View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Is Richard Gage of AE911Truth.org Fraudulent?

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 00:59

35 years in structural engineering.

ProfWag, how many structural engineers have to be quoted before you concede huh? It is now 100 percent clear that you are NOT a truth seeker and you do not give a flying f*** about the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edward E. Knesl, MS Eng, PE – Licensed Professional Civil and Structural Engineer, State of Arizona. Thirty five years of domestic and international experience in commercial and transportation projects, including: Structural Design and Analysis, Construction Administration and Management, Plan Review, and Special Inspection.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"We design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of the second within each story and subsequently at each floor bellow.

We do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the top.

The engineering science and the law of physics simply doesn't know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse. Where would such energy would be coming from?" http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29






Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:03

From an expert in structural steel.

LISTEN TO HIM PROFWAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Joseph Testa, BS CE, PE – Former Civil Engineer, Department of Transportation, State of New York. Former Licensed Professional Engineer, State of New York. Experienced with Highway Design, Drainage Design, Pedestrian access Design, Metals Engineering and Structural Steel Quality Assurance. Provided quality assurance for structural steel used in New York State bridges, and analyzing and designing repairs for deteriorated and otherwise damaged metal bridges.

* Comment 2/6/06: " I've worked in structural steel for years and I've studied major structural collapses. I don't believe the collapse witnessed was possible due to the planes and ensuing fires alone. I don't believe the core verticals would have buckled as they apparently did, unless first taken out from below. I don't claim to know who might have been responsible, but a preponderance of eyewitness testimony supports secondary [explosive] devices.

IMO, nobody knows what really happened, despite countless claims of certainty on both sides of the aisle. ...

Ideally, we need to see an accurate scale model, or at the minimum, an accurate detailed computer simulation & recreation to show that such a complete instantaneous failure of the central vertical columns is even possible." http://www.dailykos.com


* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"The speed at which the buildings fell implied that the central cores provided virtually no vertical resistance at any point during the collapses. When the live television commenter stated that there must have been tons of explosives on site to cause such a collapse, I found myself in agreement and assumed it would all come out during the investigation.

Combined with the reports of "molten metal", inexplicably high temperatures recorded even by satellite, rapid removal and destruction of the structural evidence, the finding of tiny fragments of human bone thrown laterally from the structures, the missing pentagon trillions on 9/10; I am very concerned about the kind of world we are leaving to the next generations. 9/11 and the ensuing cover up is a big part of that concern." http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:08

David Scott, AMICE, CEng, MIStructE – Consulting Structural Engineer. Founding director of a structural and architectural design practice in Perthshire, Scotland. 20 years experience in building design.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode. Lack of aircraft debris at Pentagon site leaves official story in tatters." http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:11

A structural engineer with very impressive credentials.

Nathan S. Lomba, BS CE, PE, SE, M.ASCE – Licensed Professional Civil Engineer, State of California. Licensed Professional Civil and Structural Engineer, State of Idaho. Experience ranges from custom residential to heavy industrial structures. Major project involvements include: Lead civil/structural engineer on a $700 million project for the U.S. Air Force; structural design engineer for a 41,000 sq. ft. Pulp Machine Building; and Resident Engineer on a 550 MW Natural-gas fired power plant. Member, American Concrete Institute (ACI). Member, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Charter Member, Structural Engineering Institute (SEI). Professional Member, American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). 39 years experience.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures.

Neither of the official precipitating sources for the collapses, namely the burning aircraft, were centered within the floor plan of either tower; both aircraft were off-center when they finally came to rest within the respective buildings. This means that, given the foregoing assumptions, heating and weakening of the structural framing would have been constrained to the immediate vicinity of the burning aircraft. Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the flames—just as the handle on a frying pan doesn't get hot at the same rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and stiffness.

Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, “if” the structure in the vicinity of either burning aircraft started to weaken, the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless, the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper floors to one side—much like the topping of a tall redwood tree—not a concentric, vertical collapse.

