Richard Gage Q&A

[Bluesky]

Another question for Gage:

Why did the terrorists and government decided to CD WTC7?
- why not a tower in San Francisco or the statue of Liberty or.. ?
- and why do it under cover of the WTC plane attacks, rather than have another attack?
- if they wanted to kill more people they could have demolished WTC1 and 2 earlier?
- and why warn the firefighters on WTC7 and not warn them on WTC1 or 2?.....did the CD team start to feel guilty?
- and if they demolished WTC2, then why didnt they make it fall on WTC 7.? It nearly missed, which would have been a bit embarrassing for the CD team?

Is there any credible concept that can answer any of these questions?

 

[Bluesky]

I would suggest to keep questions more to the points:

1. Rapid onset of “collapse” - how, why? Can gravity alone do it?

I think Heiwa has got some good points, but they are just not focuused enough. The questions for Gage should be:

1. The WTC 1 is recorded as falling in 14.5 seconds. That is 40%g and the implication is that 60% of the energy was not converted to knietic energy? What do you think a non- CD failure would look like and how long would it take?

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse. Gravity? ?

2. How come all the explosions from the "demolition wave" and the initial blast, and the ground floor devices, had no flashes associated with them? Is this a new type of explosive? A dark thermite perhaps?

3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration. Gravity?

3. Perhaps you can explain if WTC 1 and 2 fell through the path of greatest resistance why was the debris field spread over a 2,400 ft diameter? The perimeter frame did not offer any resistance to the collapse, it was essential pushed outwards by debris or blown outwards by escaping air and you call that unzipping like a banana. So the only resistance to collapse was the core columns and they were 37.5 ft long sticks of columns just stacked on top of each other. How would these be able to provide resistance to a collapse when they will fail if they are just knocked of the column below?.

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed mostly in its own footprint. Gravity?

How do you reconcile your claims that it landed in its own footprint with your other claims that the debris field was massive?

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds. Gravity?

There was 50,000,0000 cubic feet of air in each of WTC1 and WTC2. This was pushed out of the building in some 14~17 seconds. How could this be done without creating all the characteristics of a pyroclastic flow.? Some studies have shown that wind speeds were over 600mph. What would ae911truth expect to see in a non-CD collapse?

6. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses. Gravity?

Why do you think that thermite kept the fires going for "months". ? What supposed connection is there between the fires in the debris pile and the CD theory? How can explosive be used to bring down the tower and keep fires going?

7. Chemical signature of Thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples by physics professor Steven Jones, PhD. What has gravity to do with it?

Found in two samples that only ae911truth have...Hmmm
And what is thermite: Iron, plus Aluminum plus oxygen...now where we find these materials on a building site...Hmmm
not my field .

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples. Ditto - does gravity melt material?

The fires were very hot, but the debris pile acted like a very large furnace, so why is that unexpected?

9. Expert corroboration from top European Controlled Demolition professionals. Why does NIST ignore them?

For the same reason they ignore you. Because you are wrong and all the US experts say so. You always have to expect a few whackos and attention seakers.
So perhaps the question is why do so few people believe in CD and particulalry why so few experts? And, According to the ae911truth web site you are able to convince 97.5% of the people that you present to, that the official story is untrue: so why is there no support and so few experts?

10. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY.

If the NYPD and FDNY knew about the collapse why did they allow so many of their colleagues to be killed? ( This is both preposterous and incredibly insulting.)

If you ask politely and to the point, Richard will no doubt answer.

I can't wait.! But he hasn't answered any questions like this ever. So I will not hold my breath.

Indeed the AE911truth movement make a habit of asking questions and avoid answering any. So I think this thread is useful

 

[JamesB]

Being a Washingtonian I would go to, but I will be on vacation that day. I would ask him to explain the signs of controlled demolition on the front page of their website.

Why, for example, is a collapse into its own footprint a sign of controlled demolition in the case of WTC7, but a collapse outside of its footprint, is also a sign of controlled demolition in the case of the towers. How can 100% of the possibilities be a sign of anything?

 

[bill smith]

I think Heiwa has got some good points, but they are just not focuused enough. The questions for Gage should be:

1. The WTC 1 is recorded as falling in 14.5 seconds. That is 40%g and the implication is that 60% of the energy was not converted to knietic energy? What do you think a non- CD failure would look like and how long would it take?


2. How come all the explosions from the "demolition wave" and the initial blast, and the ground floor devices, had no flashes associated with them? Is this a new type of explosive? A dark thermite perhaps?



3. Perhaps you can explain if WTC 1 and 2 fell through the path of greatest resistance why was the debris field spread over a 2,400 ft diameter? The perimeter frame did not offer any resistance to the collapse, it was essential pushed outwards by debris or blown outwards by escaping air and you call that unzipping like a banana. So the only resistance to collapse was the core columns and they were 37.5 ft long sticks of columns just stacked on top of each other. How would these be able to provide resistance to a collapse when they will fail if they are just knocked of the column below?.


How do you reconcile your claims that it landed in its own footprint with your other claims that the debris field was massive?


