If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II

FalseFlag believes he has massive support = less than 0.1 percent of all enginers

FalseFlag said:
2,514 experts disagree with you.
Click to expand...
With less than 0.1 percent of all engineers. And your experts have no evidence. They are unable to back up the delusional lie of CD with anything.

You have a fringe few who signed Gage's petition, and like you, they offer no valid claims, no evidence.

Kind of sad to see 2500 failed experts fall for Gage's fraud.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Hang on... you have 2,514 experts, the ability to get any documents via a FIA request and yet you guys haven't actually done the new investigation yourselves? It's been 15 years, surely with 2,514 experts you could have done an investigation by now, why hasn't it happened?
Click to expand...

He can't answer that, because, you know, he's not an expert. Or because you'll just ignore the answers. Or because it's pointless.

That should be obvious.

Hank
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
Hang on... you have 2,514 experts, the ability to get any documents via a FIA request and yet you guys haven't actually done the new investigation yourselves? It's been 15 years, surely with 2,514 experts you could have done an investigation by now, why hasn't it happened?
Click to expand...

In addition to supposedly having the people qualified to do that work, who presumably could give AE911T a good deal on recompense for services rendered, this pool of people, 2500+ in number, are in the higher middle class of earners. One would expect that raising funds would not be an issue. Perhaps Gage could curtail globetrotting for 6 months as well.

It gets worse of course. They supposedly have 2500+ professionals with relevant training and experience to dispute the findings of NIST, including calling into question the fire intensity and spread predicted by the simulation NIST ran. However in regards to that last item, the only "paper" that AE911T has brought forth is the series of images produced by Chris Sarns, a carpenter by trade. Are there no fire engineering specialists in AE911T? His "paper" received accolades from the AE911T choir.
 
MileHighMadness said:
Over 21,000 experts worked on the NIST reports for WTC 1, 2 & 7; they disagree with you.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
Please show me how these 21,000 people, as you claim without providing proof, had editorial control over what went into the report.

One million people could have worked on the commission. It doesn't matter if their work is not included in it.
 
In about an hour Jonathan Cole will have his webinar.

I hope everyone watches, just so it ****** you all off. :)

Oh, also please note that 2,517 signatures have been verified. That is 3 more than yesterday. LOL LOL LOL LOL
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
Irrelevant. If they didn't mention WTC7, then it must not be connected to 9/11, right?
Click to expand...
The purpose of 9/11 CR is irrelevant to the question - why isn't the collapse of 7 WTC mentioned in it?

Wonders never cease

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
DGM said:
Is that your professional assessment? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No. I am not an expert, but you don't need to be an expert to see that he is kicking your ******'es on the issue of scale. In fact, he's pretty much making fools of skeptics throughout the entire presentation. Anyone should be able to see that.
 
FalseFlag said:
No. I am not an expert, but you don't need to be an expert to see that he is kicking your ******'es on the issue of scale. In fact, he's pretty much making fools of skeptics throughout the entire presentation. Anyone should be able to see that.
Click to expand...
Isn't this just your assessment? :rolleyes:


He impress you, a laymen. Would this be an accurate statement?
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
Isn't this just your assessment? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes, but I don't need to be an expert to see the obvious.

An expert is discussing the issue of scale. In doing so, he is making a fool of the skeptics who claimed, in this very thread, that scale matters. It does not.
 
FalseFlag said:
Yes, but I don't need to be an expert to see the obvious.

An expert is discussing the issue of scale. In doing so, he is making a fool of the skeptics who claimed, in this very thread, that scale matters. It does not.
Click to expand...
So you admit you as a laymen are impressed by his presentation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom