| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Richard Gage PWNS Mark Roberts; Must see. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 5 2008, 01:15 PM (3,621 Views) | |
| gaged | Jul 5 2008, 01:15 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
This is tooooo good. Gage makes Roberts to be out the govt shill he really is. This is the 1st part of 2. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-3685846057748316809&hl=en |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 01:33 PM Post #2 |
|
roberts LIES about the RJ lee report. |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 01:49 PM Post #3 |
|
roberts does an a bait and switch. Roberts baits Gage with a quote stating "the dust was not fine" to argue the point that not all the concrete was turned to dust. Gage walks into the trap disagreeing with the quote, then Roberts reveals the quote is from his colleague Steven Jones. The quote was taken from Steven Jones who was arguing scientific technical terms about the dust actually being "coarse" not "fine" (whilst Fetzer was arguing it was "fine" and "ultra fine"), these terms are from a technical granularity scale. well done mark! Superb debating from Roberts, skillfully trading his integrity for a point on the board! ....how much for your grandmother? |
![]() |
|
| gaged | Jul 5 2008, 02:02 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
Roberts is scum. He'd sell his soul to the Devil if the govt told him to. |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 02:09 PM Post #5 |
|
roberts explains the explosives were not used because it would take hundreds of tons of explosives to turn the concrete to dust ...but he accepts that a collapse due to structural failure alone, with zero explosives would be enough to turn the concrete to dust. part 2, 18:15 |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 02:10 PM Post #6 |
|
you don't need to attack him on a personal level, just attack his arguments - its not difficult
|
![]() |
|
| Reggie_perrin | Jul 5 2008, 02:14 PM Post #7 |
|
The start made me laugh, "I'm Richard Gage, I'm a architect of 20 years currently working on a 400 million dollar project .." "I'm Mark, I'm a tour guide" |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 02:26 PM Post #8 |
|
Roberts says "iron rich microspeheres were an expected product of the fires, they were looking for them as a signature to differentiate them from background dust." The RJ Lee report states that the iron spheres were UNIQUE to the world trade centre dust. UNIQUE is mutually exclusive to EXPECTED. this has been dealt with before and roberts is aware of it. http://activistnyc.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/he-oughta-know-better-mark-roberts-and-the-iron-rich-spherules/ He knows what he says is untrue, therefore he LIES! he won't have any credibilty left after this.
|
![]() |
|
| Reggie_perrin | Jul 5 2008, 02:26 PM Post #9 |
|
It's interesting that when Roberts says wtc7 doesn't look like a controlled demolition because you don't see the detonation squibs, yet the wtc towers do have those curious squibs, which he passes off as pockets of air escaping. |
![]() |
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jul 5 2008, 02:31 PM Post #10 |
|
Nice! lol I give Mark one thing though, all my years on forums and I never quoted someone for a signature. Then I saw Mark say the absolute most arrogant and incorrect statement quite possibly ever made by a human being. |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 03:08 PM Post #11 |
|
Roberts uses slander to counter the testimony of on the scene witnesses reporting explosions in wtc7: "both these people became very sick and very bitter about it, we appreciate their service, but conclusively the video evidence shows these things didn't happen". part 1, 18:10 |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 03:19 PM Post #12 |
|
gather around children, untermenchen and all us other incapables, ....Roberts has ridden in on his high horse and has something to say...ssshhhhhhh! "I know the oral testimonies from the public and the first responders better than anyone in the world." part 1 18:30 |
![]() |
|
| gaged | Jul 5 2008, 04:01 PM Post #13 |
![]()
|
Gage's experiment of using cardboard boxes to present the WTC's at the end was the final nail in Roberts coffin. He didnt know what to say because there was nothing to say. It was game, set, match at that point. The look of defeat on Roberts face was priceless. |
![]() |
|
| Lin Kuei | Jul 5 2008, 04:19 PM Post #14 |
![]()
|
Go Gage! It was good to see some impartiality on the part of the discussion moderator... what happened to Wieck? The look on Gage's face when Mark makes some of his dishonest claims says it all.
|
![]() |
|
| Reggie_perrin | Jul 5 2008, 04:25 PM Post #15 |
|
Man, doesn't it just make you wanna go for a beer with him, he must be a gas In all fairness he has done his homework, he knows a lot, but it is rather presumptuous of him to declare he knows more about 9/11 than anyone else on the planet, it's all a bit childish, and he's awfully smug at times. I also don;t like the way he used other peoples work to discredit Gage, just because Jones believes one thing doesn;t mean Gage believes it, i bet there are associates of Roberts who he disagrees with on certain issues. Edited by Reggie_perrin, Jul 5 2008, 04:28 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 04:32 PM Post #16 |
|
Richard Gage says "there is no possible source for these iron rich microspheres except for an alumino-thermic reaction under extremely pressurised conditions where the surface tension forms these spheres, <forms> into these tiny spheres some of which are hollow as the molten iron cools, and what is in these spheres? - aluminum, iron, potassium, manganese, this again is the chemical signature of thermite. Roberts responds: "all of these things that richard says were in these things <micro-spheres> were expected to be found on the site, just from normal building collapses, just from normal building fires" part2 7:00 Following roberts logic, there would be NO WAY to detect thermite arson as a cause of ANY ARSON INVESTIGATION. wow...we better release out of jail all those convicted of ARSON BY THERMITE, because the X-EDS method that Professor Steven Jones has used to find the chemical signature of thermite in the WTC dust and on the WTC steel beams is the same method used to convict thousands of thermite arsonists! |
![]() |
|
| gaged | Jul 5 2008, 05:21 PM Post #17 |
![]()
|
Anyone with half a brain knows thermite was used to cut the columns. You could see the perfect 45% angle cuts on the columns. |
![]() |
|
| Headspin | Jul 5 2008, 06:09 PM Post #18 |
|
Got any evidence? Jones and Gage do NOT disagree. see post #3. Roberts quotes Professor Steven Jones describing the exacting differences between the technical terms "fine" and "coarse". Roberts tricks Richard Gage by using the quote in the context of a discussion of whether the floors were pulverised to dust, or not. Of course the J**Fers will be having orgasms over it, but it has little to do with the truth or an honest debate, it is just a pre-planned cheap trick. listen again if you missed it. You will find the original Jones/Fetzer dust discussion on Fetzers site dated around Jan 2007. Professor Steven Jones and Richard Gage agree the concrete was pulverised to dust. Professor Steven Jones disagrees with Fetzer. Jones say the dust was "coarse", Fetzer says "ultra fine" powder. Edited by Headspin, Jul 5 2008, 06:15 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| HabeasCorpse | Jul 5 2008, 08:11 PM Post #19 |
|
I really don't see the point of Gage going anywhere near that silly shirt lifter. There is an old saying, Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Roberts has been a prick all his life while Richard Gage has only been an Architect for 20 years. Nothing to gain there. |
![]() |
|
| BoneZ | Jul 5 2008, 10:14 PM Post #20 |
|
That about sums it up. Roberts is such a lying, illogical, unresearched, uneducated.... _____ fill in the blank. I was actually pretty shocked at some of the things that came out of Roberts' mouth. Roberts is definitely the definition of a shill. |
![]() |
|
| JFK | Jul 5 2008, 10:22 PM Post #21 |
![]()
|
You forgot delusional... as in delusions of grandeur. I hear that is a common ailment of tour guides.
Edited by JFK, Jul 5 2008, 10:22 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| chrisfarb | Jul 5 2008, 10:55 PM Post #22 |
|
He knows what he's doing. I bet he's going for 33rd degree if you know what I mean. |
![]() |
|
| Sam | Jul 5 2008, 11:32 PM Post #23 |
|
You honestly believe that cardboard box demo was a convincing argument. It makes me amazed that Richard Gage is a qualified architect and yet could use that example. |
![]() |
|
| Sam | Jul 5 2008, 11:36 PM Post #24 |
|
The reason it would take as much explosives as Roberts says is because of what Gage claims is explosions down the collapse. If he were arguing that just a few supports were destroyed at the point of collapse then the amount of explosives would be less.OF course this would present other problems such as how did the explosives survive the jet impact. |
![]() |
|
| Sam | Jul 5 2008, 11:38 PM Post #25 |
|
If someone honestly disagrees with you this is what they are. You sure are a tolerant individual. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Lounge · Next Topic » |










9:23 AM Jul 11