There was 50,000,0000 cubic feet of air in each of WTC1 and WTC2. This was pushed out of the building in some 14~17 seconds. How could this be done without creating all the characteristics of a pyroclastic flow.? Some studies have shown that wind speeds were over 600mph. What would ae911truth expect to see in a non-CD collapse?


Why do you think that thermite kept the fires going for "months". ? What supposed connection is there between the fires in the debris pile and the CD theory? How can explosive be used to bring down the tower and keep fires going?


Found in two samples that only ae911truth have...Hmmm
And what is thermite: Iron, plus Aluminum plus oxygen...now where we find these materials on a building site...Hmmm
not my field .


The fires were very hot, but the debris pile acted like a very large furnace, so why is that unexpected?


For the same reason they ignore you. Because you are wrong and all the US experts say so. You always have to expect a few whackos and attention seakers.
So perhaps the question is why do so few people believe in CD and particulalry why so few experts? And, According to the ae911truth web site you are able to convince 97.5% of the people that you present to, that the official story is untrue: so why is there no support and so few experts?


If the NYPD and FDNY knew about the collapse why did they allow so many of their colleagues to be killed? ( This is both preposterous and incredibly insulting.)


I can't wait.! But he hasn't answered any questions like this ever. So I will not hold my breath.

Indeed the AE911truth movement make a habit of asking questions and avoid answering any. So I think this thread is useful

Just reading through Bluesky's post there. It really brings home to me how utterly inadequate the government story is. Is that really an accurate assessment of how those questions would be answered by the government side ?

If so the OCT is a dead man walking.

 

[Bluesky]

Just reading through Bluesky's post there. It really brings home to me how utterly inadequate the government story is. Is that really an accurate assessment of how those questions would be answered by the government side ?

If so the OCT is a dead man walking.

Oh dear, I dont know how to say this simply.
But if you agree with the points above, then you overwhelming support the government story..what bit didn't you understand?

 

[bill smith]

I can't post the images (minimum 15 post limit) or post the urls for them (same reason )but these are what I have stored on my imageshack. PM me and I'll send them to you.

South tower core as seen from the west. You can make out individual columns.

South tower core as seen from the east through the backlit dust clouds.

Same view as above (note the missing south tower core) as the north tower collapses). Also note the 'Spire' of the north tower.

North tower 'Spire' from a slightly different angle but still looking east.

If it's true as claimed (done from the bottom), then those would be the first to go no? I mean they obviously didn't do the perimeter columns first because they were visible from the outside and someone would've caught it on film, tape or audio.

Here's a video of the still-standing core section. Very very interesting it is too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=NL&hl=nl&v=-dWBBEtA5bI

 

[bill smith]

Oh dear, I dont know how to say this simply.
But if you agree with the points above, then you overwhelming support the government story..what bit didn't you understand?

Isincerely hope that the answers given above have your full confidence and are written in stone.

 

[beachnut]

I would ask him:

Why do architects and engineers typically specify certain levels of fireproofing for structural steel? Why is it required by the IBC (International Building Code) and IFC (International Fire Code) and why do those codes require more of it in tall buildings than they do in shorter ones?

On his website, his one of his slide states that fire can cause collapse in wood framed buildings but never in steel framed ones. However, isn't it true that there have been many examples of low-rise steel structures failing in fires? Also, don't most structural textbooks teach that heavy timber construction is actually more resilient than steel in fire conditions? Here's a quote from a relevant structural textbook:*



If he looks at you like a deer in headlights, show him this picture to help him out:

Also, in his slides, he emphasizes the sudden onset of collapse at the base, but the Dan Rather video he plays show - right at the beginning - the penthouse collapse at the top - several seconds before the rest of the building appears to be moving. How does he explain this?

Furthermore, he lists as one of the characteristics supportive of controlled demolition for WTC 7 that it fell mostly into its own footprint (that's not strictly true, either, but we'll let it go for the moment). However, for the collapse of the Twin Towers, he cites the 1200-ft-diameter debris field as evidence of controlled demolition. So, isn't he advocating that the lack of a debris field is evidence in one case and the presence of said field is evidence in the other? Doesn't that seem to contradict?

For the WTC 1 and 2 collapses, he lists the presence of several tons of molten metal as one of the 'characteristics of a controlled demolition'. While the presence is in itself a highly spurious claim, I'm not all that interested in it specifically at the WTC. I would be curious to know if he could cite examples where known demolitions produced such an effect. He should be able to name several off the top of his head if it's typical, right?

Does he have extensive experience with tall buildings? Has he, in fact, ever worked on a high-rise structure at all?

*Building Construction for Architects and Engineers, Dr. B. Benjamin, 1978. Pg 41

Gage spews much moronic tripe it is hard to believe anyone who can think for themselves can support his nonsense and lies. Only a grade school educations is needed to logically deduce Gage is a liar. The major problem with thermite is the fact it would leave lots of iron that looks like thermite product. The steel would be covered with the results of thermite use. There were zero pieces of steel found with expended thermite product on them. There were zero piles of spent thermite. Just lies made-up to fool those who lack knowledge and can't think for themselves.

The lies of Jones and Gage saying these clean up cuts made after 911 were done by thermite on 911. Who is dumber, the liars, or those who support their lies?

7 days to the Gage dumbfest; attending could make your head hurt. The people donating to Gage are getting off cheap when they learn their lesson in fraud; if they figure it out.

 

[Minadin]

Oh, absolutely, Beachnut. My questions were designed to make that fact more apparent for the (perhaps less informed) audience.

The questions I posed weren't actually ones that I didn't already know the answers to; quite the contrary.

 

[GregoryUrich]

If anyone is actually going to attend, I would appreciate clarification on any of the points in my Open Letter to Richard Gage and AE911Truth.

 

[boloboffin]

And Gregory Urich used to be a member of AE911Truth, so his questions really do deserve some answers.

 

[Edx]

The lies of Jones and Gage saying these clean up cuts made after 911 were done by thermite on 911. Who is dumber, the liars, or those who support their lies?
[qimg]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/jonesfrau1.jpg[/qimg]
.

Guess what a truther said to me when I brought that up?

He says (paraphrase):

Him: Oh so it just so happens it looks exactly the same way it does when demolitions cut the columns?

Me: But they did it like that in clean up, its clear from the pictures of the steel workers and the pictures of the recovered steel.

Him: Clearly they TOLD the clean up crew to cut it like that on purpose in order to make it less suspicious.

This however is a guy that thinks that any witness that says something that doesnt support the truther CT is in on it, or paid off or scared into submission. Amazing.

 

[Juniversal]

Guess what a truther said to me when I brought that up?

He says (paraphrase):

Him: Oh so it just so happens it looks exactly the same way it does when demolitions cut the columns?

Me: But they did it like that in clean up, its clear from the pictures of the steel workers and the pictures of the recovered steel.

Him: Clearly they TOLD the clean up crew to cut it like that on purpose in order to make it less suspicious.

This however is a guy that thinks that any witness that says something that doesnt support the truther CT is in on it, or paid off or scared into submission. Amazing.

Logic continues to evade the truthers. it's amazing how some people are willing to suspend there logic in favor of there theory. Facts don't bold well with there argument? Well...uhhh. Everybody lied!

 

[Grizzly Bear]

If anyone is actually going to attend, I would appreciate clarification on any of the points in my Open Letter to Richard Gage and AE911Truth.

Your paper mirrors my suggestion concerning AE911's precedent examples and compresses the question rather well IMO. It goes without saying that Minadin's earlier suggestion would serve well to add in too. I'll echo boloboffin on this one.

 

[fourtoe]

For the WTC 1 and 2 collapses, he lists the presence of several tons of molten metal as one of the 'characteristics of a controlled demolition'. While the presence is in itself a highly spurious claim, I'm not all that interested in it specifically at the WTC. I would be curious to know if he could cite examples where known demolitions produced such an effect. He should be able to name several off the top of his head if it's typical, right?

This question never gets the attention I think it deserves. I asked a Truther this question and it started the longest awkward silence ever.

And also to answer Tweeter's post about how only Gravy goes to confront these guys in person: I live in LA and walked over a mile with my laptop, a bunch of photos of the WTC buildings and peer-reviewed articles and Steven Jones quotes to protesters who are protesting the whole Iran vote thing in the hope that there MIGHT be some Truthers there for me to argue with.

I would love, love, LOVE to find some Truthers to confront. I'm getting tired are arguing with the LaRouche supporters, I wanna hear about how the Jews planted therm_te in the two towers!

 

[cyclonic]

Download the intro song of this video and play it when he pulls his boxes out.

 

[bill smith]

That's because it's still there.

Dave

As Richard Gage says Dave- you're getting it.

 

[Gaspode]

Discussion on missing steel split to new thread.

Posted By: Gaspode

 

[Juniversal]

I would suggest to keep questions more to the points:

1. Rapid onset of “collapse” - how, why? Can gravity alone do it?

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse. Gravity?

3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration. Gravity?

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed mostly in its own footprint. Gravity?

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds. Gravity?

6. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses. Gravity?

7. Chemical signature of Thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples by physics professor Steven Jones, PhD. What has gravity to do with it?

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples. Ditto - does gravity melt material?

9. Expert corroboration from top European Controlled Demolition professionals. Why does NIST ignore them?

10. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY.

Etc, etc.

If you ask politely and to the point, Richard will no doubt answer.

Yo Heiwa I noticed you proposed these questions and got responses but never acknowledged them. Why is that??

 

[Tweeter]

Yah it must suck that a handful of internet skeptics could be seen as the biggest obstacle for your grand movement.

But we should only take a minimal amount of credit. The lack of motivation, laziness, and whiny nature of the members of the truth movement deserve most of the credit for their own ineptitude.

TAM

You call going on the road and having seminars lazy?
He is seen in public and you guys are here on a sub forum.lol
If he even gets one more believer from every stop, he`s still doing quite better than you all.