Richard Gage to debate CD on Toronto radio show - Page 3

cmcaulif · 13th November 2007, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Arus808

Um...there is no "University of Honolulu"

There is however Honolulu Community College (one of the sub-campuses of the University of Hawaii system).

Yea, thats why I thought it was weird he said that. Or maybe I just heard wrong

bofors · 13th November 2007, 05:34 PM

I am now listening to the debate...

... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.

Mr.Herbert · 13th November 2007, 05:35 PM

Did you say Jim Hoffman boned Jenny Craig?

Arus808 · 13th November 2007, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by bofors

I now listening to the debate...

... and Jim Hoffman just owned Ron Craig.

in what world? Craig whipped Gage and hOffman and he's one man against two woo's. All it took is one man to prove both of them wrong about their claims.

DGM · 13th November 2007, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by bofors

I am now listening to the debate...

... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.

"Just schooled"? What are you 15?

T.A.M. · 13th November 2007, 05:38 PM

Someone who believes the towers were brought down via controlled demolition just said that Hoffman owned Craig...yup, now I'm convinced.

the weakness of the ignore function is it does not prevent you from seeing their comments when they are quoted.

TAM

bofors · 13th November 2007, 05:43 PM

Let me get this straight...

Ron Craig's argument is:

(1) He would have used shaped charges.

(2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions.

(3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers.

Hahahaha....

CHF · 13th November 2007, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by bofors

Let me get this straight...

Ron Craig's argument is:

(1) He would have used shaped charges.

(2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions.

(3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers.

Hahahaha....

OK Bofors. Tell us how to rig up a 110 story skyscraper with bombs so that flying a plane into the set-up wouldn't screw up the whole thing.

T.A.M. · 13th November 2007, 05:51 PM

ITUs (Indestructable Thermite Units) of course...duh!

TAM

DGM · 13th November 2007, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by CHF

OK Bofors. Tell us how to rig up a 110 story skyscraper with bombs so that flying a plane into the set-up wouldn't screw up the whole thing.

Maybe he should ask Mr Jowenko how to rig the towers.

bofors · 13th November 2007, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by CHF

I called up and asked why demolition charges weren't more audible and Gage replies that 118 FDNY heard...thermite!

I just heard this...

Ha... that's it, John? Eh?

Dude, you're a genius.

Ya, the buildings made absolutely no noise coming down at all.

Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough.

Congratulations, you win the "Bofors-Debunking/Denial" prise de jour:

Good Lt · 13th November 2007, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough.

Yeah...about all that "evidence..."

Where is it? You gonna cite it one day?

Or do you just through it all out when it doesn't show what you pretend it does?

CHF · 13th November 2007, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by bofors

I just heard this...

Ha... that's it, John? Eh?

Dude, you're a genius.

Ya, the buildings made absolutely no noise coming down at all.

Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough.

Oh look, another strawman

No bofors, I said the collapses didn't make the noise of a demolition.

You know...this kinda thing:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

That moron Gage then claimed thermite wouldn't make explosions...but then went on to claim that the FDNY heard "explosions!"

Can you make sense of that, Bofors?

Good Lt · 13th November 2007, 06:15 PM

You don't understand, CHF.

It happened IN HIS MIND, which is undebunkable.

boloboffin · 13th November 2007, 06:31 PM

Also as in this clip:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

This is a CD that Richard Gage uses to demonstrate what a controlled demolition looks and sounds like. The explosions in this clip have been taken out of the clip Gage uses.

ETA: He then uses Hoffman to explain how explosions meld together into a rushing sound. But the only rushing sound apparent on his clip is the simple sound of the building collapse, the only sound actually present in the 3 WTC buildings that collapsed on 9/11.

pomeroo · 13th November 2007, 06:35 PM

Originally Posted by bofors

I am now listening to the debate...

... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.

If you are really an engineer, why are you so scientifically illiterate? Hoffman's faulty calculations were exposed by Dr. Greening long ago.

hellaeon · 13th November 2007, 06:56 PM

Even the first rebuttle smashes Gage. Gage sounds like a bumbling idiot trying to recite the same crap for about 3-4 minutes and Craig responds with a 10 seconds tirade that gets straight to the point.

Ron, get this walking record on a debate with Mark or even Ryan M! (that would rule)

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha he is dropping pearlers! The kinetic energy of the impact is not important???

Alferd_Packer · 13th November 2007, 07:42 PM

OK, I listened to it on my way home tonight. Let me start by echoing a sentiment expressed earlier in this thread. Gage is an idiot.

Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials.

The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally.

Alferd_Packer · 13th November 2007, 08:06 PM

Gage makes a number of mistakes that clearly illustrate his lack of knowledge of his own profession.

1) Gage refers to the Parke Plaza building in Caracas as a steel framed building that survived a catastrophic fire. Wrong. It was a combined structure. It had a concrete “macro frame” every five floors with the intermediate infill floors steel framed (one of which did indeed suffer a partial collapse).

2) Gage implied that the massive size of the core columns at the base of the structure meant that the core of the building was so strong that even if the floors of the towers collapsed, the core would have remained standing 1000 feet high. In this he ignores a number of crucial facts. A) The airplane impacts damaged the core columns as well as the exterior columns. B) The core columns became progressively lighter and smaller the farther up the building you went. C) Photographic evidence indicates that, in fact, both cores did indeed survive for a few seconds longer than the rest of the structure. And most importantly, D) the lack of any diagonal bracing in the core structure (other than a few well defined locations) meant that the entire core was incapable of existing as a stand alone structure. This is a key fundamental principle of structural engineering that should be understood by architects.

3) I am not an architect, nor am I a professional engineer (although I have studied graduate level environmental engineering). I have spent many, many years in construction and buildings, especially in high rise buildings.

Gage is ignorant of the basic operational practices of construction in the private and public sectors. His insistence that to compromise building security is the only thing that would be required to access the core area for the surreptitious placement of demolition charges indicates to me that he has never ever done any design work more complicated than remodeling Auntie Annie’s Pretzels at the local mall. I mean seriously, what’s up with that? Even if you have never been involved with building construction/ remodeling it doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate the layers of bureaucracy and management that even the most minor construction project is saddled with.

Does he seriously think that the security department could dream up a bogus construction project impacting a major life safety system like the elevators without any practical oversight? This is so fundamental to the construction process that it totally boggles the mind that he would seriously present this as an argument.

Alferd_Packer · 13th November 2007, 08:09 PM

one more point:

Gage’s insistence that the so called chemical signatures of thermite as supposedly detected by Jones has any validity is just plain annoying and insulting. What, does he think we are as stupid as he is?

CHF · 13th November 2007, 08:21 PM

I loved how Gage said the lower portion of the towers should have held up the top portion because "it had been doing that for years."

In other words the man doesn't know the difference between a dynamic load and a static load.

Originally Posted by Alfred_Packer

The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally.

That's exactly why I asked him about the lack of CD charges going off. It's always fun to see how a twoofer switches between CD charges and thermite depending on what piece of evidence is being discussed.

Alferd_Packer · 13th November 2007, 08:26 PM

We need to get Craig over here for a while and prep him before the next debate.

leftysergeant · 13th November 2007, 11:54 PM

Please. Is there an MP3 of this available anywhere? I gotta have something to link to other sites where they have not yet grasped the dismal lack of function neurons between Gage's ears.

ref · 14th November 2007, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

Please. Is there an MP3 of this available anywhere? I gotta have something to link to other sites where they have not yet grasped the dismal lack of function neurons between Gage's ears.

http://blip.tv/file/get/Mekt_Ranzz-R...onCraig984.wmv

nicepants · 14th November 2007, 08:50 AM

Seems like the host is a twoofer. Also interesting that Gage always gets the last word before every commercial break.

Oh boy, Jim Hoffman the software engineer.

SELECT * from Controlled_Demolition WHERE Building = WTC7 OR WTC1 OR WTC2

Returned 0 Results

I wish the explosives expert would just ask Gage...what would be the point of thermite/mate if they're using explosives anyways?

Liszt · 14th November 2007, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by bofors

Let me get this straight...

Ron Craig's argument is:

(1) He would have used shaped charges.

(2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions.

(3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers.

Hahahaha....

is every truther on this site a "no planer"? what on earth is going on?

Gord_in_Toronto · 14th November 2007, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by nicepants

Seems like the host is a twoofer. Also interesting that Gage always gets the last word before every commercial break.

Oh boy, Jim Hoffman the software engineer.

SELECT * from Controlled_Demolition WHERE Building = WTC7 OR WTC1 OR WTC2

Returned 0 Results

I wish the explosives expert would just ask Gage...what would be the point of thermite/mate if they're using explosives anyways?

