It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Another Look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Another Look at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.



It is impossible these days in the debate over the official narrative of 9/11 and the hypothesis’s put forward from 9/11 conspiracy theorists not to mention Architects and Engineers (A&E) for 9/11 truth. This group was founded by an architect called Richard Gage who said after listening to David Ray Griffin in 2006 that he was compelled to form the group A&E for 9/11 truth. Since then this group has grown with 2340 (as of time of writing) architects and engineers who call for a new investigation into the attacks of 9/11. Under the leadership of Gage this group has published many well-known documentaries such as “the experts speak out” and “Solving the Mystery of WTC-7” not to mention their impressive “ReThink9/11” advertising campaign. This thread is going to explore this group in a little more detail.

DISCLAIMER: A&E for 9/11 truth have published a number of papers on 9/11 making a range of claims about the attacks. It is not the scope of this thread to discuss specific theories or claims made by the group but rather to discuss the nature of the group itself. I do however acknowledge that there is going to be some degree of cross over between the nature of the group and the theories proposed by the group. Furthermore much of the discussion in this thread will be focused on the founder, Richard Gage, I would like to state from the very start that I am aware that there is more than one member of A&E for 9/11 truth.

Who are A&E for 9/11 Truth.

A&E for 9/11 truth is a “non-profit” organisation that seeks to provide an alternative explanation for the collapse of WTC1,2 and 7. They have over 20,000 signatures on their petition from members of the general public and over 2300 form other professionals form the fields of architecture and engineering. Their petition states that:


On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapses of the World Trade Centre Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers and Building 7.


As mentioned above A&E for 9/11 truth have published a number of videos and documents arguing their case that the buildings were demolished as a result of controlled demolition, usually by thermite (see “Revisiting Thermite” for more information). A&E for 9/11 have stated they refute other theories such as directed energy weapons, fake planes, mini-nukes and a number of other “fringe” theories. Furthermore they do not directly attribute the attacks to any one perpetrator saying that:


We do not know who the perpetrators of this crime are. Identifying the culprits is the purpose of a real criminal investigation. However, we are able to provide overwhelming evidence of a cover-up of this crime. In addition, scientific forensic evidence indicates that only individuals who could gain long-term access inside the highly secure WTC skyscrapers and obtain advanced thermitic materials could have orchestrated the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7


The group’s website lists their board of directors as follows.

  • Richard Gage, AIA, Architect, Founder & President
  • Dan Barnum, FAIA, Secretary
  • Robert McCoy, AIA, Architect, Board Chairman
  • Tom Spellman, Treasurer

Further information about the group can be found at their website; www.ae911truth.org...




posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
2,340 Vs The World.

Ok perhaps not quite the world however this is an important point.

A&E for 9/11 truth make a lot of claims and use their petition with 2,340 signatures from various architects and engineers from around their world as a basis for their credibility. You can see this in almost all of their media publications they go on and on about the credentials of their members. Gage almost always introduces himself as “Richard Gage, AIA”. On their “ReThink9/11” advertising campaign they had huge billboards declaring that over 2,000 experts were demanding a new investigation.

So let’s put them in context.

As for right now A&E for 9/11 truth have 2,340 architects and engineers who have gave their support for the views of the group from around the world. However, take a close look at This Document, It lists only perhaps 100 structural engineers and probably even less architects. The rest are listed under “other engineers”, some come from fields that could be related such as aeronautical engineers but some of them really did leave me scratching my head. For example is a maritime engineer, a communications engineer or environmental engineer really an authority on complex high rise building design and destruction? And then most of those who come under the “other” category seem to be electrical/electronic or computer engineers while I can see how they may have some contribution I again fail to see how they could be considered any kind of authority on high rise building collapse. It’s also shocking to realise that A&E for 9/11 truth will also let students sign this list

To give this further context, the American Society of Civil Engineering has almost 150,000 members, the American institute of Architecture has about 85,000 members yet A&E for 9/11 truth has been about for over 8 years and has yet to get more than 3,000 architects and engineers from any discipline from around the world to join up?

To the credit of the group the do address this head on in the F&Q section of their saying this in response to the question “why does A&E for 9/11 truth represent such a small percentage of architects and engineers?”

Most architects and engineers have never been presented with the scientific evidence of controlled demolition. In addition, most of those who take the time to examine this evidence acknowledge that the official story can’t be true. As of the date of this publication, there are almost 1,700 architects and engineers who openly support the findings of AE911Truth vs. only a few dozen who have openly supported the NIST WTC reports. Even so, in the end, the evidence stands on its own, regardless of how many professionals are aware of it


That to me sounds like utter rubbish!

I know in fairness this was probably written a few years ago but even with their huge advertising campaign and considering how well known this group has become with Gage having done many TV interviews I find this excuse laughable. Its even more laughable when one considered that many in the construction industry have come out to actively distance themselves from Gage and co.

They say for example that one of the reasons for this is because most architects have not been presented with the scientific evidence and that only a few dozen support the NIST reports. Yet according to this article in Architecture magazine when Gage turned up at the AIA headquarters to present his evidence not a single engineer turned up, the room was instead full of members from the local 9/11 truth chapter. What’s worse for Gage are some of the other things the article has to say such as this:

The AIA itself, however, is firm about its relationship with Gage. “We don’t have any relationship with his organization whatsoever,”


The article then goes on to discuss how AIA has been trying to distance itself from Gage et al and discusses his misuse of his AIA title. It then has this to say of Gages theories:


The accusations of Gage’s organization are the typical hodgepodge of pseudo-scientific claims. Along with other esoteric and debunked technical arguments, he says that melted steel was visible at the Ground Zero site proving that the fires burned too hot to have been caused by jet fuel; that because the buildings collapsed at “near free fall speed” there must have been a controlled demolition; and that traces of a thermitereaction found in the World Trade Center debris proves that explosives were used.

All of Gage’s so-called evidence has been rebutted in peer-reviewed papers, by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, by the American Society of Civil Engineers, by the 9/11 Commission Report, and, perhaps most memorably, by the 110-year-old engineering journal Popular Mechanics.


In Short AIA, do not agree with anything Gage has to say.

Based on this video, I can see why….



The 9/11 Cash Cow.

If you have by any chance had the time to take a look through the A&E for 9/11 truth website you will have noticed that above anything else it’s about generating cash. Membership goes from $2.50 per month up to $250 per month offering up various incentives, like a free mug! Then there is the online shop where you can even buy your own coffee to go with your packs of pamphlets that will set you back over $100.

Some of their stuff I found to be in bad states such as a banner that costs $130 that is advertised as b “Be front and centre at your local 13th Anniversary of 9/11 events with our 9/11 Truth: Good for America sidewalk banner – and do your part to spread this powerful, patriotic message!”. Might just be me but I find that in poor taste considering that the anniversary is to mourn the deaths of almost 3,000 people.

But I digress, let me be very clear on something, nobody is getting really rich out of A&E for 9/11 truth but I have been able to get hold of a Report detailing its finances and it makes for some interesting reading. In the Tax Return for 2012 we can see that the group took in over half a million dollars, of that $350,000 came from donations. I find it shocking that for a non-profit charitable organisation Richard Gage took a salary of over $85,000 plus expenses.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Now that is by no means going to make him a rich man but it’s enough to live off and as such his livelihood relies on A&E for 9/11 truth continuing to promote their questionable theories regarding 9/11 and to keep the donations flowing. He makes a living out of arguing that thermite brought down the towers and demanding a new investigation. I think that as such one has to question if his loyalties are with true science or money because if he were to admit NIST where correct in their assessment of what happened his revenue would be gone. Much in the same way Alex Jones would be left penniless if he were to turn round and start telling all his listeners how the NWO does not exist and that he wants to support a full gun ban in America. Like Jones, Gage needs his audience and he will say whatever he has to in order to keep them.

To be clear I am not saying he should not be making money, I am saying that when his means of earning is dependent on him promoting highly debatable science one has to question if he really believes what he is preaching.


And one last thing….

When I was researching this thread I came across a screenshot taken from their website taken in 2007, I could not believe this, it actually state that they don’t know what they are talking about. (link)

Seriously.



