good article and i especially liked the way several comments put the democrat party (executive board, wow) member in his place.

This is one of the best of the recent spate of positive "local" mainstream journalism articles on 9/11 Truth. The reader comments were also just as inspiring. In a country that is supposedly against "crackpot theories," one would think that there would be at least a few negative comments, but there aren't. There was only one, and he was thoroughly and irrefutably trashed by at least half of the other people who commented.

There are a number of errors and misquotes in this article! Here they are....

While somewhat fair on the surface - which I appreciate - this article by Natalie O'Neill unfortunately contains numerous errors and misquotes. Can you spot them? I will be writing the Danville paper about them shortly. See the corrections below...

Richard

http://www.danvilleweekly.com/story.php?story_id=3162
Democrats host speaker on collapse of towers
Architect says it's time to review scientific data on Sept. 11

by Natalie O'Neill

Most Americans expect over-the-top conspiracy theorists and extreme left wingers to call the 911 Commission Report a lie. But scientific-minded architects and engineers?

The Tri-Valley Democrats met this week in Dublin to hear Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth speak on the structural physics of the collapsed twin towers. His goal is to bring about further investigation.

"The public bought the 911 story hook, line and sinker. But the idea of questioning is very important," said Danville resident Ellis Goldberg, who is president of the club.

Gage provided scientific data and video footage to prove his hypothesis that the impact of the plane and the fire could not have taken down the steel frame buildings. He suggested the 110-story buildings were destroyed by controlled demolitions but did not speculate who was responsible for them.

"You have to get under the infrastructure to bring a building like this down," he said.

ERROR: I did not say this - it was Peter Jennings from a video clip.

Now is the time to review the subject, he said, because the country can look at the situation more objectively.
Those skeptical of the "911 Truth" movement say footage is easily doctored up and quotes from witnesses are often taken out of context to prove a point. But Gage says there is no denying science.

Structural steel melts at about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, while plane fuel only burns up to 1,600 degrees. Knowing this, there is no way the heat could have caused the immense building frame to collapse, Gage said. He then made several references to steel frame high rise fires that have burned for up to 17 hours without melting the building's frame.

MISQUOTE: Structural steel softens to 1/2 its strength at about 1400 and doesn't need to melt in order to collapse. Never-the-less NIST has no evidence of steel temperatures over 450f degrees. The point about the steel melting temperature was in reference to the tons of molten metal found by the first responders "flowing like lava". NIST denies this because they can't account for it with the 1800f degree temperatures they say the fires reached. We're still missing 1,000 degrees!

"It doesn't add up," Goldberg said.

In addition, Gage showed that the towers hit the ground in around nine seconds - free fall speed.

MISQUOTE: Free-fall speed is about 9 seconds. The towers completed their descent in about 15 seconds.

"Acceleration (of the towers) encountered no resistance from steel columns designed specifically to resist gravity. This defies the laws of physics," Gage said.

The first plane's impact crashed into the top sixth of the north tower. Even with that segment demolished, the weight would not have been enough to crumble the rest of the building, he said.

"Is a mass of one kilogram, placed on top of a mass of five kilograms going to crush it? No," Gage said.

In controlled demolitions, explosives are timed on each floor to crumble the building on top of itself without damaging surrounding buildings. Gage provided up-close video footage of puffs of smoke - working from top floors down - coming from the rubble. This is direct evidence of explosives on each floor, he said.

MISQUOTE: What I said was that they were "explosive ejections of pulverized building materials - from highly focused points at the middle of the building. (Not "coming from the rubble").

"Your eyes are not deceiving you," he told the audience after he showed the footage.

He also presented interviews with firefighters who were on scene and described hearing the bangs and explosions.

One firefighter who cleaned up the rubble noted it didn't make sense that in a crushed office building the fire department would find no pieces of desks, chairs or keyboards - even on the bottom floors. The reason for this, Gage said, is because explosives pulverized everything.

MISQUOTE: Explosives pulverized most of the 90,000 tons of concrete, filing cabinets, people, and building materials to gravel and fine dust - but not the structural steel and aluminum cladding. These materials were ejected outside of the buildings' footprint - undermining completely the official theories of a gravitational collapse - or pancake theory. Where are the pancakes?

"This is the lynchpin. It's important we open our minds and look at what's there," said Abby Martin, a 911 Truth activist who said she flew in from San Diego to hear his speech.

The evidence Gage said he found most compelling is perhaps also the most disturbing. Centimeter-long fragments of bones were found on the tops of surrounding buildings, catapulted hundreds of meters. Parts of the building were also found up to 800 meters from the towers, suggesting a higher explosion force than what any plane could administer, he said.

MISQUOTE: I quoted FEMA which maintained that the primary debris field was a 1200 ft diameter around the twin towers. Where did Natalie come up with 800 meters? (A much farther distance!) The bone fragments were found on top of the Deutsche Bank building which is not "hundreds of meters" away but a couple of hundred feet at most. Still - how can a gravitational collapse cause this?

MISQUOTE: The explosive force of the plane is irrelevant because that event occurred 1 to 2 hours prior to each tower's "collapse" onset. What is relevant is the tremendous explosive force of the demolition charges breaking all the windows within 400 feet and hurling 20 ton beams 500 feet laterally!

At the beginning of the speech, he asked the audience of 40 to raise their hands if they believed explosives were used in the towers. About 60 percent of the audience raised their hands. At the end of his speech, he asked the same question and about 90 percent of the audience raised their hands.

"We need an investigation based on all of this evidence," Gage said.

THANK YOU FOR PATIENCE WITH THESE REPORTERS!

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect