Architects Petition

This slide was a part of the original slideshow.

Number of Architects

The first thing to notice in this slide is the paucity of professionals that have joined Gage.

There are currently 80,000 members of the American Institute of Architects. Gage has 14 active and retired licensed architects listed on this slide and 15 associated professionals. As of 31 March 2008, there are 53 active and retired licensed architects listed at their website, along with 35 associated professionals. (Students are not included in either group.) This makes up a total of 88 people.

Now either the 88 or the 80,000 have a serious problem. Truth has been found in smaller ratios before, but authority isn't derived from numbers or expertise necessarily. 80,000 people can be wrong just like 88 people can be wrong.

What matters is the evidence. What matters are the actual facts, rightly seen and rightly interpreted. Experts in a field are more practiced at seeing and interpreting the facts. But the experts can be wrong, and this is one of Richard Gage's arguments.

What we know is that someone here is wrong. Gage's presentation doesn't allow for very much compromise. One group is horribly wrong and one group is right.

People may fault me for implying that all 80,000 members of the AIA not currently members of AE911Truth are absolutely in opposition to Gage's group. However, they arguably are.

I would hazard a guess that all of them are aware of these buildings falling down (most certainly the twin towers). Yet only these 88 have seen fit to join Gage's group, and many of them only after viewing Gage's presentation.

By his own admission, Gage has made this presentation many times to groups of building professionals. How many of them have walked away? Gage doesn't share these statistics with us. He must have a rough idea.

The Investigation As Goal

The text on the right side of this slide and the next is the petition that all members of AE911Truth must sign:

On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 - specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe that there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore that the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that may have been the actual cause behind the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC Building 7.

Gage's organization claims to be speaking on behalf of the People of the United States of America. So many do so nowadays that the People of the United States must be a terribly confused body. For the record, I am one of those People, and none of those on Gage's membership rolls speak for me.

Dispensing with the patriotic hyperbole, the main claim that Gage must prove in this petition is that such an investigation is needed.

The events of 9/11 are among the most investigated events in world history. The collapses of those three buildings specifically are the subject of several studies and numerous scholarly papers by the scientific community. The National Institute of Standards and Technologies has released its final report on the collapse of the twin towers, and its delayed report on the collapse of 7 World Trade is due any day now. These collapses have been and continue to be investigated.

But Gage believes that these buildings fell because of explosive devicesdeliberately placed to knock them down. This is not something that Al Qaeda could have pulled off, as Gage will argue in slide 65. Gage believes that he is exposing a level of government complicity in these attacks, and that is why he requires a "truly independent investigation with subpeona power."

Extraordinary claims demands extraordinary evidence. As you will see, Gage's evidence will not support his extraordinary claims. Therefore his call for a further investigation will be rightly rejected.

Navigation

Slideshow Date	Previous Slide		Current Slide		Next Slide
May 2008:	Slide 6	<	Slide 7	>	Slide 8
March 2008:	Slide 4	<	Slide 5	>	Slide 6
January 2008:	Slide 5	<	Slide 6	>	Slide 7
September 2007:	Slide 2	<	Slide 3	>	Slide 4