AE911 Press Conference - Feb 19th, 2010

Sorry if this is a double post, I don't see another thread listed:

DATE: February 19, 2010

TIME: 11am – 6pm

PLACE: Marines' Memorial Club & Hotel,
609 Sutter St.
San Francisco, CA


PROGRAM:


11:00 am - Press Conference
Richard Gage, AIA, accompanied by other distinguished speakers and prominent petition signers, will announce this milestone with a brief dynamic presentation of the evidence which has convinced over 1,000 architects and engineers to support the demand for a real investigation. The presentation will be followed by Q&A. Press kits will be distributed.

Open to the Public - Free



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

It seems as this conference may have some worthy news coverage? C-SPAN
perhaps at a minimum?

Just came to post this. On my calendar.

Looks like Richard is cashing in on people who want to believe. Next he'll be running for president and having an affair with some hot chick.

Doubt there will be any MSM, there, naturally - how about a live webcast or podcast? Any plans, or possibility?

Considering that the number of people with architectural and engineering degrees in the US alone is in the hundreds of thousands, and millions worldwide. Gage isn't exactly setting the professional communities on fire.

From accounts he has buttonholed a lot of retired pros, conned many into a lite version of his petition that just seems to request a reinvestigation of 9/11 circumstances, and had passersby sign on out of impulse sympathy.

Bottom line, it took him years to get .01% of the professionals to sign up, there is no movement in the peer review and among associations.
99.99% of architects and engineers believe the WTC buildings collapsed due to the planes acting like gigantic bombs and loss of structural integrity from the uncontrolled fires. All the hard evidence points to that. No solid evidence of controlled demolition.

Gage will continue trying and make a career out of claiming otherwise. His pseudoscience and agenda driven speculations will continue to be ignored.

...nevermind the fact that the buildings' collapse (and therefor the involvement of the (any number, regardless of how small) scinetists he has managed to pull together) is only tiny part of the entire 9/11 story.

Hope you weren't basing your entire argument on the invovlement of such a small (by your account) set of engineers supporting this small piece of the overall puzzle.

You weren't were you?

The powers that be have already won, as far as 911 is concerned. There are still a lot of sheep that refuse to see the evidence, but too much time has passed for an investigation to have any real impact. Even if the evidence was blatantly obvious, which I'm sure it is, there would be plausible deniability since enough time has passed. Any evidence would be refuted and the matter would be swept under the carpet as quietly as they could manage.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Hope you weren't basing your entire argument on the invovlement of such a small (by your account) set of engineers supporting this small piece of the overall puzzle.

You weren't were you?

9/11 is complex in that the Bush admin had foreknowledge of a major attack and did not employ all possible means to stop it. Suppressed was the known involvement of the Saudi royal family and Pakistan's ISI in funding and co-ordination. Many other loose ends and perpetrators still at large.

But I object to the Kiddie Konspiracy level of discussion which deflects from the deep serious issues. The WTC buildings collapsed because their particular architectural design were not capable of withstanding the massive assault from planes and fires compromising their self-support capability. It's been demonstrated in detail by independent architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, forensic investigators, worldwide.

People like Gage dining out on bad science and ignorance pushing his wonky theories 8 years later only benefits his pocketbook and ego.



[edit on 2-2-2010 by mmiichael]

reply to post by mmiichael

But I object to the Kiddie Konspiracy level of discussion which deflects from the deep serious issues. The WTC buildings collapsed because their particular architectural design were not capable of withstanding the massive assault from planes and fires compromising their self-support capability. It's been demonstrated in detail by independent architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, forensic investigators, worldwide.

Well, that explains WTC-1 and WTC-2. What of WTC-7? (and, not 3-6?)






[edit on 2/3/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
what of WTC-7?

Don't want to repeat what's been elaborated on already in hundreds of ATS threads. Check the search engine on the site.

WTC was chronically damaged on one face, sprinkler system was knocked out and water pressure could not be accessed to fight the fire.

The overheated steel structure with the damage put undue stress on key support columns which eventually gave way in an avalanche of failures resulting in collapse. An article in STRUCTURE Magazine a few years ago even isolate the exact column.

Despite massive speculation and wild claims, firefighters and thousands of spectators watched as WTC7 moaned and shuddered for hours the afternoon of 9/11 before it finally fell. No observation of characteristics of any explosive charges or evidence of them found in the debris.

More details here

www.debunking911.com...

reply to post by mmiichael


Yeah, seen them.

Tell you what, I'll spend some time on your link, if you spend some time on mine

www.911research.com...

[This site is updated regularly - almost daily.]

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by mmiichael

 

Yeah, seen them.

Tell you what, I'll spend some time on your link, if you spend some time on mine

www.911research.com...

[This site is updated regularly - almost daily.]

Checked it out. High School Science.

