Former Debunking Director of JREF Schooled by Richard Gage AIA


That's awesome.

At JREF I noticed a couple weeks or so ago that "Debunking Director" made a thread about this encounter there, sans video. He tried to make it sound like he was schooling Richard Gage. Clearly it was the other way round.

Clearly it was the other way round. Indeed!

Here is the link to that thread. This is someone who admits that he doesn't understand 7th grade physics and the debunkies pretend like he took Richard Gage to school. RIDICULOUS! On an intuitive level, even three and four year old children understand that when a falling object hits something it slows down. This concept is lost on the debunkies.

Debunker / debunkie

Would you call anyone in the 9-11 Truth movement who speaks out against the Controlled Demolition of the 3 towers as a debunker or debunkie?

There are very few as I understand it, but they are here. Hope those around them can persuade them to stop with the CD debunking. Gage and others show us that Controlled Demolition of the 3 towers is a proven fact.

With you in the struggle,
WeAreChangeLA -


In the 9/11 Truth Movement "speaks out against the Controlled Demolition of the 3 towers," and who participates in "CD debunking?"

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Mike Ruppert comes to mind,

Mike Ruppert comes to mind, for one.

From what I remember...

Ruppert's last statement re: CD was that he thinks it's possible. However, I don't follow Ruppert anymore, and haven't for a long time. I want to know who has been actively speaking out against CD, and debunking it within the 9/11 Truth Movement. Keeping in mind that asking people to focus on subjects that the media doesn't like to tackle, and asking questions about CD that might not coincide with the hypothesis is not speaking out against CD, and is not taking part in CD debunking.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Some things never change

"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking; where it is absent, discussion is apt to become worse than useless."
- Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace (1862)

LOL...This Is Great

I just got BANNED from JREF this week!


Also, they said in a thread that I was lying about the level of traffic that was being given to The Ultimate Con...Figures, they banned me so that I can't debunk that claim.

Well JREF, I know you read this blog, and it was pleasure seeing one of your "kind" get SLAMMED by Gage...especially on the freefall speed...You're boy Goldilocks was at a loss.

So, here are the stats on Youtube...

4 Star Rating
#11 - Most Discussed (All Time) - United Kingdom
#4 - Most Discussed (All Time) - News & Politics - United Kingdom
#15 - Most Discussed (All Time) - News & Politics
#58 - Most Viewed (All Time) - United Kingdom
#2 - Most Viewed (All Time) - News & Politics - United Kingdom
#10 - Most Viewed (All Time) - News & Politics
#2 - Top Favorited (All Time) - News & Politics - United Kingdom
#11 - Top Favorited (All Time) - News & Politics

Oh, you also said that you could not find any references to the video anywhere... I guess your internet search skills leave a lot to be desired.

How about you google the last 9 letters of the video 8n-nT-luFIw...This will be webpages with links to the video

Results 1 - 10 of about 116,000 for 8n-nT-luFIw. (0.49 seconds)

How about you google the term "9/11 proof"

Second on the list baby!

How about you google "The Ultimate Con" (In quotations so it pulls up ONLY that exact phrase")

Results 1 - 10 of about 260,000 for "The Ultimate Con".

So JREFers...not only do your debunking skills match that of a half drunk crap house rat, but it seems you can't even use something as simple as Google!

Keep taking those vaccinations boys...We will surely win by attrition :)

JREF is a joke

Not that you needed to be told this, but they are a joke over there. I went to read some of the forums and see what sort of debate might be happening - the replies are not fact based or informed, they are just sarcastic attacks by people who seem to feel some blind allegiance to NIST. Rediculous.

The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry

A history teacher?

I wonder if he covers The Lavon Affair or Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio in his history classes. I suspect not.

Oh, man...

Imagine if Gage had retorted with that.

Then again, that would have kinda been venturing into the whodunnit territory...


With "teachers" like Jeff, it's no wonder the perps felt confident demolishing 3 skysrapers in broad daylight.

Show "waste of energy" by drunkhorse

truth smackdown.

truth smackdown.

"9/11 was a day of firsts."

"9/11 was a day of firsts." Oh, OK. It was a day of firsts - yes, that explains everything. Now it all becomes clear. Lots of strange and bizarre things happened that day because "it was a day of firsts." Silverstein said they decided to pull "IT" but he really meant pull the fire fighters out. He referred to a group of men as "it" and when the firefighters left, the building came straight down at free fall speed for 8 floors., and near free fall speed for the rest of it's collapse. OK, I understand now. Big, smart debunker guy explains it all. He so smart. LMAO

Day of firsts and lasts

When WTC 7 fell, it was the first and last day in history where conservation of momentum didn't apply. Historic, especially for history teachers, one would say.

Nothing proves harder and more unforgiving that 9/11 is a big lie than the laws of nature.


This guy is not very smart.... I love when he claimed ignorance about why building seven fell in the exact manner of a CD because he is not a "physicist or engineer" and Richard said that it is "high school physics"- HA. classic. Also when he realizes his own theory about "pull it" doesn't make sense because there were NO firefighters in the building to "pull out"- they were all outside waiting for the building to be demolished.

Yeah, the fire fighters were

Yeah, the fire fighters were pulled out around noon I think. I also like the way he tries to vilify Gage by implying that he is saying some of the fire fighters were involved. Just one of the underhanded tactics that debunkers pull from their bag of tricks. the facts are firmly planted on our side of the debate. All the debunkers can do is twist, distort and cherry pick what they want, in order to make their arguments sound more persuasive.


have little to fall back on except for straw men and the appeal to 9/12 emotions.

"The FDNY lost over 300 brothers that day!!!"

That was the one thing Mr. History Teacher actually got right.

James Randi

I've been wondering what to think:

Does anyone here think that at this point, James Randi himself is a part of the 9/11 cover up, simply for ALLOWING that pseudo-skeptic 9/11 subforum to EXIST on his website? (EDIT: Don't forget, that particular subforum didn't exist until mid 2006 when Loose Change became virally popular. He could shut down that one subforum and it would be just like 2005 again.)

I mean, how can he so haughtily disagree with a man who was in the WTC at the time of the attacks? Oh, WR, who was in the basement, is wrong, and James Randi, watching the events on Fox News, is right?

Or is he just a senile old man who sees the thread index with its super long, hundreds-of-replies threads, and thinks, "well, they must be debunking those theories pretty good with threads this long."

Good point

I think that he may be a pid shill to a certain extent - keep things appearing unbiased, but defend the OCT to dovetail with the rest of the visible MSM opinion about questioning the OCT. The forum is so skewed in such an ignorant direction it is hard to NOT conclude that they have a vested interest in reinforcing the OCT.

The love that you withhold is the pain that you carry


Obviously they have a vested interest in reinforcing the OCT. I have no doubt that some of the more prolific (i.e. 8,000 posts in one year) posters there are paid shills, but those shills may have no direct contact or involvement with James Randi.

I was just wondering about Randi himself. He has only posted on his own forums a grand total of 52 times (you can see that in the post where he discusses Rodriguez).

Maybe he purposely keeps above the fray, for the sake of plausible deniability in the event that this truly breaks wide open. Because it's obviously the "go-to" forum for those who wish to find links which will reinforce their already cemented point of view, and they consider themselves the ultimate debunking authority on the subject. When Charlie Sheen threw down the gauntlet to debate "debunkers," and someone at JREF started a thread about it, several people said "What's preventing him from registering an account and debating us here?"

Goebbels would be proud of them.

I don't know about Randi

I don't know about Randi being a paid shill,but I do know he has skeletons in his closet. Someone might want to contact the Sylvia Brown people to see if they could dig up some of those audio recording/ transcrips that were floating around the web 'round about the time of 911.

The Amazing Meeting 5.5

Mark Roberts(Gravy) was invited to speak at The Amazing Meeting(TAM) 5.5 back in 2008. I can only assume that this means James Randi endorses and is aware of his nonsense. This was the link.

You're right...

It's impossible to conclude that Mark Roberts is not a paid shill. So when you see something like this:

You have to wonder if Randi himself is "in on it."

One big happy family.

Here you can see Mark Roberts and other "skeptics" sitting together at that meeting[4th picture down]. I showed up and made some comments on that blog. Mark showed up as well and he invited me to start posting at the JREF forums. I did so for roughly a year(never got banned) but I could only endure the Dunciad for so long. Obviously, Mark made a big splash with his speech. Here you can read other attendees opinions on it.

Bad Feeling

Kevin says, "Careful there, Richard," at the end. I'm uneasy with the comment.

Richard, stick to cars, busses and trains. Stay away from the unfriendly skies. Gravity is a bitch, and has no mercy!

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief
Washington, DC

It was not Daniel Nigro.

I spoke to Daniel Nigro. Here's what I wrote at the time.

"Well I just talked to Daniel Nigro. He was put in charge of the fire department that morning after Peter Ganci was killed. He was at WTC7 at the time of collapse, and does not believe it was Controlled Demolition. However, he says he did not talk to Larry Silverstein that day, and doesn't know who did. He is now retired."

And I don't know if this is legitimate, but it seems to be.

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.

We don't know who spoke to Larry Silverstein.

If Larry Silverstein and Daniel Nigro have conflicting accounts, why?

Edit: There is also this account.

"In the afternoon of September 11, the Fire Department informed him that the smaller 7 World Trade Center building, which he owned, was going to collapse."

Edit: And these interesting accounts...

After 10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001: Fire Fighters Trying to Extinguish Fires in WTC 7

11:07 a.m. September 11, 2001: CNN Incorrectly Reports Possible Third Skyscraper Collapse in New York

(11:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Fire Chief Ordered to Put Out Fires in WTC 7, But Does Not Do So

After 12:00 Noon September 11, 2001: Larry Silverstein Tells Fire Department Commander to ‘Pull’ WTC 7

4:15 p.m.-4:33 p.m. September 11, 2001: Con Edison Shuts off Power to WTC 7 after Being Told It Could Collapse

(4:30 p.m.) September 11, 2001: WTC Building 7 Area Is Evacuated Due to Anticipated Collapse

(5:15 p.m.) September 11, 2001: Firefighter Tells Reporter that WTC Building 7 Will Collapse Soon

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

This guy keeps claiming he's not an expert

but he's not willing to listen to experts. And he's so sure he knows what he's talking about. And he's so sure even someone like Richard Gage doesn't know what going on. He's a phony. There are two kinds of people who say they believe the official story of 911. 1) those who are ignorant of the overwhelming facts and have not done the research, or 2) those who are in on the cover-up. My guess is this guy is in the second group.