# "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 6, 2016, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917 "2016-08-06T07:26:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/1 "2016-08-06T07:26:04Z")
Hi I haven’t discussed 9/11 conspiracy theories before. I’m rewatching the original Zeitgeist movie on Youtube. The first segment about the origins of Christianity is appalling but I’m finding the 9/11 section intriguing. Anyway after looking on Wikipedia I came across “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth”: > **[Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth)** > > Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc. (AE911Truth) is an American non-profit organization promoting the conspiracy theory that the World Trade Center was destroyed in a controlled demolition, disputing accepted conclusions around the September 11 attacks, including The 9/11 Commission Report, as well as FEMA's "WTC Building Performance Study" (2002). Their claims and theories lack support among the relevant professional communities. > Richard Gage, a San Francisco Bay Area architect, founded... Here’s their site: > **[Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth | WTC Twin Towers and Building 7](https://www.ae911truth.org/)** > > AE911Truth is a nonprofit organization that represents more than 3,000 architects and engineers who are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11. it is a non-profit “education” organisation. I didn’t know about Building 7’s collapse before: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/pTbIu8Zeqp0/maxresdefault.jpg "ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE | 2007 (HD)") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTbIu8Zeqp0) They have over 2500 signatories of architects and engineers. [http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html](http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html) It seems that for each one you can see their details including a statement about their views. It has been estimated that there are about [700](https://ncse.com/blog/2013/08/how-many-creationists-science-0014996) qualified scientists that believe in young-earth creationism. If their belief in the authority of the Bible, there is pressure on them to believe that maybe Genesis is literally true. But what pressure is there for these architects and engineers to be in this organisation? Are they all conspiracy nuts? Here is their evidence section: > **[Evidence Overview](https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/evidence-overview)** > > AE911Truth is a nonprofit organization that represents more than 3,000 architects and engineers who are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11. it claims: “Since 9/11, however, independent researchers around the world have assembled a large body of evidence that overwhelmingly refutes the notion that airplane impacts and fires caused the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7” So is this just an example of conspiracy nuts that have as much evidence that there is that the moon landings were faked? ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/2 "2016-08-06T07:33:23Z")
From the FAQ page: > **[Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/faqs)** > > AE911Truth is a nonprofit organization that represents more than 3,000 architects and engineers who are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11. It claims “As of the date of this publication, there are almost 1,700 architects and engineers who openly support the findings of AE911Truth vs. only a few dozen who have openly supported the NIST WTC reports” ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/3 "2016-08-06T07:33:56Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > So is this just an example of conspiracy nuts that have as much evidence that there is that the moon landings were faked? It’s this. This topic has been done to death on the SDMB, and the overwhelming consensus is that it’s conspiracy theory nonsense on par with the Illuminati. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/4 "2016-08-06T07:39:08Z")
BlakeTyner: I’m focusing on this specific website this time… and the “overwhelming consensus” of SDMB is different from what a huge number of architects and engineers seem to claim… I mean architects and engineers would be very qualified to talk about this in a similar way that politicians would be qualified to talk about the Illuminati but can you find a similar website where large numbers of politicians are providing evidence that the Illuminati exists? ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/5 "2016-08-06T07:42:17Z")
The long story short is that, in that list of people, 1. Many are just fake names that could never be verified. 2. At least a few (that we know of) are names of engineers/architects who have said they never signed on, and in fact reject the truthers conclusions. 3. You don’t have to be a STRUCTURAL engineer to get on that list…you can be an electrical engineer, aerospace…etc. 4. You don’t have to be an ARCHITECT or ENGINEER to get on the list–an undergrad student is fine. Any of their crap looks compelling if you’re only looking at their crap. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/6 "2016-08-06T07:44:30Z")
It seems unlikely that “the three worst structural failures in modern history” happened all at the same time, especially when one of the buildings only had fires on two or three floors… [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/pTbIu8Zeqp0/maxresdefault.jpg "ZEITGEIST: THE MOVIE | 2007 (HD)") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTbIu8Zeqp0) But that’s just my unqualified impression… ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/7 "2016-08-06T07:46:12Z")
Each and every one of those claims has been discussed, repeatedly, on this board and plenty of others. Popular Mechanics even did an article debunking most of the claims. If you wanna open that can of worms, search the forum for 9/11 Truth and be ready to dedicate the next few months of your life to reading. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/8 "2016-08-06T07:49:29Z")
> [@BlakeTyner](#): > > Each and every one of those claims has been discussed, repeatedly, on this board and plenty of others. Popular Mechanics even did an article debunking most of the claims. I know that because they have a response to the Popular Mechanics article: > **[Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can't Face up to Reality...](http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/604-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-1.html)** > > Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers but was never hit by a plane. How?... Their long response implies that Popular Mechanics didn’t do such a good job of debunking it. > [@](#): > > If you wanna open that can of worms, search the forum for 9/11 Truth and be ready to dedicate the next few months of your life to reading. I’d rather look at what what experts are claiming rather than look at old threads about what posters here were saying. And I’m focusing on this website not any of the other 9/11 related conspiracy theories. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/9 "2016-08-06T07:54:09Z")
It looks like Popular Mechanics even published a book about it: > **[Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can't Face up to Reality...](http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/604-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-1.html)** > > Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers but was never hit by a plane. How?... Part 2 > **[Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can't Face up to Reality...](http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/612-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-2.html)** > > Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers but was never hit by a plane. How?... Part 3 > **[Debunking the Real 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can't Face up to Reality...](http://www1.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/622-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-3.html)** > > Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers but was never hit by a plane. How?... Part 4 > **[Debunking The Real 9/11 Myths: Why Popular Mechanics Can’t Face Up to Reality...](http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/634-debunking-the-real-911-myths.html)** > > Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers but was never hit by a plane. How?... I haven’t read much about it but it seems unlikely that 3/3 buildings would collapse in a way that appears to be a controlled explosion (visually). In movies buildings don’t collapse like that at all. ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/10 "2016-08-06T07:54:09Z")
All the threads cite their sources, which include academic and professional. 100% of actual, peer-reviewed, academic sources support the official story. Look 'em up, or don’t, but I wouldn’t expect many people around here to re-engage that dead horse topic. Even talking about it for this long has made me feel skuzzy. Good luck! ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/11 "2016-08-06T07:57:53Z")
Those links talking about the PM book also provides sources. You said “the overwhelming consensus is that it’s conspiracy theory nonsense **on par with the Illuminati** ”. “Conspiracy theory nonsense”? I know what that looks like and I know that there is hardly any evidence about the Illuminati. Well there is the Bilderberg Group but they don’t have huge numbers of related videos and pages after pages of in depth stuff that these people have. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/12 "2016-08-06T08:01:28Z")
BTW the statement “This topic has been done to death on the SDMB” implies that there has been a lot of interest in the topic including people who are supporting the conspiracy theories. On the other hand the David Icke reptilian theory probably hasn’t been “done to death” which provides more evidence about the “overwhelming consensus is that it’s conspiracy theory nonsense”. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/13 "2016-08-06T08:04:10Z")
BTW what do you think of “As of the date of this publication, there are almost 1,700 architects and engineers who openly support the findings of AE911Truth vs. only a few dozen who have openly supported the NIST WTC reports”? Do you think that there are actually many thousands of architects and engineers who have openly supported the NIST WTC reports and they just deliberately lied? ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/14 "2016-08-06T08:07:52Z")
Read the previous threads. Why should it all be repeated for you? Look it up, it’s there. ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/15 "2016-08-06T08:08:27Z")
I’d be happy to lecture about good sources versus garbage sources (and burden of proof.) But that’s what I do for a living, and if you’re good at something, never do it for free. Fall semester’s about to start. Register for my Comp. I class. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/16 "2016-08-06T08:09:57Z")
> [@BlakeTyner](#): > > The long story short is that, in that list of people, > > 1. Many are just fake names that could never be verified. > 2. At least a few (that we know of) are names of engineers/architects who have said they never signed on, and in fact reject the truthers conclusions. > 3. You don’t have to be a STRUCTURAL engineer to get on that list…you can be an electrical engineer, aerospace…etc. > 4. You don’t have to be an ARCHITECT or ENGINEER to get on the list–an undergrad student is fine. > > Any of their crap looks compelling if you’re only looking at their crap. Ok but you haven’t gone into any specifics about their arguments other than saying that “Each and every one of those claims has been discussed, repeatedly, on this board and plenty of others. Popular Mechanics even did an article debunking most of the claims.” If “the overwhelming consensus is that it’s conspiracy theory nonsense on par with the Illuminati” why were “Each and every one of those claims has been discussed, **repeatedly** ”? It sounds to me like some posters were not agreeing with the “overwhelming consensus”. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/17 "2016-08-06T08:14:27Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Read the previous threads. > > Why should it all be repeated for you? Look it up, it’s there. Previous **threads**? If “the overwhelming consensus is that it’s conspiracy theory nonsense on par with the Illuminati” why would there be multiple threads on this? Is there also the same number of threads going over and over about the Illuminati on these forums? BlakeTyner did try to respond to my arguments specifically though he just tried to explain away the number of people mentioned rather than any of their specific arguments. One of my main interests is about Building 7… ---
**Author:** ![BlakeTyner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@BlakeTyner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlakeTyner)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/18 "2016-08-06T08:18:55Z")
Yes. Threads. When the 9/11 Truther movement was still a thing, they came here to “just ask questions” (ie mention something, have it explained, then move the goalposts and mention something else.) It wasn’t long-term SDMB members arguing for the conspiracy. It was Truthers brigading–or trying to. ---
**Author:** ![JohnClay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c37758/32.png) [@JohnClay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnClay)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/19 "2016-08-06T08:50:37Z")
> [@BlakeTyner](#): > > Yes. Threads. When the 9/11 Truther movement was still a thing, they came here to “just ask questions” (ie mention something, have it explained, then move the goalposts and mention something else.) That sounds like you’re saying that the threads were from a while ago… so then maybe it is better for me to start this new thread rather than reopen long dead threads… maybe they left because they didn’t like the “consensus” here. > [@](#): > > It wasn’t long-term SDMB members arguing for the conspiracy. It was Truthers brigading–or trying to. Well I’ve been a SDMB member for at least 10 years… I’ve been a seeker of the Truth (but not claiming too strongly to have definitely found it though I do cling to my beliefs for a while until I’m sure they’re wrong). In this case I’m saying that from my POV it seems like Building’s 7 collapse looks like a demolition. I can’t understand how a fire on 2-3 floors would cause it to suddenly collapse like that in such a clean way. Rather than keeping on telling me to look in other threads I’d like it if people could explain that to me. Thanks for explaining how those 2000 names could have got there though. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917/20 "2016-08-06T09:07:16Z")
> [@JohnClay](#): > > I haven’t read much about it but it seems unlikely that 3/3 buildings would collapse in a way that appears to be a controlled explosion (visually). To which a two-part question is in order; 1. Have you actually ever seen a controlled explosion? 2. Have you ever actually seen the WTC collapse? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/architects-engineers-for-9-11-truth/761917.md?page=2)