• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How I Debated a 9/11 Truther and Survived - Dave Thomas

Mr.Herbert said:
Dave Thomas, a CSI fellow, is a physics and mathematics graduate of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology and is currently a senior scientist at Quasar International, Inc., in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He is the president of New Mexicans for Science and Reason.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Oh! Okay... Good. For a bit there, I was wondering if the link was referring to this Dave Thomas:
060730_eating_vmed_2p_widec.jpg


Given that he passed away in 2002, that would've been a shock :boggled:. And I would've been wondering what the heck was up with the Skeptical Inquiry folks. Communing with the dead isn't quite their style. ;):D
 
Interesting article, good for him. This portion in particular caught my eye:

"Gage wants to debate me again, on Denver public television station KBDI. While I normally prefer not to provide platforms for conspiracy theorists to push their cases, in this instance KBDI has already been running Gage’s 9/11 “Truth” documentaries during fundraising specials."

And I thought I had it bad where my local PBS station plays endless Doo-wop reunion specials, André Rieu concerts and Wayne Dyer lectures during their pledge drives:boggled:
 
This is what I get for not paying attention to Alumni mail. I didn't even go down during 49'ers this year.

Incidentally, I have seen the Vigilantes play at the Cap one 49'ers. They're pretty good.

I'm also extremely disappointed that there were that many truthers there to begin with.
 
Newtons Bit said:
This is what I get for not paying attention to Alumni mail. I didn't even go down during 49'ers this year.

Incidentally, I have seen the Vigilantes play at the Cap one 49'ers. They're pretty good.

I'm also extremely disappointed that there were that many truthers there to begin with.
Click to expand...
You went to soko-roo?
I was down the road in lost crutches...
If anybody ought to know about explosions and explosives, the "Energetic materials" folks there are it!
 
rwguinn said:
You went to soko-roo?
I was down the road in lost crutches...
If anybody ought to know about explosions and explosives, the "Energetic materials" folks there are it!
Click to expand...

Indeed. We would hear a couple of rather large bangs once or twice a day on campus.
 
Edx said:
How I Debated a 9/11 Truther and Survived:
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/how_i_debated_a_9_11_truther_and_survived/

Interesting article.
Click to expand...

Gage argued that there are ten reasons WTC 7, which was not hit by an airplane, was intentionally demolished:

[...]

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

[...]

7. Chemical signature of Thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples by physics professor Steven Jones, PhD
Click to expand...

Thermite causes "pyroclastic clouds" now?

Gage is all over the place.
 
Dave Thomas said:
I discussed the claims that thermite was used and showed a test filmed at Tech in which a large quantity of thermite failed to cut a large steel beam.
Click to expand...

Jeebus, you know what he's talking about? He's talking about the clip of Van Romero that Jesse Ventura used on his Conspiracy Theory program. Except Ventura conveniently skipped over the part about how the thermite failed to cut the steel beam. Here's the clip (part with Van Romero starts about forty seconds in):


Ventura lets him ask the question, "Does it burn long enough and hot enough so that we have structural failure?" But hilariously, rather than answer the question, they then cut to Jesse asking, "Alright, anybody still got any doubts?"

Newton's Bit, do you have any kind of relationship with Romero, where you can ask him about the Ventura show? I sent him an email when the show aired but he never replied.
 
Brainster said:
Jeebus, you know what he's talking about? He's talking about the clip of Van Romero that Jesse Ventura used on his Conspiracy Theory program. Except Ventura conveniently skipped over the part about how the thermite failed to cut the steel beam. Here's the clip (part with Van Romero starts about forty seconds in):


Ventura lets him ask the question, "Does it burn long enough and hot enough so that we have structural failure?" But hilariously, rather than answer the question, they then cut to Jesse asking, "Alright, anybody still got any doubts?"

Newton's Bit, do you have any kind of relationship with Romero, where you can ask him about the Ventura show? I sent him an email when the show aired but he never replied.
Click to expand...

