Why don't Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Fund Research?

Mick West said:
So why is Mark Basile connecting his chip research proposal to them? Promising to give leftover funds to them? If the money can go in that direction, why not the other direction?

And why is there all this stuff about nanothermite on their site?
Click to expand...
I think there is an intention to provide some funding for the Mark Basile effort for lab costs by AE911 when they have it.

Nanothermite has been claimed to have been found in the WTC dust by a number of volunteer researchers since 2009 who had access to university labs free of charge. Mark's effort is to provide an independent study to confirm or refute the original study, and it does not have the luxury of the use of university labs, so there is funding needed for that.

The much bigger question here is why hasn't the U.S. government done or funded a study to confirm or refute the original study and the contention that they don't take it seriously because the paper on it was published in a Bentham journal is very weak and actually embarassing.
 
Last edited:
Mick West said:
You don't think their charter would tally with funding research though?
Click to expand...
I think that the charter only says the things they want to do. Often times in volunteer organizations that receive donations whatever funding they have is used for things that can't be done by volunteer work. This would be for paying a small staff, airline travel and lodging, public outreach things like flyers and billboards, etc. AE911 is involved in public outreach and the dissemination of research by its members and others affiliated in the cause to gain a new investigation into the events which took place in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001. If something can be handled by volunteerism it should be, due to limited funding.

The above should be obvious, and with that in mind I find the entire point of this thread ridiculous and disingenuous. It is and has always been the government's responsibility to provide an accurate explanation for these events and they have failed to do so as shown by the NIST WTC 7 report omissions. With that having been shown in a clear and incontrovertible way now, it is hard to understand why some here are not clamoring for a new investigation.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
I think that the charter only says the things they want to do. Often times in volunteer organizations that receive donations whatever funding they have is used for things that can't be done by volunteer work. This would be for paying a small staff, airline travel and lodging, public outreach things like flyers and billboards, etc. AE911 is involved in public outreach and the dissemination of research by its members and others affiliated in the cause to gain a new investigation into the events which took place in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001. If something can be handled by volunteerism it should be, due to limited funding.

The above should be obvious, and with that in mind I find the entire point of this thread ridiculous and disingenuous. It is and has always been the government's responsibility to provide an accurate explanation for these events and they have failed to do so as shown by the NIST WTC 7 report omissions. With that having been shown in a clear and incontrovertible way now, it is hard to understand why some here are not clamoring for a new investigation.
Click to expand...

So you think that even though it would greatly benefit AE911 to fund research to demonstrate their claims are correct, they should not do so because the government did a bad job?

It makes no sense. Why don't they do things that they claim would benefit them, and instead just petulantly say someone else should do it?
 
Mick West said:
So you think that even though it would greatly benefit AE911 to fund research to demonstrate their claims are correct, they should not do so because the government did a bad job?

It makes no sense. Why don't they do things that they claim would benefit them, and instead just petulantly say someone else should do it?
Click to expand...
What you are saying is akin to it being learned that a local police investigation of the murder of a poor person was inaccurate and that the wrong person may have been convicted for it, with some people in the community then telling the family to hire a private investigator to provide a full understanding of the crime with their own money, instead of insisting the local police re-open the investigation with oversight by the county commissioners or equivalent. I would think most people would find that problematic and not the other way around.

The local police are funded for the job and if it was shown that they did not provide an accurate explanation, and bring the actual perpetrator(s) to justice, then they would need to redo their investigation. I don't believe anyone legitimate would object to them doing so.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
What you are saying is akin to a police chief doing a bad job on a murder investigation of a poor person and telling the family to hire a private investigator with its own money. I would think most people would find that problematic and not the other way around. The police chief is funded for the job and if it was shown that he did not provide an accurate explanation then he would need to redo his investigation. I don't believe there would be any effort by anyone legitimate to stop him from doing so.
Click to expand...

The current strategy hasn't worked since the inception of AE911 so how about a new one? Research.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
What you are saying is akin to a police chief doing a bad job on a murder investigation of a poor person and telling the family to hire a private investigator with its own money. I would think most people would find that problematic and not the other way around. The police chief is funded for the job and if it was shown that he did not provide an accurate explanation then he would need to redo his investigation. I don't believe there would be any effort by anyone legitimate to stop him from doing so.
Click to expand...

Right, but suppose the family had some money, and they could spend some of that money on proving their suspicions. And if they did this it would both prove their case, and expose the lies of the police. Spending that money would seem to be the obvious thing to do.

So why would you suggest they don't?
 
Mick West said:
Right, but suppose the family had some money, and they could spend some of that money on proving their suspicions. And if they did this it would both prove their case, and expose the lies of the police. Spending that money would seem to be the obvious thing to do.

So why would you suggest they don't?
Click to expand...
It is unethical and immoral to expect the family (in the hypothetical I used) to provide an accurate explanation of the crime, when it is a governmental obligation. It is also not their responsibility to fund an investigation and expose police lies. This is precisely why we have a government. Your argument here is untenable.

You also cannot compare AE911 to a rich family here. Given their multiple purposes they do not have the money to do what you propose. They are actually nearly broke right now.

Before it gets lost on anyone here, it needs to be restated that there is research done on a volunteer basis by AE911 members and affiliates. That research has shown the NIST WTC 7 report to be remiss and actually fraudulent. This is more than adequate to re-open the investigation. When is that going to happen?
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
It is unethical and immoral to expect the family to provide an explanation when it is a governmental obligation and it is not their job to fund an investigation and expose police lies. Your argument here is untenable.
Click to expand...

Of course it's not their job. That's entirely not the point.

The point is that they could do it, but they don't.

If the family could solve the murder for a portion of their yearly income, then would you advise them not to for some moral reason?
 
Mick West said:
Of course it's not their job. That's entirely not the point.

The point is that they could do it, but they don't.

If the family could solve the murder for a portion of their yearly income, then would you advise them not to for some moral reason?
Click to expand...
No, they really can't fund research all that much as they just don't have the money.

I have explained to you that much of the money they receive is earmarked for specific things like billboards and videos like Explosive Evidence.

I would like to know why you don't seem to think enough has been shown by volunteer researchers, like Gerry and myself, to cause the investigation to be re-opened.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
No, they really can't fund research all that much as they just don't have the money.

I have explained to you that much of the money they receive is earmarked for specific things like billboards and videos like Explosive Evidence.
Click to expand...

Which hasn't worked. Try research.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
No, they really can't fund research all that much as they just don't have the money.

I have explained to you that much of the money they receive is earmarked for specific things like billboards and videos like Explosive Evidence.
Click to expand...
They don't have $5,000?

I would like to know why you don't seem to think enough has been shown by volunteers like Gerry and myself to cause the investigation to be re-opened.
Click to expand...
Quite clearly AE911 are not just saying "we need a slightly better investigation". They are saying there they think is clear evidence of controlled demolition with nanothermite.

So why don't they spend a little bit of money to demonstrate this?
 
Mick West said:
They don't have $5,000?


Quite clearly AE911 are not just saying "we need a slightly better investigation". They are saying there they think is clear evidence of controlled demolition with nanothermite.

So why don't they spend a little bit of money to demonstrate this?
Click to expand...
I believe they are going to fund the lab costs for Mark Basile's study.
 
@Tony Szamboti

You are actually predicting that the research will not happen!

It can be proved by AE911 for $2000, but they won't.

This triggers my BS detector into high alert mode.
 
gerrycan said:
No, I asked where you got that from. When you said
"@gerrycan

I have noticed that you too are predicting that the $2000 proof will not happen via AE911"
Click to expand...
Ok. My mistake. Sorry.
  • Do you think they will invest $2000 to prove this once and for all?
I predict they will not.
[... I also predict that you will obfuscate in answering this question...]
 
qed said:
Ok. My mistake. Sorry.
  • Do you think they will invest $2000 to prove this once and for all?
I predict they will not.
[... I also predict that you will obfuscate in answering this question...]
Click to expand...
So you basically just made it up? That's not really in keeping with what this forum is about is it? If you look over my posts on this very thread, you will see that I said no such thing, and actually applauded ae911 for their efforts when it comes to supporting research. But maybe it's easier for you to just make stuff up than do that...
 
gerrycan said:
So you basically just made it up? That's not really in keeping with what this forum is about is it? If you look over my posts on this very thread, you will see that I said no such thing, and actually applauded ae911 for their efforts when it comes to supporting research. But maybe it's easier for you to just make stuff up than do that...
Click to expand...
  • Do you think they will invest $2000 to prove this once and for all?
I predict they will not.
 
gerrycan said:
So you basically just made it up? That's not really in keeping with what this forum is about is it? If you look over my posts on this very thread, you will see that I said no such thing, and actually applauded ae911 for their efforts when it comes to supporting research. But maybe it's easier for you to just make stuff up than do that...
Click to expand...

How about answering the question?
 
gerrycan said:
see above re #237 . And how about reading the thread and not asking questions that i have already answered?
Click to expand...
  • Do you think they will invest $2000 to prove this once and for all?
External Quote:
The group of researchers that I am a part of have been and remain independent in nature. Personally though, I do support ae911 100%, but I would not say that I was a "celebrated" member of ae911. Whenever I have approached ae911 for help and support when researching, they have always been very open and supportive, as per their charter. I applaud and respect that.
Is that a yes or no?
 
Tony Szamboti said:
What you are saying is akin to it being learned that a local police investigation of the murder of a poor person was inaccurate and that the wrong person may have been convicted for it, with some people in the community then telling the family to hire a private investigator to provide a full understanding of the crime with their own money, instead of insisting the local police re-open the investigation with oversight by the county commissioners or equivalent. I would think most people would find that problematic and not the other way around.

The local police are funded for the job and if it was shown that they did not provide an accurate explanation, and bring the actual perpetrator(s) to justice, then they would need to redo their investigation. I don't believe anyone legitimate would object to them doing so.
Click to expand...
This is a wonderful point because if you believe that the police lied or that you were wrongfully convicted the burden of proof is actually on you , so yes I would expect that the family would pay for the investigation just exactly like they did in the case of Ryan Ferguson who was just released from prison after 9 years in Missouri. The issue that is being overlooked in the run around "why doesn't the government...." is simple because in order for the government to investigate anything it requires reasonable suspicion and or probable cause. If AE want that investigation because of their assumptions then the burden of proof is on them making the claim of NT. They could simply and quickly provide the PC for a new investigation by spending 2,000 dollars. So the question remains Why Dont They ?
 
I stand by what I stated. When I was a board member of AE911T I tried to get Gage interested in working with some of the engineers and expert signers of the petition to undertake a building performance study, re engineer the twin towers from the information we already have, do an FEA and so forth. Use the volunteers to... instead of ponying up recurring contributions or whatever they hound them for... but ask them to GIVE their expertise for some some research. Heck they might even be able to get a tax deduction for it. Gage flat out refused. I even suggested that he organize a "private meeting/discussion/brainstorming" session when they had their 1000 Press event... where it was expected a number of these people would all be in the same place at the same time. Idea was rejected.

Reason: Gage does not actually want to face the fact that his talking points could be false. And he certainly doesn't want to be embarrassed by funding research which undermines or disputes them. Geez Loiuse he'd have to back down, apologize (yea right) and maybe even give up on his mission.

He plays smoke and mirrors. Claiming to be wanting research, demanding some officials do it, discrediting other research or study which undermines his talking points. He can only travel this road and do it as long as he can... the road? Sewing doubt among the naive and fooling them into believing that 2000 engineers and architects have rigorously studied the WTC and think it's CD/ inside job/ false flag operation. Perhaps a handful would agree with him and most simply... like the average Joe were shocked enough to want to understand the destruction better and signed the petition calling for an investigation. He sells his organization by sewing the belief that it was CD, no ifs, ands or buts.

This amounts to snake oil bait and switch.. no there there PR spin. If someone bequeathed them $1MM they would not do research, but do more marketing and outreach and "education".

Sad to see so many people, intelligent people have been taken in by this scam.
 
Last edited:
Jeffrey Orling said:
I stand by what I stated. When I was a board member of AE911T I tried to get Gage interested in working with some of the engineers and expert signers of the petition to undertake a building performance study, re engineer the twin towers from the information we already have, do an FEA and so forth. Use the volunteers to... instead of ponying up recurring contributions or whatever they hound them for... but ask them to GIVE their expertise for some some research. Heck they might even be able to get a tax deduction for it. Gage flat out refused. I even suggested that he organize a "private meeting/discussion/brainstorming" session when they had their 1000 Press event... where it was expected a number of these people would all be in the same place at the same time. Idea was rejected.

Reason: Gage does not actually want to face the fact that his talking points could be false. And he certainly doesn't want to be embarrassed by funding research which undermines or disputes them. Geez Loiuse he'f had to back down, apologize (yea right) and maybe even give up on his mission.

He play smoke and mirrors. Claiming to be wanting research, demanding some officials do it, discrediting other research or study which undermines his talking points. He can only travel this road and do it as long as he can... the road? Sewing doubt among the naive and fooling them into believing that 2000 engineers and architects have rigorously studied the WTC and think it's CD/ inside job/ flase flag operation. Perhaps a handful would agree with him and most simply... like the average joe were shocked enough to want to understand the destruction better and signed the petition calling for an investigation. He sells his organization by sewing the belief that it was CD, no ifs, ands or buts.

This amounts to snake oil bait and switch.. no there there PR spin. If someone bequeathed them $1MM they would not do research, but do more marketing and outreach and "education".

Sad to see so many people, intelligent people have been taken in by this scam.
Click to expand...

Is there a counter to this statement?
 
As Tony correctly notes Gage IS AE911T and AE911T is Gage. He's absolute monarch over there and he makes or signs off on every decision. It's his baby... and...he's not giving any of it up. Volunteer to serve or be gone. I suppose people feel they are doing something noble and a great cause and so they give.. their time and money... to get more.

The interesting thing to me... is how Gage manages to look in the mirror and keep this facade up? Does he really believe his rhetoric, talking points and theories... or does he know... that it's a crock of rubbish? He could reach that conclusion because his work has been debunked, discredited falsified and shown to be made up out of whole clothe by many many engineers, scientists, and intelligent lay persons on internet forums, in published papers, on debunking web site, on YouTubes, even debates with Chris Mohr. He's got to be aware that his stuff has been pretty well destroyed. Does he not believe or accept it? Does he bury his head in the sand and not read or review the critiques? He doesn't address the points as raised as far as I know. It seems as if he's up in some ivory tower of denial of all the counter arguments to his Blueprint for truth.

While I disagree with Tony, I give him credit for not shrinking from his critics... usually and attempting to do research... and produce something of substance whether right of wrong other than PR.

It's all about Gage. It's that simple.
 
Jeffrey Orling said:
As Tony correctly notes Gage IS AE911T and AE911T is Gage. He's absolute monarch over there and he makes or signs off on every decision. It's his baby... and...he's not giving any of it up. Volunteer to serve or be gone. I suppose people feel they are doing something noble and a great cause and so they give.. their time and money... to get more.

The interesting thing to me... is how Gage manages to look in the mirror and keep this facade up? Does he really believe his rhetoric, talking points and theories... or does he know... that it's a crock of rubbish? He could reach that conclusion because his work has been debunked, discredited falsified and shown to be made up out of whole clothe by many many engineers, scientists, and intelligent lay persons on internet forums, in published papers, on debunking web site, on YouTubes, even debates with Chris Mohr. He's got to be aware that his stuff has been pretty well destroyed. Does he not believe or accept it? Does he bury his head in the sand and not read or review the critiques? He doesn't address the points as raised as far as I know. It seems as if he's up in some ivory tower of denial of all the counter arguments to his Blueprint for truth.

While I disagree with Tony, I give him credit for not shrinking from his critics... usually and attempting to do research... and produce something of substance whether right of wrong other than PR.

It's all about Gage. It's that simple.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't all about Gage and you never heard me say that. I said he and the office manager are the only two full time paid individuals and that the two of them take care of all day to day operations.
 
FireOfficer1822 said:
This is a wonderful point because if you believe that the police lied or that you were wrongfully convicted the burden of proof is actually on you , so yes I would expect that the family would pay for the investigation just exactly like they did in the case of Ryan Ferguson who was just released from prison after 9 years in Missouri.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The burden of proof is on the accuser to show that a crime has been committed. In this case AE911Truth claims a deliberate mass murder, and claims to have proof. See Jeffrey's comment below:

Jeffrey Orling said:
He sells his organization by sewing the belief that it was CD, no ifs, ands or buts.
Click to expand...

So the first order of business is for AE911Truth to scientifically establish that these alleged crimes took place. That would require further research as we've been demanding;
If and when such facts are established and accepted by the scientific community, let's say the ASCE as one example, then THOSE organizations would be brought onboard to define the scope of a new investigation.

Until such a time this is, as Jeffrey I think correctly puts it, just a PR exercise.
 
@Tony Szamboti

Use your influence to make this experiment happen.

It is imperative that AE911 drive the research so that the outcome cannot be criticized.

It will only cost $2000.
 
Alienentity said:
Agreed. The burden of proof is on the accuser to show that a crime has been committed. In this case AE911Truth claims a deliberate mass murder, and claims to have proof. See Jeffrey's comment below:



So the first order of business is for AE911Truth to scientifically establish that these alleged crimes took place. That would require further research as we've been demanding;
If and when such facts are established and accepted by the scientific community, let's say the ASCE as one example, then THOSE organizations would be brought onboard to define the scope of a new investigation.

Until such a time this is, as Jeffrey I think correctly puts it, just a PR exercise.
Click to expand...

When one learns ... and I don't follow AE911T anymore... that they spend tens of thousands for billboard campaigns and none for research it speaks volumes... or it's as plain as the nose on your face.

Tony, I did not write that you said it was all about Gage... I wrote it... and I stand by it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oystein
Debunking resource: Engineers Assess the Truth in AE911Truth (Scott & Hamburger, 2021)
Replies
36
Views
9K
Jeffrey Orling
Jeffrey Orling
Mick West
Sean Kirkpatrick's Interview With Daniel Lavelle at The Guardian [Transcript]
Replies
26
Views
5K
MapperGuy
M
Mick West
The Dumbing Down of AE911Truth, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
3 4 5
Replies
188
Views
60K
econ41
econ41
John J.
Is "Improved Instrumental Techniques...", Nolan, Vallee, Jiang, Lemke 2022 a useful paper?
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
Z.W. Wolf
Z.W. Wolf
NorCal Dave
Meta Materials From UFOs
2 3 4
Replies
134
Views
29K
Gary C
Gary C

Latest posts

Back
Top