The disappearance of Chloie Leverette and Gage Daniel in 2012 - proof that fire science is BS?

[MicahJava]

Look up the case of the disappearance of Chloie Leverette and Gage Daniel. A house fire, which may have involved oxygen tanks, a grandma who smoked and also took oxygen, allegedly sometimes at the same time, in a house may have involved semi-hoarder level stacks of fuel. They found the bones of the grandparents in the basement side-by-side one another, the bones of the pet dog, and even pet bird. Many, many forensic "experts" in fire were hired to comb through the evidence and find a single sign of human remains from the children. These people shouted from the highest mountains that they found no possible sign of the childrens' remains, and that the fires or explosions couldn't have possibly disintegrated the children so finely as to prevent their people from finding it - SOME OF THESE INVESTIGATORS WERE INVOLVED IN IDENTIFYING HUMAN REMAINS FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. There was also talk of a metal safe that was never found.

Now, the children's mother and half of those who hear about this case feel absolutely certain that the fire was used as a cover for the kidnapping of the children. The mother still gives interviews insisting that somebody out there must have kidnapped them. A lot of commenters on the internet, however, seem convinced that the so-called experts are exaggerating their knowledge behind the mysteries of fire.

Hopefully this is enough emotional content to open your mind into realizing the very serious possibility that fire science is going to be remembered as equal to the witch trials.

 

[kookbreaker]

More of an unsolved mysteries than a conspiracy, but whatever.

First of all I did look things up and couldn't find anything definitive that their bones were found in the basement.
Several of the sources note that there wasn't even much left of the grandparents remains, whose bodies were larger and their bones more developed than the kids. The dog and bird probably tried to get away from the fires hence some remains were found. Kids may have just been burned completely to ash.

If this was cover for a kidnapping, I must say it was a stroke of luck for the kidnapper than the Grandparents were hoarders of very flammable items.

This could be as the mother presents it: A cover for a kidnapping, but I'd like to see more evidence than just her claims and a lack of body material.

 

[Oystein]

...
Hopefully this is enough emotional content to open your mind into realizing the very serious possibility that fire science is going to be remembered as equal to the witch trials.

Uhmm... huh?!?

Why do you expect that "emotional content" is a legitimate way to conclude an entire field of scientific research is humbug?
What is your point?

 

[theprestige]

Many, many forensic "experts" in fire were hired

How many? Two? Four? A hundred? Who hired them?

These people shouted from the highest mountains

Who? Name names. In what venue did they actually publish their findings?

 

[Axxman300]

Look up the case of the disappearance of Chloie Leverette and Gage Daniel. A house fire, which may have involved oxygen tanks, a grandma who smoked and also took oxygen, allegedly sometimes at the same time, in a house may have involved semi-hoarder level stacks of fuel. They found the bones of the grandparents in the basement side-by-side one another, the bones of the pet dog, and even pet bird. Many, many forensic "experts" in fire were hired to comb through the evidence and find a single sign of human remains from the children. These people shouted from the highest mountains that they found no possible sign of the childrens' remains, and that the fires or explosions couldn't have possibly disintegrated the children so finely as to prevent their people from finding it - SOME OF THESE INVESTIGATORS WERE INVOLVED IN IDENTIFYING HUMAN REMAINS FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. There was also talk of a metal safe that was never found.

Now, the children's mother and half of those who hear about this case feel absolutely certain that the fire was used as a cover for the kidnapping of the children. The mother still gives interviews insisting that somebody out there must have kidnapped them. A lot of commenters on the internet, however, seem convinced that the so-called experts are exaggerating their knowledge behind the mysteries of fire.

Hopefully this is enough emotional content to open your mind into realizing the very serious possibility that fire science is going to be remembered as equal to the witch trials.

1. This is a case from 2012, and the state issued an Amber Alert which remains open to this day, so your claim is a lie (per usual).

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/tbi/documents/missing-children/Gage%20Daniel%20Chloie%20Leverette.pdf

2. You posted zero links to support your BS claim (per usual).

3. Name the TBI agents who worked at Ground Zero in NYC after 9-11. Seriously, name them.

4. At no point does the mother suggest who might be behind this kidnapping, and neither child has turned up in the past 12 and a half years. They might have been in the house, depending on where they were when losing consciousness, and the materials near their bodies.

5. We know the cause of the fires at the WTC on 9-11. The structural failure is an engineering issue, not a fire-science issue. which you'd know if you bothered to learn anything.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Look up the case of the disappearance of Chloie Leverette and Gage Daniel. A house fire, which may have involved oxygen tanks, a grandma who smoked and also took oxygen, allegedly sometimes at the same time, in a house may have involved semi-hoarder level stacks of fuel. They found the bones of the grandparents in the basement side-by-side one another, the bones of the pet dog, and even pet bird. Many, many forensic "experts" in fire were hired to comb through the evidence and find a single sign of human remains from the children. These people shouted from the highest mountains that they found no possible sign of the childrens' remains, and that the fires or explosions couldn't have possibly disintegrated the children so finely as to prevent their people from finding it - SOME OF THESE INVESTIGATORS WERE INVOLVED IN IDENTIFYING HUMAN REMAINS FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. There was also talk of a metal safe that was never found.

Now, the children's mother and half of those who hear about this case feel absolutely certain that the fire was used as a cover for the kidnapping of the children. The mother still gives interviews insisting that somebody out there must have kidnapped them. A lot of commenters on the internet, however, seem convinced that the so-called experts are exaggerating their knowledge behind the mysteries of fire.

Hopefully this is enough emotional content to open your mind into realizing the very serious possibility that fire science is going to be remembered as equal to the witch trials.

Appeal to Emotion Fallacy.
Argument from Incredulity Fallacy.
Hearsay.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Kidnapped for what purpose? Not ransom, obviously. Is this more of that adrenochrome nonsense?

 

[Dave Rogers]

So, to summarise, some unspecified people on the Internet say some experts were wrong about something, therefore a different, though possibly overlapping, group of experts may have been wrong in some unspecified way about something else, proving that a third and completely different group of experts were definitely wrong about something completely unrelated. Nice logic there.

Dave

 

[ahhell]

1. This is a case from 2012, and the state issued an Amber Alert which remains open to this day, so your claim is a lie (per usual).

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/tbi/documents/missing-children/Gage%20Daniel%20Chloie%20Leverette.pdf

2.
You posted zero links to support your BS claim (per usual).
3. Name the TBI agents who worked at Ground Zero in NYC after 9-11. Seriously, name them.

4. At no point does the mother suggest who might be behind this kidnapping, and neither child has turned up in the past 12 and a half years. They might have been in the house, depending on where they were when losing consciousness, and the materials near their bodies.

5. We know the cause of the fires at the WTC on 9-11. The structural failure is an engineering issue, not a fire-science issue. which you'd know if you bothered to learn anything.

That, especially that.

Also:
Huh, one case disproves an entire field of study? Sure, if you say so.

Honestly, what are the fire science experts even saying that disproves fire science? Is fire science disproven because the experts can't find the kids remains which is somehow impossible?

 

[Axxman300]

It took me all of five minutes to track the story down along with related vintage news video. Doesn't seem like they thought the kids burned up in the house for very long, and the Amber Alert is still active. As far as the investigators they brought in, there is no mention of any of them working at Ground Zero. And the fire at the WTC on 9-11 was never a mystery.

This is just another drive-by BS-bomb throwing from this guy.

 

[MicahJava]

The responces here are so lazy I just might not bother responding to them. Try Google. And of course this thread has both parties of children-did-or-did-not-die-in-the-fire, yet no internal arguments because the "goal" is defeating the truthers.

We are now hearing about how the LA fires were caused by the a lack of knowledge by the Fire Department, and even the best scientists, regarding the spreading of underground fires. The fire allegedly started small and was put out, only for it to reignite hours later because the fire spread underground.

I realize that dismissing all of fire science would also preclude the assumption that the fires in the Towers couldn't have been that hot based on the government's own data. I guess you could say that this argument is a bit of a... kamikaze!

 

[Dave Rogers]

I guess you could say that this argument is a bit of a... kamikaze!

That would be at least as accurate as saying that it's an argument.

Dave

 

[ahhell]

That would be at least as accurate as saying that it's an argument.

Dave

To the extent I understand the argument.

Ad hom regarding folks in this thread.
unsourced claim about the understanding of fire and its promulgation related to fire science.
Some sort of claim that those who don't buy into the 911 the WTC burned hot enough to melt steel are just denying science that doesn't come from the Government.

To be honest, I not sure what he's on about but every few months Micah comes by to say fire science is BS due to some event unrelated to skyscrapers burning down therefore the WTCs melted?

ETA and based on passed evidence will hear from him in 6 months or so?

 

[Oystein]

The responces here are so lazy ...

The responses were less lazy than the opening post, which didn't bother to link sources, provide actual quotes and citations, name names.
At least a couple of responces [sic!] were written after responders spent time googling the case. I personally think that shouldn't have happened: It entirely suffices to note that you FAILED to provide evidence to support your claims, which were vague anyway, and to then apply Hitchen's Razor.

 

[Axxman300]

The responces here are so lazy I just might not bother responding to them. Try Google. And of course this thread has both parties of children-did-or-did-not-die-in-the-fire, yet no internal arguments because the "goal" is defeating the truthers.

Nope. You try to make a case to support your foolishness by citing another case you know nothing about. Par for the course.

We are now hearing about how the LA fires were caused by the a lack of knowledge by the Fire Department, and even the best scientists, regarding the spreading of underground fires. The fire allegedly started small and was put out, only for it to reignite hours later because the fire spread underground.

This is yet another lie.

What happened was the firefighters were called off early due to internal politics, and park politics. You claim scientists were involved, which is also a lie. The Oakland Hills fire started the same way, decades ago, and what happened was the fire department violated protocol. There is no mystery here. In fact, the science helped mitigate damage when and wherever possible. You are really bad at this.

I realize that dismissing all of fire science would also preclude the assumption that the fires in the Towers couldn't have been that hot based on the government's own data

Science is hard for a lot of people. But most are smart enough not to argue science they do not understand.

 

[JimOfAllTrades]

Science is hard for a lot of people. But most are smart enough not to argue science they do not understand.

I admire your optimism. YouTube and pretty much every social media platform is crammed with people spouting off about things they have absolutely no idea about.

eta: Hell, I've probably been one of them once in a while. But that OP was the distilled essence .

 

[ahhell]

Science is hard for a lot of people. But most are
smart enough not to argue science they do not understand.

If only that were true.

 

[MicahJava]

To the extent I understand the argument.

Ad hom regarding folks in this thread.
unsourced claim about the understanding of fire and its promulgation related to fire science.
Some sort of claim that those who don't buy into the 911 the WTC burned hot enough to melt steel are just denying science that doesn't come from the Government.

To be honest, I not sure what he's on about but every few months Micah comes by to say fire science is BS due to some event unrelated to skyscrapers burning down therefore the WTCs melted?

ETA and based on passed evidence will hear from him in 6 months or so?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/12/us/palisades-zombie-fires.html

 

[Axxman300]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/12/us/palisades-zombie-fires.html

Did you read the article? I ask because it undermines your claim about fire science not being up to speed:

Firefighting experts are acutely aware of the rising threat of hidden embers.

James Urban, an assistant professor of fire protection engineering at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts, said smoldering fires in certain natural materials, including decaying roots, spongy wood and peat bogs, can go undetected for months, only to be rekindled by a windstorm. He said new technology was being used to fight the phenomenon. One research project he’s working on with the U.S. Forest Service aims to upgrade computer models to better predict the threat of flying and smoldering firebrands. Elsewhere, tech start-ups spot and chase down rogue embers with autonomous helicopters and drones.

And this part is key to understanding the start of the main fire:

Los Angeles fire officials said that after the Palisades fire they had repeatedly “cold-trailed” the perimeter of the Jan. 1 fire, feeling for residual heat with their hands and digging out live spots. At a community meeting in January after the Palisades fire, Joe Everett, an assistant Los Angeles fire chief whose family had been fighting fires in Pacific Palisades for generations, told residents that hose lines had been kept on site for days.

“That fire was dead out,” Mr. Everett told Palisades residents on Jan. 16, referring to the New Year’s Day blaze. If investigators were to find that the Palisades fire arose from old embers, he added, “it would be a phenomenon.”

And true to form for your quality of research, you ignore an actual conspiracy:

Times Investigation: LAFD report on Palisades fire was watered down, records show

The deletions and revisions are likely to deepen concerns over the LAFD's ability to acknowledge its mistakes before and during its response to the blaze — and to avoid similar mistakes in the future.

www.latimes.com

Former LAFD Assistant Chief Patrick Butler, who is now chief of the Redondo Beach Fire Department, agreed that the Lachman fire should have been addressed in the report and said the deletions were “a deliberate effort to hide the truth and cover up the facts.”

He said the removal of the reference to the LAFD’s violations of the national Standard Firefighting Orders and Watchouts was a “serious issue” because they were “written in the blood” of firefighters killed in the line of duty. Without citing the national guidelines, the final report said that the Palisades fire’s extraordinary nature “occasionally caused officers and firefighters to think and operate beyond standard safety protocols.”

The final after-action report does not mention that a person called authorities to report seeing smoke in the area on Jan. 3. The LAFD has since provided conflicting information about how it responded to that call.

Villanueva told The Times in October that firefighters returned to the burn area and “cold-trailed” an additional time, meaning they used their hands to feel for heat and dug out hot spots. But records showed they cleared the call within 34 minutes.

Fire officials did not answer questions from The Times about the discrepancy. In an emailed statement this week, the LAFD said crews had used remote cameras, walked around the burn site and used a 20-foot extension ladder to access a fenced-off area but did not see any smoke or fire.

Here you have clear evidence that the LAFD is going out of its way to cover up departmental failures which contributed to the Palisades Fire. Something that we would have seen by now with 9-11 with FDNY, NYPD, Port Authority, ATF, FBI, NTSB, and other reports had a conspiracy existed.

You are really bad at this.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The responces here are so lazy I just might not bother responding to them.

Did you write this bit in April then wait 8 months to write the rest?

Nice to see that in the intervening period you didn't waste a moment on getting down to some really thorough research.