I also suspect that he was asked to show something different compared to what they made out he was showing. The first part of the experiment was really stupid, essentially amounting to throwing a match on the steel and observing it not collapsing. Surely this could not be what Romero was intending to demonstrate, or else he is a freaking idiot, which doesn't make sense. So I'd love to know the full story here as well.
 
Brainster said:
Jeebus, you know what he's talking about? He's talking about the clip of Van Romero that Jesse Ventura used on his Conspiracy Theory program.
Click to expand...

I believe that Dave Thomas and Van Romero are friends. I listen to Dave on the "Science Watch" podcast (of their radio show), and I think he mentioned this recently.
 
Does anyone else notice that the steel beam they are heating with the super-thermite is horizontal instead of vertical?

At least make the experiment look legitimate, instead of watching some chemicals burn on a horizontal beam and say "so any doubts?"
 
Garb said:
Does anyone else notice that the steel beam they are heating with the super-thermite is horizontal instead of vertical?

At least make the experiment look legitimate, instead of watching some chemicals burn on a horizontal beam and say "so any doubts?"
Click to expand...


Don't confuse a daytime soap opera for a real sociological exposition of human interpersonal relations.

Don't confuse a Jerry Springer show for a real investigation of American family dynamics.

Don't confuse a Bill O'Reilly or Geraldo Rivera interview for a reporter giving his guest a real opportunity to present his/her ideas.

In each case, the key word is "real".

Don't confuse Ventura's show for, well, as far as I can tell, anything real.

The arguments are fake.
The disagreements are fake.
The skepticism is fake.
The investigation is fake.

They should call it "The WWF does 60 Minutes".

They whole thing is fixed.
 
Just put it this way... when they did their fire test on the steel, I kept saying to myself: "and truther's complain about national geographic's experiment? :rolleyes: "

ETA: Oh by any chance does somebody have the barfing smiles image?
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Just put it this way... when they did their fire test on the steel, I kept saying to myself: "and truther's complain about national geographic's experiment? :rolleyes: "
Click to expand...

Thats what I thought as well, of course you won't find them doing anything but praising Ventura though. How honest of them!
 
Brainster said:
Ventura lets him ask the question, "Does it burn long enough and hot enough so that we have structural failure?" But hilariously, rather than answer the question, they then cut to Jesse asking, "Alright, anybody still got any doubts?"
Click to expand...

As retarded as the show is, I think this was just Romero misspeaking. He probably wanted to say it does burn long and hot enough to cause a structural failure, at least the intonation is right for that.

Of course with twoofers you never know. It's entirely possible he phrased it as a question, but spoke it as a statement to make it seem as if he claimed it was going to fail, but not state it, as not to be liable for lying.

McHrozni
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Just put it this way... when they did their fire test on the steel, I kept saying to myself: "and truther's complain about national geographic's experiment? :rolleyes: "

ETA: Oh by any chance does somebody have the barfing smiles image?
Click to expand...

Yep, it's ridiculous, and this is totally appropriate:

rollbarf.gif
 
orphia nay said:
Yep, it's ridiculous, and this is totally appropriate:

rollbarf.gif
Click to expand...

Most of those smileys are falling "in their own footprint". But a couple of them look like they're being thrown huge distances to the side. Almost as if they were "nano-thermited"...!
 
Last edited:
McHrozni said:
As retarded as the show is, I think this was just Romero misspeaking. He probably wanted to say it does burn long and hot enough to cause a structural failure, at least the intonation is right for that.

Of course with twoofers you never know. It's entirely possible he phrased it as a question, but spoke it as a statement to make it seem as if he claimed it was going to fail, but not state it, as not to be liable for lying.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

To me it sounds as if it's a quote mine. All this nonsense about "transparency" why isn't Ventura releasing all his footage unedited?

My bet is Van Romero said something like "The key question is does it burn long enough and hot enough so that we have structural failure" or something like that. With the gross misrepresentation and grand standing in that friggin show its no big stretch.
 
I really want to know the full story about that thermite experiment, anyone trying to get to the bottom of it? Someone said they knew they guy?
 
I just emailed Dave Thomas asking for a link to or a copy of the full clip, and I will announce when I have his answer.
 
Ahoy from Dave Thomas

Howdy there. By the time Orphia had e-mailed me, I'd already gotten signed up. I've lurked around the JREF off and on, and do appreciate the nuggets that sometimes blossom here. I gave a talk on Bible Codes at TAM4 a few years back, FWIW.

Anyway, the videos! The videos! Here's what I've told Orphia:
Let me check with the EMRTC folks to see if I can send these videos out. The Ventura show had Romero asking the question about the beam with thermite, "Will it burn hot enough and long enough to fail structurally?" The cheesy part of the Ventura show is that, while they gave the results of the non-thermite test (didn't fail), they only HINTED at the results of the actual thermite test, with Ventura leading the charge by asking "Any questions?" Of course, the question that needed to be asked was "Did it burn hot enough and long enough to fail structurally?" The answer was no, and there's a video of Van Romero proving that by smacking the beam with a hammer.

More later, Dave Thomas
Click to expand...

Anyway, nice to finally come aboard. I am teaching a class on critical thinking for physics at NM Tech, and today's class was on 9-11 physics. I've developed a nice little simple model that actually does fairly well with the twin towers piledriver collapses, getting very close to the results that Bazant acheived (What Did and Did not Cause Collapse
of WTC Twin Towers in New York, Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE , Vol. 134 (2008), in press) with a very detailed model that includes beam busting, concrete pulverization, air pushed out the windows, etc.

I a junior, so I can't post hyperlinks as yet - you'll have to find these on your own. Cheers, Dave Thomas (not the Wendy's, and not a MacKenzie brother either).
 
Welcome aboard!

I've seen New Mexico Tech on TV a few times. It looks like a fun place to work. Just blow stuff up all day in the middle of the desert.

edit -- seriously, I saw their full-scale test of the Murrah Building bombing.
 
Last edited:
DaveThomasNMSR said:
Howdy there. By the time Orphia had e-mailed me, I'd already gotten signed up. I've lurked around the JREF off and on, and do appreciate the nuggets that sometimes blossom here. I gave a talk on Bible Codes at TAM4 a few years back, FWIW.

Anyway, the videos! The videos! Here's what I've told Orphia:

Let me check with the EMRTC folks to see if I can send these videos out. The Ventura show had Romero asking the question about the beam with thermite, "Will it burn hot enough and long enough to fail structurally?" The cheesy part of the Ventura show is that, while they gave the results of the non-thermite test (didn't fail), they only HINTED at the results of the actual thermite test, with Ventura leading the charge by asking "Any questions?" Of course, the question that needed to be asked was "Did it burn hot enough and long enough to fail structurally?" The answer was no, and there's a video of Van Romero proving that by smacking the beam with a hammer.

More later, Dave Thomas
Click to expand...

Anyway, nice to finally come aboard. I am teaching a class on critical thinking for physics at NM Tech, and today's class was on 9-11 physics. I've developed a nice little simple model that actually does fairly well with the twin towers piledriver collapses, getting very close to the results that Bazant acheived (What Did and Did not Cause Collapse
of WTC Twin Towers in New York, Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE , Vol. 134 (2008), in press) with a very detailed model that includes beam busting, concrete pulverization, air pushed out the windows, etc.

I a junior, so I can't post hyperlinks as yet - you'll have to find these on your own. Cheers, Dave Thomas (not the Wendy's, and not a MacKenzie brother either).
Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum, Dave, and thanks again for your prompt and cordial email replies.

I've saved my gut reaction to that email till now...

So the thermite didn't even weaken the horizontal steel beam, let alone render it "molten"?

:big:

It's as we suspected, but it's nice to see it confirmed.

I hope you can get the full video of the experiment, as that would add to the lulz, especially the factor where the truthers would squirm and spin. ;)
 
Waiting on NM Tech

Orphia wrote
Welcome to the forum, Dave, and thanks again for your prompt and cordial email replies.

I've saved my gut reaction to that email till now...

So the thermite didn't even weaken the horizontal steel beam, let alone render it "molten"?



It's as we suspected, but it's nice to see it confirmed.

I hope you can get the full video of the experiment, as that would add to the lulz, especially the factor where the truthers would squirm and spin.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I've sent a query seeking permission to release the video JESSE VENTURA DOESN'T WANT THE WORLD TO SEE! ;)

I'll let y'all know if it gets the OK.

Cheers, Dave
 
Welcome, sir. Glad to see you here.

BTW: Yes, the links prevention is in place, but it's not against the rules to leave off parts that would trip the autoprevent. For example: "You can see (topic being referenced) at cnn.com". That seems to work. Just leaving off the http:// and www. seems to work.

--------

Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any idea why Gage is so willing to take on opposition on TV/radio shows? My only guess is to popularize his AE911T group, but just getting signatures and site members isn't really generating any income for hm. Plus, it isn't exactly a risk-free method of gaining adherents; he could simply be interviewed or participate in non-argumentative settings and get the same amount of exposure. And lets be blunt: He didn't exactly cover himself with glory when he met Gravy (Mark Roberts, who's forum handle here is "Gravy") on the air. Anyway, the only reason I can see is to popularize himself and his group, but he seems to be choosing a way that would certainly backfire on him.
 
Here are the Videos!

They are on my Youtube channel, thegrizzledwizard.

I've sent Orphia an explanatory letter with the links, that I've asked her to post here on my behalf (newbies can't Link!)

Cheers, Dave
 
AWESOME.

I'm going to have to make a youtube video comparing that with the Venturas version.

So he actually filmed it all HIMSELF and then gave the footage to the production company? Is that why he has this footage?

This is pretty devastating to Venturas honesty really.
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
AWESOME.

I'm going to have to make a youtube video comparing that with the Venturas version.

So he actually filmed it all HIMSELF and then gave the footage to the production company? Is that why he has this footage?

This is pretty devastating to Venturas honesty really.
Click to expand...


The three videos I've posted at my YouTube grizzledwizard channel were all made by NM Tech, EMRTC, to support requests made on behalf of Ventura's crew.

While the "Conspiracy Theory" episode on 9-11 indeed showed some of the tests, they did NOT show the concluding test (Romero and the hammer), which was left on the cutting room floor.

However, they were filmed at NM Tech by Tech personnel, and not by "HIMSELF" (if you mean Jesse Ventura is "HIMSELF").

If you mean "Van Romero" by "HIMSELF", that does make sense - Van had the filming done to support Ventura, and then Van allowed me to make copies.
Sarite?

Cheers, Dave
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
You missed one - the Romero comment after the thermite test!
Here's the YouTube code: d-pZf56L0lg

Cheers, Dave Thomas
Click to expand...

Hahahahahaha! Thanks, Dave! I knew Ventura was gliding right over the "Did it fail structurally," part of that but it's hilarious to see the part that he left out.

ETA: Props to Orphia for inviting you to the forum and welcome!
 
Last edited:
Good work on the Gage nonsense, Dave.

And it's nice to see another Techie on these boards :)
 
DaveThomasNMSR said:
The three videos I've posted at my YouTube grizzledwizard channel were all made by NM Tech, EMRTC, to support requests made on behalf of Ventura's crew.

While the "Conspiracy Theory" episode on 9-11 indeed showed some of the tests, they did NOT show the concluding test (Romero and the hammer), which was left on the cutting room floor.

However, they were filmed at NM Tech by Tech personnel, and not by "HIMSELF" (if you mean Jesse Ventura is "HIMSELF").

If you mean "Van Romero" by "HIMSELF", that does make sense - Van had the filming done to support Ventura, and then Van allowed me to make copies.
Sarite?

Cheers, Dave
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave,

I am curious as to ...

1. Why Romero would trust that someone like Ventura could be trusted to not twist his words (like all truthers do) and...
2. What Romero thinks of how they used his footage?

I also also interested in that the quote "does it burn long enough and hot enough" since in the clip you showed with the hammer it didn't say "and hot enough" so was probably a different taken or from a different scene right?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom