WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine

I have shown scientific evidence that debunks Jones' thermite paper. I claimed that it was flawed and showed it.

Ridicule is not scientific evidence.

I hope it helps you see the reality that A&E has absolutely nothing of merit and are bilking people. How else can Gage pay himself $85,000/yr for doing nothing but feeding paranoia.

I don't know where Gage gets his money and I careless. So you believe Gage should not be paid? Perhaps you shouldn't be paid for your work.

Nothing is for free, and exposing this huge conspiracy cost a lot of money. Or do you believe all these scientist should all work for free?

Gage shouldn't be paid for fraud. In 14 years he hasn't exposed anything other than there's more than one born every minute.
If you are up for it, you can try to defend Jones' paper. We can start with the thermodynamics or the chemistry of the thermite reaction. Your choice.

a reply to: pteridine

Gage shouldn't be paid for fraud. In 14 years he hasn't exposed anything other than there's more than one born every minute.

Fraud, yet you have failed miserably to prove he is a fraud. That's your "opinion" enjoy it.

If you are up for it, you can try to defend Jones' paper. We can start with the thermodynamics or the chemistry of the thermite reaction. Your choice.

Not interesting in debating with someone that is dishonest.

a reply to: Informer1958

Let's take a look here.

The Poorly Scripted Cognitive Infiltration of AE911Truth and Tom Sullivan’s Lies of Omission

Who fact checked this slide? Who included it with the article without any links to the original source? Who put that caption on it that claims this information relates to a “cutter charge designed for use with thermite” when it clearly is NOT? Who selectively edited the abstract taking out the mention of the fact that this is a “thermite igniter” for a propellant charge? Who chose an image of a MINING demolition controller which is incapable of being used for building demolitions when CDI has their own software driven system that is? These are serious questions that require immediate retractions for the good of the credibility of Richard Gage, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, and the entire Truth movement.

Richard Gage’s Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth seems to be spreading more and more disinformation since Gregg Roberts has come on board and their latest foray into anti-detcord disinfo (Tom Sullivan section starts at 1:34:35 into the video) with CDI (primary suspect for the demolition of the Trade Centers) explosives loader Tom Sullivan, is no exception.

Tom Sullivan is now being paraded around as a former CDI employee, someone who took photos and “loaded” buildings with explosive charges for demolition. But in this video “interview” with Richard Gage, his story is wildly inaccurate as he contradicts himself over and over again and his real purpose (aside from undermining the controlled demolition investigation of 9/11 (much like Steven Jones’ “thermite” saga)) seems to be to spread deliberate misinformation about det cord to real Truth advocates.

empirestrikesblack.com...

As you can see, Richard Gage and "AE 911 Truth" have been discredited, and rightly so.

a reply to: skyeagle409

As you can see, Richard Gage and "AE 911 Truth" have been discredited, and rightly so.

The Poorly Scripted Cognitive Infiltration of AE911Truth and Tom Sullivan’s Lies of Omission

Such a poor "opinionated" rant from someone who hates science.

Where is your science that debunks A&E Science?

a reply to: Informer1958

Where is your science that debunks A&E Science?

Let's take another look at "AE 911 Truth" the organization you have been depending upon.

AE911 Truth Fails, Again

The Troofers were all excited that they got a vote held at the Americans Institute of Architects annual meeting, unfortunately it failed by the overwhelming vote of 3,892 to 160.

AE911 Truth claims over 100 of their members are in the AIA, which means that they barely managed to get votes from any other architects at all.

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

Richard Gage and "AE 911 Truth" has been taking serious hits from both sides of the fence. "AE 911 Truth" is a laughingstock.

a reply to: pteridine

Gage shouldn't be paid for fraud. In 14 years he hasn't exposed anything other than there's more than one born every minute.

Richard Gage and "AE 911 Truth" are frauds and it is amazing that even "Veterans Today" has jumped on them. Simply amazing!

a reply to: Informer1958

Where is your science that debunks A&E Science?

We can take a look here.

Major Problems with Tom Sullivan’s AE911Truth “Interview”

This deliberate manipulation of the relevant facts is a major disappointment. Seeing AE911Truth put out this kind of work is troubling indeed. It is going to feed the debunker community and probably drive several engineers and architects away from Richard Gage’s previously good works.

In order to reclaim the integrity that AE911Truth has built over the years, Richard Gage himself must immediately retract this work and thoroughly investigate every single aspect of Tom Sullivan’s story. Though Sullivan would have had to approve the power point presentation slides, ultimately Richard Gage must take responsibliity for this terrible mistake.

After emailing AE911Truth and after trying to email the author of the “interview” article, I have heard back from no one about the serious flaws in their article. Instead, I have noticed that they are trying their best to make sure it is posted in as many locations as they can complete with the glaring mistakes and deliberate misstatements. As of this afternoon, the article still features the incredibly inaccurate and downright deceptive power point slides and the factually inaccurate captions as you can see from the screenshot below.

willyloman.wordpress.com...

Since "AE 911 Truth" has been blasted and discredited for fraud and deception on both sides of the fence, why would anyone take AE911 Truth seriously?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Still waiting for your evidence of science that debunks A&E.

All the ridiculing in the world against A&E doesn't pass as science.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Major Problems with Tom Sullivan’s AE911Truth “Interview”

More bias yellow journalism all based on someones "opinions". You must be jumping with joy believing this smut is some kind of science.

Still waiting for your science in debunking A&E?

a reply to: Informer1958

The truth does not need fabricating. However the OS does.

Apparently, you are unaware that Richard Gage was confronted and exposed by a hardcore truther at the "AE911 Truthr" Event on 4/12/2011. Needless to say, their argument became very heated to say the least. During the heated exchange, Richard Gage admitted that he was an architect, and has never studied the very important NYC seismographic data, and that thermite does not explain all of the evidence from 9/11. The hardcore truther then went on the say this about Richard Gage:

It's absolutely mind-blowing to think about how many well-intended people are still fooled by this man's unscientific claims...

As I was saying, Richard Gage and "AE911 Truth" have been blasted by those on both sides of the fence, and rightly so. Now, yet another group, that once worked for "AE911 Truth," has been attacking "AE911 Truth" for fraud and deception on the way it does business.

It is no mystery as to why "AE911 Truth" is a laughingstock of itself.

a reply to: Informer1958

Still waiting for your science in debunking A&E?

We can now take a look here.

Lies of AE911Truth Exposed

It is time to bring the lies of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 “Truth” (AE911Truth) to light.

First, as we see, here, AE911Truth claims that over 24,000 Architects and engineers came face to face with the truth. However, as this site points out, if you go to AE911Truth’s own site, you’ll see they only added 50 new petitioners, and if you watch the videos from AE911Truth’s own Web site, you’ll see that only 4 of those 50 were architects or engineers.

truthersaresanitychallenged.wordpress.com...

a reply to: Informer1958

Still waiting for your evidence of science that debunks A&E.

Now, we can go here.

The Shaky Moral Foundation that AE911Truth is Built Upon

healthwyze.org...

Now, that it has been determined that Richard Gage and "AE911 Truth" have been deceiving the public with disinformation,, deception, and lies, there is nothing of scientific value from "AE911 Truth."

a reply to: Informer1958

Still waiting for your science in debunking A&E?

Apparently, there is nothing of value from the discredited website of "AE911 Truth." Even truthers have now exposed the lies and deception of "AE911 Truth."

AE911Truth lies about "118 Witnesses", is made aware, then lies further

"They've finally done it. The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has now lost any shred of dignity or honesty they may have once had"

On your main page, you state that 118 first responders heard sounds of explosions "at the plane impact zone - a full second prior to collapse". I've read and re-read AE911truth's Graeme MacQueen's paper "118 Witnesses" and can't find a single witness who reported hearing an explosion at the impact zone a full second prior to collapse, much less 118.

The majority of witnesses (all 31 in the "bomb" category and well over half in the "explosion" category) use the term bomb or explosion to describe the sound DURING the collapse. IE, the roar of the collapse sounded like an explosion/bomb. The remaining accounts describe explosions well before and well after the collapses, as explicitly described by the first responders, and many say they believe in hindsight that the explosions were electrical (Stephen Gregory) or the like.

A few of the eyewitnesses do say that they heard an "explosion" above them and looked up to see one of the towers collapsing. Since the eyewitnesses don't say that the explosion occured before the collapse began (as opposed to the noise they heard being the collapse itself), it's completely dishonest to say that the noise was heard "a full second prior to collapse". Absolutely none of them (unless I'm missing one) describe the noise as coming from the impact zone, which makes this a double lie. A couple days later, a Judy Shelton responded by saying, "Thank you for pointing this out, we are fixing it."

Weeks passed without them changing a thing. Finally today I checked back and see that the main page now reads, "Sounds of explosions and flashes of light witnessed at the beginning of the "collapse" by 118 first responders". Instead of CORRECTING what was already a lie about the sounds of explosions, they pushed it even further to now include "flashes of light" as well!

I know of one person (Stephen Gregory) who talked about flashes of light, but he explicitly states that he believes it was electrical, due to the building coming apart. They're taking his words out of context, but this is still only one person (MAYBE a few others that I'm missing). Certainly not all 118! Maybe this group should reconsider its reason for existing if they have to lie to support their existence.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Just another example of many of how "AE911 Truth" has been deceiving the public over the years.

To sum it up, it has been shown that "AE911 Truth" does not have credibility.

a reply to: Informer1958

All the ridiculing in the world against A&E doesn't pass as science.

To put it bluntly, even hardcore truthers have now called into question, scientific claims of "AE911 Truth."

a reply to: skyeagle409

So now you're posting opinions from JREF of all places? Or "international skeptics" as they now call themselves. Wonder why they changed their name...maybe had a few credibility issues themselves....

Btw that Seismic paper was not hosted at ae911truth.

a reply to: Flatcoat

So now you're posting opinions from JREF of all places? Or "international skeptics" as they now call themselves. Wonder why they changed their name...maybe had a few credibility issues themselves....

It is no secret that "AE911 Truth" has been discredited and debunked time and again. I've even debunked the claim of "AE911 Truth" that the WTC buildings collapsed at free fall, which was very easy to debunk simply by reviewing videos and photos that depicted debris striking the ground while the collapse of the WTC buildings was still in progress many stories above ground level. Common sense alone should have told "AE911 Truth" the WTC buildings were not falling at free fall speed by that very fact.

Ever wondered why after 14 years there is still no evidence of demo explosives and thermite at ground zero? It should be obvious considering that a number of countries around the world had warned the United States prior to 9/11 that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda would attack America with hijacked airliners. After 9/11, Osama bin Laden claimed responsibility for 9/11 and al-Qaeda released the martyr videos of the 9/11 hijackers. I might add that al-Qaeda has been upset at the 9/11 Truth Movement for taking credit away from them.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

An Al Qaeda representative says that claims the U.S. government was behind the attacks on Sept. 11th are demeaning to Al Qaeda.

www.theonion.com...

a reply to: Informer1958

All the ridiculing in the world against A&E doesn't pass as science.

What science does "AE911 Truth" have? Even those within the Truth Movement have attacked "AE911 Truth" for its deceptive practices and lies. Now, let's go here.

"AE911 Truth" Claim:
"Evidence of thermite incendiaries in steel samples."

False! They found nothing that you would not expect to be there. The most touted "evidence" is iron microspheres, which are formed both in fires, and in violent scraping of steel. The collapses of the WTC towers (the dust from which covered WTC7) was guaranteed to produce these spheres. In fact investigators used iron microsphere as a "signature" when examining the extent of the spread of the WTC dust.

In addition, thermite is made from iron oxide and aluminum - vast amounts of were would be found in the towers, so obviously would also be found in the dust.

www.metabunk.org...

We can also take a look here to see how microspheres can be created.



To continue.

"AE911 Truth" Claim:
"Sounds of explosions heard by credible witnesses"

But not recorded on the audio of the video of the collapse. Or the audio of people very close to WTC7. Or even from a significant number of the thousands of people there. Controlled demolition charges are incredibly loud, as they are releasing a lot of energy. What people reported hearing was most likely things falling (including initially from the two towers), or just things blowing up in the fires. You would expect people to hear some bangs. If there was a controlled demolition then you would hear a series of closely spaced very loud bangs.

Demolition implosions sound like this:



This is not what demolition implosions sound like.



To sum it up, there is no problem debunking "AE911 Truth" claims with facts and evidence.

a reply to: skyeagle409

It is no secret that "AE911 Truth" has been discredited and debunked time and again.

Who says A&E was discredited? You?

Show me where scientist proved A&E science is a fraud by using real science?

I am not interested in other people "opinions" or phony videos, or OS experts.

You show me the science, if you cannot do that then, A&E Science stands as very credible.

You can bad mouth, ridicule and claim all the fallacies against A&E all you want. I want the scientific proof?

a reply to: Informer1958

Who says A&E was discredited?

That won't fly. "AE911 Truth" has been discredited and It's history already.

You show me the science, if you cannot do that then, A&E Science stands as very credible

Credible?! In cased you missed it, let's hear it once again from a hardcore truther who confronted Richard Gage that the AE911 Truth event in 2011.

9/11 Truther Confronts Richard Gage of "AE911 Truth"

"It's absolutely mind-blowing to think about how many well-intended people are still fooled by this man's unscientific claims..."

edit on 5-10-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)