Because it is super-powerful extra-explosive silent ~~marmite~~ thermite?

Alferd_Packer · 14th November 2007, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by bofors

Let me get this straight...

Ron Craig's argument is:

(1) He would have used shaped charges.

(2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions.

(3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers.

Hahahaha....

1) The argument is a valid one. In spite of the truther’s fixation with thermite, super thermite and steel eating termites, their proposed alternative has numerous technical drawbacks that they hand wave over.

2) No, that is not what he said. He said that the thruthers proposed system presents numerous logistical issues. Gage’s glossing over of these issues by ranting about the security in the building ignores those logistical issues entirely.

3) Yes, planes hit the building and the fires burned in the building, and that was enough to initiate the collapse. Gravity took care of the rest with no explosives needed.

Alferd_Packer · 14th November 2007, 10:11 AM

Back to an issue I raised earlier. Gage implicated the elevator upgrade project as the method by which he believes that explosives were planted in the building. Let’s look at this claim. If this were true, then the elevator company, Otis, and the elevator mechanics who were permanently assigned to work in the building as well as the mechanics assigned to the elevator upgrade project. The in-house port authority as well as the outside consultants and design engineers working on and inspecting the project would have had to be part of the plan as well. Let’s not forget Frank DeMartini. As the construction manager for the towers it would have been his job to monitor and oversee all projects in the building. Finally, and most damning of all to Gage’s supposition is the fact that the elevator shafts were not adjacent to all of the core columns. In fact, the higher you went, the more core space that was used for other purposes.

All this should be obvious to a practicing architect with any experience in high rise construction and renovation.

Mekt_Ranzz · 14th November 2007, 07:34 PM

Here is an example of where a typical layperson can go horribly astray when confronted with what he or she may assume to be an elementary physics problem. Au contraire!

Question: A 20-story building hangs suspended from a crane so that the bottom of the building is 10 feet directly above a 90-story building. Right next to this first 20-story building is another identical 20-story building suspended from another crane at an identical height above the ground, but with no building underneath it. Both cranes let go of their respective 20-story buildings at the same time. Which one hits the ground first?

Answer: This is actually a bit of a trick question.

Prior to 9/11/01, 100% of Advanced Physics Degree professionals would have agreed with the lesser-educated, "common sense" crowd and said that the building with nothing but air beneath it would strike the ground considerably faster than the other, which, quite honestly, could not really be expected to burrow its way through a 90-story building to reach the ground at all.

However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time."

So you see, one must always consult one's local physics expert when questions concerning the physical universe arise. PLEASE DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK THROUGH ANY TYPE OF PHYSICS PROBLEMS ON YOUR OWN AT HOME—ALWAYS CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL. Only a professional knows which laws of physics are currently being applied to describe the physical universe that surrounds us. THESE PHYSICAL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Please do not assume you are up to date on the latest equations and/or theories concerning gravitation or conservation of energy and momentum.

You may now return to your regularly-scheduled life, knowing that you are safe in the good hands of the people who you expect to watch out for you and your family's best interests, since that would take too much time out of your day to do for yourself.

Brought to you by the "Have You Hugged Your Big Brother Today?" foundation.

Originally posted by tzo at 911Blogger.com

Alferd_Packer · 14th November 2007, 07:44 PM

Quote:

However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time."

What are you talking about?

Tbone · 14th November 2007, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer

What are you talking about?

Just the same old "free fall" thing.

Mr.Herbert · 14th November 2007, 07:48 PM

I think that was a Drive- By Wooing

pomeroo · 14th November 2007, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mekt_Ranzz

Here is an example of where a typical layperson can go horribly astray when confronted with what he or she may assume to be an elementary physics problem. Au contraire!

Question: A 20-story building hangs suspended from a crane so that the bottom of the building is 10 feet directly above a 90-story building. Right next to this first 20-story building is another identical 20-story building suspended from another crane at an identical height above the ground, but with no building underneath it. Both cranes let go of their respective 20-story buildings at the same time. Which one hits the ground first?

Answer: This is actually a bit of a trick question.

Prior to 9/11/01, 100% of Advanced Physics Degree professionals would have agreed with the lesser-educated, "common sense" crowd and said that the building with nothing but air beneath it would strike the ground considerably faster than the other, which, quite honestly, could not really be expected to burrow its way through a 90-story building to reach the ground at all.

However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time."

So you see, one must always consult one's local physics expert when questions concerning the physical universe arise. PLEASE DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK THROUGH ANY TYPE OF PHYSICS PROBLEMS ON YOUR OWN AT HOME—ALWAYS CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL. Only a professional knows which laws of physics are currently being applied to describe the physical universe that surrounds us. THESE PHYSICAL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Please do not assume you are up to date on the latest equations and/or theories concerning gravitation or conservation of energy and momentum.

You may now return to your regularly-scheduled life, knowing that you are safe in the good hands of the people who you expect to watch out for you and your family's best interests, since that would take too much time out of your day to do for yourself.

Brought to you by the "Have You Hugged Your Big Brother Today?" foundation.

Originally posted by tzo at 911Blogger.com

I have a sneaking suspicion that you are not at home with "advanced physics." What you sarcastically claim that physicists have learned from the buildings that collapsed is something they really haven't learned at all. But, then, you are a conspiracy liar: you don't care.

LashL · 14th November 2007, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer

What are you talking about?

Hmm. Seems like just another twoofer parroting nonsense without ever being on a first name basis with reality.

ktesibios · 14th November 2007, 07:56 PM

Every time a troofer drops by with yet another regurgitation of the same old long-discredited talking points, I start channeling one of my favorite authors:

Originally Posted by Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad

The guide was bewildered -- non-plussed. He walked his legs off, nearly, hunting up extraordinary things, and exhausted all his ingenuity on us, but it was a failure; we never showed any interest in any thing. He had reserved what he considered to be his greatest wonder till the last -- a royal Egyptian mummy, the best preserved in the world, perhaps. He took us there. He felt so sure, this time, that some of his old enthusiasm came back to him:

"See, genteelmen! -- Mummy! Mummy!"

The eye-glass came up as calmly, as deliberately as ever.

"Ah, -- Ferguson -- what did I understand you to say the gentleman's name was?"

"Name? -- he got no name! -- Mummy! -- 'Gyptian mummy!"

" Yes, yes. Born here?"

" No! 'Gyptian mummy!"

"Ah, just so. Frenchman, I presume?"

"No! -- not Frenchman, not Roman! -- born in Egypta!"

"Born in Egypta. Never heard of Egypta before. Foreign locality, likely. Mummy -- mummy. How calm he is -- how self-possessed. Is, ah -- is he dead?"

"Oh, sacre bleu, been dead three thousan' year!"

The doctor turned on him savagely:

"Here, now, what do you mean by such conduct as this! Playing us for Chinamen because we are strangers and trying to learn! Trying to impose your vile second-hand carcasses on us! -- thunder and lightning, I've a notion to -- to -- if you've got a nice fresh corpse, fetch him out! -- or by George we'll brain you!"

http://www.mindspring.com/~eliasen/t...s/innoc27.html

I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for a claim that isn't dead and decomposed already.

T.A.M. · 14th November 2007, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer

OK, I listened to it on my way home tonight. Let me start by echoing a sentiment expressed earlier in this thread. Gage is an idiot.

Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials.

It is not the acquisition of knowledge that makes one a scholar, but rather the logical and correct application of that knowledge.
- TAM 2007

TAM

rwguinn · 14th November 2007, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by LashL

Hmm. Seems like just another twoofer parroting nonsense without ever being on a first name basis with reality.

They haven't even been to the same party, much less been introduced!

Mekt_Ranzz · 14th November 2007, 09:47 PM

Question: A 20-story building hangs suspended from a crane so that the bottom of the building is 10 feet directly above a 90-story building. Right next to this first 20-story building is another identical 20-story building suspended from another crane at an identical height above the ground, but with no building underneath it. Both cranes let go of their respective 20-story buildings at the same time.

Which one hits the ground first?

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

Gravy · 14th November 2007, 10:04 PM

The question is far too complex. We are but simple country folk. Please let us know when the YouTube video is available.

Also, these schnozzberries taste like schnozzberries.

13th November 2007, 05:03 PM	#81
cmcaulif Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 405	Originally Posted by Arus808 Um...there is no "University of Honolulu" There is however Honolulu Community College (one of the sub-campuses of the University of Hawaii system). Yea, thats why I thought it was weird he said that. Or maybe I just heard wrong
cmcaulif Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 405

13th November 2007, 05:34 PM	#82
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579	I am now listening to the debate... ... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig.
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579	Last edited by bofors; 13th November 2007 at 05:35 PM.

13th November 2007, 05:35 PM	#83
Mr.Herbert Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,448	Did you say Jim Hoffman boned Jenny Craig?
	Last edited by Mr.Herbert; 13th November 2007 at 05:36 PM.

13th November 2007, 05:36 PM	#84
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,204	Originally Posted by bofors I now listening to the debate... ... and Jim Hoffman just owned Ron Craig. in what world? Craig whipped Gage and hOffman and he's one man against two woo's. All it took is one man to prove both of them wrong about their claims.
Arus808 Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 6,204	__________________ Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato. “Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.” “Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”

13th November 2007, 05:37 PM	#85
DGM Skeptic not Atheist Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 24,743	Originally Posted by bofors I am now listening to the debate... ... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig. "Just schooled"? What are you 15?
	__________________ "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

13th November 2007, 05:38 PM	#86
T.A.M. Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 20,795	Someone who believes the towers were brought down via controlled demolition just said that Hoffman owned Craig...yup, now I'm convinced. the weakness of the ignore function is it does not prevent you from seeing their comments when they are quoted. TAM

13th November 2007, 05:43 PM	#87
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579	Let me get this straight... Ron Craig's argument is: (1) He would have used shaped charges. (2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions. (3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers. Hahahaha....
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579

13th November 2007, 05:48 PM	#88
CHF Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 3,871	Originally Posted by bofors Let me get this straight... Ron Craig's argument is: (1) He would have used shaped charges. (2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions. (3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers. Hahahaha.... OK Bofors. Tell us how to rig up a 110 story skyscraper with bombs so that flying a plane into the set-up wouldn't screw up the whole thing.
CHF Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 3,871

13th November 2007, 05:51 PM	#89
T.A.M. Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 20,795	ITUs (Indestructable Thermite Units) of course...duh! TAM

13th November 2007, 05:54 PM	#90
DGM Skeptic not Atheist Join Date: May 2007 Location: West of Northshore MA Posts: 24,743	Originally Posted by CHF OK Bofors. Tell us how to rig up a 110 story skyscraper with bombs so that flying a plane into the set-up wouldn't screw up the whole thing. Maybe he should ask Mr Jowenko how to rig the towers.
	__________________ "Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

13th November 2007, 05:59 PM	#91
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579	Originally Posted by CHF I called up and asked why demolition charges weren't more audible and Gage replies that 118 FDNY heard...thermite! I just heard this... Ha... that's it, John? Eh? Dude, you're a genius. Ya, the buildings made absolutely no noise coming down at all. Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough. Congratulations, you win the "Bofors-Debunking/Denial" prise de jour:
bofors Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 579

13th November 2007, 06:10 PM	#92
Good Lt Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,498	Quote: Ya, let's through out all the evidence, including the audio evidence, that proves CD and just claim that the explosions were not loud enough. Yeah...about all that "evidence..." Where is it? You gonna cite it one day? Or do you just through it all out when it doesn't show what you pretend it does?
Good Lt Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,498	__________________ Sorrowful and great is the artist's destiny. - Liszt Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful. - Ian Faith Last edited by Good Lt; 13th November 2007 at 06:11 PM.

13th November 2007, 06:15 PM	#94
Good Lt Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,498	You don't understand, CHF. It happened IN HIS MIND, which is undebunkable.
Good Lt Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,498	__________________ Sorrowful and great is the artist's destiny. - Liszt Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful. - Ian Faith

13th November 2007, 06:35 PM	#96
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081	Originally Posted by bofors I am now listening to the debate... ... and Jim Hoffman just schooled Ron Craig. If you are really an engineer, why are you so scientifically illiterate? Hoffman's faulty calculations were exposed by Dr. Greening long ago.
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081

13th November 2007, 06:56 PM	#97
hellaeon Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,488	Even the first rebuttle smashes Gage. Gage sounds like a bumbling idiot trying to recite the same crap for about 3-4 minutes and Craig responds with a 10 seconds tirade that gets straight to the point. Ron, get this walking record on a debate with Mark or even Ryan M! (that would rule) hahahahahahahahahahahahaha he is dropping pearlers! The kinetic energy of the impact is not important???

13th November 2007, 07:42 PM	#98
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	OK, I listened to it on my way home tonight. Let me start by echoing a sentiment expressed earlier in this thread. Gage is an idiot. Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials. The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally.
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

13th November 2007, 08:06 PM	#99
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	Gage makes a number of mistakes that clearly illustrate his lack of knowledge of his own profession. 1) Gage refers to the Parke Plaza building in Caracas as a steel framed building that survived a catastrophic fire. Wrong. It was a combined structure. It had a concrete “macro frame” every five floors with the intermediate infill floors steel framed (one of which did indeed suffer a partial collapse). 2) Gage implied that the massive size of the core columns at the base of the structure meant that the core of the building was so strong that even if the floors of the towers collapsed, the core would have remained standing 1000 feet high. In this he ignores a number of crucial facts. A) The airplane impacts damaged the core columns as well as the exterior columns. B) The core columns became progressively lighter and smaller the farther up the building you went. C) Photographic evidence indicates that, in fact, both cores did indeed survive for a few seconds longer than the rest of the structure. And most importantly, D) the lack of any diagonal bracing in the core structure (other than a few well defined locations) meant that the entire core was incapable of existing as a stand alone structure. This is a key fundamental principle of structural engineering that should be understood by architects. 3) I am not an architect, nor am I a professional engineer (although I have studied graduate level environmental engineering). I have spent many, many years in construction and buildings, especially in high rise buildings. Gage is ignorant of the basic operational practices of construction in the private and public sectors. His insistence that to compromise building security is the only thing that would be required to access the core area for the surreptitious placement of demolition charges indicates to me that he has never ever done any design work more complicated than remodeling Auntie Annie’s Pretzels at the local mall. I mean seriously, what’s up with that? Even if you have never been involved with building construction/ remodeling it doesn’t take much imagination to appreciate the layers of bureaucracy and management that even the most minor construction project is saddled with. Does he seriously think that the security department could dream up a bogus construction project impacting a major life safety system like the elevators without any practical oversight? This is so fundamental to the construction process that it totally boggles the mind that he would seriously present this as an argument.
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post Last edited by Alferd_Packer; 13th November 2007 at 08:28 PM.

13th November 2007, 08:09 PM	#100
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	one more point: Gage’s insistence that the so called chemical signatures of thermite as supposedly detected by Jones has any validity is just plain annoying and insulting. What, does he think we are as stupid as he is?
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

13th November 2007, 08:21 PM	#101
CHF Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 3,871	I loved how Gage said the lower portion of the towers should have held up the top portion because "it had been doing that for years." In other words the man doesn't know the difference between a dynamic load and a static load. Originally Posted by Alfred_Packer The most glaring example of his cognitive dissonance is his insistence that thermite was used because it has no distinctive sounds, that would have been picked up by every camera and video recorder in Manhattan that day, yet in the very next breath he insists that explosives were used that were powerful enough to blast the exterior panels into neat 30 foot sections and to toss them hundreds of feet laterally. That's exactly why I asked him about the lack of CD charges going off. It's always fun to see how a twoofer switches between CD charges and thermite depending on what piece of evidence is being discussed.
CHF Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 3,871

13th November 2007, 08:26 PM	#102
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	We need to get Craig over here for a while and prep him before the next debate.
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

13th November 2007, 11:54 PM	#103
leftysergeant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 18,863	Please. Is there an MP3 of this available anywhere? I gotta have something to link to other sites where they have not yet grasped the dismal lack of function neurons between Gage's ears.

14th November 2007, 12:06 AM	#104
ref Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,685	Originally Posted by leftysergeant Please. Is there an MP3 of this available anywhere? I gotta have something to link to other sites where they have not yet grasped the dismal lack of function neurons between Gage's ears. http://blip.tv/file/get/Mekt_Ranzz-R...onCraig984.wmv
ref Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,685	__________________ 9/11 Guide homepage Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

14th November 2007, 08:50 AM	#105
nicepants Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,723	Listening Now Seems like the host is a twoofer. Also interesting that Gage always gets the last word before every commercial break. Oh boy, Jim Hoffman the software engineer. SELECT * from Controlled_Demolition WHERE Building = WTC7 OR WTC1 OR WTC2 Returned 0 Results I wish the explosives expert would just ask Gage...what would be the point of thermite/mate if they're using explosives anyways?
	__________________ Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen -Einstein Last edited by nicepants; 14th November 2007 at 08:52 AM.

14th November 2007, 08:57 AM	#106
Liszt Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,026	Originally Posted by bofors Let me get this straight... Ron Craig's argument is: (1) He would have used shaped charges. (2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions. (3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers. Hahahaha.... is every truther on this site a "no planer"? what on earth is going on?
Liszt Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 1,026

14th November 2007, 09:00 AM	#107
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 24,063	Originally Posted by nicepants Seems like the host is a twoofer. Also interesting that Gage always gets the last word before every commercial break. Oh boy, Jim Hoffman the software engineer. SELECT * from Controlled_Demolition WHERE Building = WTC7 OR WTC1 OR WTC2 Returned 0 Results I wish the explosives expert would just ask Gage...what would be the point of thermite/mate if they're using explosives anyways? Because it is super-powerful extra-explosive silent ~~marmite~~ thermite?
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

14th November 2007, 09:56 AM	#108
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	Originally Posted by bofors Let me get this straight... Ron Craig's argument is: (1) He would have used shaped charges. (2) He can't figure out how to plant the demolitions. (3) .... and that planes hit the WTC twin towers. Hahahaha.... 1) The argument is a valid one. In spite of the truther’s fixation with thermite, super thermite and steel eating termites, their proposed alternative has numerous technical drawbacks that they hand wave over. 2) No, that is not what he said. He said that the thruthers proposed system presents numerous logistical issues. Gage’s glossing over of these issues by ranting about the security in the building ignores those logistical issues entirely. 3) Yes, planes hit the building and the fires burned in the building, and that was enough to initiate the collapse. Gravity took care of the rest with no explosives needed.
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

14th November 2007, 10:11 AM	#109
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	Back to an issue I raised earlier. Gage implicated the elevator upgrade project as the method by which he believes that explosives were planted in the building. Let’s look at this claim. If this were true, then the elevator company, Otis, and the elevator mechanics who were permanently assigned to work in the building as well as the mechanics assigned to the elevator upgrade project. The in-house port authority as well as the outside consultants and design engineers working on and inspecting the project would have had to be part of the plan as well. Let’s not forget Frank DeMartini. As the construction manager for the towers it would have been his job to monitor and oversee all projects in the building. Finally, and most damning of all to Gage’s supposition is the fact that the elevator shafts were not adjacent to all of the core columns. In fact, the higher you went, the more core space that was used for other purposes. All this should be obvious to a practicing architect with any experience in high rise construction and renovation.
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

14th November 2007, 07:34 PM	#110
Mekt_Ranzz Student Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 32	For Advanced-Degreed Physicists Only! Here is an example of where a typical layperson can go horribly astray when confronted with what he or she may assume to be an elementary physics problem. Au contraire! Question: A 20-story building hangs suspended from a crane so that the bottom of the building is 10 feet directly above a 90-story building. Right next to this first 20-story building is another identical 20-story building suspended from another crane at an identical height above the ground, but with no building underneath it. Both cranes let go of their respective 20-story buildings at the same time. Which one hits the ground first? Answer: This is actually a bit of a trick question. Prior to 9/11/01, 100% of Advanced Physics Degree professionals would have agreed with the lesser-educated, "common sense" crowd and said that the building with nothing but air beneath it would strike the ground considerably faster than the other, which, quite honestly, could not really be expected to burrow its way through a 90-story building to reach the ground at all. However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time." So you see, one must always consult one's local physics expert when questions concerning the physical universe arise. PLEASE DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK THROUGH ANY TYPE OF PHYSICS PROBLEMS ON YOUR OWN AT HOME—ALWAYS CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL. Only a professional knows which laws of physics are currently being applied to describe the physical universe that surrounds us. THESE PHYSICAL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Please do not assume you are up to date on the latest equations and/or theories concerning gravitation or conservation of energy and momentum. You may now return to your regularly-scheduled life, knowing that you are safe in the good hands of the people who you expect to watch out for you and your family's best interests, since that would take too much time out of your day to do for yourself. Brought to you by the "Have You Hugged Your Big Brother Today?" foundation. Originally posted by tzo at 911Blogger.com
Mekt_Ranzz Student Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 32

14th November 2007, 07:44 PM	#111
Alferd_Packer Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,746	Quote: However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time." What are you talking about?
	__________________ No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

14th November 2007, 07:46 PM	#112
Tbone Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,448	Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer What are you talking about? Just the same old "free fall" thing.
Tbone Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,448

14th November 2007, 07:48 PM	#113
Mr.Herbert Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,448	I think that was a Drive- By Wooing

14th November 2007, 07:48 PM	#114
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081	Originally Posted by Mekt_Ranzz Here is an example of where a typical layperson can go horribly astray when confronted with what he or she may assume to be an elementary physics problem. Au contraire! Question: A 20-story building hangs suspended from a crane so that the bottom of the building is 10 feet directly above a 90-story building. Right next to this first 20-story building is another identical 20-story building suspended from another crane at an identical height above the ground, but with no building underneath it. Both cranes let go of their respective 20-story buildings at the same time. Which one hits the ground first? Answer: This is actually a bit of a trick question. Prior to 9/11/01, 100% of Advanced Physics Degree professionals would have agreed with the lesser-educated, "common sense" crowd and said that the building with nothing but air beneath it would strike the ground considerably faster than the other, which, quite honestly, could not really be expected to burrow its way through a 90-story building to reach the ground at all. However, since 9/11/01, physicists have learned that the answer is actually "there will be virtually no difference in the rate of descent between the two 20-story buildings. They will both strike the ground essentially at the same time." So you see, one must always consult one's local physics expert when questions concerning the physical universe arise. PLEASE DO NOT ATTEMPT TO WORK THROUGH ANY TYPE OF PHYSICS PROBLEMS ON YOUR OWN AT HOME—ALWAYS CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL. Only a professional knows which laws of physics are currently being applied to describe the physical universe that surrounds us. THESE PHYSICAL LAWS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. Please do not assume you are up to date on the latest equations and/or theories concerning gravitation or conservation of energy and momentum. You may now return to your regularly-scheduled life, knowing that you are safe in the good hands of the people who you expect to watch out for you and your family's best interests, since that would take too much time out of your day to do for yourself. Brought to you by the "Have You Hugged Your Big Brother Today?" foundation. Originally posted by tzo at 911Blogger.com I have a sneaking suspicion that you are not at home with "advanced physics." What you sarcastically claim that physicists have learned from the buildings that collapsed is something they really haven't learned at all. But, then, you are a conspiracy liar: you don't care.
pomeroo Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,081

14th November 2007, 07:53 PM	#115
LashL Goddess of Legaltainment™ Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 36,396	Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer What are you talking about? Hmm. Seems like just another twoofer parroting nonsense without ever being on a first name basis with reality.

14th November 2007, 07:56 PM	#116
ktesibios Worthless Aging Hippie Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 1,493	Every time a troofer drops by with yet another regurgitation of the same old long-discredited talking points, I start channeling one of my favorite authors: Originally Posted by Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad The guide was bewildered -- non-plussed. He walked his legs off, nearly, hunting up extraordinary things, and exhausted all his ingenuity on us, but it was a failure; we never showed any interest in any thing. He had reserved what he considered to be his greatest wonder till the last -- a royal Egyptian mummy, the best preserved in the world, perhaps. He took us there. He felt so sure, this time, that some of his old enthusiasm came back to him: "See, genteelmen! -- Mummy! Mummy!" The eye-glass came up as calmly, as deliberately as ever. "Ah, -- Ferguson -- what did I understand you to say the gentleman's name was?" "Name? -- he got no name! -- Mummy! -- 'Gyptian mummy!" " Yes, yes. Born here?" " No! 'Gyptian mummy!" "Ah, just so. Frenchman, I presume?" "No! -- not Frenchman, not Roman! -- born in Egypta!" "Born in Egypta. Never heard of Egypta before. Foreign locality, likely. Mummy -- mummy. How calm he is -- how self-possessed. Is, ah -- is he dead?" "Oh, sacre bleu, been dead three thousan' year!" The doctor turned on him savagely: "Here, now, what do you mean by such conduct as this! Playing us for Chinamen because we are strangers and trying to learn! Trying to impose your vile second-hand carcasses on us! -- thunder and lightning, I've a notion to -- to -- if you've got a nice fresh corpse, fetch him out! -- or by George we'll brain you!" http://www.mindspring.com/~eliasen/t...s/innoc27.html I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for a claim that isn't dead and decomposed already.
	__________________ Ship me somewheres east of Suez, where the best is like the worst, where there ain't no ten commandments and a man can raise a small, bristly mustache.

14th November 2007, 08:01 PM	#117
T.A.M. Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 20,795	Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer OK, I listened to it on my way home tonight. Let me start by echoing a sentiment expressed earlier in this thread. Gage is an idiot. Like Judy Woods, one has to wonder just how he managed to acquire his credentials. It is not the acquisition of knowledge that makes one a scholar, but rather the logical and correct application of that knowledge. - TAM 2007 TAM