{"id":296,"date":"2010-09-05T11:03:46","date_gmt":"2010-09-05T18:03:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=296"},"modified":"2011-03-21T21:20:39","modified_gmt":"2011-03-22T04:20:39","slug":"participants-in-coast-to-coast-am-9-11-debate-speak-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=296","title":{"rendered":"Participants in Coast to Coast AM 9-11 debate speak out"},"content":{"rendered":"

Most observers consider the informal Coast to Coast \u00e2\u20ac\u0153debate\u00e2\u20ac\u009d between architect Richard Gage, chemist and scholar Niels Harrit, and physicists Kim Johnson and Dave Thomas to have been a success although who \u00e2\u20ac\u0153won\u00e2\u20ac\u009d depends largely on who you ask. The August 21st<\/sup> event, which was more of a conversation than a formal debate, explored what caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings on September 11, 2001. Gage and Harrit argued that explosives destroyed the buildings while Thomas and Johnson reaffirmed the official explanation that office fires ultimately led to collapses.<\/p>\n

A few days after the debate I asked Thomas to give me his impressions. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153I think Kim and I did OK.\u00c2\u00a0 We certainly could have handled some of the questions better, but being on Coast to Coast is a bit like being in a pressure cooker,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153There were several questions I had ready answers for, but never got a chance to squeeze them in.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas said he doesn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think he and Johnson swayed many committed \u00e2\u20ac\u0153truthers,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d but he also doubts that Gage and Harrit made many new converts either. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153We gave people new to the debate a lot to think about,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Physicist Dave Thomas<\/p><\/div>\n

I asked Thomas what he considered to be among his strongest points delivered during the debate. He responded, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The collapses themselves, captured on so many films, and without the sounds of explosions going off. Plus, physics insights from the models and experiments I did helped me describe the collapses. Yes, they happened quickly (12 to 15 seconds), but were certainly not \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcfree-fall.\u00e2\u20ac\u2122\u00c2\u00a0 There was resistance as each floor was hit by the growing mass of the upper section.\u00c2\u00a0 I think the descriptions of WTC 7’s long burning times and complicated and long collapses were productive also.\u00c2\u00a0 In the final moments of the show, a caller really thought he had me with his statement that the cores should have remained after the Twin Towers collapsed, and I was able to inform him that they did, and that these briefly-tottering columns are called “Spires”\u00c2\u00a0and that they’re well-known\u00c2\u00a0and discussed on the NMSR website.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas added that these spires would not have existed if thermite had been used to cut columns.<\/p>\n

Architect Richard Gage accuses Thomas and Johnson of \u00e2\u20ac\u0153hand waving,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d saying they simply dismiss inconvenient facts. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153They just don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t deal with the evidence,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Gage said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153I thought that on several points Mr. Thomas avoided facing very clear sets of facts including the free-fall of Building 7. He tried to explain that because the inside of the building caved out first, there was just nothing left so the rest of the building came down, denying that over fifty very rigid columns of the perimeter gave absolutely no resistance to the collapse of this building up above that\u00e2\u20ac\u201din this case the perimeter of the building is falling at free-fall acceleration. This is one example of a direct denial of reality, Gage said adding. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153At this point I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122m doubting his sincerity.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Early in the debate, Thomas used an analogy that\u00c2\u00a0many observers found unusual. He was discussing David Chandler, the physics teacher whose calculations regarding free-fall forced the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to modify its final report. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153David Chandler took a movie of the tower collapse and measured it very carefully and found that the average acceleration was about two-thirds of the acceleration of gravity. And he contended because it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s accelerating at all, that means there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not much of a dynamic force, and he estimates this force\u00e2\u20ac\u201dwhich I calculate with my physics model as at least 30 times the weight, he only gets a third of the weight, and I think that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s really the fundamental flaw of 9-11 truth physics,” he said. “They woefully underestimate the huge impact that\u00e2\u20ac\u201dit\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s like a \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcton of bricks\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 hitting you.”<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/a>

