posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 04:01 AM
I just listened to the whole show. You can find links on 9/11 Blogger.
I don't agree with the earlier poster who said the host favored Dave Thomas. I thought he did a pretty good job of remaining impartial.
I also don't agree that Richard hung up on purpose. It was at literally the closing moments of the show and they also lost a caller to some
technical difficulty immediately afterward. Then they said goodnight and it was over.
Over-all I think it was a great show and a great demonstration of the issues being debated today, that have no doubt now been exposed to thousands of
new people in greater detail.
Gage was easily able to hold his own and stumped Mr. Thomas on a few questions in particular, where Thomas responded very hesitantly and frankly with
more than a couple repetitive and blatantly idiotic answers. Basically the mantras that "debunkers" use here, except when they deflect to another
issue in their posts to dodge something they can't resolve (and you all KNOW you do this), Mr. Thomas was forced into moments of awkward silence
instead. Refreshing amount of humanity inherent to radio that just isn't there on the internet.
On the other hand, the host fairly pointed out that Gage had a habit of making suggestions and then backing away from concrete statements to say that
we need further investigation. In each case I 100% agree that further investigation is needed and Gage was right for refusing to speculate on issues
like who would have been involved or what exactly was placed exactly where, but he did make a few claims too concretely where the data
available presently may be plenty suggestive but nonetheless is wanting of further resolution. For example he states as his opinion that thermite was
the main cause of collapse for WTC7. I don't agree with that but it's a trivial disagreement.
When Dr. Harrit arrived to the show he took Thomas back to school. I love the way Dr. Harrit presents his arguments. He also absolutely refused to
speculate on any issue that was not a technical one within his expertise, much to my own satisfaction. The speculation is good for nothing and it
manipulates the burden of proof onto us, the individuals demanding further investigation into these issues, instead of the people who are
actually responsible for the criminal investigation.
One thing I remember, Dr. Harrit made mention of the fact that out of 400-500 documented skyscraper fires, not a single one had resulted in collapse
except allegedly for WTC7. Thomas later would claim that an oil rig completely collapsed from fire alone, but he must have missed the "skyscraper"
part of what Harrit had actually said. Harrit didn't get a chance to respond to that.
Harrit also informed both "debunkers" that their excuses of WTC7 being especially liable to collapse because of the impacting debris from WTC1, was
in direct contradiction to NIST's official report, that those impact damages were insignificant to their final hypothetical mechanism.
Over-all, like I said, it was a good show. Could have been better, could have been worse, but it was a good presentation for the public.