Gage's next debate

Miragememories said:
If you wish to have any credibility, defend your statements.

Of course the JREF circus will accept your rhetoric; that is preaching to the chorus.

If Gage is making things up (lying), then it should be like "shooting fish in a barrel" to list his lies and show them as such.

The fact that you fail to do so, suggests that the only one misrepresenting the truth is yourself!

MM
Click to expand...
All of Gages claims are nonsense. Which part of "all of" do you not understand? Your list of evidence to support Gage's claims, is zero. If you had something you post it, instead you post nothing. Start a thread for your 70k a year fraud hero, present your evidence. Darn, you have nothing. No thread for you.
 
Miragememories said:
If Gage is making things up (lying), then it should be like "shooting fish in a barrel" to list his lies and show them as such.
Click to expand...

Is thermal expansion made up by NIST or not?

You really going to back Gage on that?
 
Scott Sommers said:
The more you listen to him, the more you realize he is making things up and even contradicting himself.
Click to expand...

Something along the lines of this...I was watching the presentation he & Sullivan gave and Richie said something like, "in our list of CD features we have 'came down in its own footprint', and our critics note that WTC 7 didn't come straight down, but leaned to one side. What do you say in response?" And his response was that not all CD's come straight down. So has Richie changed his list? Doubtit. It was just his way of saying, well it doesn't matter how wrong we really are it was still a CD no matter what.
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
Is thermal expansion made up by NIST or not?

You really going to back Gage on that?
Click to expand...

Thermal expansion is as revealing as the fact that ice melts.

The fact that the NIST based their findings on thermal expansion is most surprising given how common that piece of knowledge is.

MM
 
grandmastershek said:
‎"It has been difficult to find defenders of the official story who will acknowledge in a scientific and sincere manner the troubling forensic evidence that we present."

Translation: If you don't accept the smoke n mirror show of Jones & AE911Truth, they will not debate you.

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/454-radio-debate.html
Click to expand...

I personally sent an invitation to him and the engineers at ae911t to come here and debate their issues, and to post the debate both here & there.

There response: "Nope..."

ETA: [softened] So Gage is also a liar.

This comment doesn't rise to Gage saying explicitly "no one will debate us." So I rescind my comment.

The best interpretation of Gage's comment is "Debunkers hear what we present & laugh at us."

And THAT is not a lie. It's the FSM's honest truth.

I have heard others at ae911t claim that we won't debate them. Those comments, based on my offer, are not true.
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
Libel means nothing to you obviously.

MM
Click to expand...
a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression

(1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt

(2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means

(3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (

4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel.


I think I could make the case. (I know my lawyer could).


:p
 
DGM said:
a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression

(1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt

(2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means

(3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (

4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel.


I think I could make the case. (I know my lawyer could).


:p
Click to expand...

Cut 'n paste does not make an argument.

But maybe it suffices for the standard which you adhere to.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Thermal expansion is as revealing as the fact that ice melts.

The fact that the NIST based their findings on thermal expansion is most surprising given how common that piece of knowledge is.

MM
Click to expand...

Nice dodge MM. Now answer the question. Did NIST make up thermal expansion, as Gage claimed, or not?
Miragememories said:
Cut 'n paste does not make an argument.

But maybe it suffices for the standard which you adhere to.

MM
Click to expand...

Your "LA LA LA LA LAAA!!!" has been noted.
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
What argument should I be trying to "make". That I know what "Libel" means?
Click to expand...

No silly...follow MM's lead and change the subject.

Also, I am not sure if this was noted elsewhere in the thread but Rev Mohr has asked if anyone from JREF lives in the area (Colorado I believe) to try to attend.
 
Last edited:
Richard Gage? But he totally proved his theories with those cardboard boxes!



Look out Mohr, if he gets out the boxes it's OVER!!!

:jaw-dropp
 
Last edited:
tfk said:
I personally sent an invitation to him and the engineers at ae911t to come here and debate their issues, and to post the debate both here & there.

There response: "Nope..."

ETA: [softened] So Gage is also a liar.

This comment doesn't rise to Gage saying explicitly "no one will debate us." So I rescind my comment.

The best interpretation of Gage's comment is "Debunkers hear what we present & laugh at us."

And THAT is not a lie. It's the FSM's honest truth.

I have heard others at ae911t claim that we won't debate them. Those comments, based on my offer, are not true.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that Gage (and the rest of the truthers) prefer debates that give them some kind of publicity or notoriety. The last thing they want is a written, technical debate because they do not have a prayer in the world.

It's much more difficult to use certain debating strategies in a technical debate, especially if it's a written one.

If truthers had any real arguments they would be publishing in journals, presenting at technical conferences, and convincing more engineers/scientists then just a handful out of thousands and thousands.
 
grandmastershek said:
Nice dodge MM. Now answer the question. Did NIST make up thermal expansion, as Gage claimed, or not?
Click to expand...

Dodge?

The fact that steel expands when heated is old news.

Stuff that the NIST should know down to the very physics.

Their theory about how thermal expansion was a new previously unconsidered phenomenon leading to spectacular building failures is what I call to question.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Dodge?

The fact that steel expands when heated is old news.

Stuff that the NIST should know down to the very physics.

Their theory about how thermal expansion was a new previously unconsidered phenomenon leading to spectacular building failures is what I call to question.

MM
Click to expand...

Yet you don't question that either Gage:

a. Quote mined NIST to make TE appear as something they made up.

or

b. He himself is totally oblivious to something any high school senior could explain adequately.

Secondly, when will you be validating you concerns beyond fallacious reasoning?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom