Comments on: Wellingtonians lap up 9/11 conspiracy theory rubbish

By: RNZ woes – what does it mean for science coverage? | Griffin’s Gadgets

Fri, 19 Feb 2010 01:08:14 +0000

[...] communication efforts with her interviews with the likes of Professor Sir Paul Callaghan. Her interview last year with 9-11 conspiracy theorist, Richard Gage, was controversial but showed a sceptical and [...]

By: noneedtostartcallingnames

noneedtostartcallingnames — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 01:56:57 +0000

Has anyone ever thought that Hi tech weapons could have been used? Surely we’re not so naive as to think that plain old explosives were used? If laser/microwave technology can be used in every day life then why could it not be used in military/secret ops?
If you’ve seen what a microwave does to a metal spoon then an understanding of what could have been used in the towers should come to our attention.
This microwave technology is invisible, I’ve never seen any blasts in my microwave until you put metal objects in there.
As far as rigging the towers is concerned, this would be too much of a task to complete discretely whilst normal business is going on.
I bet this post will be Modded!

By: harryr

harryr — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 10:43:34 +0000

WFC7 was a controlled demolition. In my eyes tehre is NO otehr way that that building could have come down. I have always had my doubts about teh collapse of the twin towers and felt that if they had come down by the plane crash, they should have fallen over and not straight down at almost freefall speed. Jet fuel burns with an orange flame and is well under 2000 degrees F, well below the melting point of steel. No jet engines melt when they are in operation and neither does kerosine heaters. And a fire with a lot of black smoke much burn a lot cooler than and fire in a jet engine or a heater where there is little or no smoke.

So i am convinced that WTC7 was demolished but i am less sure about 1 & 2, the towers. But whatever I think will make no difference to what ever actually happend.

I went along to see Richard Gage in Auckland after the worst interview i ahd ever heard Kim give. Totally hostile and showing all the skills of a great impatial interviewer. Yea, right!

So I am still open on 1 & 2 and I am prepared to listen to facts, if there are any. But what has Richard got to gain? He has lot income and all he wants is an INDEPENDANT inquirey into the collapse, something they did not have the first time around. More was spent on the stains on Monica’s dress than this “investigation”.

By: Peter Griffin

Peter Griffin — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:47:45 +0000

Totally agree sn00ker. By demanding an investigation into the company responsible for the maintenance of the World Trade Centre’s elevators, he is suggesting that in the run up to 9/11 work was done in the lift shafts to plant explosives to produce his controlled demolition. However he doesn’t seem to account for the impact the planes crashing into the buildings would have on the carefully laid plans for the controlled explosions. The whole thing is ludicrous.

By: Giovanni Tiso

Giovanni Tiso — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:18:09 +0000

Nanothermite might have a wikipedia page devoted to it but from what I’ve read about it it’s not at all clear that it actually exists.

By: sn00ker

sn00ker — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:49:43 +0000

I think you are guilty, as is Mr Gage, of underestimating just how much work is involved in doing a controlled demolition that drops a building – especially one that has irregular load-bearing structures as was the case with 7WTC – into its own footprint. The people who do that it for a living spend many days clearing and wiring a building. It’s not something that can be done in a matter of hours, in a building that’s on fire, and still achieve such a neat result. The preparatory work that goes into structural demolition with explosives is thoroughly documented all over the internet. Ask Google.

If someone were to suggest that the building had been constructed with self-destruct systems integral to its design, I would be more inclined to believe that than I am to believe that there was a post fact mission to wire and demolish it as neatly as was achieved. And, of course, the risk of an in-building self-destruct system would be “the wrong people” finding out about it and working out how to trigger it. Not exactly something one wishes to risk their life over, no?