Jones paint chips, a millimeter thin, could not do much beyond warm steel a couple degrees even if they were thermite or some hypothesized magic-super-nano-thermite. Even Jones has conceded that and feebly says maybe some actual explosive was used with the thermite as an igniting material.

As any chemist will tell you, peanut butter has more volatile force than thermite. The thin red chips, of which there were tons, have been shown to actually be primer paint. This is Jones's second attempt to cash in on a controversial scientific 'discovery' that turned out to be bogus. His first was Cold Fusion.

This kind of wild speculation and pseudoscientific bafflegab was popular 5-6 years ago before the NIST and FEMA reports came out and hundreds of independent scientists were able to look at the accumulated evidence. Demolition experts and structural engineers worldwide have looked at all the data, photos, accounts, etc. Some disputes on certain points, but overall consensus.

A good in-depth review of Jones's wonky paint chip experiments is at this Italian site.

11-settembre.blogspot.com...

Few bother to even trying to debunk all those weird theories any more.

The still uncharted waters of 9/11 research lie with the depth of complicity of the US admin and it's agencies and their covering for Saudi and Pakistani involvement.

But there really has been no real question for a long time now why and how the WTC buildings collapsed. Relegated to the conspiracy sub-culture where bad science and disproven looney theories have unusually long shelf lives.



[edit on 3-2-2010 by mmiichael]

reply to post by mmiichael

But I object to the Kiddie Konspiracy level of discussion which deflects from the deep serious issues.

I see you have appointed yourself the upmost authority on 911. Well sir, I have to disagree with you as you lack serious scientific knowledge on the subject and know nothing of what you parrot.

9/11 is complex in that the Bush admin had foreknowledge of a major attack and did not employ all possible means to stop it.

That is your opinion, however I have an opinion, and that key members in the Bush administration were part of helping to pull off 911. We call it doing a false flag operation, which is something you have no knowledge about and do not want to know, because in your mind you think our government is not capable of pulling off such a defeat.

Suppressed was the known involvement of the Saudi royal family and Pakistan's ISI in funding and co-ordination.

Again, that is your opinion, but here is my opinion since facts, and sources are not important to you anyway.
If this information is suppressed about the Saudi royal family and Pakistan's ISI in funding and co-ordination, then you are only assuming, or playing on a hunch.

Many other loose ends and perpetrators still at large.

Oh, I agree with you, that the real “perpetrators are still at large.”

But I object to the Kiddie Konspiracy level of discussion which deflects from the deep serious issues.

Then why are you posting in a conspiracies website, as if you are above everyone else, my what a big ego you have.

The WTC buildings collapsed because their particular architectural design were not capable of withstanding the massive assault from planes and fires compromising their self-support capability.

Your opinions are sadly wrong and sciences has already disputed your disinformation that you continue spread of the OS. ATS members looking for truth do not like to dwell in ignorance. You are only parroting the OS as stated in the 911 commission report and NIST which have now been proven lies. ( I don’t think anyone has told you yet, you know the proven lies.)

The fact is, the WTC were overly built and built to withstand multiple impacts of fully loaded commercial airliners the Boeing 707, the largest airliners of their day. The WTC façade was build like a fish net the planes could hit in any directions at any speed they were design to punch a hole through the whole building, while keeping the rest of the building intact. BTW, this information came from the WTC designer himself.

So while you continue to parrot the OS, of the WTC and your statement of, “because their particular architectural design were not capable of withstanding the massive assault from planes and fires compromising their self-support capability.” your statement it is a proven lie.

It's been demonstrated in detail by independent architects, structural engineers, demolition experts, forensic investigators, worldwide.

Beside Popular Science, National Geographic and NIST I don’t think any publication has written anything that proves the OS fairytale is true and as the publication I have just mention above, they have all been debunked by professionals from around the world who expertise exceeds your government pseudo sciences.

People like Gage dining out on bad science and ignorance pushing his wonky theories 8 years later only benefits his pocketbook and ego.

Your opinion in how you loathe Gage only shows how ignorant you really are since the man has punch holes into your OS fairytale that you dearly hang onto.
Anyone who wants to push the “wonky OS theories for 8 years,” has just proven they are fast asleep. Time to wake up do some real research.
Everyone knows the government lied to the American people about 911, where have you been?












[edit on 3-2-2010 by impressme]

I don't loathe Gage. I'm actually rather grudgingly impressed by his chutzpah. Nobody ever got poor underestimating the credulousness of a certain type of American, but his readiness to aim really low is nothing short of breathtaking.

He's like one of those old-fashioned snake-oil salesmen. It's quite a feat of presentation.

reply to post by mmiichael

Jones paint chips, a millimeter thin, could not do much beyond warm steel a couple degrees even if they were thermite or some hypothesized magic-super-nano-thermite.

Besides your “opinions” do you have credible sources to back your ridiculous claim?
Or is insulting everyone who will not summit to your OS is all you can do?

Even Jones has conceded that and feebly says maybe some actual explosive was used with the thermite as an igniting material.

Do you have any proof that it was not used or could not have been used? ( I didn’t think so!)

As any chemist will tell you, peanut butter has more volatile force than thermite.

Really, I guess my ignorance proceeds me, please show me any scientists that would make such a ridiculous statement of such ignorance.

The thin red chips, of which there were tons, have been shown to actually be primer paint.

That is disinformation you are parroting you do not know what you are talking about.

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe


We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.
Global Research Editor's Note
The definition of thermitic material:
A trademark used for a welding and incendiary mixture of fine aluminum powder with a metallic oxide, usually iron, that when ignited yields an intense heat.
Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. (Wikipedia)
What we are dealing with is the melting/ burning of metal structures.
“Metals are capable of burning under the right conditions, similarly to the combustion process of wood or gasoline. ... A thermite reaction is a process in which the correct mixture of metallic fuels are combined and ignited.
Ignition itself requires extremely high temperatures.”
Readers can reach their own conclusions as to the far-reaching implications of these findings.
Although the authors do not address the broader issue of the 9/11 attacks, their findings have a direct bearing on the likely causes of the collapse of the WTC buildings on September 11, 2001. The findings also question the validity of the official report of the 911 Commission.
Below are selected excerpts of the article. Readers can also link to the complete text, by clicking the link
Complete Article
www.bentham-open.org.../2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.

www.globalresearch.ca...

This is Jones's second attempt to cash in on a controversial scientific 'discovery' that turned out to be bogus.

Bogus, I have yet to see any sciences that has disproved Jones findings.
Perhaps, you could show me these scientific journals from scientist who have done peer review papers disputing Jones findings? (I didn’t think so)

to cash in on a controversial scientific 'discovery' that turned out to be bogus. His first was Cold Fusion.

Cash in, please elaborate with some proof that Jones is looking to strike it rich?

This kind of wild speculation and pseudoscientific bafflegab was popular 5-6 years ago before the NIST and FEMA reports came out

That is utterly nonsense and disinformation that you are spreading into smearing Professor Steven Jones.
His final report came out years later after NIST & FEMA reports were out, and you know that. Stop spreading disinformation.

Demolition experts and structural engineers worldwide have looked at all the data, photos, accounts, etc. Some disputes on certain points, but overall consensus.

Absolutely nonsense, The only people that disputes anything are the lying NIST reports.

Most structural engineers do not believe in that nonsesence that you parrot and well over a thousand engineers alone are demanding a new investigation to to the destruction of the WTC

1026 architectural and engineering professionals
and 6365 other supporters including A&E students
have signed the petition demanding of Congress
a truly independent investigation.

www.ae911truth.org...

The still uncharted waters of 9/11 research lie with the depth of complicity of the US admin and it's agencies and their covering for Saudi and Pakistani involvement.

If this was all true then why did we attack Iraq and Afghanistan? Looks to me we attack the wrong countries don’t you agree?

But there really has been no real question for a long time now why and how the WTC buildings collapsed. Relegated to the conspiracy sub-culture where bad science and disproven looney theories have unusually long shelf lives.

Such as your OS fairytale, which falls in the same categories as laser beams from space and holograph planes hitting the WTC.

Originally posted by mmiichael

Considering that the number of people with architectural and engineering degrees in the US alone is in the hundreds of thousands, and millions worldwide. Gage isn't exactly setting the professional communities on fire.

lol...till they actually find out 'WHAT' known facts are, and what is HYPOTHESIZED..and since only about 37% of Americans use the internet, where is the ONLY place you will see the first 35 minutes of the Pentagon BEFORE the facade fell...or any detail in length about WTC7...when have you EVER seen that on MSM...HOW many do you think know there was only a 16 foot diameter hole between the first and second floor?....HOW many know there was a 10 foot hole exiting the Pentagon?

HOW many do you think would be interested to know that when the kink forms on WTC7...the ENTIRE building instantly, evenly descends as fast as an object can fall in laboratory conditions where ALL objects descend the same rate as in a vacuum.

And with the spin that GOV. and the MEDIA put on asking questions about 9-11....you're basically a terrorist...if you ask questions

From accounts he has buttonholed a lot of retired pros, conned many into a lite version of his petition that just seems to request a reinvestigation of 9/11 circumstances, and had passersby sign on out of impulse sympathy.

People sign when they find out exactly what the 'official story' has to offer.....NOTHING

Bottom line, it took him years to get .01% of the professionals to sign up, there is no movement in the peer review and among associations.
99.99% of architects and engineers believe the WTC buildings collapsed due to the planes acting like gigantic bombs and loss of structural integrity from the uncontrolled fires. All the hard evidence points to that. No solid evidence of controlled demolition.

YOU said it..there is NO physical HARD evidence......lol....where is it?

there was NO 'extreme-heat-compromising' steel examined to lead the hypothesis...testing proved no floors collapsed from the fires and heat present..and in order for a scientific investigation to eliminate a possibility of an agent contributing to the collapse...there MUST be testing, OF THAT AGENT, in order to remove the possibility...where are the testing results that dismiss the possibility that explosives or accelerents were used...

"oh no your honor we didn't test....we don't need to, because THE BOSS SAID there was none...and that's good enough for us".....

sooo....how soon before we hear that statement?

Gage will continue trying and make a career out of claiming otherwise. His pseudoscience and agenda driven speculations will continue to be ignored.

good...I hope so....no one else has the balls to do it

Originally posted by impressme

Bogus, I have yet to see any sciences that has disproved Jones findings.
Perhaps, you could show me these scientific journals from scientist who have done peer review papers disputing Jones findings? (I didn’t think so)

That is utterly nonsense and disinformation that you are spreading into smearing Professor Steven Jones.

No, you just want to bury your head in the sand. Jones is a fraud. I linked to one paper that showed it. You will never read it.

Jones published in Bentham, a phony vanity press publisher out of Abu Dhabi (or somewhere in the Middle East). You pay $700 and they print anything. Two American college kids submitted a gobbledygook computer generated paper and submitted to Bentham. It was accepted - for the fee.

The Bentham magazine editor of the quit in protest after it was put in without her consent. No English language real peer review would touch the paper. The methodology and controls were not executed properly, for one thing. More to the point Jones conclusion on thermite were drawn on faulty principles. Jones admits as any scientist knows, a thin layer of thermite would have no significant effect on the massive amounts of steel involved.

Professional chemists looking at it have weighed in with the same conclusions. Look up Dr Greening. There is no reason for the scientific community to refute Jones because he isn't even on the scientific radar. His paper is one of many thousands of junk science articles that have littered he landscape for hundreds of years. The closest he came to acknowledgement was when he was pushing Cold Fusion in the 80s. Which was also rotten science. Look it up.

There are millions of academics and scientists out there, many out of work or retired. With no credibility to lose a few sometimes attach their credentials to flaky causes. Check out the UFO, alternative medicine, and conspiracy fields. Quite a few charlatans doing the talk circuit and doing books, particles, websites, videos. The Internet has given all this crap a second life.

You won't believe any of this because you're determined to somehow implicate the US govt in bombing some buildings that were already destroyed by two fuel-filled planes weighing 90 tons each that were crashed into the WTC. It happened in broad daylight, fireman and thousands watched the destruction. All tangible evidence demonstrates clearly and unequivocally what the results were.

Thousands of independent writers, journalists, investigators would love to get their hands on something that would show the US was involved in the destruction of the WTC towers. They've tried. Nothing.

The Truther cult desperate to prove their "Insider Job" has not come up with anything of substance in over 8 years. They will never admit they're wrong and the Internet will carry sites and discussion forums with the same disinformation and baseless speculations forever.

The real scientific world just quietly looks on in amusement.





[edit on 3-2-2010 by mmiichael]

Jones published in Bentham, a phony vanity press publication out of Abu Dhabi. You pay $700 and they print anything. Two American college kids submitted a gobbledygook computer generated paper and submitted to Bentham. It was accepted - for the fee.

The difference is: the computer entry was easily spotted and makes no sesne.

Nobody has been able to disprove the science...all they do is attack the
journal as a method to discredit the authors.

Let us know when you have a valid theory / argument for the science
presented in the paper.

Originally posted by turbofan

Jones published in Bentham, a phony vanity press publication out of Abu Dhabi. You pay $700 and they print anything. Two American college kids submitted a gobbledygook computer generated paper and submitted to Bentham. It was accepted - for the fee.

The difference is: the computer entry was easily spotted and makes no sesne.

Nobody has been able to disprove the science...all they do is attack the
journal as a method to discredit the authors.

Let us know when you have a valid theory / argument for the science
presented in the paper.

Won't enter into another debate here. I've made my pitch and knowledgeable ATS members have provided scientific explanations, links, hard science.

You want to deny it's there and continue to push the flaky theories and demonstrably agenda driven bad science like Jones and his paint chip thermite.

Obviously nothing will change that. You have some company. There are whole communities dedicated to this kind of foolishness. It's like a religion. Sometimes people from the reality sphere drop in for a look around. They're usually hounded as supporters of some mythical OS, disinformation agents, debunkers, whatever.

This is all junior league bad fiction thinking. One reason most bonafide professionals won't come within a mile of it. Embarrassing.


[edit on 3-2-2010 by mmiichael]

reply to post by mmiichael


I'll drink to that.


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3/2/2010 by Sauron]