Lynn Margulis, PhD - Scientist - AE911Truth.org

[ProthoPectore]

a "gaia hypothesis" jedi.....

[jedichris8]

Yep! Pretty obvious all 3 buildings were blown up, anyone with any common sense can realize this, but this woman speaks the truth and she KNOWS they were blown up as well. Soon the world will see the true darkness of the result of this inside job. The time is coming soon people.

[stallioonie]

rest in peace!

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 I have educated myself, at university and in 10 years in construction. You dont appear to have made it out of school.

[Headshothorror4488]

oidunno88 IS A MORON, HE IS THE EXAMPLE OF THE UNEDUCATED U TUBE TROLLS OR MOMS BASEMENT D BUNKNOTHINGS WHO IGNORE SCIENCE EVIDENCE AND LAWS OF PHYSICS. IGNORE THE TROLLS WHO STAY IN DENILE IGNORING EVIDENCE. SHOW ME EVIDENCE ON THE NIST THEORY !! U FAIL TROLL, DONT BOTHER YOUR IGNORED CHILD, 100%, BUT YOUR IGNORANT SO........

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 thanks. Its reassuring to know that I am on the other side to a dribbling retard like you. Lynn Margulis is a biologist, not an engineer. That you take her word so seriously, indicates that you are only interested in the tiny, tiny minority of voices who confirm your prejudices and not the overwhelming majority who accept the obvious. You do so blindly and without question. This isn't science for you it is religious dogma and an article of faith. It is truly pathetic.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 You are a dick, and an illiterate, retarded one at that. She's a biologist, a respected one maybe, but a biologist nevertheless and therefore is not qualified to speak on this subject other than in the broadest terms and on issues surrounding scientific method. She is badly informed and wrong. Sorry a fucking child can work that out.

[magnetmanca]

@oidunno88 I think you are missing the point of what she said earlier in the video. She excels at thinking and is approaching it in a logical way based on what she's seen and heard about how it came down.

See most people believe that when part of a building gets weakened by by heat, that part of the building would bend and then collapse. That is why the pancake theory makes no sense. Considering the building was quite high I don't see how the whole thing would collapse due to heat itself.

[oidunno88]

@magnetmanca From the evidence of this video she most certainly does not excel at thinking, she comes across as insane.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 There is no 'science or laws of physics' that back up her or your claims. The thing is, engineering is a complex subject so I suppose it is not surprising that a biologist and a retard (you, in case you were wondering) would struggle to understand it.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 Not true, many steel buildings have collapsed from fire. It, in fact, used to be a method to demolish steel buildings. Another inconvenient truth for you to ignore.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 The entire ACADEMIC AND INDUSTRY COMMUNITY broadly accepts the findings of the NIST report and even where there are disagreements, no one, but no one believes troofer fantasies. Construction makes up 10% of the US economy and all the troofers can manage to get on-side are a small number of non-related, barely qualified fantasists (Lynn Margulis for example) and one or two mid grade engineers. Together they are produce a total of FUCK-ALL peer reviewed papers. They are a joke.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 You appear to be mentally challenged, perhaps I shouldn't use difficult words like 'dogma' when handing you a lesson. I'd suggest reading a book, one with words, not just pictures.

[oidunno88]

@Headshothorror4488 I have a degree in civil and strucural engineering and 10 years construction industry experience. Which is more than you or Lynn Margulis. I have done my research and I am not a) mad like LM, or b) a fucking retarded basement dwelling tinfoil troofer like you. Dick. If you are going to take me on again, try learning to spell. Oh and caps lock is on the left side of your keyboard middle row. Its ok to turn it off. DIck.

[magnetmanca]

@oidunno88 If your so educated then maybe you can shut everyone up and just tell us exactly how the buildings came down so fast.

[oidunno88]

@magnetmanca I think it is impossible to make dogmatic believers shut up. I have explained why the buildings collapsed in the way they did, you are welcome to scroll down and read them. Perhaps you can tell me what makes a biologist such an authority on this subject. You wont be able to of course, because she is not.

[magnetmanca]

@oidunno88 I've read your arguments and so far you haven't offered up any real plausible reasons for why the buildings came down the way they did. You say heat can bring down a building, but near free fall speeds I don't think so.

[oidunno88]

@magnetmanca Just to be clear structural failure of columns on the damaged floors caused by the plane and an unprecedented fire brought the buildings down. I was mistaken, you'll actually have to check my comments on another video for a more detailed explanation - i didn't write it here and cant be bothered to repeat it.

[bjdm3089]

@oidunno88 Although I anticipate a response filled with more fallacious arguments and baseless insults, I feel it is necessary to address your doubts. It is indisputable that NIST's refusal to explore the controlled demolition hypothesis a) violated national standards for fire and explosions investigations (NFPA 921, circa 2001); b) does not explain the constant downward acceleration of all three towers (resistance of undamaged structural steel?); c) denies clear evidence of flows of molten iron

[oidunno88]

@bjdm3089 You are correct about one thing, I am going to insult you. You may be able to form a sentence and use words like 'fallacious', but it doesn't stop you being a pig ignorant bed wetting tinfoil idiot like the rest of the morons who populate these pages. a) doubtful b) yes is does, perfectly and whats more it is substantiated by seismic readings which is a fuck load more than any troofer pet fantasies c) there is no such 'evidence'

[oidunno88]

@bjdm3089 b) I have explained this in a reasonable fashion without insults on other videos if you care to look at my comments. I'm sure you wont because the opinion of someone who has actually attended lectures in the subject will come a long way down your list of authoritative voices compared to say, a biologist, or a janitor, or a mentally ill tinfoil basement dwelling loser.

[magnetmanca]

@oidunno88 watch?v=wFidciVopu4 Try debunking what the explosives expert says. You can't say this guy is talking shit because his words make sense.

[oidunno88]

@magnetmanca Yawn. There are 6 companies world wide that demolish tall buildings, he is not in one of them. He is a either a liar or an incompetent, most likely a combination of the two. Like many troofers, he likes the sound of his own voice and the adulation of fellow bed wetting basement dwellers. Suffice to say, that none of the collapses look or sound like controlled demolitions. and given that it would have been impossible to rig the buildings, I am quite confident he is talking shit.

[bjdm3089]

@oidunno88 In brief, whereas Lynn and other experienced professionals in fields relevant to 9/11 research utilize the scientific method in order to corroborate their hypothesis, presenting forensic evidence along the way... You blatantly insult these professors and scientific experts using childish fallacies, all the while ignoring ALL the forensic evidence they have specifically asked you to address. Whether you dismiss this evidence out of fear or mere hatred, I do not know, but I pray for you

[oidunno88]

@bjdm3089 Biology isn't a relevant field to structural engineering is it? Troofers do not corroborate their fantasies, they cherry pick data without understanding the implications of their logical errors and then use flawed reasoning to attack plausible explanations while simultaneously using the same shitty logic to say 'X' must be wrong, therefore my fantasy is right. Troofers are unsurpassed masters in the abuse of scientific method. Lynn Margulis should be fucking ashamed to be in this video

[oidunno88]

@bjdm3089 It is your argument which is fallacious - there is not one industry or academically recognised figure in 911AE. Not one. These are not people to be respected, they are a mix of the ill-informed, vain publicity seekers and fantasists.

[millvalleyrn]

Outstanding... one of the best of the series of AE interviews in my opinion.

[pkallen58]

I thank not only Lynn, but my son for alerting me as to this video's existence. This is one brilliant scientist explaining how she has come to her conclusions and how scientists process information. A must see. For all you critics, open your minds; this woman is truly brilliant and very real. Her associations are valid and I have no doubt whatsoever that she is clarifying what needed to be explained - as far as the scientific process - a long time ago.

[oidunno88]

'The red/grey crystals are high temperature incendiaries.' Even if they were a product of an explosive reaction, it is a logical error to say that they must have resulted from an explosion - there are other explanations. Which she ignores. Unscientifically.

[oidunno88]

"unfortunately there was a lot of evidence about the uh pieces the columns were uh broken into. The nature of the uniform nature of the dust" That doesn't sound like someone who knows what they are talking about

[oidunno88]

"unfortunately there was a lot of evidence about the uh pieces the columns were uh broken into. The nature of the uniform nature of the dust" That doesn't sound like someone who knows what they are talking about.

[oidunno88]

The first 5 mins of this video where talks about what she knows is fine. Clearly a learned person. As soon as she starts talking about buildings she is clearly so far out of her depth it makes you wonder her credibility. Very odd.

[SamJendo1]

@oidunno88 can you give a few examples of what you mean?

[oidunno88]

@SamJendo1 She starts by making a very passionate speech about the power of science to be self correcting and work its way to the truth, then immediately starts with the proposition that it must have been a controlled demolition because she cant explain it. Its bizarre.

Of course she also makes the point that something cannot be science unless it follows scientific method and is open to scrutiny and we all know that AE911 have published for proper peer review a total of NO papers.

[oidunno88]

@SamJendo1 "3 buildings come down at 'almost' the speed of freefall." Therefore, she goes on to explain, there must have been 'high exlposives' and that this is the most reasonable hypothesis. It isn't the most reasonable hypothesis, clearly, even if you are stupid enough to believe CD theories, the FIRST thing that should strike you, the FIRST thing to consider is the planes. Of course, the buildings did not fall at freefall speed. They fell considerably slower.

[oidunno88]

@SamJendo1 All of the evidence wasn't removed. A great deal of testing was carried out. Truthers object because the testing did not focus on their theory of CD. But the theory of CD is wrong on just about every level. Thermite has never been used to bring down a building before. Nano-thermite is to the best of my knowledge a 'work in progress'. There is no way all 3 buildings could have been rigged such that the demolition could be done at freefall speed. There is ZERO evidence......

[oidunno88]

@SamJendo1 The was of course a lot of testing carried out, however she and troofers in general object because it did not focus on their pet theory. Leaving aside the mechanisms of structural failure. CD isn't a theory worth consideration anyway because in order for the 3 towers to have collapsed at freefall speed every floor of all 3 buildings would have to have been rigged. 30,000 people worked in those towers and there isn't one account of any work carried out to the buildings structure.

[sdeevG]

@oidunno88

Wrong. 4 months prior the employees admitted the elevators were closed and guarded and they heard "refurnishing" being done.

Are you saying that the buildings didn't come down at freefall speed? If so, don't expect a reply.

[oidunno88]

@sdeevG Hearing refurbishment is not prima facie evidence of a conspiracy, it is evidence of a building owner carry out his statutory and legal duties to maintain his property. It is of course a total irrelevance anyway, because to demolish the building at freefall speed, you would need access to all structural columns, not just those around the lift shafts. So no evidence then.

Oh, the buildings didn't come down at freefall speed, its just that this inconvenient truth is ignored by troofers.

[sdeevG]

@oidunno88

Whoever talked about a "conspiracy". It's a conspiracy when you talk about the conspirators. The professionals from AE speak out on the controlled demolition and rest is for the public to speculate as to who the conspirators are.

Also do you know what freefall speed is? 9/11 commission report admitted the north and south towers came down in under 10 seconds and i leave it up to you to find out the gravitational force specific to NY's altitude and the height of the buildings.

[oidunno88]

@sdeevG Well you appear to be a truther. So its your hobby. The 'professionals' from AE are mostly unqualified to speak on the subject, given that they are scientists in unrelated fields, like this mental woman, or they are inexperienced or they are students or they are simply liars. Architects opinions, who make up a lot of AE, should be viewed with sceptisism FIRST. If you knew anything about the design and construction process you would know that failures mechanisms are the specialism of SE's

[Headshothorror4488]

@oidunno88 , HAHAHAHAHA. WOW !!!! YOU ARE A TRUE IDIOT KID. DO I TRUST THOUSANDS OF EXPERTS OR A UNEDUCATED U TUBE TROLL WITH NO LIFE ? U CAN NOT WIN, SHOW ME THOUSANDS WHO AGREE WITH THE NIST THEORY ? PLEASE ? U CANT SLANDER EXPERTSBWITH DEGREES, THEY HAVE THE DEGREE , YOU FAIL !!!! WATCH THE MENTAL HEALTH PART OF EXPERTS SPEAK OUT. FAIL !!!!

[oidunno88]

@sdeevG The NIST report did no such thing. Its just troofers keep telling you that and you believe them because you are gullible. Gravitational force due NY's altitude? Are you taking the piss? Read a fucking book. Clue, its called potential energy (I can only imagine thats what you mean). And you people wonder why you are laughed at.

[Headshothorror4488]

@oidunno88 WHAT !!!! THIS LADY GOT A MEDAL IN SCIENCE FROM CLINTON AND THE DIVINCCI MEDAL YOU IGNORANT UNEDUCATED U TUBE TROLL !!!!!!!! SHE IS SPEAKING FACTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND SCIENCE EVIDENCE. THIS LADY IS JOINED BY THOUSANDS WITH DEGREES , PHYSICISTS, ENGINEERS AND ALL DEAL WITH BUILDINGS MORON. TO TRY AND SLANDER A DEGREE HOLDER SUCH AS HER SHOWS YOUR OWN STUPIDITY.

[Aanthanur]

WOW then she goes on to tell a huge lie....

NIST did test the Hypothesis of Explosives, and the reasonable concludion was, no sound of explosions as it would have to be expected from that hypothesis, thus hypthesis failed and can be dismissed, come up with another Hypthesis, one that will not fail at the first test already.

[fake2]

@Aanthanur But that was only after NIST ignored all the first responders (90+) and any witnesses that said they heard explosions pre-collapse.

[Aanthanur]

@fake2 hearing explosions does not mean there were explosives, explosions are often present in fires.

[fake2]

@Aanthanur .I'd like to consider hearing explosions means there were explosives until proven otherwise. If half the responders are 100% wrong there are still at least 45 that have the possibility of being right. A new investigation would get to the bottom of this. Thanks for your thoughts.

[Aanthanur]

@fake2 jsut look at some of the resent fires in London, explosions in burning buildings. happens all the time.

and 90 first responders is not really much compared to the huge number of first responders.

[Aanthanur]

i hope she will ask some experts in the involved fields, because she is way out of her field here. and the AE has no Hypthesis. They talk about it since years and while they sale DVD's they still didn't find time to work out a proper hypthesis.

[Somnambulo]

Awesome clip. Lynn is now my hero.

[KB4QAA]

Dr. M.  I listened to your talk 30 years ago and was fascinated. Obviously the lab chemicals have gotten to your brain. So sad.

[Funkadelic2]

Folks, it IS important that you show your sympathy with those seeking a new investigation, but it is important too, to really sign the petitions actually demanding a new, real, IMPARTIAL investigation:

w w w 2.ae911truth. org/signpetition. p h p

Thank you.

[mikethemooable]

Makes sense to me. Thanks!

[mooners40]

The most likely hypothesis for wtc7 is controlled demolition - and free-fall and eyewitness testimony and physical evidence of sufidation of the steel prove this

[GruesomeTruth]

She does a good job laying out the abstract arguments against NIST & their poor work. Hope we get to hear more more detailed arguments from her.

My guess is that NIST scientists basically did the best they could considering they were given an impossible mandate: to explain the 3 collapses Only in terms of damage & fires, and to ignore 'crazy' demolition possibilities.

Tho NIST did give a barely passing nod to demolition in dealing with WTC7. But it seems clear they'd already ruled it out.

[dudewithopinion]

Her arguments would apply to the global warming hoax too.

[danp5648]

Is her main point to be shitty science or is it overt fraud by NIST? That is my question.

[Funkadelic2]

@danp5648 Both of them.

[jops11]

Another great video with professional insite. Thank you AE911 truth

[therealgretavo]

OK so the answer is actually that he was put in touch with the original sample collector by Steve Jones. While this isn't the same as getting the sample from Jones directly, it's still one of the same sources as used by Jones. This still doesn't count as replication as far as I'm concerned, esp given the lack of mention of the chips by anyone who looked at the dust before Jones...

[therealgretavo]

@Lietuvispartizan Where did Basile obtain the sample he analyzed? I'm not disputing that nanothermite was found in the samples that Steve Jones collected, I'm disputing whether that nanothermite is actually in all of the WTC dust including samples that didn't go through Steve Jones.

[Lietuvispartizan]

@therealgretavo You should address these questions to M.Basile, not me. I think he has 4 dust samples:

/watch?v=PZNAd45vK-4&feature=m­fu_in_order&list=UL;t=76s

[therealgretavo]

@Lietuvispartizan He doesn't say there where he obtained the four samples (I'm guessing here they are the same as Jones'). To consider these findings credible they must be replicated using different samples for which the chain of custody is credibly established (which may of course be impossible). As it is this evidence is only as credible as Steven Jones, which given his "Jesus in America" paper and his endorsement of Glenn Beck as a legitimate truthseeker concerns me deeply, that's all.

[Lietuvispartizan]

@therealgretavo Nope, you're wrong. Basile obtained a dust sample from NY museum:

/watch?v=JZNQq7XBLwc;t=190

[therealgretavo]

@Lietuvispartizan he says from *a* NY museum that wishes to remain anonymous--my concern stands.

[99Eternal]

@therealgretavo The dust itself is far from the only evidence supporting controlled demolition.

But, to enlighten you, even FEMA found the iron microspheres Steven Jones found - FEMA WTC report Appendix C, they even said the findings were inexplicable and further analysis is recommended in their conclusion. All of the "inexplicable anomalies" FEMA found just happen to coincide with controlled demolition with thermate, thermite, and possibly conventional explosives.

[therealgretavo]

@99Eternal I understand that the towers were demolished and I believe it probably involved both conventional thermite and/or thermate as well as explosives of some kind. My only concern is with the alleged evidence of nanothermite. I don't necessarily doubt that the chips that are being found and analyzed by Jones, Basile, and anyone else are nanothermite-

[therealgretavo]

@99Eternal -I'm concerned about the integrity of the dust samples they obtained. I don't see what about the WTC demoilitions requires anything as exotic as nanothermite, and if there's the slightest chance that it's a setup along the lines of the forged (but accurate) Dubya AWOL documents that sank Dan Rather's career I think we should be very cautious.

[99Eternal]

@therealgretavo Right on. I guess what I'd say then is look into whether or not conventional explosives cause the anomalies FEMA found ie the chemical make-up of FEMA's samples, and the the iron rich micro spheres. Just fyi these FEMA samples were not from dust samples but steel samples, 3 of them I believe. nano-thermate happens to explain the inexplicable anomalies FEMA found in their report, the spheres, the iron/steel flowing from the buildings, the molten steel reported by firefighters etc.

[99Eternal]

@therealgretavo Don't get me wrong, I don't know exactly what was used, rdx, thermite, thermate, nanothermate or a combination. Every one's findings including FEMA interestingly enough seem to point to nano-composite explosives and/or thermate due to the size of the particles and the presence of sulphur within the oxidized steel samples (and alleged dust samples).

I do understand your point about the validity of the dust samples, but keep in mind their findings coincide with FEMA's steel.

[therealgretavo]

@99Eternal My understanding of the FEMA sample (Appendix C in the FEMA report) is that it's consistent with thermate (thermite plus sulfur), and that nothing about it requires that nanothermite have been used, but i could be wrong. The iron-rich microspheres would seem to be the result of explosions dispersing the molten iron being produced by thermite/thermate. What essential role, if any, would have been played specifically by nanothermite (which can't be as easy/cheap to get as thermite)?

[99Eternal]

@therealgretavo "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”

Their findings explain the anomalies FEMA found, and gets into the nano sized particles etc. Written by nine professionals, who's work is based off Steven Jones' findings.

The likelyhood of their findings being fraudulent, considering the USGS dust samples also contain this material, is in my opinion extremely low. To each his own though, I understand your hesitancy.

[therealgretavo]

@99Eternal The USGS analysis found iron rich spheres, but did not mention red/gray chips. I think it's odd they would admit to finding previously molten iron spheres which are pretty damning to the official story but leave out mention of red/gray chips if they had been in their samples... time will tell, I'm sure...

[99Eternal]

@therealgretavo Exactly, so both FEMA and USGS find the same materials that prompted Steven Jones to further investigate which is the reason he ends up finding the red/grey chips nano-scale in terms of size.

He then asked 8 other professionals from areas around the globe to peer review his findings. Many debunkers attempt to attack how heavily his work has been peered, and completely avoid the work/experiments itself. I would think there would be peer reviewed responses if Jones is a fraud!

[EGRJ]

@99Eternal It hasn't been corroberated by independent scientists. The one paper it got published in turned out to be a fraud which accepts blatantly false papers composed of compueter-generated nonsense from non-existent institutions as soon as the people submitting pay up.

[99Eternal]

@EGRJ AE911TRUTH have over 1,300 peer reviewed and published papers, which "one" are you speaking of?

No corroboration?? Did you even watch this vid?

FEMA found the iron-rich microspheres, FEMA also says they are "INEXPLICABLE".

USGS also finds iron rich microspheres in their dust samples...

If the AE911Truth papers are fraudulent, why don't you (or anyone else) write a peer reviewed response to them, or to FEMA, or to the USGS explaining the anomalies?!

Laughable..

[99Eternal]

@EGRJ Try 1,500 licensed architects and engineers, for a start! Demolition experts, chemists, physicists, metallurgical analysts, firefighters, ironworkers, pilots, intelligence, military, experts from every field that has anything to do with 9/11 have come forward, you ignorant fool!.

Tom Sullivan, Richard Humenn Jerry Lobdall, Mark Basile, Jeff Ferrer, Tony Szamboti, Stepehen Dusterwald, Casey Pfeiffer, Kathy McGrade, Ron Bookman, Robert McCoy, Kamal Obeid all on video, I can go forever...

[MustacheVerra]

Excellent!

[therealgretavo]

Why would there be so much unignited material left in the dust anyway? The findings are relevant only if they are true, and we only have Steven Jones' say so that the dust samples he collected had these chips in them before they were given to him. Where is the replication of these findings, not in Jones' own samples, but in samples collected and analyzed by someone not associated with Jones?

[Lietuvispartizan]

@therealgretavo

/watch?v=AJ7hXrmMRPc;t=38m08s

[therealgretavo]

recently expressed support for Glenn Beck. Why no mention of red/gray chips in the reports by among others the RJ Lee group, which Jones and others have cited because they *did* report finding previously molten iron and molybdenum microspheres, which by themselves put the lie to the official collapse explanation? Are we to believe either that the presence of red/gray chips was ignored by them, or that they hushed up that finding but not others just as incriminating?

[chronotek2009]

when this dvd comes out it needs to be shown on tv, instead of that crap they had on the history channel.

[kansasisaband]

The charade is all but over. Anyone weighing the scientific data with a semi-rational mind can see that this was an inside job.

[ComicPenius]

NIST refuses to provide the data from their computer simulation. That makes it invalid since it cannot be tested by scientists. Since the simulation is the only supporting evidence for their hypothesis of "thermal expansion", they have not done any science at all. All evidence should be peer reviewed whether it's AE911, Popular Mechanics or NIST.

[oidunno88]

@ComicPenius Ignorance personified. Thermal expansion is a fully understood behaviour of materials. There are many peer reviewed papers based on the findings of NIST and there is NOTHING stopping troofers creating their own finite element model to substantiate their claims. Nothing other than the fact most are too stupid to spell 'finite'.

[ComicPenius]

@oidunno88 If thermal expansion easily capable of dropping a building in ~10 seconds then NIST should have no problem in releasing the input parameters for their model. Refusing to release such data only creates suspicion so even you should support the release of the data.

[oidunno88]

@ComicPenius Apart from the fact that you clearly have no understanding of how materials behave under temperature, you have a bigger misunderstanding of things are proven. If troofers want to be heard they must first demonstrate they have a case. In this instance they must build their own model, with their own plausible assumptions and conditions to show that an alternative explanation exists. You've had 10 fucking years to come up with the goods and you have come up with NOTHING.

[oidunno88]

@ComicPenius You aren't taken seriously because you do attempt to argue seriously. The whole '911 troof community' is a pathetic joke. The sad truth (for you at least) is that, even if your nutty theories are correct (which of course they aren't as any 7 year old child can figure), there isn't a single person in your group of 'engineer' and 'scientist' heroes that have the intellectual capacity to demonstrate it. Not one. 10 fucking years. Nothing. 

[ComicPenius]

@oidunno88 Excellent! So you support the call for NIST to release the data from their model? After all, if any contrary theory is "nutty" there won't be any problem. Right?

[oidunno88]

@ComicPenius No, I support the idea of troofers doing the hard work that they expect of others themselves. You people have had 10 years. Put up or shut the fuck up.

[ComicPenius]

@oidunno88 No, AE911Truth are putting up and mental midgets suffering from cognitive dissonance, like yourself, are telling them to shut up.

I assume your scientific credentials are greater than Lynn Margulis? Care to share them?

[betamale3]

@ComicPenius

>>I assume your scientific credentials are greater than Lynn Margulis? Care to share them?<<

You shouldnt blindly follow authority, the truth isnt determined by the size of your credentials.

And you dont need any scientific training to see she is suffering from "Nobel Syndrome", even though she hasnt won a Nobel prize

[TABOOVSKNOWLEDGE]

Evidence by Authority!

I like that term!

[haze42082]

This 10 minute interview was amazing!

[haze42082]

Much love to dr. Margulis, coming from mass here! I didn't think anyone living in this state questioned the official story. Lol anyways thank you again dr. Margulis

[cogrn73]

get to the point, i know what science is.

[grizzzlyjoe]

@Frosti2008 Nah ... he wasn't smart enough to be trusted with the secrets, he drinks too much and was a coke freak in his earlier years ... that makes you untrustworthy for anything but being someone else's puppet.

Cheney & Rumsfeld, and their "guys" set it up, leaving Bush grinning with "Plausible Denability".

Bush knew "something" was going to happen, but not WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, or HOW --- BUT he did know "WHY" ... it was his father's unfinished business.

[pianodavy]

Dr. Margulis shocks me here with her hypocritical assessment. So, I guess she didn't happen to catch the videos of totally fueled jumbo airliners flying into these buildings? Where is her evidence for the "controlled explosions"? Why does she not inform her listeners of the unique exoskeleton design of the towers which were meant to collapse exactly as they did in the event that future demolition would be needed? Why does she ignore temperature ratings of jet fuel? Conspiracy theorist!

[FYRFOX198]

@pianodavy You didn't get the memo. They destroyed the evidence while you were still in shock back then and maybe you haven't recovered yet. You need to watch the other video with the architect who was there when they built the Towers. He said the core of the building was done in such a way. If the pancake theory is correct the core with the elevator shaft should've

[tippohat]

That lady is pretty great!

[blossombogart2]

please keep up the great work Mr. Gage...someday all truth will see the light of day...you are a real patriot..

[ho2cultcha]

this is FANTASTIC! when is the word going to get out?

[truefictions]

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."

Great video. Peace

[hypnofan35]

i have this "big" theory. i contend that if space debris come together by the force of gravity the natural shape will be hollow sphere. Put your physics cap on for a minute and analyze how gravity will sum and prevail.. Inside surface is very similar to outside surface with similar atmosphere & landscape. That's like a blocked concept. Why would it be blocked?  It seems like we are being led to believe it is something else. The proof is simplistic by measuing Gforce down a well shaft.