough to buy the last one from Richard Gage :D )

You can see how Gage managed to get together with these people. And look again at the religious sheeple imagery again:

Kip Herriage and Karl Bessey are the leaders of this unique wealth oriented company, who brought AE911Truth to this annual conference in order to give their followers very sensitive information that few other Wall Street gurus dare to understand or to provide.

And this bit:

What does all this have to do with 9/11?

Sounds to me like, "And that reminds me of our dear lord Jesus!"

Hanging out with these scammers has nothing to do with 9/11 and I think Gage is almost rubbing it the faces of any passing Truthers to put it up on his website. Well, last year he did a tour of Australia, New Zealand and Japan. This week he's in Jamaica. Next week Tahiti, perhaps? Venice? The Maldives? Really get that Truther word out on the beaches of Phuket?
 

Back
Top Bottom