The Ethics of Gage

The JREFers are raising the question of whether Richard Gage is upholding the ethics of architects.

forums.randi.org...

They provide a link to the architect's code.

www.aia.org...

It looks to me like that code is mostly about serving the interests of architects. They mention the Art and Science of architecture a lot. But the words physics and mathematics are not in there.

In 2008 I asked Gage about the steel and concrete on every level of the towers. He looked at me like I had grown a second head and then gave the LAME excuse of the NIST not releasing accurate blue prints. My pledge father was an architect. The standard joke at Illinois Institute of Technology was the architects studied funny physics and funny math.

Gravity works the same way all over the planet and the physics of skyscrapers cannot change. Is the architectural profession violating ethics by not resolving this and explaining what data is necessary to resolve it. Architects cannot escape physics. Where are those structural engineers.

psik

Not quite sure what I would label it... A forum for followers of stage magicians, mindlessly practicing knee-jerk skepticism (just as mentally easy as what true believers do), whining to a government agency to save them from ideas that they don't agree with...

wow

/slowclap

reply to post by psikeyhackr


In truth I only clicked on your thread because I miss read the title to say " The ethics of Gaga ".

Never the less good info. But you need to change the title a bit to include something in relation to the towers so people will click my fellow member.

SnF

reply to post by psikeyhackr

....physics of skyscrapers cannot change

Actually, you're a little confused there, as are many "truthseekers". The "physics" of every structure is different as every structure is different. Thats why so many "truthseekers" like to over-generalize and say things like "skycrapers do this" or "skyscrapers never do this...". I would say its misleading but as you've probably noticed by now, no one is being mislead, as no one is actually paying any attention to the microscopic subset of persons who speak about conspiracies based on their non-existant experience with nonsensical building categories like "skyscraper" and "metal frame building".

Originally posted by randyvs

In truth I only clicked on your thread because I miss read the title to say " The ethics of Gaga ".

Lady Gaga has a much higher standard of ethics than Richard Gage.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

....physics of skyscrapers cannot change

Actually, you're a little confused there, as are many "truthseekers". The "physics" of every structure is different as every structure is different. Thats why so many "truthseekers" like to over-generalize and say things like "skycrapers do this" or "skyscrapers never do this...". I would say its misleading but as you've probably noticed by now, no one is being mislead, as no one is actually paying any attention to the microscopic subset of persons who speak about conspiracies based on their non-existant experience with nonsensical building categories like "skyscraper" and "metal frame building".

All skyscraper have to counteract the force of gravity to remain standing. The tube-in-tube structure of the WTC is a trivial variation from the normal grid design of the Empire State Building. But you can't find the distribution of steel down any skyscraper in the world. They are making a BIG DEAL out of trivia.

The conservation of momentum is the same everywhere. The top of the north tower would have to accelerate the mass below and destroy the supports which would require energy. This is the biggest scientific farce in history.

People pretending to be intelligent are trying to convince other people that they are too stupid to comprehend the obvious but then they don't provide simple data like the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level. Richard Gage does not even bring that up. He would have to explain why almost all architects were not saying it was impossible in 2002.

psik

reply to post by waypastvne


Ya I think that would at least be a pretty good bet. In fact that would've made an intersting heading.

Gages Ethics Lower than Gagas.