You are here

The No-Show Physics & Civil Engineering Debate with RichardGage911 & _____

Why won’t any qualified experts defend the official story? I regularly host this annual debate, sponsored by the Association for Nine Eleven Truth Awareness. Richard Gage, the guest debater this year, then provides a most persuasive presentation of the main points of the debate that would have to be satisfactorily addressed by a future opponent – if one were to be found. In the absence of an opponent this year, the debate was considered “Resolved: the Official Conspiracy Theory of 9/11 violates Newton’s Laws of Motion, especially the complete collapse of the 3 World Trade Center towers.” The debate occurs…


5th Annual 9/11 Physics Debate: And the winner is….David Chandler!

Watch the video HERE‘s Fifth Annual 9/11 Physics Debate, held every year on March 14 (Einstein’s birthday), once again was won by the contestant representing the pro-9/11-truth position: science teacher David Chandler of and coordinator of Scientists for 9/11 Truth. As always, the victory was by default. (During the five year history of the 9/11 Physics Debate, not one qualified scientist has stepped forward to defend the official story of what happened to the three World Trade Center skyscrapers.) In this “debate” David Chandler explains in clear, straightforward language why we know that World Trade Center Building 7 and the Twin…


Physics prof Denis Rancourt speaks out on 9/11 — and gets it half right!

Physics professor and academic freedom fighter Denis Rancourt appeared on the Kevin Barrett Show yesterday and agreed that the implosion of World Trade Center Building 7 was clearly a case of controlled demolition — but that the destruction of the Twin Towers might not have been! (The discussion of 9/11 occurs during the last 20 minutes of the show.) Dr. Rancourt argued that the gravitational energy released by the Towers’ coming down was great enough, and the mysteries of how various materials interact with each other under such conditions mysterious enough, to cast doubt on many of the apparent “smoking…