Using Gage's results at AIA as a metric for CT acceptance

[tfk]

I propose an experiment.

Let's use Richard Gage's membership increases as an (informal) metric for the acceptance of 9/11 conspiracy theories.

According to the ae911t website:

• 24,000 Architects at SF AIA Convention Come Face to Face With 9/11 Truth

• Most of the time we had ... the busiest booth around us by far!

Given these two pieces of info, we can reasonably assume that a fair percentage of the attendees at the convention are aware of Gage's presence there.

I propose the following:

1. that we use his sign-up numbers as a coarse metric of the PROMPT acceptance of his presentations. Only people that signed up in San Francisco would be included in this study.

2. we divide up the signees into "technically sophisticated" and "technically unsophisticated" cohorts, based on their formal academic & professional experience.

3. that, a week or so after these folks join ae911t, we extend to them a kind, respectful invitation to come discuss their thoughts & the reasons that they joined. (After all, if new to the discussion, they only heard one side of the argument.)

4. that, after they have heard both sides of the argument, we find whether or not those folks maintain their connection to ae911t.

We could get rough ideas for:

1. percent acceptance
2. acceptance of 911 CT vs. technical sophistication
3. spontaneous vs. considered acceptance

Obviously, this is a damn coarse & uncontrolled experiment. But folks have been locked into simply shouting at each other for quite some time. This is a rather rare (once / year) opportunity to gather some info. A chance to do something new.

Improvements to the experiment welcome.

tom

 

[T.A.M.]

Not fair to use Gage at the AIA as a metric for acceptance. For that I would like to see how he is accepted at (A) the local highschool, and (B) the local University "Young Libertarians love Ron Paul" meeting.

TAM

 

[tfk]

I would agree that these results would only reflect the response of "architects & the people that accompany them to conventions".

tom

 

[tfk]

This is not intended to be a determinant of what is right about 9/11. We've already come to that conclusion.

After all, I've already gone on the record as offering my opinion that architects are not the group that can make the judgment of whether or not the buildings should have collapsed in the way that they did.

The right group would be structural engineers with extensive experience in designing large buildings, and more experience in analyzing damage to, and failure modes of, large buildings. I believe that there is precisely zero possibility that Gage would choose to attempt to ever present to a gathering of structural or mechanical engineers.

I would be VERY interested in how his presentations were received by high school & college aged students. I fear that the results would be depressing. The kids are very amenable to the idea that all the old farts are unscrupulous, and that only they hold the key to justice once they gain the reins of power. But we all have felt that when we were kids, and civilization has survived somehow.

So I'd expect a higher than average acceptance among the young.

I look at this as a uncontrolled glimpse into the ability of the 911 movement to package & sell their product in a very short period of time to a select group of people.

The most interesting part to me involve the complications. Peer pressure. Willingness to change one's mind, i.e., admit that you'd made a mistake. Or perhaps been credulous. In public.

These are always the fascinating hidden variables in tests like these.

tom

 

[Mr.Herbert]

I'm a wee bit curious. On April 23rd of this year. Gage bragged:

Apr 23, 2009

640 Architects and Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation​

Now, here we are, post AIA convention and the recent tally states:

647 architectural and engineering professionals
and 3589 other supporters including A&E students

So is it fair to assume that Gage got 7 out of the 25 thousand that walked through the convention to sign up? This is = to .0279% of those in attendance.


Or am I missing something?

 

[tfk]

Sounds about right. Maybe a touch high.

tom

 

[Grizzly Bear]

I would be VERY interested in how his presentations were received by high school & college aged students. I fear that the results would be depressing. The kids are very amenable to the idea that all the old farts are unscrupulous, and that only they hold the key to justice once they gain the reins of power. But we all have felt that when we were kids, and civilization has survived somehow.

So I'd expect a higher than average acceptance among the young.

Can't speak for the University I attended par say, but most of the students I attended design studio with never promoted nor discussed anything concerning the 911 conspiracies. Gage hasn't been here, but the university occasionally has showings of conspiracy videos like Zeitgeist and most recently I can recall the Obama Deception thing Jones was pushing... The architecture students whom I spoke about Richard Gage to found his ideas kookoo. I saw one student in the architecture school with an infowars sticker on her laptop, but I didn't feel like confronting her out of nowhere to get any indication of her stance with Gage.

Students whom I spoke with outside of the architecture school were at worst calling out "anomalies" with the TV airings but didn't quite lean into no-planer territory nor CD territory. And others still out of the few I discussed the matter openly outside of JREF took issue with the way in which the structures fell and openly told me that they weren't familiar with the engineering concepts involved. They therefore didn't really take any position leaning into Gage's CD claims... And I saw no indication that they had herd about him.

Just my observation... I never got the chance to see the attendance rates at the CT video showings mostly because they showed them in the evenings, and my class schedules usually either ender well before then, or they took place during my night classes.

I don't think I need to say much about how I received his presentations... I've obviously made it quite clear I don't buy his material

 

[ref]

I'm a wee bit curious. On April 23rd of this year. Gage bragged:



Now, here we are, post AIA convention and the recent tally states:



So is it fair to assume that Gage got 7 out of the 25 thousand that walked through the convention to sign up? This is = to .0279% of those in attendance.


Or am I missing something?

He said they got about 50 new petition signers. Maybe only 7 of those were architects

 

[Lenbrazil]

He said they got about 50 new petition signers. Maybe only 7 of those were architects

It sounds to me like was refering to architects, if he meant petition signers of all stripes he made a non-sequiter:

"...we spoke to hundreds of architects and must have added about 50 to our petitioners over the course of 3 days."

 

[Bobert]

These architects were busy talking shop all day so RG's booth was a welcome stop for a little comic relief.
BTW RG showed great interview skills there by leading the interviewee.