Great Richard Gage interview according to JREF, page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 07:38 AM by 911files
Originally posted by Six Sigma
It's not "emotional" ... I just like pointing out how much of a hypocritical title it is. The truth is the last thing you guys are after.


I know you intend that as a generalization, but I am a "truther". Early on when I began my personal research, I absorbed a lot of my information from unreliable sources and was just as off-base as most of those posting here at ATS. That period lasted only a few months, because I realized I was applying a bias to my research that was just as bad as that used by "OS'ers". So I decided to alter my methodology and focus on generating primary data sources, doing my best to keep my personal bias out of the process by engaging/collaborating with the best and brightest in their respective fields that I could find.

I have stayed away from the WTC controversy for a very good reason. I am NOT a structural engineer. Although I had the mandatory strength of materials class in college, structural engineering, especially when it comes to structures like the WTC complex, is a very specialized field. So, although I have a heavy background in physics and math, I figure my opinion is nothing more than that of a technical layperson when it comes to the WTC.

I find the NIST report in general to be a very reasonable explanation for the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2. However, as a technical layperson, I find the NIST explanation for the collapse of WTC7 laughable. That does not mean I find the demolition theory any more plausible, just that I consider the collapse "unexplained". So I do support the efforts of Gage and his group in seeking an "independent investigation", although I do believe they are locked into their own version of the event.

There are some very serious and capable 911 researchers out there. They continue to move forward to document the events of 9/11 in spite of the damage done to the 911 Truth movement since 2006 by all of the "crazy". Many others however have simply thrown up their hands in disgust and moved on with their lives. For me, my focus was/is the Pentagon event. Some of the layers have been peeled back, but there remains a lot of work to be done. But it is sad that the title "truther" has come to carry such a negative connotation.

edit on 23-7-2012 by 911files because: (no reason given)


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 09:36 AM by hooper
reply to post by psikeyhackr


I am not trying to estimate it.. I have seen 440 for the north tower and 550 for the south tower. I have not seen 3 digits of precision before. So you explain where you got it.

Its in the report that you refuse to read. Had you taken my advice and read the report you wouldn't be asking the question.


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 09:42 AM by maxella1
reply to post by Six Sigma




Yes, the use of asbestos was halted during the construction. The "truther" stated that both buildings were "full." Your comment about Silverstein is ridiculous- period. I have managed many projects in older buildings that have asbestos. Abatement's are quite costly, yes. But I think you should educate yourself on the necessity of it's removal.


What part of my comment about Silverstein was ridiculous?

As far as i know asbestos needs to be removed during any type of construction, repair or remodeling work in the building. Buildings such as the WTC have companies moving in and out of it all the time and every time they remodel the office space. Silverstein was looking at a very large expanse if he wanted to keep it occupied. 9/11 saved him the trouble. The First Responders inhaled some of it for free at ground zero (myself included).

So tell me what is ridiculous about what I said...?


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 09:49 AM by hooper
reply to post by maxella1


As far as i know asbestos needs to be removed during any type of construction, repair or remodeling work in the building.

No, only if its in poor condition and friable. Most of the stuff in the WTC was directly affixed to the steel structure which was never modified for construction.
Buildings such as the WTC have companies moving in and out of it all the time and every time they remodel the office space. Silverstein was looking at a very large expanse if he wanted to keep it occupied. 9/11 saved him the trouble. The First Responders inhaled some of it for free at ground zero (myself included).

Where is everyone getting the idea that the remediation of the ACM in the WTC buildings was the financial responsibilty of the leasee? This is usually not the case.


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 09:51 AM by maxella1
reply to post by hooper




Where is everyone getting the idea that the remediation of the ACM in the WTC buildings was the financial responsibilty of the leasee? This is usually not the case.


whos responsibility was it ?


reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 10:01 AM by Six Sigma
Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by hooper




Where is everyone getting the idea that the remediation of the ACM in the WTC buildings was the financial responsibilty of the leasee? This is usually not the case.


whos responsibility was it ?


Here you go:

vls.law.villanova.edu...



reply posted on 23-7-2012 @ 10:28 AM by thegameisup
reply to post by Six Sigma


I wonder what Larry has to say about the unprecedented powerdown just before 9/11?

What was the reason for it? Conveniently it affected all the security in the towers.




Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why the Pentagon?
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags
NEVER FORGET 9-11….Maybe we SHOULD forget.
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Personal Theory on The Twin Towers Plane Pilots
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Note from trapped workers surfaces 10 years after 9/11
  Posted 1 days ago with 6 member flags
Where were you when the world stopped turning...
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags