3-4 PM PDT (4-5 PM MDT, 6-7 PM EDT) David Ray Griffin Ph.D. author "the New Pearl Harbor" : and Kevin Ryan for 9/11 Truth
in Dialogue/debate with
Jonathan Kay Author of "Among the Truthers" and Karen Stollznow Ph.D. Editor Skeptical Inquirer,
Peter Phillips - Host
Topic: Veracity of the 9/11 Commission Report and Related Issues
Download Hour 1 MP3 File
4-5 PM PDT (5-6 PM MDT, 7-8 PM EDT) Richard Gage, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Niels Harrit ( University of Copenhagen)
in dialogue/ debate with
Dave Thomas with New Mexicans for Science and Reason and Richard Mueller University of California Physics professor.
Mickey Huff - host
Topic: The Science of the Collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7. (Note: WPFW in Washington DC is doing an earlier segment on the Pentagon)
5-6PM PDT (6-7 PM MDT, 8-9 PM EDT) National Phone in: Paul Rea for 9/11 Truth and Karen Stollznow
Download Hour 3 MP3 File
IT'S HERE: Skeptical Inquirer July/August issue on 9/11 Truth! Read Dave Thomas's article ONLINE! Most of the July/August issue of Skeptical Inquirer is devoted to analyses and discussion of
9/11 Truth and 9/11 conspiracy theories.
The Coast to Coast Debate is Over! Resources and Reviews
On August 21st, 2010, NMSR's Dave Thomas and Kim Johnson debated Richard gage and Niels Harrit of Ae911truth, on the
Coast-to-Coast AM radio show. Here are some resources and reviews of the event.
This reveals the Truther take on the proceedings. They were clearly listening to a different debate than the rest
of us. Especially memorable are these two comments:
"I need some clarifications here:Mr Thomas also states that we (the truth movement) greatly underestimate the energy
of the impact. He has an experiment on his website which should be viewed so you can see his math. He is taking impact
measurements by dropping items onto a scale. But this is just the point we are making. In order for him to get his
measurement, he must first drop an item through nothing but air. His experiment presumes no resistance. Additionally,
his math formula uses 'g' for gravity in his calculation. We KNOW (as in the case of tower 1) that it descended at 2/3g.
He seems to forget this fact and calculates with 'g' or is my understanding way off base here. I was only a B student in
Calc. ..."
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-08-22/coast-coast-am-911-debate-richard-gage-and-dave-thomas#comment-236359
This shows the pervasiveness with which 9/11 physics teacher David Chandler's analyses have misled many in the
truth movement. My work shows that the AVERAGE of freefalls and collisions for both Twin Towers comes to 2/3 g for the early
part of the collapse, and 1/3 g at the end. Chandler smooths out this process, and acts like the average acceleration
is the actual representation of what happened, and thus lowballs the actual impact by a factor of 100 (YES, ONE HUNDRED!)
Then Tony Szamboti, author of "The Missing Jolt" paper over at the Journal of 911 Studies,
writes "In a structure with a factor of safety of at least 3.00 to 1 the only way the upper section of it can fall
through it at 2/3rds g, without a dynamic load, is if about 85 to 90% of the integrity of the structure was being
consistently removed unnaturally, leaving only 1/3rd of the minimum strength necessary to support the static load
with no reserve. Gordon Ross has previously described it as a weight being dropped in and moving down through custard.
I tend to agree with him, in that the lower section was being turned into a custard like consistency, and it had
nothing to do with dynamic loads, because they provably weren't occurring.":
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-08-22/coast-coast-am-911-debate-richard-gage-and-dave-thomas#comment-236406
Silly me, thinking I could use a free-fall experiment to test something I think was in free-fall!
Slides from Dave Thomas's recent presentation, with a physics model for the tower collapses,
links to related pages and videos, and lots more! (~3 Meg)
Animated Movie: Model Overlaid with WTC 1 Collapse Dave Thomas's physics model of the tower collapse, compared to actual. The two small red squares falling
on the right represent objects dropped from the top (110th) and impact-level (96th) stories, and these are in
true freefall. The towers are clearly falling at less than freefall speeds in this physics analysis. The
horizontal red lines (top of WTC1, top of WFC3, top of WTC7, and ground level) were used to calibrate the
scale of the plot.
