Recent Headlines

Rosie O'Donnell is picking up where she left off.
Once Again, The Will of the Voters Is Denied
Uzbek officer says Tashkent bombings falseflag
US Congressman Ed Markey gets a copy of 9/11 Nano Thermite Scientific report
Ex-ISI Chief Says Purpose of New Afghan Intelligence Agency RAMA Is ‘to destabilize Pakistan’
Taboo News and Corporate Media
Peter Phillips Of Project Censored Endorses NYC CAN
Polls show broad skepticism among Americans of official 9/11 narrative
New York Judge Dismisses Claim Negligent Construction Contributed To WTC 7 Collapse
Bombshell: Bin Laden worked for US until 9/11
Drills successful planting bombs in 10 buildings, including DHS offices: GAO
Kevin R. Ryan: Demolition access to the WTC Towers
Naval "National Center for Energetics" Records Of Pre-9/11 Nano-Energetic Materials Development, Nonexistent Or Destroyed
Did the Earth Shake Before The South Tower Hit the Ground?
29 Engineers: Only Explosives Can Explain 9/11 World Trade Center Destruction
David Chandler responds to Frank Greening
“Chief Engineer” Hyman Brown by Patrick Marks
Two Days Before 9/11, Military Exercise Simulated Suicide Hijack Targeting New York
Psychologists Weigh In On 9/11
New York Senator Gillibrand Supports New 9/11 Investigation
Much Of 9/11 Commission's Findings Cite Intelligence Garnered By Torture
AE911Truth in Washington DC July 14th-16th
Daniel Sunjata: Intellectual Dishonesty In The Age Of Universal Deceit...
Vice President Biden receives Thermitic Material paper
Pardon Our Dust, or, Why the World Trade Center Dust Matters
Marie-Paule Pileni (Bentham Open) and nano-technology
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Blogads

Loose Change: An American Coup DVD

User login

RSS Feeds

Web Stuff

This site best viewed with Firefox


Proof of Controlled Demolition, part 2 Richard Gage, AIA

( Home » blogs » John_Parulis's blog » Proof of Controlled... )
Entries in this section are created by individual users who register with this site and are largely unmoderated. Content in this section should not be interpreted as being supported by 911blogger.com, or by any other members of this site, and should only be viewed as a posting of the individual who created it. Please contact a team member if you notice a post which violates our general rules.
Submitted by John_Parulis on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 12:11pm.
| | | | | | | |



Click To Play


Architect, Richard Gage explores the flawed conclusions of the 911 Commission report and the conclusions of NIST, in this new presentation on evidence supporting controlled demolition for World Trade 1, 2 and 7.

Newly produced architectural blueprints of the north tower augment Richard's analysis. ae911truth.org

Produced by John Parulis of brightpathvideo

The presentation at Sonoma State Univ, Project Censored, is divided in 3 parts, this is part 2

» login to post comments | 0 points

Personally,

I don't think we need any more proof. We already have more than we need. Now we just need an investigation.

Submitted by TruthNow on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 1:46pm.
» login to post comments | 3 points

AIA

Richard is working to enlist more architects in overturning AIA's support for the NIST report. The evidence needs to be heard again and spoken to by new faces as well. The more high level professionals who come on board the better.

Submitted by John_Parulis on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 3:13pm.
» login to post comments | 1 point

uses Judy Wood's flawed pancake calcs

OK, this concerns me; Richard Gage is using a graph from Judy Wood's notoriously wrong "Billiard Ball" paper ( http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html ). Which suggests a "pure" pancake collapse time of 87.9 seconds at least.

These calculations have been debunked many times and should stop being used by the 911 movement (they are also in 911 mysteries).

Jim Hoffman has developed calculations based on the same principles which result in much shorter times.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/models/index.html

Submitted by lozenge on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 2:15pm.
» login to post comments | 0 points

pancake

I believe Richard was using that graph to illustrate a flawed concept.

Submitted by John_Parulis on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 3:15pm.
» login to post comments | 0 points

Well, he was using it to

Well, he was using it to demonstrate that the collapse time should have been longer if gravity-driven. To paraphrase he says something like if each floor goes 'ker-chunk, ker-chunk' and takes at least 1 second then it'll take at least 100 seconds for 100 floors.
So clearly he's using it to make the point that the observed collapse time is impossibly short.

Submitted by lozenge on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 3:31pm.
» login to post comments | 0 points

Who's flawed concept? Wood's?

I haven't watched the video yet (no time to at the moment) so I'm just asking for clarification.

_______________
"We are going to keep up this fight till the end, till the very end... They took it from the top to the bottom. We're gonna take it from the bottom to the top!" -Dan Wallace

Submitted by stallion4 on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 3:34pm.
» login to post comments | 0 points

yes

yes wood's

Submitted by John_Parulis on Tue, 04/24/2007 - 4:22pm.
» login to post comments | 0 points

There are several

excellent papers on http://www.journalof911studies.com/ that discuss very cogently the issues of propagation or initiation of collapse and the, excuse me, -demolition - of the buildings themselves. He might be encouraged to use these as opposed to Judy's.

Submitted by medicis on Fri, 05/11/2007 - 7:53pm.