• 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.

Gage and Szamboti to speak at New Jersey Institute of Technology

Do you think they were able to sway anyone with their smoke and magic?

I've been to a couple of their shows and never seen anything more then Gage preaching to the choir.

Did you talk to them personally?
 
Last edited:
Several days ago I had very briefly considered writing up some brief about - something, some debunking 101 on two or three of AE's main mantras, and sending it to the CE department's office. But I doubt that any document brief enough to be actually read by those who'd need one could prepare them well enough to face Gage's well-rehearsed rebuttals.
 
There were probably a handful of people who had no idea about 7wtc in the audience. Most were already in the truther camp. I sense the engineers did not buy the Gage pitch.. but were too polite to call bull puckey on him... And of course a Q&A is not the format for a technical argument... with no graphics.... which by the way Gage had his little slide show (YUCK).

I think non critical thinkers with no technical background AND a political predisposition to not trust the media or the government can and will fall for the pitch. To understand what happened to the WTC you need to invest a fair amount of time.

+++++

I don't the conspiricists or the average person merit the time of a point by point refutation aimed at"the layman" of Gage's bullet points.

What needs to be done is a point by point simple to understand explanation of how each tower came down and explain each of the (notable) "observations" including "dripping" orange liquid from 2wtc... so called free fall and the tilting top which doesn't fall over the side top name a few.

This does not require of math and esoteric formulas... but basic principles of engineering and physics. It should probably have graphics and videos which are simple to understand.

Those three towers had very unique engineering features. They were not garden variety typical high rises as Gage or even NIST would have us believe. They collapsed as they did because of how they were put together and designed. Ignoring the engineering features as explaining a collapse is a huge mistake.
 
Oystein said:
Several days ago I had very briefly considered writing up some brief about - something, some debunking 101 on two or three of AE's main mantras, and sending it to the CE department's office. But I doubt that any document brief enough to be actually read by those who'd need one could prepare them well enough to face Gage's well-rehearsed rebuttals.
Click to expand...

There is a germ of a good idea there Oystein. I had been giving it some thought myself. Procrastination won the day - plus issues of credibility and "standing". :o
 
Last edited:
Did you try to ask a question during the Q&A? I ask because usually Gage has his show crew intercept anything that he wouldn't want to address. I say this because I've experience this first hand.

Did they actually address any questions you would consider to be "hard"?
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
There were probably a handful of people who had no idea about 7wtc in the audience. Most were already in the truther camp. I sense the engineers did not buy the Gage pitch.. but were too polite to call bull puckey on him... And of course a Q&A is not the format for a technical argument... with no graphics.... which by the way Gage had his little slide show (YUCK).

I think non critical thinkers with no technical background AND a political predisposition to not trust the media or the government can and will fall for the pitch. To understand what happened to the WTC you need to invest a fair amount of time.

+++++

I don't the conspiricists or the average person merit the time of a point by point refutation aimed at"the layman" of Gage's bullet points.

What needs to be done is a point by point simple to understand explanation of how each tower came down and explain each of the (notable) "observations" including "dripping" orange liquid from 2wtc... so called free fall and the tilting top which doesn't fall over the side top name a few.

This does not require of math and esoteric formulas... but basic principles of engineering and physics. It should probably have graphics and videos which are simple to understand.

Those three towers had very unique engineering features. They were not garden variety typical high rises as Gage or even NIST would have us believe. They collapsed as they did because of how they were put together and designed. Ignoring the engineering features as explaining a collapse is a huge mistake.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the feedback Sander. I'm in broad agreement with your comments in this later post.
 
JSanderO said:
There were probably a handful of people who had no idea about 7wtc in the audience. Most were already in the truther camp. I sense the engineers did not buy the Gage pitch.. but were too polite to call bull puckey on him... And of course a Q&A is not the format for a technical argument... with no graphics.... which by the way Gage had his little slide show (YUCK).

I think non critical thinkers with no technical background AND a political predisposition to not trust the media or the government can and will fall for the pitch. To understand what happened to the WTC you need to invest a fair amount of time.

+++++

I don't the conspiricists or the average person merit the time of a point by point refutation aimed at"the layman" of Gage's bullet points.

What needs to be done is a point by point simple to understand explanation of how each tower came down and explain each of the (notable) "observations" including "dripping" orange liquid from 2wtc... so called free fall and the tilting top which doesn't fall over the side top name a few.

This does not require of math and esoteric formulas... but basic principles of engineering and physics. It should probably have graphics and videos which are simple to understand.

Those three towers had very unique engineering features. They were not garden variety typical high rises as Gage or even NIST would have us believe. They collapsed as they did because of how they were put together and designed. Ignoring the engineering features as explaining a collapse is a huge mistake.
Click to expand...

Good Ideas JSO, sorry you had to indure the dog and pony show.
 
I did not ask any questions of Gage or Tony... I am not interested in corning them and calling BS when Tony for example slipped in his BS missing jolt stuff. Gage is a disbelief guy... free fall means CD and nothing else...

