9/11 Debate: Do We Know The Truth?

06/28/12 Robert Lorei
Radioactivity: Live Call-In (Thursday) | Listen to this entire show:

Large_3472

Good morning, welcome to Radioactivity. I’m Rob Lorei. Coming up today- a program that we’ve had scheduled for more than a month—a debate about what happened on 9/11.

Tonight at the Roosevelt in Ybor City- Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth will show his new film about why he and others think we don’t know what caused the three buildings at the World Trade Center to collapse on September 11th 2001.

We’re going to hear Gage debate a leading scientific skeptic about the 9/ll conspiracy theories for the next hour. By the way after this program- at 11 this morning-- We’ll hear a special edition of Democracy Now on which Amy Goodman will discuss the Supreme Court’s health care decision.

Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He has been an architect for more than 23 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings. Mr. Gage became interested in researching the destruction of the WTC high-rises after hearing on the radio the conclusions of 9/11 researcher David Ray Griffin in 2006, which launched his own quest for what he calls the truth about 9/11. He is the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth….

Dave Thomas, a physicist and mathematician, is president of New Mexicans for Science and Reason and a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. He is currently a scientist/ programmer at IRIS/PASSCAL in Socorro, New Mexico, and also teaches classes in physics, psychology, and critical thinking at New Mexico Tech. In his spare time he’s a juggler and a bluegrass musician. E-mail:

nmsrdave@swcp.com.

We’re going to hear opening statements for six minutes each by our guests. I will ask a series of follow up questions. We’ll have five minutes for our guests to question each other. And we’ll take your phone calls and e-mails later—and we’ll give our guests two minutes to sum up at the end of the program.

Richard and Dave, welcome to WMNF---

Richard- let’s start with you- tell us in six minutes why you think the official story about the collapse of the three buildings at the World Trade Center is wrong.

FMI AE 9/11 Truth

Dave Thomas’ skeptic group

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

comments powered by Disqus

Comments

Deja vu

Box Boy will get his butt handed to him again, will still declare victory, and all will be well in Troofer Land. :-)

Albright Smith.

DjVu? Sure, smith. Recur this. 6%Dust made of hardened MOLTEN IRON droplets 'violently ejected' from exploding/incendiaries bringing 3 multi-storied steel framed high-rises to ground at FREE FALL. ALL concrete pulverized into DUST. MOLTEN Steel running down the channel rails 'like we was in a foundry" in the PILE weeks later. 0.6% identified unignited thermitic materials in DUST. Pinocchio Sunder/Gross creatioNIST "normal office furnishings fire" secret computer Graphics, are holograms for the dying imagination in a land of Liars. "countermisinformation" in smiths Sunsteinian La La.

Talk's cheap

Instead of enlightening college physics professors who don't drink the Kool-Aid, Roger, why doesn't Box Boy get some W14 X 730s, stand them up, paint some stuff on them, demonstrate his hypothesis for us on video, and post the results at ae911"truth"? Is that too big a job for his "800 engineers"?

slap

Dave Thomas is a shill. It is very obvious.

albury not foolin anyone still

albury smith is an unqualified, anonymous shill, a demonstrable lying troll, who spends his life posting his absurd misinformation, disinformation and obfuscations on every page possible that mentions 911 truth. It doesnt matter how or what was used to bring building 7 down, or if it took ten seconds or thirty. The fact that building 7 fell at freefall acceleration for ~2.5 seconds, as acknowledged begrudgingly by NIST, IS evidence that explosives were used as it is IMPOSSIBLE for all the structural support necessary for freefall acceleration to be achieved to be removed instantaneously and simultaneously without some form of controlled demolition. as he well knows, and as he is unable to prove otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt, not just because he is an anonymous unqualified troll, but because the laws of physics applied just as much on 9-11 as they do today. further evidence of his chutzpah can be witnessed via a simple internet search for "albury smith 9 11" - his pitiful efforts are quite amusing as he stuggles against an overwhelming growing majority of people who after looking into a few facts, find it not unreasonable for family members of the victims to be calling for a proper independent transparent unfettered investigation with subpoena power.

Platonic analyst

It is an error to trust Thomas on fundamental 9/11 concepts such as the nature of the twin towers' destruction, since he has demonstrated great difficulty grasping the elementary 9/11 class: http://www.global-platonic-theater.com/Censors,%20Handling/Challenging%20on%20Baby%20Step/thomas.htm Love,

Epistemological conundrums

A quick search here: http://redlands.patch.com/events/blueprint-for-911-truth shows a final count of ~50 postings by you of your vacuous and simple-minded babystep link, Danny, and it appears that you stonewalled Dave with it too, so your hapless confusion over the WTC 7 collapse has been more than adequately expressed and documented. Have you visited Gaithersburg, MD yet to find out what a "highly intriguing epistemological conundrUUUuuuUUUuuuUUUuuuUUUuuuMMMM!" is?

Steel Wool

Is Dave Thomas suggesting the WTC towers--at least the sections that caught fire--were composed largely of steel wool? If so, that might explain the existence of 6% iron microspheres in the dust samples. ;-)

re: steel wool

Were Harrit, Jones, et al. "reminded" of that too, just as they were of exotic explosives? Since not one column or other piece of structural steel was pulled from the debris with a melted or explosively-cut end on it, where did these alleged iron microspheres come from, and when were they produced?

ho hum albury the glum

albury smith shill ( aka ass ) is an unqualified, anonymous troll, a demonstrable liar, who spends his life trolling any website that refers to 911 truth, posting his unsolicited absurd misinformation, disinformation and obfuscations on every page possible, tirelessly and repetitively.. all the while pretending to be some sort of final arbiter, on all things 911 who, while remaining anonymous, continually slanders qualified experts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fUT7XgLiTY the official version of events is nothing more than mere allegations. there has never been any credible evidence offered to support any of it. as a matter of fact, their own *evidence* actually proves 100% the official version of events can not be true, as a little investigation into the murray street engine shows... http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_king/2009/09/murray-street-engine.html It doesnt matter how or what was used to bring building 7 down, or if it took ten seconds or thirty. The fact that building 7 fell at freefall acceleration for ~2.5 seconds, as acknowledged begrudgingly by NIST, IS evidence that explosives were used as it is IMPOSSIBLE for all the structural support necessary for freefall acceleration to be achieved to be removed instantaneously and simultaneously without some form of controlled demolition. http://rememberbuilding7.org/ as he well knows, and as he is unable to prove otherwise beyond any reasonable doubt, not just because he is an anonymous unqualified troll, but because the laws of physics applied just as much on 9-11 as they do today. any legitimate psychiatrist would therefore regard alburys position as insane. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/psychologists-mental-health-questioning-911-sane.html further evidence of his chutzpah can be witnessed via a simple internet search for "albury smith 9 11" - his pitiful efforts are quite amusing as he stuggles against an overwhelming growing majority of people who after looking into a few facts, find it not unreasonable for family members of the victims to be calling for a proper independent transparent unfettered investigation with subpoena power, as called for, by an overwhelming, continually growing, majority of the worlds population, a fact verifiable by past and recent polls. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/911-and-the-war-on-terror-polls-show-what-people-really-believe-10-years-later.html what makes you think anyone cares what you think shillboy? give up... youre not fooling anyone still, lol, with your lies.. http://911caper.com/tag/explosives-in-wtc/

That's odd

If no one cares what I think about paranoid and goofy 9/11 "truth movement" crap, why do you keep following me around and telling me that, little anonymous stalker man?

cry more sook

me anonymous? you post with false intentions . ive told you already, im happy to out myself as soon as you do, im not scared.. want a video debate? lol... of course you dont... toughen up princess... deal with it.. and from http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/06/04/do-we-need-another-911-conspiracy-theory/comment-page-1/?wpmp_switcher=mobile Jeremy R. Hammond: June 29th, 2012 at 12:39 pm 1) Ah, but NIST didn’t even TRY to explain it, because it rejects any alternative hypothesis to its own. It rejects the scientific method. In fact, it went to such lengths to avoid having to explain it that it denied that any such evidence from WTC 7 exists. 2) Yes, NIST claimed that “no steel was recovered from WTC 7?. That is a lie. See the FEMA report Appendix C. NIST does not even mention this piece of steel, not even to explain why they think it may not have been from WTC 7. They just ignore it completely. Hmmm… 3) It was melted. Melted. Let me say that again: melted. As you acknowledge, there is no explanation for this within the fire-induced collapse hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis, however, does offer an explanation for this. See previous comments. Dropping empty cardboard cartons on each other doesn’t get it, even if you’re not Box Boy’s representative. I warned you, Albury. You are banned for trolling. ************ banned for trolling.. the word is getting out! bwahahahaha- just for lolz... type "gormless shill" into google...the answer is as equally priceless. or.. if youre scared.. dont do it.. and be like albury and pretend the growing mountain of evidence is non existent.. http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2012/06/9-11-truth-new-cia-documents-released.html the fact is - 911 did not happen how albury imagines - http://www.911hardfacts.com/

meanwhile.. back at the ranch

little stalker man... i wonder if thats in the poor trolls handbook on how to deal with those who dont play his stupid question and answer game.. or if hes just making it up as he goes.. like NIST... who after having every attemp discredited.. simply gave up in the end.. theres just no credible explanation for albury, or the sudden collapse of building seven, through the path of most resistance, at frreefall acceleration... lol... youre gorgeous albury.. keeep up the good work you gormless shill :p - a little more passion might help... come on.. bare your soul! youre losing support as we speak! com on man! do it for your country! viva la ISRAEL!

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

why do you keep following me around and telling me that,

NIST does not mention WTC7 Steel? WRONG!!