Architect Richard Gage, AIA<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Then he launched into an analogy using a bowling ball:<\/a> <\/a><\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153If you take a bowling ball and put it on your toe, that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s okay. If you drop it from 12 feet, you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re gonna break your toe,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas said with dramatic flourish, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153and that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s just what happened to those buildings.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Gage said of the bowling ball analogy, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The problem here is that, yes, you can put a bowling ball on the foot, and it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s okay, but first of all you don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t have a 12-foot drop in the case of the North Tower, and even if you did, when the bowling ball hits the foot, it slows down, while it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s crushing bone, etc.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Gage said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153But when the North Tower hit the sections below there was no slowing down. In fact, it speeded up, violating the laws of physics.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Dan Roggenkamp, an American university teacher in Taiwan who listened to the debate, said he was particularly amused by the bowling ball comment. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153One of the things that really struck me was how Thomas\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcside’ tried to use simple analogies to explain complex events, an example being the bowling ball analogy,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Roggenkamp said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153He did it a number of times. Rather than arguing as a scientist, he’s trying to persuade listeners using false analogies. Your toe is the World Trade Center. The bowling ball is the combined force of … whatever. It’s ridiculous.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Thomas said he was irritated when Gage \u00e2\u20ac\u0153brought out his laundry list\u00e2\u20ac\u009d of things on which the two supposedly concur. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153While we agree on a few technical details (microspheres were found, WTC 7 had a two-second period of free-fall, and so on), Gage over-exaggerated these agreements and put false words into my mouth time and again,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas told me, adding a few items \u00e2\u20ac\u0153for the record.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153Gage said we agreed that planes hit two towers, three came down.\u00c2\u00a0 But, I also made the point that the third tower, WTC 7, was hit by one of the tallest skyscrapers in the world, something Gage dismisses. We agree that there were two seconds of free-fall at WTC 7 but disagree strongly that these prove controlled demolition,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The collapse took much longer than Gage claims\u00e2\u20ac\u201dat least 16 seconds, not Gage’s 6.5 seconds. The collapse proceeded not only vertically, but horizontally as well. For a brief moment, a part of WTC 7 wasn’t supported as it collapsed. This in no way proves controlled demolition.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n

I asked Gage how he believed Thomas had arrived at a different conclusion regarding the duration of the collapse. He explained, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s evidence that there is damage about six seconds prior to the overall collapse of the building\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthe east penthouse fails. The official theory tells us that that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s the result of an internal collapse starting on the 12th floor and column 79\u00e2\u20ac\u201ddue to the new phenomenon of \u00e2\u20ac\u0153thermal expansion.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d So, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s theorized that this whole process takes about 15 seconds before the overall collapse. The problem is, if there was some sort of internal collapse that took out the interior columns, that would have taken out the penthouse long before it went down. So, since the penthouse on top\u00e2\u20ac\u201dand I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122m referring to the central penthouse\u00e2\u20ac\u201dit went down a second before the overall portion of the building\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthen it was held up until that point by its structure, so its structure must have been all removed, synchronistically timed; therefore, the central penthouse went down a second before the overall structure, so the official theory of internal collapse leaving this building a cave inside doesn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t hold water.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

A good deal of the debate revolved around the possible use of thermite or nanothermite to destroy the buildings. Gage and Harrit argued that thermitic materials were used to cut core columns and explain the presence of iron microspheres in trade center dust.<\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153We agree there were microspheres in the dust but disagree completely about their significance,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153As I said, these were expected from the hot fires, and perhaps older welding traces, etc.\u00c2\u00a0 The iron microspheres are not evidence of thermite,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said. Gage remarked, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Mr. Thomas is in denial. He\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not facing the reality that these spheres take 2800 degrees of temperature to create.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d\u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Industrial Physicist Kim Johnson<\/p><\/div>\n

Thomas also said he agrees with Gage that thermite would create pools of molten iron, but despite witness testimony and photographic evidence Gage offers, he disputes that molten pools were ever found at the scene. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153I say they were not, and only anecdotal stories of their existence are offered,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Thomas said. Elsewhere Kim Johnson has referred to these photos as \u00e2\u20ac\u0153faked.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Similarly, Thomas and Johnson dismiss numerous reports of explosions by witnesses who insist they could distinguish between explosive blasts and other loud sounds. David Chandler claims acoustic evidence has been destroyed. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153In any videos that would be reasonably expected to record the explosion sounds, the videos were cut and don’t show the segment where we now know a fast series of explosions occurred.\u00c2\u00a0 I am not allowed to say NIST cut them, but they are all cut: either the audio or the whole audio\/video segment was cut out,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said. \u00c2\u00a0\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n

Kim Johnson felt one of his strongest points involved bomb-sniffing dogs. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153I got Harrit on the dogs.\u00c2\u00a0 Apparently Gage does not understand how these dogs are trained and cross-trained.\u00c2\u00a0 Dogs sniff out the combination of the blend of aluminum and iron oxides which form the basis of the thermite incendiary,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Johnson said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Gage was making things up as he went along, or repeating earlier things that were made up or extreme speculation and treating them as fact, and this was one of his major errors.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Gage didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t take that criticism seriously. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Thermite is aluminum and iron. There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s aluminum and iron in everything, so there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no way dogs can be trained to sniff for it,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Gage said. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Well, I won\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t say there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no way; I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122m not a dog expert either, but these are normal office building materials, and you can\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t train dogs for that, and that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s probably one of the reasons thermite was used,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d he said.<\/p>\n

During\u00c2\u00a0a 2009\u00c2\u00a0interview,\u00c2\u00a0a reporter from the German web site gulli.com asked Niels Harrit, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Why did no bomb sniffing dog bark?\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Harrit responded, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153All the bomb sniffing dogs were sent home by the security company two weeks before. Furthermore, they are trained on conventional explosives which smell rather characteristically.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Some have suggested that the dogs would be trained to look for ignition devices, not thermite itself.<\/p>\n

Johnson told me in an email message, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Truthers are still conspirators who aren’t quite sure of who pulled this off, but like to believe this kind of stuff, and the scientists who studied it got it right.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d He also claims he tried to \u00e2\u20ac\u0153test\u00e2\u20ac\u009d me with some convoluted scheme that remains unclear. I never found the message he refers to and am unsure\u00c2\u00a0what he is talking about, but this is what he said:<\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153If you look back over your email, you will see that I worked an equation into one of them that should have said F = m * (dV\/dt).\u00c2\u00a0 Only I messed it up a bit (I don’t remember quite how at the moment) to see whether you would catch it. Dave did but you didn’t. I do apologize for deliberately doing that, but it was a test\u00e2\u20ac\u201d a test that I did not think you would pass. Neither will most of the rest of the world, especially those who listen to Coast to Coast, few of whom are scientists.\u00c2\u00a0 It set the level of understanding.\u00c2\u00a0 It’s why Dave and I came up with the bowling ball analogy,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Johnson said.<\/p>\n

I wrote back to Johnson saying I would have told him I lack a science background had he simply asked\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthat there was no need for subterfuge. The occasion seemed to reveal an unnecessarily deceitful approach.<\/p>\n

Elsewhere Johnson says of David Chandler, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153He certainly does not understand Newtonian mechanics, and neither does most of the population\u00e2\u20ac\u201despecially the Coast to Coast listeners who have their minds already made up (probably most). Most cannot understand the real details of why scientists at NIST use and trust FEM models.\u00c2\u00a0 Few even have a clue as to what an FEM model is!\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Professor Niels Harrit<\/p><\/div>\n

So, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s clear that according to Johnson, most people, including other scientists, are unqualified to understand why he, Thomas, and NIST have been right all along.<\/p>\n

Danish scientist Niels Harrit, a chemist and professor at the University of Copenhagen who participated in the debate, said afterwards that the so-called \u00e2\u20ac\u0153debate\u00e2\u20ac\u009d was in no way scientific. Harrit pointed out that when scientists debate an investigation, they agree on the observations; otherwise, there is nothing to talk about. If A and B are both looking at the same thing and A says, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153This is black” while B says, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153This is white,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d it won\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t work. Harrit said this is essentially what happens in discussions with Thomas, Johnson, and others like them.<\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153They poison\u00e2\u20ac\u201dquite deliberately\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthe supposed communication with false information. Luckily, they are not very clever, so they are easily caught\u00e2\u20ac\u201dif the host lets you! I was dissapointed with Punnett who turned out to be just as un-knowing as his listeners. Many lines of arguments were cut off\u00e2\u20ac\u201dalso as a consequence of the trick Thomas has learned to say three things at a time, preventing you from answering. You may choose: \u00c2\u00a0Either Thomas and Johnson are very stupid or they are being paid to pretend to be. The last thing is intellectually dishonest, of course, and in my universe, dishonesty is a kind of stupidity,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Harrit said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Most observers consider the informal Coast to Coast \u00e2\u20ac\u0153debate\u00e2\u20ac\u009d between architect Richard Gage, chemist and scholar Niels Harrit, and physicists Kim Johnson and Dave Thomas to have been a success although who \u00e2\u20ac\u0153won\u00e2\u20ac\u009d depends largely on who you ask. The August 21st event, which was more of a conversation than a formal debate, explored what […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[3,1],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1tQeJ-4M","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":234,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=234","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":0},"title":"AE911Truth, physicists to debate World Trade Center destruction on Coast to Coast AM","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"August 3, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"A highly anticipated debate between two members of Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth and two physicists is scheduled for August 21, 2010. The debate will air on the popular late night talk show Coast to Coast AM with host Ian Punnett between 10pm - 2am Pacific time. Richard Gage,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "911"","block_context":{"text":"911","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":5244,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=5244","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":1},"title":"Niels Harrit presents WTC dust and WTC7 collapse in High Court","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"March 17, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"","rel":"","context":"In "General"","block_context":{"text":"General","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=1"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":78,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=78","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":2},"title":"Over 1000 architects and engineers have signed petition to reinvestigate 9-11 destruction","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"June 23, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"\"At some level of government, at some point in time, there was an agreement not to tell the people the truth about what happened.\"\u00c2\u00a0John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the 9-11 Commission in his book The Ground Truth (Page 4) \u00c2\u00a0 By Shawn Hamilton \u00c2\u00a0 Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "911"","block_context":{"text":"911","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/theswillbucket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/06\/ExaminerGage1-300x225.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":694,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=694","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":3},"title":"Richard Gage, Chris Mohr debate 9\/11 at University of Boulder","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"March 6, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"Live Radio Broadcast_Univ. Colo. Boulder Debate: 9\/11 WTC Destruction: Archived version (click here):","rel":"","context":"In "911"","block_context":{"text":"911","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":225,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=225","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":4},"title":"Taming the Beast: a short history of the AE911Truth debates","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"July 27, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"Reprinted from AE911Truth website Soon after Richard Gage, AIA, became interested in the subject of the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9\/11, he began debating critics who felt qualified to challenge the explosive evidence. Gage twice debated Ron Craig (International Society of Explosives Engineers), as well\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "911"","block_context":{"text":"911","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1461,"url":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?p=1461","url_meta":{"origin":296,"position":5},"title":"Yonaguni \u00e4\u00b8\u017d\u00e9\u201a\u00a3\u00e5\u203a\u00bd\u00e5\u00b3\u00b6\u00e6\u00b5\u00b7\u00e5\u00ba\u2022\u00e5\u0153\u00b0\u00e5\u00bd\u00a2 (Yonaguni-jima Kaitei Chikei): underwater structures in Japan may indicate human culture is older than we think","author":"Shawn Hamilton","date":"May 22, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=K4cItoDIHdQ \"The Yonaguni Monument is a massive underwater rock formation off the coast of Yonaguni, the southernmost of the Ryukyu Islands, in Japan. There is a debate about whether the site is completely natural, is a natural site that has been modified, or is a manmade artifact.[1][2]\u00c2\u00a0 The site is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "General"","block_context":{"text":"General","link":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/?cat=1"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/theswillbucket.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/05\/yonaguni1-300x202.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/296"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=296"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/296\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=296"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=296"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/theswillbucket.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=296"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}