You might not be able to make that out but what it say's is this,



Architects and Engineers are trained to design buildings that function well and withstand potentially destructive forces. However, the 3 high-rise buildings at the World Trade Center which "collapsed" on 9/11 (the Twin Towers plus WTC Building #7) presented us with a body of evidence (i.e.controlled demolition) that was clearly outside the scope of our training and experience.


They actually admitted that the collapse of the buildings was out side their scope of expertise!

No wonder they took that page down!

In closing, all I can say is that if you are one of the people who hangs on the every word that A&E for 9/11 truth have every published then you seriously have to question your sources. They have no widespread scientific backing and they are out to line their pockets with your hard earned cash though highly questionable science.


+18 more 
posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Note ATS'ers, this is yet another opinion piece from OP, it doesn't change a flawed NIST report or any of the other holes in the official version of the events.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
Note ATS'ers, this is yet another opinion piece from OP, it doesn't change a flawed NIST report or any of the other holes in the official version of the events.


look,

Rather than pointless one liners that do nothing to discredit anything I have said why don't you tell me where you specifically disagree with me.

Its all very well getting in that all important first post to grab all those anti-OSer stars

But please make it count, what specifically do you disagree with me on and what sources do you have to back up any assertions you may have.
edit on 27-3-2015 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)


+8 more 
posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
Note ATS'ers, this is yet another opinion piece from OP, it doesn't change a flawed NIST report or any of the other holes in the official version of the events.


look,

Rather than pointless one liners that do nothing to discredit anything I have said why don't you tell me where you specifically disagree with me.

Its all very well getting in that all important first post to grab all those anti-OSer stars

But please make it count, what specifically do you disagree with me on and what sources do you have to back up any assertions you may have.


I disagree with your total approach, your presentation, the way you just attack everyone who disagrees with the official version like it's some kind of crime.

And it's typical debunker style, when all else fails attack the people and their credibility, usually using ''they express their views for all the cash it will bring'', have you ever thought that perhaps it took some of these folks a lot of guts to go on the line and disagree with the official version?

Holes can usually be picked from both sides of a debate but there is only ever one truth.
edit on -180002015-03-27T13:27:27-05:000000002731201527032015Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:27:27 -0500 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Thank you for a well thought out and researched thread OP.

However, as we see with ALL 9/11 threads, I fear it will change no ones mind on the issue.

Everyone already has their minds made up and back up that predetermined mindset with their form of 'proof'.

I am sure they will be along here shortly.

S&F none the less.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Zcustosmorum



I disagree with your total approach, your presentation, the way you just attack everyone who disagrees with the official version like it's some kind of crime.


Again, your post is lacking anything of substance you are not debunking anything I have said in the OP rather you seem to be taking the attitude that you can ignore pretty much everything I have to say because you believe I believe the official story.

I am not attacking people who disagree with the official story, at least not on a personal level, I am attacking Gage I suppose but that is only because I think that it is possible to argue that he is deliberately spreading misinformation to make money.



And it's typical debunker style, when all else fails attack the people and their credibility, usually using ''they express their views for all the cash it will bring'', have you ever thought that perhaps it took some of these folks a lot of guts to go on the line and disagree with the official version?


There is more to this than "he is in it for the cash", true I do believe that is a big part of A&E for 9/11 truth but at the same time its true. Gage makes $85,000 out of A&E for 9/11 truth that's how he makes his money so no matter what contrary evidence he is presented with, he is probably going to ignore it because like i said if he turns round and starts saying that NIST were correct and thermite is a load of rubbish, he is going to lose his means of earning.

As such you have to question his motivations.

To me that is entirely logical.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin



I am not attacking people who disagree with the official story, at least not on a personal level, I am attacking Gage


So you are attacking.



There is more to this than "he is in it for the cash", true I do believe that is a big part of A&E for 9/11 truth but at the same time its true. Gage makes $85,000 out of A&E for 9/11 truth that's how he makes his money so no matter what contrary evidence he is presented with, he is probably going to ignore it because like i said if he turns round and starts saying that NIST were correct and thermite is a load of rubbish, he is going to lose his means of earning.


His means of earning is architecture, which is his profession and A&E for 9/11 truth is a non-profit organization.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zcustosmorum




His means of earning is architecture, which is his profession and A&E for 9/11 truth is a non-profit organization.


Really so that is why he is taking a salary of $85,000 from A&E for 9/11 truth?

Its probably more now, it was about ten grand less in 2009.

Also I cannot see that he has been involved in any significant architecture projects in the last few years.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Ever since I read your very good thread on Building 7 I've been interested in your 9/11 threads. Again, good work, good reasoning, and you've brought forward points and data that I haven't seen anywhere else. Thanks for an informative OP.


+4 more 
posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

What a useless thread - or should I say waste of bandwidth. Instead of posting all you did, you could have just said in one sentence that you think A&E are in it for the money. Pretty much a baseless claim unless you can prove this in some way - like those running it left their practices and are living the hi-life on a beach collecting their $2.50 checks each month. But you can't make that claim or prove anything. I say this goes into the hoax bin until proof is presented.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Zcustosmorum




His means of earning is architecture, which is his profession and A&E for 9/11 truth is a non-profit organization.


Really so that is why he is taking a salary of $85,000 from A&E for 9/11 truth?

Its probably more now, it was about ten grand less in 2009.

Also I cannot see that he has been involved in any significant architecture projects in the last few years.


So you're accusing him of dodgy activites? Isn't there a watchdog which oversees non-profit organizations in the U.S, have they said anything?

And an applicable quote, which could apply to a lot of things:

''The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.''

-George Orwell



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22




What a useless thread - or should I say waste of bandwidth


What a waste .... going to hold my tong [edit]



you could have just said in one sentence that you think A&E are in it for the money


But there is more to this thread, it discusses the beliefs of A&E for 9/11 truth, it discusses its membership and there is also that bit at the end about how it once basically admitted that the destruction of the towers was out of their scope of expertise. Don't get me wrong, I think its also important to point out that do some degree they are milking a cash cow, its entirely possible that Gage really does believe what he is saying and making money out of it. Although I have to say I find it hard to believe that he can have no doubt in his mind.



like those running it left their practices and are living the hi-life on a beach collecting their $2.50 checks each month.


Well they made $350,000 out of counting those $2.50 checks and Gage ended up taking a salary of $85,000 out of those little checks and the other sources of funding they have.



I say this goes into the hoax bin until proof is presented.


Good for you!!

Now could you also please point to a specific point you disagree with me on, present a logical and factual argument as to why you disagree with sources to back up your assertions?
edit on 27-3-2015 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I wonder how many pro-OS'ers profit from material they publish and/or monetary donations they receive?




posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Zcustosmorum




So you're accusing him of dodgy activites? Isn't there a watchdog which oversees non-profit organizations in the U.S, have they said anything?


Nope!

Never said their was anything dodgy about it, I just pointed out that he was making a fair bit of money out of this non-profit organisation.

If I thought he was committing fraud I would have said as much, please refrain from putting words into my mouth.

So what do you think about the AIA distancing themselves form Gage??



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin



So what do you think about the AIA distancing themselves form Gage??


I'ts only natural, the mainstream always do these things when someone talks against it, same happened with Stephen Jones (the guy who discovered the thermite), his university turned on him because his paper hadn't been published, he subsequently quit and then got his paper published, along with a few other scientists who helped write it



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22

The reason the OP is so long is BECAUSE proof was presented. Just because it spells a story you don't like doesn't make it a hoax. Try again.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Nice thread. Star and flag from me, though you are likely to get blasted by truthers for pointing out reality.

Reality: 14 years later and who knows how much money donated to the movement, yet no new investigation has ever been performed, no legal case built, no new evidence presented, no formal, detailed challenge set forth against the official report. Just endless rallies, websites, seminars, merch selling, videos made, books sold, ect... in other words, a cottage industry for the fringe.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

That page is not on their web site. It is on an OSer web site. It could be doctored.

I can make the same baseless claims about you - you post here to justify your .25/post on 911 or you'll lose your position as a debunker. I mean you keep making threads about 911 though it's somewhat a dead subject. Need to pay the bills I guess.

See how that works?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join