Re NIST report: Gage repeatedly claims that NIST did not discuss the unusual erosion of a few pieces of steel found in the piles. Not only did NIST discuss that, the report spends SEVERAL PAGES on it, and NIST did an independent analysis of three samples from a column for which the as-built location could be roughly determined, in addition to a sample from the same column analyzed by FEMA. See NCSTAR1-3C, p. 229-232. NIST noted that this column was from no higher than the 53rd floor and was eroded while in a horizontal position, while it was in the piles. There are even photos of the recovered column, showing no evidence that it was attacked by thermite, thermate, or any weapon in the truthers' fantasy arsenal. Gage knew none of this because he couldn't be bothered to read the NIST report. Further, tests continued to be done by metallurgy labs on this phenomenon, and it was discovered that it could be reproduced with a variety of common contaminants.

That isn't WTC 7 steel, Dave

This is what passes for logic and honesty with Jeremy Hammond, who just delighted another poster here by banning me for "trolling": http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/06/04/do-we-need-another-911-conspiracy-theory/ Hammond avoided anything he didn't want to address by claiming repeatedly that he wasn't a representative of Chandler, Gage, and various other 9/11 frauds, and glommed onto an innocuous statement in NCSTAR 1-3 that simply disclaimed any actual testing of steel known to have come from WTC 7. According to him, the NIST researchers were hiding Sample 1, a rusty piece of junk assumed to have been in WTC 7, and whose odd corrosion has still not been fully explained. Playing "Gotcha!" games with NIST statements and banning people who actually make sense are two huge victories for Jeremy and his loyal sycophant here.

blah blah blah..

lol - cry more sooks.. again albury, you simpl ignore all the links ive posted, to simply whinge like a little girl whos panties are all twisted about being not allowed to play on some websites any more. youre not fooling anyone, just look at the polls, youre clinging to a dying fringe movement that according to psychiatrists, are in need of some sort of treatment. poor pitiful gormless lumpen. did nist explain freefall acceleration? No. after botching their first few attempts at an "explanation" , and after been shown up to be totally incompetent, theyve just given up now, have blamed some sort of miraculous new phenomenon on the collapses, and simply ignore all the inconsistencies, science, logic, common sense and reason. dont worry about temperatures getting hot enough to melt steel, how about evaporating it! can you morons or nist explain this? http://rememberbuilding7.org/sulfidated-steel/ no.. you cant..but regardless,, go outside and play with the traffic - no one cares what unqualified anonymous idiots think, and no one is asking for your sycophantic opinions. the reason people want a proper investigation, is because the NIST report has been determined to be incomplete and unscientific.. and all you can do to support your case that no further inquiry is necessary is to refer back to the NIST report. lol - it doesnt take a genius to work out the flaws in that reasoning. as far as you being banned on websites albury - lol - youre a little slow on the uptake aint you.. people dont like trolls! deal with it.

Hammond's dog-and-pony show

You seem to do much better on sites that ban people who don't drink the 9/11 "truth movement" Kool-Aid, little stalker man, so why don't you go there and help Jeremy Hammond explain structural engineering to SEs with doctorates in it?

dry your eyes little one..

all i hear is waah waah waah lol - all this work you have to do commenting all over the internet is making you upset. why dont you get a hobby little unqualified anonymous troll. if people want to think theres good reason to hold a proper enquiry, and professionals and experts the world over believe its not unreasonable, in fact to not do would be insane.. then why cant you just let it be at that.. such a sad life you lead.. compelled to troll the world wide web trying to convince the world how clever you are.. poor poor little troll

Platonic analyst

Albury Smith is hardly qualified to discuss the fundamental topics of 9/11 such as the criminal controlled demolitions in the World Trade Center, as (s)he flunks, like Thomas, the elementary 9/11 class of www.911babystep.com. Behold the link (s)he candidly provided: http://redlands.patch.com/events/blueprint-for-911-truth. Also like Thomas, Smith appears to be a 9/11 faithkeeper, i.e. an individual whose mind has been so marked by 9/11 that (s)he unconsciously prefers to ridicule her/himself rather than accept the slightest evidence that would question her/his worldview. Love,

Baby step

Getting some W14 X 730s and painting explosives on them to demonstrate the Harrit/Jones "theory" would be a great baby step, Dan, so why don't you support it? Watching video of the demonstration requires no expertise in structural engineering, so even you could understand the results.

must try harder troll

getting the nist modelling to match real world events to demonstrate your myth would be a great baby step albury. actually, any credible evidence that doesnt include magic passports would be a great start.

i guess hes moved on again

albury is having a hard time trying to convince all the commenters here he is the real deal lol poor thing.. http://www.darkmoon.me/2012/who-runs-the-madhouse-by-dr-paul-craig-roberts/comment-page-1/#comments

we killed him?

i have not been able to find a post by the notorious shill albury smith since ~ 3rd july 2010.. prior to this date,, his postings were accessible on a daily basis on multiple forums.. i fear( lol asif ) he may have been liquidated due to his extreme incompetence, as it is evident that his myth hugging cult following is decreasing on an hourly basis.. and he was naught but a liability to his cause.. sux 2 b an albury! :)