He's clearly running his snake oil biz and living big. BTW he did tell me that although the board thought I was a "cognitive infiltrator" or agent... he never did... as if this matters to me. hahahaha

I went there to listen to the NJIT engineering school presentation and hear their questions... the former was pathetic and I told the professor who pretty much agreed and that he was only presenting what the NIST reports concluded.

Tony had a party with the walk off distance... and I am sorry to say... it mattered not.. the column did not buckled... it collapsed when it was knocked of pulled over by the massive transfer structures down on flrs 5-7 a idea not embraced by this forum or NIST.

I just don't see a 1000#/ft column which loses one girder bracing it on a single floor out of 4 buckling but I wasn't about to make this assertion and don't have "the math" to support this anyway. 79 came down and everything above it as well not just the top bit as Tony likes to claim because.... you can't see daylight below the top floor when the EPH drops.

Tony should know better. He has some engineering background and has engaged others on 911FF and on this site and is in denial.

Their evidence for CD is pathetic... their arguments are laughable. It's amazing that people have given him millions of dollars and will give him more for this nonsense.

I suppose you can't blame people like Ted Walter for falling for the BS. He couldn't tell if it was or not. I also don't think Gage acquits himself of the arguments which undermine his BS. He doesn't want to know and refuses to listen and if you try to explain something he repeats his bullet points like a parrot. It's clear he's in too deep to renounce his position and he'd probably have thousands of people really pissed at him and wanting their money back.... So the charade goes on.. the self delusion continues and no AE research is done... because... it would reveal they are making it all up!

++++

The one engineering student and 3 profs I spoke with including the CE chair were not buying their pitch. It felt like being at what a scientology meeting would be like.

You can fool some of the people some of the time... and Gage is doing just that.
 
Last edited:
JSanderO said:
I have been communicating with Jay who will arrange parking for me. I have not taken the opportunity to compile and present to him materials which would make him re consider his "beliefs". He did mention that he was a good friend of my friend who is a Prof Emeritus in architecture so this may predispose him to give me a listen.

My hunch is they will claim:

that the "insides" did not collapse before the naked visible facade/curtain wall. (they are wrong about this)

That the NIST simulation does not match the real world visuals (it doesn't)

They will claim "symmetry" means CD and there was no "symmetry" and it does not mean CD regardless.

They will fail to explain how their CD was done... where the "thermite" was placed and what did it do.... and of course where is the evidence of this in a single piece of steel?

They will link eutectic burning of the webs of a few beams with a thermite attack, but this hardly would cause column failure especially in the usual example with the burnt beam is not buckled.

Their argument will be one of disbelief and a failure to examine the structure and all the "transfers" which were located between floor 5&7 which would likely cause the visuals if they failed... ie there was no need to destroy 57 columns over 8 floors simultaneously to cause the facade drop.

They will not explain the massive IB /kink in the entire north facade nor the fact that the entire exterior twisted around a virtual vertical hinge in the SW area of the building.

They will deny that there were extensive fires low down in the building.

'Their argument appears to be completely based on "disbelief" and the "collapse time" of the facade for 105'. (precisely the distance from the top of flr 7 which has only a dozen or so columns supporting it directly coupled to the foundation)

Their case is only compelling to those who don't know the facts, the observations, the actual structure and something about steel frames... the profile of their supporters.
Click to expand...

I suspect that in time Sanders, you too will realize that your 'friends' here have been lying to you for years.
 
Notconvinced said:
I suspect that in time Sanders, you too will realize that your 'friends' here have been lying to you for years.
Click to expand...

I don't known what this comment has to do with the NJIT presentation. The only people who seem to be fast and loose with the truth are the people in the ironically named "truth movement"... and that was evident in their presentation.
 
NoahFence said:
Did anyone really think those to morons were going to convince anyone of anything?
Click to expand...

I think they DO convince people... non critical thinkers with an anti government... I don't trust gov or the media about anything bias.

One of Gage's parrots would not admit to me that every single thing in the mainstream media is not managed / staged PR. He actually believes this. And he claimed to be ex FBI!

Gage's presentation is a shock and awe stun with deceptive vids, analysis of them, false statements and appeals to authorities who are not even authorities. Anyone can produce an authority who supports anything!

It's been mentioned many times over the years... 9/11 is a stunning example of the absence of critical thinking... or follow the leader and parrot things you don't understand... trust and don't verify... listen to people who claim to be "experts" talking out of their butts.

People who don't, or can't think... or who are just to lazy to think and learn will never understand the event or simply fall in line with the snake oil pitch. And this is happening all the time.

They don't want the truth, nor a new investigation... They want their bias confirmed... by people who they will way too easily call experts... such as Griffin, a retired theologian who writes a book about the collapse of 7 wtc.
 
So to sum up your appearance there JSanderO, you had the opportunity to raise questions and/or disagreement about the AE911T presentation but you chose to come here instead and "preach to the choir".

It sounds like Richard and Tony did an excellent job presenting their case.

I have never observed you provide anything but some vague notion that hidden fires lead to a major rapid truss failure on the lower floors of WTC7. With no real engineering hypothesis to use as argument, it comes as little surprise that you remained stone cold silent at that event.
 
Last edited:
Criteria said:
So to sum up your appearance there JSanderO, you had the opportunity to raise questions and/or disagreement about the AE911T presentation but you chose to come here instead and "preach to the choir".

It sounds like Richard and Tony did an excellent job presenting their case.

I have never observed you provide anything but some vague notion that hidden fires lead to a major rapid truss failure on the lower floors of WTC7. With no real engineering hypothesis to use as argument, it comes as littlei surprise that you remained stone cold silent at that event.
Click to expand...

No point in going into a church and scream god does not exist if no one will listen!

Just like you ignore truth and science, in favor of personal belief systems.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
No point in going into a church and scream god does not exist if no one will listen!

Just like you ignore truth and science, in favor of personal belief systems.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the New Jersey Institute of Technology membership were all AE911T followers prior to the arrival of Richard Gage and Tony Szamboti?
 
Criteria said:
So to sum up your appearance there JSanderO, you had the opportunity to raise questions and/or disagreement about the AE911T presentation but you chose to come here instead and "preach to the choir".

It sounds like Richard and Tony did an excellent job presenting their case.

I have never observed you provide anything but some vague notion that hidden fires lead to a major rapid truss failure on the lower floors of WTC7. With no real engineering hypothesis to use as argument, it comes as littlei surprise that you remained stone cold silent at that event.
Click to expand...

Excuse me... I attended because I wanted to LEARN from engineers who had presumably studied the collapses. I am not interested in confronting Gage or AE or debunking their stuff. Absolutely no interest to me.

They did the same dog and pony show they've done for that last 6 years... probably not a slick but all the same bullet points. Others have debunked their stuff.

I did make contact with several professors and hope to "pick" their brains and have them "critique" some of my own "work/understanding". That was my mission... although I was hoping to learn something from the engineering department AT the event.

It was hosted by a truther and I cynically believe this is a strategy to someone lend gravitas to AE by simply APPEARING at an engineering school. For them mission accomplished. But believe me they did not impress hardly a person... aside from the dyed in the wool supporters who show up for these events again and again... And I ask WHY?? AE never has a thing new to say.... same old same old.


+++++

I did speak with Gage for a few and did tell him I support one thing they advocate: further investigation... and the collapse of 7wtc had nothing to do with free fall caused by CD. I offered to share with him my own findings... he was not interested.... How bout them apples? He wants to be isolated from research inside his cocoon of belief.

+++++

Sadly ALL too much of the evidence is not available or "hidden" as you write. Gage's and Tony's CDs are hidden too ain't they?

My approach is to understand the mechanics of the collapse... and I see no reason to rule out heat as a major cause. AE is not interested in the mechanics of collapse... it's all buildings exploding in mid air (wrong!)

FIRST understand how they came apart... and then look for sensible reasons that caused those motions / disintegration.
 
Last edited:
9/11 truth and AE911T celebrate the delusional stage of perpetual ignorance

Sounds like it was like a meeting of Bigfoot nuts, and Flat Earth dolts. A typical failed movement of nuts and dolts - the closest 911 truth will get to engineering is giving talks on a national holiday to fellow nuts and dolts at an engineering school.

Gage is selling lies to make a buck - pathetic lies mocking the the murder of thousands.

14 years of BS, Gage has a profession funded by a fringe few nuts and dolts. A movement for people who prefer to let someone else do their thinking, because research takes too much time. Is it laziness, or ignorance.

A note to those who can't figure out 911, or don't like the hundreds of papers on 911 by real engineers, scientist and others who based their findings and conclusions on facts and evidence...
Nothing is stopping anyone from investigating 911 on their own dime. If you don't understand structural engineering and why the WTC could collapse; Go Back to School - get an education and stop whining.

I can't work out if Gage is dumb or very smart - Dumb, means Gage is dirt dumb, can't figure out 2+2=4 given the answer key. Smart, means Gage found out nuts and dolts will donate to a BS group with a BS petition; all based on the ignorance and gullibility of those donating; Gage does a great job of keeping it simple and stupid. He take KISS to a new level, KISAS.

I can work out his followers are dumber than dirt, a special branch of terminal gullibility syndrome (TGS).
 
Last edited:
Criteria said:
So to sum up your appearance there JSanderO, you had the opportunity to raise questions and/or disagreement about the AE911T presentation but you chose to come here instead and "preach to the choir".
Click to expand...

Have you been to any of Gages shows? I have and attempted to ask questions. He screens all questions. No one puts him on the spot at one of his shows.
 
DGM said:
Have you been to any of Gages shows? I have and attempted to ask questions. He screens all questions. No one puts him on the spot at one of his shows.
Click to expand...

Apparently your problem asking questions was one of poor presentation. I am sure they have little choice but to discard incendiary or rhetorical questions.

I've had no difficulty getting my straightforward questions addressed.

JSanderO did not indicate that asking questions posed a problem. Especially since he elected to not attempt any questions, and he also indicated that he was able to talk directly with Richard Gage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom