[Merged] AE911T's Experts Speak Out Tour - Page 2

Clarrisani · 26th May 2012, 02:59 AM

I heard a rumour there might be a live stream. Does anyone know if this is true? And if it is, can someone get one of their signs onto the stream?

Oystein · 26th May 2012, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by Clarrisani

I heard a rumour there might be a live stream. Does anyone know if this is true? And if it is, can someone get one of their signs onto the stream?

There was one for the kick-off gig:
http://911blogger.com/news/2012-05-2...erts-speak-out

Grizzly Bear · 28th May 2012, 07:25 PM

Gage pretty much lost my interest with his inability to do more than university speeches. His campaign would have better served doing more to get into the political system and to confront the professional bodies with influence to get his crap published; of course his pseudo-professional quack work obviously inhibits him from doing it, he's shown no personal initiative. He's now going to waste his donor's money going on speeches that'll accomplish nothing. He likes reliving this cycle over and over.

If that's all his efforts still accomplish it's no wonder I rarely if ever feel a need to comment on him anymore

Foolmewunz · 28th May 2012, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by Richard Gage

Sponsor a Student Attendee - Donate $10 to AE911Truth Now (100 needed)
Many of the students that come to our events request free tickets - and we will not turn anyone away from the education of the crime of the century that has manipulated millions of people across the country and around the world to go to war. Your $10 donation enlightens a soul. THIS IS A DONATION ONLY, NOT A TICKET FOR ENTRY.

Apparently, not only can you get in for free, but you also drain ten bucks from someone who wanted it to be used for a potential true believer. This is from his schedule, where the first three items are fund-raising gimmicks. Sponsor a Student $10, Sponsor an advert $100 (with 10 sponsors needed) and Sponsor a City $1000, where they can hire people to print up leaflets and post signs and stuff. They even mention that this is for weaker cities (like NYC and Chi, for instance) where there's an insufficient following.

So, just trot along to your local venue. Richard Gage says you won't be turned away. (But wanna bet there's some serious pressure to "contribute"?)

Myriad · 28th May 2012, 09:06 PM

I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Foolmewunz · 28th May 2012, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Myriad

I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad

I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues.

Myriad · 28th May 2012, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues.

Sure, that's understandable, at least as far as turn-out is concerned. And it would fit into the aforementioned category of serious research or reporting of the situation. As long as such goals aren't conflated with fantasies of turning the lectures into impromptu debates.

Is there some other way besides turn-out to assess desperation? Arguably, desperation set in years ago. If there are any major changes in message or tone I'd expect to see them echoed on the Web site.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Scott Sommers · 28th May 2012, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by Myriad

I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done.

Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst.

Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient.

Respectfully,
Myriad

I've never paid anything to these cretin. If I were trying to crash one of their events, I'd go there and say I was reporting for a student newspaper. I'd say something like I am not a supporter, but the paper asked me to write a report, so I'm not donating anything. Ask them if them want coverage in your paper.

Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't.

Myriad · 28th May 2012, 10:21 PM

I didn't mean to imply that you'd paid for admission, Scott. Just that you're someone with a legitimate journalistic interest in such events. They should let you in free as press, even knowing exactly who you are (though knowing who they are, they wouldn't).

Your advice would certainly work (though not the specifics; I don't think I could pass for a student reporter). However, if I did go to one of the lectures, even though I would report what I observed including a head count, my main reason for attending would be for entertainment. And since I'm morally opposed to both enriching Truthers and stealing entertainment, it would be a bit of a dilemma.

Scott Sommers · 28th May 2012, 10:38 PM

I understood that...or at least I didn't mean to imply that's what you meant. I'm just passing on advice to someone trying to get into these things...or I'm trying to anyway. I'm not feeling very well this morning. I think it's caffeine withdrawal.

Anyway, I agree with your general sentiment that these things are a waste of life. I suppose if you want an authentic feeling, you have to go. My feeling now after spending so much time with these guys is that it really wasn't worth it. They are dumb as a pile of rocks. The smart ones are here on the JREF, if you can believe that. I can suggest things to look for while someone is in such an event, but it would be more like suggesting ways to kill time in prison than intellectual guidance.

fourtoe · 30th May 2012, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't.

Wouldn't that be dishonest? You don't even have to say that either, if you have a blog, you can be considered a journalist.

I'll be in NYC when they are so I wanted to go, but Myriad made me feel bad cause I do totally want to go to debate. I've had my question I would ask since 2010, I wanted to ask it when he debated Dave Thomas on C2C:

"Mr Gage, in your ppt you claim 118 people witnessed explosions and saw flashes on 911 during the WTC7 collapse and then proceed to show several quotes from the eye-witnesses. In your debate with Mark Roberts in 2008, Roberts pointed out that in your presentation you took only two eye-witness quotes about the flashes and split them up over several slides, not citing every single quote, in order to make it appear like more than just two of witnesses said they saw flashes. You did not respond to that claim in 2008 and 4 years later, you're still doing this in your ppt.

If you're going to ask well intentioned folk to donate money to your cause, don't you feel that you owe it to them the try and honestly represent the events and the eye-witness accounts? Did you feel that only two witnesses describing flashes wasn't sufficient enough to support your claim? If you didn't, then why?"

I might trim it down a little. But if no one else from the boards is gonna go to the NYC event (on the 23rd of June?) then yeah, I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand.

DGM · 30th May 2012, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by fourtoe

I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand.

As someone that has been to his "shows", you will not be in a debate with Gage. He runs the shows, he is not doing these to debate. He is making his pitch and is not interested at all in debating his stance. If you have a friendly question that he can answer and make himself look knowledgeable, his staff will allow it to happen. If you want to stand up and look like a "shill" he will also help you to make that happen.

You might notice I refer to his appearances as "shows". That is what they are.

Go if you want but, don't expect to change the minds of anyone there. He really is only preaching to the choir (that's how he wants it).

tntruther · 15th June 2012, 02:44 AM

The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are conducting a world wide tour to premier their new documentary, "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out".
The program begins with a 30 minute introduction by Founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, then the 90 minute Documentary, followed by a Q&A session.
I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd.
I don't have a lot of time for discussion in this thread until after the show because we still have a lot of work to do to get ready.
I will be shooting video but I'm pretty slow at editing. I will try to do up some segments of individual questions from this forum as a priority.
Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science.

Thank you!

Sorry, I can't do URLs here yet but please do watch the pre-release version of the documentary on YouTube. "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out"

Belz... · 15th June 2012, 03:04 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are conducting a world wide tour to premier their new documentary, "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out".

Not this tripe again. Move along.

Orphia Nay · 15th June 2012, 03:23 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd.

When will you present your petition to Congress?

DC · 15th June 2012, 03:34 AM

Quote:

stick to the science

i will once Gage and co does.

Aepervius · 15th June 2012, 04:22 AM

This :

http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91

is the correct forum for your thread.

sarge · 15th June 2012, 04:34 AM

I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum.

Zeuzzz · 15th June 2012, 05:20 AM

I've yet to see a really detailed explanation that has not been refuted by some sort of architect or scientist that fully explains the natural "progressive" collapse of WT7.

Likewise, I've yet to see any sort of scientific architectural argument in favor of "controlled demolition" that has not been refuted by skeptics that debunk the conspiracy theories.

But, I've yet to see any sort of reason (vague, substantial or co-incidental) given by any conspiracy theorist that gives a good motive, reason or purpose to take down WT7 in a controlled demolition. The idea that the twin towers were a CD is even more ludicrous, and even though you can point to all sorts of evidence that can be construed as some sort of evidence in support of CD (that, on closer inspection, nearly all break down under scrutiny), it's just impossible to fit any sort of controlled demolition idea into any sort of coherent conspiracy that fits in with reality.

Its not something that either side is going to able to ever prove to the other beyond all reasonable doubt.

The people advocating this controlled demolition theory I see as comparable to a group of conspirators in possession of a magic unicorn in a boat arguing with people on land who insist that before they are allowed to moor they prove the length of the coastline. Each side is going to better the others arguments nearly indefinitely^[wp], but the burden of proof lies with the people making the extraordinary claims. Occam s Razor.

No unicorn.

The conspiracy theorists are left lost at sea where they will likely drown in their own sea of delusions.

Zeuzzz · 15th June 2012, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are

..... Scientists that have controversial views.

This is the science and technology section, if you have a particular science argument to put forward then state it. I'm not watching a video from these people, seen most of them already, but you need to mention specifics, else you'll just get post after post of ridicule.

cjnewson88 · 15th June 2012, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

But, I've yet to see any sort of reason (vague, substantial or co-incidental) given by any conspiracy theorist that gives a good motive, reason or purpose to take down WT7 in a controlled demolition.

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

Drudgewire · 15th June 2012, 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

There was a macro going around fB yesterday which listed all the offices in WTC-7 the NWO obviously wanted to destroy. It ended with "9/11: The More You Know, The Less You Sleep." I had to comment that pointing out sleep deprivation causes trutherism might be counter-productive.

Travis · 15th June 2012, 06:26 AM

Hmmm, some questions he won't answer might include:

Why is fireproofing required in steel skyscrapers?
What would arrest the falling block?
Who did he sell his soul to?

timhau · 15th June 2012, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science.

The what?

Quad4_72 · 15th June 2012, 06:40 AM

Originally Posted by sarge

I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum.

Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs.

W.D.Clinger · 15th June 2012, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Originally Posted by sarge

I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum.

Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs.

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

Quad4_72 · 15th June 2012, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

Yes that makes much more sense now. This post belongs as far away from science as possible.

timhau · 15th June 2012, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

This post belongs as far away from science as possible.

He/she did mention the word. Along with the usual whining for respect instead of trying to earn it, of course.

uke2se · 15th June 2012, 07:38 AM

What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work?

Quad4_72 · 15th June 2012, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by uke2se

What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work?

I would feel more comfortable if he didn't...

Bell · 15th June 2012, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd.

Why? Gage doesn't do science.

Horatius · 15th June 2012, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by tntruther

I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd.

Here's a serious question I'd like to hear him answer, from a thread I started last year:

Originally Posted by Horatius

I notice that none of this is actually related to Gage's work as an architect. It's all pretty much just "raising awareness". Can anyone point to any aspect of Gage's presentations that are directly attributable to Richard Gage's professional work as an architect? I don't believe I've ever seen him do or say anything that wasn't copied from someone else's work.

The "evidence" that Richard Gage presents is, so far as I can tell, taken entirely from other peoples' work. Those other people are not architects or engineers. So I'd like to know what Dickie Gage has actually done.

This question really has two sides*:

1) What new evidence or analysis has Gage produced? Has he pointed out any aspects of the events of 9/11 that support the CD hypothesis, which no one before him ever pointed out?

2) Has he ever specifically refuted any evidence or analysis from earlier, untrained people? That is, has he ever said to a layman, "Sure, you might think that Feature X was important, but based on my experience, I can tell you that it's not a feature that could distinguish a CD from a fire-induced collapse"?

As it stands now, no one has ever been able to point out any new work Gage has done that directly relates to the science or engineering of the collapses. This leads us to the unlikely situation that untrained laypeople did two amazing things: 1) They spotted all the relevant evidence, and conducted all the relevant analyses, so that there was nothing new for Gage to do; and 2) In doing the above, they made no mistakes at all; they went down no blind alleys, they found no red herrings, they made no calculation errors.

If that was possible, then why do we need A&E9/11 at all? If laypeople can do all the needed work, flawlessly, then why should the endorsement of A&E9/11 carry any weight?

*It's interesting to note that, in the case of the NIST reports, we can say "Yes" to both these questions.

thedopefishlives · 15th June 2012, 08:48 AM

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

Dash80 · 15th June 2012, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by thedopefishlives

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

Hehe, even my nine year old daughter found that ridiculous.

Horatius · 15th June 2012, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by thedopefishlives

Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.

Nope....

Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills

Well he made them all look like morons with this.......

http://i643.photobucket.com/albums/u...tos/BoxBoy.jpg

Originally Posted by Horatius

Which is noting more than re-enacting the sorts of experiments truthers were doing with things like chicken wire models years before.

Just a stupider remake of the original, like Rollerball.

Sabrina · 15th June 2012, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by cjnewson88

Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country.

Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..

I swear to FSM, if someone makes one more attempt to bring up that stupid meme that WTC7 was demolished to destroy the documents and papers it contained, I will hunt them down and do very bad things to them.

It's called a freakin' SHREDDER... Geez...

Scott Sommers · 15th June 2012, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger

This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum.

sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

That's because he is a Truther pretending to not be one. In his previous 6 posts, he appeared much more interested in members knowing what he really believes. I guess he changed his mind.

Originally Posted by tntruther

Truthers actually put their own reputation and safety at risk for the betterment of society when they stand up to the government's official conspiracy theory of 911.
I'm a truther, but I'm not trying to exploit anyone. I just want to get to the truth about how those 3 buildings fell. And my major motivating factor is the tragic fate of the victims. So please, don't hate truthers for simply digging in to the science for the sake of justice.

Quad4_72 · 15th June 2012, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by Sabrina

I swear to FSM, if someone makes one more attempt to bring up that stupid meme that WTC7 was demolished to destroy the documents and papers it contained, I will hunt them down and do very bad things to them.

It's called a freakin' SHREDDER... Geez...

We dispose of our secret documents by blowing our offices up, allowing any papers inside the building to be ejected onto the street for everyone to see

DGM · 15th June 2012, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

We dispose of our secret documents by blowing our offices up, allowing any papers inside the building to be ejected onto the street for everyone to see

What's wrong with this? No true American would dare throw their leaders under the bus. If someone found something they would burn it, don't make waves, that's our motto.

Quad4_72 · 15th June 2012, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by DGM

What's wrong with this? No true American would dare throw their leaders under the bus. If someone found something they would burn it, don't make waves, that's our motto.

Exactly. That's why you noticed Ground Zero looked similar to how New York City looks during New years eve. All of those documents thrown about everywhere looked like confetti. But we knew our citizens would be too afraid to look at any of them for fear of us putting them in our patented FEMA DEATH CAMPS.

28th May 2012, 07:25 PM	#43
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,689	Gage pretty much lost my interest with his inability to do more than university speeches. His campaign would have better served doing more to get into the political system and to confront the professional bodies with influence to get his crap published; of course his pseudo-professional quack work obviously inhibits him from doing it, he's shown no personal initiative. He's now going to waste his donor's money going on speeches that'll accomplish nothing. He likes reliving this cycle over and over. If that's all his efforts still accomplish it's no wonder I rarely if ever feel a need to comment on him anymore
Grizzly Bear このマスクによっ Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,689	__________________ Graduation on 8/13/2011 8D Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 28th May 2012 at 07:28 PM.

28th May 2012, 08:49 PM	#44
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,511	Originally Posted by Richard Gage Sponsor a Student Attendee - Donate $10 to AE911Truth Now (100 needed) Many of the students that come to our events request free tickets - and we will not turn anyone away from the education of the crime of the century that has manipulated millions of people across the country and around the world to go to war. Your $10 donation enlightens a soul. THIS IS A DONATION ONLY, NOT A TICKET FOR ENTRY. Apparently, not only can you get in for free, but you also drain ten bucks from someone who wanted it to be used for a potential true believer. This is from his schedule, where the first three items are fund-raising gimmicks. Sponsor a Student $10, Sponsor an advert $100 (with 10 sponsors needed) and Sponsor a City $1000, where they can hire people to print up leaflets and post signs and stuff. They even mention that this is for weaker cities (like NYC and Chi, for instance) where there's an insufficient following. So, just trot along to your local venue. Richard Gage says you won't be turned away. (But wanna bet there's some serious pressure to "contribute"?)
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

28th May 2012, 09:06 PM	#45
Myriad Hyperthetical Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 8,196	I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done. Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst. Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient. Respectfully, Myriad
	__________________ The cosmos is a vast Loom, with time the warp and space the weft. We are all fruit of the Loom, unaware.

28th May 2012, 09:24 PM	#46
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,511	Originally Posted by Myriad I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done. Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst. Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient. Respectfully, Myriad I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

28th May 2012, 09:41 PM	#47
Myriad Hyperthetical Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 8,196	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz I would like to hear, first hand, whether he's getting as desperate as it seems on the surface. I'd also like eyes or ears on the ground to get accurate assessments of the turn out in various venues. Sure, that's understandable, at least as far as turn-out is concerned. And it would fit into the aforementioned category of serious research or reporting of the situation. As long as such goals aren't conflated with fantasies of turning the lectures into impromptu debates. Is there some other way besides turn-out to assess desperation? Arguably, desperation set in years ago. If there are any major changes in message or tone I'd expect to see them echoed on the Web site. Respectfully, Myriad
	__________________ The cosmos is a vast Loom, with time the warp and space the weft. We are all fruit of the Loom, unaware.

26th May 2012, 02:59 AM	#41
Clarrisani Scholar Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 61	I heard a rumour there might be a live stream. Does anyone know if this is true? And if it is, can someone get one of their signs onto the stream?

26th May 2012, 03:35 AM	#42
Oystein Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Germany Posts: 9,738	Originally Posted by Clarrisani I heard a rumour there might be a live stream. Does anyone know if this is true? And if it is, can someone get one of their signs onto the stream? There was one for the kick-off gig: http://911blogger.com/news/2012-05-2...erts-speak-out

28th May 2012, 09:59 PM	#48
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,641	Originally Posted by Myriad I don't see any good reason for anyone to attend the sessions, unless they're doing serious research and/or reporting on 9/11 truth activities, as for instance Scott Sommers has done. Anyone else is either being successfully trolled (if they pay the going rate to get in), or being a dick (if they don't). Expecting to trap Gage or change anyone's mind with a pointed question in the Q and A session is foolish -- useless at best, and playing into his hand at worst. Counter-leafletting outside is fine, and a fairly thin sheaf of leaflets should be sufficient. Respectfully, Myriad I've never paid anything to these cretin. If I were trying to crash one of their events, I'd go there and say I was reporting for a student newspaper. I'd say something like I am not a supporter, but the paper asked me to write a report, so I'm not donating anything. Ask them if them want coverage in your paper. Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy Last edited by Scott Sommers; 28th May 2012 at 10:12 PM.

28th May 2012, 10:21 PM	#49
Myriad Hyperthetical Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 8,196	I didn't mean to imply that you'd paid for admission, Scott. Just that you're someone with a legitimate journalistic interest in such events. They should let you in free as press, even knowing exactly who you are (though knowing who they are, they wouldn't). Your advice would certainly work (though not the specifics; I don't think I could pass for a student reporter). However, if I did go to one of the lectures, even though I would report what I observed including a head count, my main reason for attending would be for entertainment. And since I'm morally opposed to both enriching Truthers and stealing entertainment, it would be a bit of a dilemma.
	__________________ The cosmos is a vast Loom, with time the warp and space the weft. We are all fruit of the Loom, unaware.

28th May 2012, 10:38 PM	#50
Scott Sommers Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,641	I understood that...or at least I didn't mean to imply that's what you meant. I'm just passing on advice to someone trying to get into these things...or I'm trying to anyway. I'm not feeling very well this morning. I think it's caffeine withdrawal. Anyway, I agree with your general sentiment that these things are a waste of life. I suppose if you want an authentic feeling, you have to go. My feeling now after spending so much time with these guys is that it really wasn't worth it. They are dumb as a pile of rocks. The smart ones are here on the JREF, if you can believe that. I can suggest things to look for while someone is in such an event, but it would be more like suggesting ways to kill time in prison than intellectual guidance.
	__________________ for the original publication Who Still Believes in 9/11 Conspiracies? for Google Books Becoming Taiwan: From Colonialism to Democracy

30th May 2012, 01:50 PM	#51
fourtoe Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Northridge, Ca Posts: 1,015	Originally Posted by Scott Sommers Just make up anything. These guys are stupider than a dead fish. I have never underestimated their intellect. They are always stupider than you think they could be. Just make up a reason why you think they should let you in. Either it works or it doesn't. Wouldn't that be dishonest? You don't even have to say that either, if you have a blog, you can be considered a journalist. I'll be in NYC when they are so I wanted to go, but Myriad made me feel bad cause I do totally want to go to debate. I've had my question I would ask since 2010, I wanted to ask it when he debated Dave Thomas on C2C: "Mr Gage, in your ppt you claim 118 people witnessed explosions and saw flashes on 911 during the WTC7 collapse and then proceed to show several quotes from the eye-witnesses. In your debate with Mark Roberts in 2008, Roberts pointed out that in your presentation you took only two eye-witness quotes about the flashes and split them up over several slides, not citing every single quote, in order to make it appear like more than just two of witnesses said they saw flashes. You did not respond to that claim in 2008 and 4 years later, you're still doing this in your ppt. If you're going to ask well intentioned folk to donate money to your cause, don't you feel that you owe it to them the try and honestly represent the events and the eye-witness accounts? Did you feel that only two witnesses describing flashes wasn't sufficient enough to support your claim? If you didn't, then why?" I might trim it down a little. But if no one else from the boards is gonna go to the NYC event (on the 23rd of June?) then yeah, I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand.
	__________________ *My old username used to be knife fight colobus, but it was totally too long.* -Here's my YouTube Channel where I either debate crazies (Kirk Cameron, Westboro Baptist Church, Truthers etc.) or play Zelda -I sooo have a blog. -The thread for discussing/reviewing and posting any 911 related debates one can find!

30th May 2012, 03:42 PM	#52
DGM #4 Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 14,311	Originally Posted by fourtoe I would feel bad going just to start a debate with Gage where he has the upper hand. As someone that has been to his "shows", you will not be in a debate with Gage. He runs the shows, he is not doing these to debate. He is making his pitch and is not interested at all in debating his stance. If you have a friendly question that he can answer and make himself look knowledgeable, his staff will allow it to happen. If you want to stand up and look like a "shill" he will also help you to make that happen. You might notice I refer to his appearances as "shows". That is what they are. Go if you want but, don't expect to change the minds of anyone there. He really is only preaching to the choir (that's how he wants it).
	__________________ Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

15th June 2012, 02:44 AM	#53
tntruther New Blood Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 7	Controlled demolition on 911 The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are conducting a world wide tour to premier their new documentary, "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out". The program begins with a 30 minute introduction by Founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, then the 90 minute Documentary, followed by a Q&A session. I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd. I don't have a lot of time for discussion in this thread until after the show because we still have a lot of work to do to get ready. I will be shooting video but I'm pretty slow at editing. I will try to do up some segments of individual questions from this forum as a priority. Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science. Thank you! Sorry, I can't do URLs here yet but please do watch the pre-release version of the documentary on YouTube. "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out"
tntruther New Blood Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 7

15th June 2012, 03:04 AM	#54
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details... Posts: 28,455	Originally Posted by tntruther The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are conducting a world wide tour to premier their new documentary, "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts speak out". Not this tripe again. Move along.
	__________________ The Onmyouza Theatre, An unofficial international fanclub forum dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za: "In the interests of time and space, it is not unreasonable to cite one point at a time. Citing 30 is the equivalent of citing none. Obviously." - Robert Prey "Physical evidence must be observed and interpreted by witnesses which makes it subjective and subject to mistakes and to fraud." - Robert Prey

15th June 2012, 03:23 AM	#55
Orphia Nay Penguilicious Spodmaster. Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables). Posts: 28,352	Originally Posted by tntruther I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd. When will you present your petition to Congress?
	__________________ Are you an ex-Truther? Please share your story. ~ The Australasian Skeptics Forum.

15th June 2012, 03:34 AM	#56
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,649	Quote: stick to the science i will once Gage and co does.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

15th June 2012, 04:22 AM	#57
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,741	This : http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=91 is the correct forum for your thread.
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

15th June 2012, 04:34 AM	#58
sarge Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Fayetteville, NC Posts: 2,329	I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum.
	__________________ I'm a not-so-strict constructionist, fiscally conservative, social liberal. Exactly which party represents me?

15th June 2012, 05:20 AM	#59
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241	I've yet to see a really detailed explanation that has not been refuted by some sort of architect or scientist that fully explains the natural "progressive" collapse of WT7. Likewise, I've yet to see any sort of scientific architectural argument in favor of "controlled demolition" that has not been refuted by skeptics that debunk the conspiracy theories. But, I've yet to see any sort of reason (vague, substantial or co-incidental) given by any conspiracy theorist that gives a good motive, reason or purpose to take down WT7 in a controlled demolition. The idea that the twin towers were a CD is even more ludicrous, and even though you can point to all sorts of evidence that can be construed as some sort of evidence in support of CD (that, on closer inspection, nearly all break down under scrutiny), it's just impossible to fit any sort of controlled demolition idea into any sort of coherent conspiracy that fits in with reality. Its not something that either side is going to able to ever prove to the other beyond all reasonable doubt. The people advocating this controlled demolition theory I see as comparable to a group of conspirators in possession of a magic unicorn in a boat arguing with people on land who insist that before they are allowed to moor they prove the length of the coastline. Each side is going to better the others arguments nearly indefinitely^[wp], but the burden of proof lies with the people making the extraordinary claims. Occam s Razor. No unicorn. The conspiracy theorists are left lost at sea where they will likely drown in their own sea of delusions.
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241	Last edited by Zeuzzz; 15th June 2012 at 05:39 AM.

15th June 2012, 05:24 AM	#60
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241	Originally Posted by tntruther The Architects and Engineers for 911Truth are ..... Scientists that have controversial views. This is the science and technology section, if you have a particular science argument to put forward then state it. I'm not watching a video from these people, seen most of them already, but you need to mention specifics, else you'll just get post after post of ridicule.
Zeuzzz Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 5,241

15th June 2012, 05:30 AM	#61
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: The van with the big antenna Posts: 1,286	Originally Posted by Zeuzzz But, I've yet to see any sort of reason (vague, substantial or co-incidental) given by any conspiracy theorist that gives a good motive, reason or purpose to take down WT7 in a controlled demolition. Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country. Motive? Sounds suspect to me!..
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

15th June 2012, 05:40 AM	#62
Drudgewire Critical Doofus Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 9,434	Originally Posted by cjnewson88 Apparently (according to a random Judy Woods loving truther on YouTube) WTC7 housed the "largest CIA office next to Langley" in the entire country. Motive? Sounds suspect to me!.. There was a macro going around fB yesterday which listed all the offices in WTC-7 the NWO obviously wanted to destroy. It ended with "9/11: The More You Know, The Less You Sleep." I had to comment that pointing out sleep deprivation causes trutherism might be counter-productive.
	__________________ "You post a lie, it is proven 100% false, you move the goalposts and post yet another lie and it continues on around till we're back to the original lie as if it will somehow become true if it's re-iterated again. The same misquotes over and over again. The same hindsight bias, appeals to authority, etc." -lapman describing every twoofer on the internet

15th June 2012, 06:26 AM	#63
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,936	Hmmm, some questions he won't answer might include: Why is fireproofing required in steel skyscrapers? What would arrest the falling block? Who did he sell his soul to?
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

15th June 2012, 06:38 AM	#64
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: East of Sweeden Posts: 9,658	Originally Posted by tntruther Let's please try to stay respectful and professional and stick to the science. The what?
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

15th June 2012, 06:40 AM	#65
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by sarge I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum. Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

15th June 2012, 07:12 AM	#66
W.D.Clinger Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 2,441	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Originally Posted by sarge I've reported your post. I find nothing objectionable in the thread title or the content of your post, but I believe it exists in the wrong forum. I think it more properly belongs in the CT forum. Why? His topic seems pretty specific to 9/11 CTs. This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum. sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment.

15th June 2012, 07:23 AM	#67
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by W.D.Clinger This thread was started in the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology (SMMT) subforum. sarge was saying it belonged in the CT subforum, which includes the 9/11 subforum. The moderators apparently agreed with sarge, because this thread has since been moved to the 9/11 subsubforum. sarge was not the only one to note that the original post contained no science. Pardon my cynicism, but the original post's suggestion that we view a new YouTube video made it look more like spam than an honest request for scientific questions or comment. Yes that makes much more sense now. This post belongs as far away from science as possible.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

15th June 2012, 07:35 AM	#68
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: East of Sweeden Posts: 9,658	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 This post belongs as far away from science as possible. He/she did mention the word. Along with the usual whining for respect instead of trying to earn it, of course.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

15th June 2012, 07:38 AM	#69
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work?
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

15th June 2012, 08:30 AM	#70
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by uke2se What's Gage going to peddle now that the nanu-nanu-thermite zombie has finally died for real from the head-shot that was the Milette report? Maybe he could do some actual - I don't know - architecturing work? I would feel more comfortable if he didn't...
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

15th June 2012, 08:39 AM	#71
Bell beautiful freak Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 20,465	Originally Posted by tntruther I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd. Why? Gage doesn't do science.
	__________________ Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life. I♥NY You gotta love cops.

15th June 2012, 08:46 AM	#72
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 21,885	Originally Posted by tntruther I'd like people from this forum to offer scientific questions for Richard Gage that I can present to him in Nashville on July 3rd. Here's a serious question I'd like to hear him answer, from a thread I started last year: Originally Posted by Horatius I notice that none of this is actually related to Gage's work as an architect. It's all pretty much just "raising awareness". Can anyone point to any aspect of Gage's presentations that are directly attributable to Richard Gage's professional work as an architect? I don't believe I've ever seen him do or say anything that wasn't copied from someone else's work. The "evidence" that Richard Gage presents is, so far as I can tell, taken entirely from other peoples' work. Those other people are not architects or engineers. So I'd like to know what Dickie Gage has actually done. This question really has two sides: 1) What new evidence or analysis has Gage produced? Has he pointed out any aspects of the events of 9/11 that support the CD hypothesis, which no one before him ever pointed out? 2) Has he ever specifically refuted* any evidence or analysis from earlier, untrained people? That is, has he ever said to a layman, "Sure, you might think that Feature X was important, but based on my experience, I can tell you that it's not a feature that could distinguish a CD from a fire-induced collapse"? As it stands now, no one has ever been able to point out any new work Gage has done that directly relates to the science or engineering of the collapses. This leads us to the unlikely situation that untrained laypeople did two amazing things: 1) They spotted all the relevant evidence, and conducted all the relevant analyses, so that there was nothing new for Gage to do; and 2) In doing the above, they made no mistakes at all; they went down no blind alleys, they found no red herrings, they made no calculation errors. If that was possible, then why do we need A&E9/11 at all? If laypeople can do all the needed work, flawlessly, then why should the endorsement of A&E9/11 carry any weight? *It's interesting to note that, in the case of the NIST reports, we can say "Yes" to both these questions.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

15th June 2012, 08:48 AM	#73
thedopefishlives Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 762	Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself.
thedopefishlives Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 762

15th June 2012, 09:06 AM	#74
Dash80 Blitzkrieg Bop Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Home Sweet Home Posts: 1,539	Originally Posted by thedopefishlives Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself. Hehe, even my nine year old daughter found that ridiculous.
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

15th June 2012, 09:52 AM	#75
Horatius NWO Kitty Wrangler Join Date: May 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Posts: 21,885	Originally Posted by thedopefishlives Well, he did come up with the infamous "Box Boy" demonstration all by himself. Nope.... Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills Well he made them all look like morons with this....... http://i643.photobucket.com/albums/u...tos/BoxBoy.jpg Originally Posted by Horatius Which is noting more than re-enacting the sorts of experiments truthers were doing with things like chicken wire models years before. Just a stupider remake of the original, like Rollerball.
	__________________ Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd