• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Now it is 1303 VERIFIED licensed Architects and Engineers addressing congress

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Sorry to the trojan horses like Soupnazi630 and I_Gaze_at the Blue...among others...

Your gig is up for infiltrating 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit them

There should be legal charges against people like Soupnazi630 and Gaze at the Blue who infiltrate 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit and destroy the wishes of the many legitimate licensed Architects and Engineers who are simply requesting a new investigation.

Soupnazi630, Gaze at the Blue, and others like you are nothing but a trojan horse attempting to muck up a legitimate 9/11 petition to congress and should be charged for your misrepresentation and attempt to foil an American process

If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.

Now luckily Architects and Engineers for a new 9/11 investigation are more aware of who is on their petitions...

AE911Truth.org

Verification Team Assures a Sound Foundation
 
Last edited:

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Sorry to the trojan horses like Soupnazi630 and I_Gaze_at the Blue...among others...

Your gig is up for infiltrating 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit them

There should be legal charges against people like Soupnazi630 and Gaze at the Blue who infiltrate 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit and destroy the wishes of the many legitimate licensed Architects and Engineers who are simply requesting a new investigation.

Soupnazi630, Gaze at the Blue, and others like you are nothing but a trojan horse attempting to muck up a legitimate 9/11 petition to congress and should be charged for your misrepresentation and attempt to foil an American process

If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.

Now luckily Architects and Engineers for a new 9/11 investigation are more aware of who is on their petitions...

AE911Truth.org

Verification Team Assures a Sound Foundation

Most people on that website are not certified to do anything.
 

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Sorry to the trojan horses like Soupnazi630 and I_Gaze_at the Blue...among others...

Your gig is up for infiltrating 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit them

There should be legal charges against people like Soupnazi630 and Gaze at the Blue who infiltrate 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit and destroy the wishes of the many legitimate licensed Architects and Engineers who are simply requesting a new investigation.

Soupnazi630, Gaze at the Blue, and others like you are nothing but a trojan horse attempting to muck up a legitimate 9/11 petition to congress and should be charged for your misrepresentation and attempt to foil an American process

If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.

Now luckily Architects and Engineers for a new 9/11 investigation are more aware of who is on their petitions...

AE911Truth.org

Verification Team Assures a Sound Foundation

Actually you are wrong.

My whole point in joining this petittion was to prove that they have no verification process and they do not. I'vebeen listed as an Architect for some time now and they never verified it.

In fact the article you link to proves it. They claim they only time they ask for copies of documentation such as licensing is when the person requesting to join is a foreigner. Other than that one of their members does a websearch just to see if the individual joining the petition has a history on the web of anything which may be detrimental to the petittion.

In other words if people use their real names to discredit or argue against the twoofers in some place like a political forum they are disqualified.

And thats it for their verification process.

Playing devils advocate for a moment if the most or all of the 1303 engineers and architects were indeed engineers and architects ( we know not all are what they claim ) the fact is they are still a minescule percentage of those two professions and not enough to lend any credibility to their claims. And of course they have no evidence.
 

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Actually you are wrong.

My whole point in joining this petittion was to prove that they have no verification process and they do not. I'vebeen listed as an Architect for some time now and they never verified it.

In fact the article you link to proves it. They claim they only time they ask for copies of documentation such as licensing is when the person requesting to join is a foreigner. Other than that one of their members does a websearch just to see if the individual joining the petition has a history on the web of anything which may be detrimental to the petittion.

In other words if people use their real names to discredit or argue against the twoofers in some place like a political forum they are disqualified.

And thats it for their verification process.

Playing devils advocate for a moment if the most or all of the 1303 engineers and architects were indeed engineers and architects ( we know not all are what they claim ) the fact is they are still a minescule percentage of those two professions and not enough to lend any credibility to their claims. And of course they have no evidence.

They claim they DO have evidence but you claim they do not have evidence.

How can you make such a statement?

Have you seen and examined their evidence?

If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.

Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?
 
Last edited:

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
445
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.

Like anyone, and I do mean anyone, gives a flying four-letter word !!!

creative your just pissed because your delighfully irrelevant little movement is going nowhere fast, and that your spitting the dummy over being shown and proven how useless your beloved Gage and Gaggle are.

"Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" is a scientific impossibility and an oxymoron.

There are no "real architects or engineers" who have signed that petition.

A person who signs that petition stops being an architect or an engineer in the same way that a brain surgeon who suddenly decides to try shrinking tumors by dangling crystals over peoples heads is no longer able to effectively work in his field.

Nobody on that sham of a petition are credible or at the top of their field.

All this time and NOT one has ever managed to produce a paper to a reputable and respected Journal ... ANYWHERE on this planet ... in ANY language.

All these "supposed" professionals whom have produced precisely ZERO work ... just the same old Powerpoint and touting for donations to keep Gage high-flying around the globe.

Why does he need travel so much ... in todays world and with the advent of instantanous and global communication through the internet, does he really need to go to far-flung places to show his wee PowerPoint ???

AE911Truth seems to exist for the sole purpose of promoting Richard Gage, covering both salary and expenses as he travels around the world presenting his ridiculous presentation and stumping for more donations ... and when the truth of that finally sinks in, I hope you have the good grace to feel shame !!!

Twoofers, like you have been claiming "final nail in teh official storys coffin!!!!111!!" for years now ... with each piece of fradulent evidence ... with each made-up "smoking gun" from an anonymous source ... with each internet pseudodocumentary that takes the same lies and puts them in a different order ... with each desperatly amateurish video tossed up on YooToob by teenagers in basements with a mixing desk.

Seriously, what kind of coffin needs to have so many final nails hammered into it ???

Obviously one built by Da Twoof who know as much about casket-building as they know about any other subject of which they blather about !!!

But creative feel free to try bring charges about, since your such a staunch Warrior4DaTwoof we can expect no less effort ... show your commitment instead of whining on the internet ... go on ... I dare you !!!

Double dare you ... :bringit

Show these postings to the authorities ... I am sure that given this "indisputable" evidence the FBI will have no choice but to come across the Pond to knock on my door !!!

Prepare yourself for the much more likely pointing and laughing though ...

Oh! btw I never ever, ever got any sort of verifying e-mail from Grazyna Samborska ... just the bog standard welcome aboard kinda thang ... so that is bovine fecal matter too !!!
 

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
They claim they DO have evidence but you claim they do not have evidence.

How can you make such a statement?

Have you seen and examined their evidence?

If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.

Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?

Where is it?

That is the point, they claim to have evidence and they show.........................nothing.
 

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
"Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" is a scientific impossibility and an oxymoron.

Like I asked Soup...Have you seen and examined their evidence?

If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.

Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?
 

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Like I asked Soup...Have you seen and examined their evidence?

If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.

Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?

Like I explained to you they have not produced evidence of any kind.

They have no evidence to examine.

As I-Gaze-at-the-Blue pointed out they have only a power point presentation.

So based on the strength a colorful slide show you want another investigation.

They will not produce said evidence.
 

marduc

don't panic
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
5,333
Reaction score
3,591
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
1303.. They need to get 34 more, then they might attain some modicum of credibility.
 

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Where is it?

That is the point, they claim to have evidence and they show.........................nothing.

"architects and engineers are presenting new evidence indicating that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by controlled demolition (AE911truth.org). One piece of evidence they cite is the discovery by a team of U.S. and international scientists that the explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers."

Note: For those who don't know....nano thermite is simply a form of nano-aluminum powders which is a high tech explosive. By slightly changing the composition of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) you get varied types of explosive reactions. Variations of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) are used anywhere from solid rocket fuels to various forms of high tech explosives with various types of reactions.


Evidence & Resources

This was aired on Denmark's National News Television about the evidence...

 
Last edited:

Soupnazi630

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
867
Reaction score
293
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
"architects and engineers are presenting new evidence indicating that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by controlled demolition (AE911truth.org). One piece of evidence they cite is the discovery by a team of U.S. and international scientists that the explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers."

Note: For those who don't know....nano thermite is simply a form of nano-aluminum powders which is a high tech explosive. By slightly changing the composition of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) you get varied types of explosive reactions. Variations of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) are used anywhere from solid rocket fuels to various forms of high tech explosives with various types of reactions.


Evidence & Resources

This was aired on Denmark's National News Television about the evidence...


All this time you and Bman have been claiming they have NEW evidence.

Now your going retro with the debunked comic book tales of nano thermite?

Yoiu just proved my point again.

Nano thermite is science fiction BS and long since proven to be so.

This particular subject was closed a long time ago and these AE911truthers have no new evidence as I have been saying all along.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
28,237
Reaction score
11,696
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"According to Danish science news site Videnskab.dk, a controversial article claiming that World Trade Center dust samples contained "active thermitic material" was published in the "Open Chemical Physics Journal" without the knowledge or approval of the editor in chief, Marie-Paule Pileni.
The editor in chief has resigned over the incident.
Says Pileni:
“I cannot accept that this topic is published in my journal. The article has nothing to do with physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political viewpoint behind its publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Period.”


11 Settembre: "Active Thermitic Material" claimed in Ground Zero dust may not be thermitic at all

so much for thermite. CD this was hashed out months and months ago.
 

creativedreams

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
2,730
Reaction score
232
Location
Timbuktu
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
"According to Danish science news site Videnskab.dk, a controversial article claiming that World Trade Center dust samples contained "active thermitic material" was published in the "Open Chemical Physics Journal" without the knowledge or approval of the editor in chief, Marie-Paule Pileni.
The editor in chief has resigned over the incident.
Says Pileni:
“I cannot accept that this topic is published in my journal. The article has nothing to do with physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political viewpoint behind its publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Period.”


11 Settembre: "Active Thermitic Material" claimed in Ground Zero dust may not be thermitic at all

so much for thermite. CD this was hashed out months and months ago.

Why would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...
 

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
445
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Like I asked Soup...Have you seen and examined their evidence?

If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.

Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?

Why should I need examine it in a lab ... did they ???

Hell no !!!

Anybody with even the slightest bit of genuine scientific knowledge (and integrity) can easily see their claims are bunk ... you most certainly do not need "examine" them.

Nothing they say has real world validity, they have no real evidence of hundreds of tons of explosives, sherbert, Fairy Dust or anything.

If they had why have they not provided it before now ... everybody and their dog knows that the longer they wait the less influence it would have.

Year on year less people are interested in this, they couldn't even get just over $2,000 together for their idiotic light campaign, just two thousand dollars from all these "professional" level people ... yeah right !!!

Nobody turned up to that event ... nobody was interested in what nutjobs think and they were soundly ignored, they only have a ONE MINUTE video from what was built up to be "the" surprise national news event of the year", what a bunch of morons.

Honestly, most twoofy groups could not organize a piss-up in a brewery !!!

creative, this is what you do not understand, Gages Gaggle do not have "evidence", they have some speculative "claims" ... now we all know you have no understanding of scientific methodology, but those who do understand it know for a fact that Gage does NOT have proper scientific evidence or proof ... it FAILS on all normal and accepted standards of scientific proof ... period !!!

REAL scientists and researchers do NOT put their findings up on the internetwebbything ... they publish in JOURNALS ... proper ones, not made-up ones like Jones' site.

This is established practice ... you cannot escape or dodge that they have utterly, utterly failed in that.

The WTC collapses were the SINGLE MOST STUDIED ENGINEERING FAILURES in history.

Engineers and relevent scientists world-wide looked at it ...

Engineers and relevent scientists world-wide presented their findings for peer-review in the relevent scientific and engineering Journals and to the relevent Societies, many of which I have often linked.

Now I know that by being such dry technical and academic works they are above and beyond the understanding of many ... but they have been fully ACCEPTED by the real scientific and engineering communities worldwide ... whom DO understand them ... and they AGREE with them.

Not one professional body of real experts anywhere on this planet agree with Gage or the twoof claims ... not one !!!

Gage, Jones and Co. have NEVER presented their claims for the rigourous scrutiny of real science, instead presented only for a LAY audience ...that is shady.

Now I know you will counter with they are just trying to get a new investigation ... but here's the thing, new investigation or not ... there has been NOTHING ... nothing whatsoever preventing them from presenting a paper to a real Journal ... ever !!!

They could still have been presenting papers and proper scientific presentations in the meantime, from all this supposed body of professionals do not tell me it has been impossible for at least a handful of them to get together and do their own FEA or multiphysics presentation at the same time as garnishing public support.

NOTHING has ever been preventing them ... so why haven't they done so, they are supposed to be engineers'n'stuff afterall ???

At the end of the day all you have are untutored opinions from lay people whom are just regurgitating what Gage ... an architect, speaking well out his comfort zone are telling you happened, and you do not see it !!!

Yet it is not that these people do not already know that you present science to ... well science ... presenting purely for random people on the internet is NOT science !!!

Gage and Gaggle can "claim" all they want they have evidence of hundreds of tons of explosives ... but a "claim" is not evidence or proof, if they had such they SHOULD already have shown it ... to real science.

They haven't done that, and their little PowerPoints are NOT articulate, credible or anywhere NEAR approaching how real science is presented.

What they have done is throw around a few sciency-sounding buzzwords to fool people with very little to zero understanding of the scientific method and telling them it is "evidence".

It's NOT !!!

Truly it isn't ... it is junk low-level stuff poorly presented.

But because you have no understanding of how proper science is conducted you fell for it ... and believe it because it fits whatever particular bias or mistrust you have.
 
Last edited:

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
445
Location
Bonnie Scotland !!!
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Why would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...

Because it broke every standard going ... and showed her what a poor excuse for a Journal Bentham is.

Not only was the topic one which was not a physical chemistry one, it also was openly political.

But at least you did get one thing right, the science was "simple", a childs grasp demonstrated ... ergo, too low to be credible or aceptable !!!
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
28,237
Reaction score
11,696
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...

Did you go to the link? Resign because it was trash science to report the findings as nano thermite without looking at the other possibilities. Opinions are easy for people to come up with, proving is the tough part. I will say again, I have seen nothing new about 9/11 other than opinions. Come forward with the evidence, (don't say we will when Congress gives us a new investigation), demostrate your evidence/theory will hold up to review and last that the evidence has been reviewed by an impartial party. See CD, I am at a point that what you want the govt. to do, then the "truthers" need to do.
 
Top Bottom