For this reason alone, I rejected the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC towers out of hand. Subsequent evidence supporting controlled, explosive demolition of the two buildings are more in keeping with the observed collapse modalities and only serve to validate my initial misgivings as to the causes for the structural failures. " http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:15

Dennis J. Kollar, PE – Structural Engineer. Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Wisconsin.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"For me the most convincing aspect that the 911 collapse was a controlled demolition is the recorded explosions on the 9/11 Eyewitness DVD. The explosions, along with the uniformity and totality of the collapses, when added to the 100's of so-called coincidences on, before and after that day, add up to more evidence of a Government involved crime than has convicted most people in our prisons today." http://www.ae911truth.org


David C. Avina, BS ME – Project Construction Manager. 15 years of heavy utility and industrial construction experience. 5 years of operations experience. 10 years of project engineer experience in the construction of large utility power plants and industrial process facilities. Experienced with all phases of construction practices and procedures from demolition, civil, structural, mechanical electrical controls, and through startup and commissioning.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"Based upon the analysis of the telecast video reports, interviews of on site personnel and witness testimony, including that of the building lease holder and also those other reports provided by independent engineering observations, I am of the firm understanding that the collapse of the World Trade buildings 1, 2, and 7 were not caused by a plane impact, nor was this collapse caused by a fire from the fuel from the alleged plane impacts." http://www.ae911truth.org


Erwin De Jong, MS Mechanical and Structural Eng – Aerospace and Structural Engineer.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition: "From a technical point of view it is not explainable that a steel structure sinks down into its own footprint with obviously no resistance after intense fires or even a plane crash." http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Aug 2009, 01:16

Scepcop wrote:ProfWag, another structural engineer. How many more does it take to convince you?

Just one would be nice Mr. Wu. From my perspective, your reading comprehension skills SUCK! Please review again what I wrote: This page lists well over 1000 certified structural engineers, certified by the Structural Engineering Certification Board (SECB) of The National Council of Structural Engineers Association. None of your names are certified structural engineers. NONE OF THEM! Go back and look for yourself http://www.secertboard.org/Docs/Listing ... _12-07.pdf . You see, Richard Gage is trying to convince people that he has all of these experts behind him, when, upon a little closer evaluation, he does not. This is a clear case of fraud, pure and simple. There is your proof.
Have a wonderful day Mr. Wu.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby ciscop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:22

sorry to be late for the dance but richard gage is the owner of 911truth.org?
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:23

A logical analysis from a Fire Protection Engineer.

Edward S. Munyak, BS ME, MS Eng. Mgmt., PE – Licensed Professional Mechanical Engineer and Fire Protection Engineer, State of California. 20 years experience as a Fire Protection Engineer for the U.S. Departments of Energy, Defense, and Veterans Affairs. Contributing Subject Matter Expert to the U.S. Department of Energy Fire Protection Engineering Functional Area Qualification Standard for Nuclear Facilities. Member, Board of Directors, Northern California - Nevada Chapter, Society of Fire Protection Engineers. Currently Fire Protection Engineer for the city of San Jose, CA, 10th largest city in the U.S.

* Presentation at the 2007 National Fire Protection Association World Fire Safety Conference "High Rise Buildings and Large Fires - Structural loads & thermal strain - What can happen" 6/4/07:

"We will find that the government investigations into building collapse [at the World Trade Center] must consider controlled demolition as far more probable since fire effects collapse could never be duplicated. ...

- The concentric nearly freefall speed exhibited by each building was identical to most controlled demolitions.

- The aircraft impact and fire severity effects were magnified in the NIST reports.

- Collapse of WTC 1, 2 & 7 were not caused by fire effects. ...

The NIST fire results proved that the fire loading in WTC was consistent with all building code assumptions and that the steel frame temperatures were not even close to the critical temperature of steel 593 degree Centigrade. Analysis also showed that the fire in WTC 2 [South Tower] was almost under control and running out of fuel when it suddenly and totally failed in less than one hour. Analysis further shows that the fire was oxygen starved hence not nearly at hot as other high rise fires. The official reports and conclusions had many technical distortions and obfuscations of the excellent research input in arriving at a flawed, politically driven conclusion of building performance."


* Editor's note: WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11, seven hours after the collapses of the Twin Towers. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.


* Presentation to the Northern California - Nevada Chapter, Society of Fire Protection Engineers 4/21/06: "A steel frame building with the mass of WTC 1 or 2 could have partial structural collapse after aircraft impact only if the heat output was at least 100 times the heat release rate of the accountable fuel load and ventilation conditions in the south tower.

This fire would need to involve every floor from impact floor to the roof with most windows broken and providing plenty of oxygen as in the Edificio Windsor fire in Madrid.

This most severe fire would need to burn for at least 12 hours before loss of strength from heat; and thermal strains from expansion and contraction caused partial collapse." http://www.ncnsfpe.org


* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"I have collaborated with a research chemical engineer (P.E. in CA also) and he has worked with NIST reports that positively show that the jet fuel contributed very little to the duration of the fires and that in fact all the fires were very weak in historical perspective. They were oxygen starved as evidenced by the black smoke. If you dig deeper into the NIST reports they confirm that steel temperatures were low.

I presented for continuing education credits at the NFPA World Safety Conference in Boston, MA 6/4/2007. My presentation showed that all three WTC "collapses" have no resemblance to any previous high rise fire, full scale fire tests in the UK involving much higher steel temperatures, or computer simulations using finite element analysis. " http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:25

Mikos S. Fabersunne, BS Eng, PE – Licensed Professional Mechanical Engineer, State of California. Hazardous Substances Engineer with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (oversight of seismic hazard study of industrial wastewater treatment plant; design of piping system; construction oversight, database development). Formerly Mechanical Engineer with the California Energy Commission. Over 25 years as Licensed Professional Mechanical Engineer.

* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"The nearly free-fall velocity and the symmetrical path of collapse of Building 7, the confined footprint of the building's debris, the lack of any external force applied to the building's exterior are suspicious. Coupled with these factors, a visual comparison of the collapse with that of buildings being leveled by professional, controlled demolition suggests that the cause officially attributed to the failure (weakening of the structural members due to fire) is exceedingly unlikely. The true cause was likely an intentional, controlled demolition using explosive thermal charges typically employed for such purposes.

The failures of WTC Buildings 1 and 2, likewise, are suspicious due to the inherent design strength of the buildings' cores to withstand aircraft impact; the relatively low temperature of a kerosene fire v. the temperature required for structural steel failure; the presence of subterranean molten steel, suggesting that a high-temperature cutting material was employed ("thermate" or a derivative); the debris cloud, which resembled that from an explosion; and like Building 7, the near free-fall velocity of collapse.

Together these factors suggest that the cause of collapse was an intentional deployment of a professionally designed and executed demolition process utilizing systematically and remotely detonated, thermal cutting charges strategically situated throughout the buildings on key structural support members and their joints." http://www.ae911truth.org
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:29

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:ProfWag, another structural engineer. How many more does it take to convince you?

Just one would be nice Mr. Wu. From my perspective, your reading comprehension skills SUCK! Please review again what I wrote: This page lists well over 1000 certified structural engineers, certified by the Structural Engineering Certification Board (SECB) of The National Council of Structural Engineers Association. None of your names are certified structural engineers. NONE OF THEM! Go back and look for yourself http://www.secertboard.org/Docs/Listing ... _12-07.pdf . You see, Richard Gage is trying to convince people that he has all of these experts behind him, when, upon a little closer evaluation, he does not. This is a clear case of fraud, pure and simple. There is your proof.
Have a wonderful day Mr. Wu.


Did you check all 786 names to see if any match your list? Really?

Whether they are on the list or not, those architects and engineers are professionals. That's all he claims. He does verify each and every one of them for their credentials. When you sign the petition, there is a verification process if you are an architect or engineer. They ask your license number too.

How is that fraud? If Gage had said that all his members are on your list, that would be lying, but he didn't. You are just BSing out of desperation again.

Read the statements above. These people have YEARS of professional work experience in structural design and engineering. That is REAL!

You are just a BSer. So what is your point?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:30

ciscop wrote:sorry to be late for the dance but richard gage is the owner of 911truth.org?


No he is the owner of AE911Truth.org.

Check out that site.

ProfWag has spelling problems and spelled the title of the URL in this thread wrong. I will go fix it now.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Aug 2009, 01:35

Scepcop wrote:
ciscop wrote:sorry to be late for the dance but richard gage is the owner of 911truth.org?


No he is the owner of AE911Truth.org.

Check out that site.

ProfWag has spelling problems and spelled the title of the URL in this thread wrong. I will go fix it now.

I sure did leave out the AE. My bad.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Is Richard Gage/911truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Aug 2009, 01:37

Scepcop wrote:Did you check all 786 names to see if any match your list? Really?

Did I personally? No. Did someone else? Yes. Of course, that same person also claims that there are less than 300 architects and engineers on that list, but I really didn't want to go there and count so I haven't posted that info here. Yet.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Is Richard Gage of AE911Truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby Scepcop » 27 Aug 2009, 01:53

ProfWag, uh, check this out. It appears that YOU are the one committing the fraud here. You are insinuating the one has to be a member of the SECB to be a "real structural engineer"? Is that correct?

Well according to their FAQ, this cerification is just an optional add on enhancement to make you look better and more skillful, it does not make someone any less of a structural engineer if they don't have it. Thus, you are attempting to dishonestly insinuate that these structural engineers are not licensed in order to discredit them. That is not true and is highly misleading, deceptive and unethical on your part. Here's proof.

Read their FAQ below, which exposes the deception of ProfWag: (nowhere on here does it say you have to be a SECB member to be a "real structural engineer"!)

http://www.secertboard.org/qanda.htm

1.

Q:

Is certification by the SECB the same as licensing by States?

A:

No. The SECB certifies an engineer, already licensed, in the practice of Structural Engineering. Certification will not affect anyone's present structural engineering registrations/licenses, nor will it make it easier to obtain licensing in other states at this time. The hope is that, in the future, it may do so.
2.

Q:

Will certification make it easier to become licensed in one of the ten states that presently license structural engineers either by practice or title?

A:

No. But, it is anticipated that states will recognize the certification process by SECB in the future and allow SECB certification to eliminate much of the verification processes required by State Licensing Boards.
3.

Q:

Will certification be granted by "grandfathering"?

A:

No.
4.

Q:

Do I have to be licensed as a Structural Engineer to be certified by the SECB?

A:

No. But a license granted by a legal jurisdiction is required.
5.

Q:

I am already a licensed Structural Engineer. Why should I become certified by the SECB?

A:


Certification by the SECB is yet another testament as to the level of skill you possess. The certification requirements may exceed the requirements of your State Licensing Board. Also, national certification may be more recognized and required by stakeholders in other states where you work, if those states do not license structural engineers. Receiving certification through the Structural Engineering Certification Board aids in:


* Establishing an identity for structural engineering, as a distinct and separate professional practice from civil engineering, in much the same was that neurologists, cardio-vascular surgeons, and other medical specialties have established professional certification programs to identify practice in the various medical practice fields.
* Assisting the broader efforts by NCSEA and SEI and NCEES to work with the various states to promote the adoption of uniform structural engineering practice legislation, so that our licenses will be more transportable from state to state in the future and also, so that structural engineering practice is restricted to those who have the appropriate education and experience to practice it competently.
* Providing the practicing profession a direct voice in establishing what the appropriate standards of primary education, continuing education, and experience are for structural engineering licensing.
* Attempting to re-establish structural engineering as a profession, rather than as a technical avocation, and in so doing enhance the perceived value of our services to our clients.

6. Q. What is the justification for the application/annual certification fees?
A. Fees are established based on the following considerations:

i.
ii.

iii.
iv.
Administrative staff time and costs
Direct reimbursement for actual costs incurred by board and committee members who are volunteering their time for the program and the betterment of the profession
Support the visibility of the program to assure it meets the intended goal and vision of the program
Unlike licensing programs administered by states, this program is fully self supporting and does not receive subsidies from states or other local/national organizations
7. Q. Why, if an applicant did apply for certification through grandfathering during the initial year, is there an additional certification fee for all prior years that one was eligible?
A. Certification through the grandfathering provisions is a privilege being provided to the individual. It permits the applicant to be certified and become a charter member without having to go through examinations and other processes that have developed in the time since the applicant was initially practicing. Individuals who have participated through the initial year have supported the program and helped in its success and the betterment of the profession and protection of the public. Those who chose not to participate during the intial year, are obtaining the privilege, but must also contribute to the same level as the original applicants.
8. Q.

What is the appropriate acronym and title to use in acknowledging my certification?
A. Engineers certified in the practice of structural engineering through the SECB are encouraged to use “SECB” following their name and titles (Joe Smith, PE, SECB). The correct terminology to use in describing certification is the following: “Joe Smith, Certified in the Practice of Structural Engineering.” No alternate usages are acceptable. The SECB cannot be held liable for the misuse
of this terminology.
9. Q.

What will I receive upon being approved for certification?
A. Individuals will receive a plaque, wallet card and a lapel pin upon being approved for certification.
Each renewal cycle, a new plate will be sent for the plaque displaying the appropriate expiration
date, along with an updated wallet card.
10. Q.

How do I document my PDH’s for each renewal cycle and what hours are appropriate to use
toward certification?”
A. Please refer to the “Recertification” button on the home page of the website
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Is Richard Gage of AE911Truth.org Fraudulent?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Aug 2009, 02:00

Uhhhhh no, where the hell did you get that idea? I'm merely insinuating that certification goes along way towards credibility. And, if the structural engineer institute doesn't have anyone backing Gage, then I question his support.
For example, I work in Human Resources. There is a Human Resources certification called a PHR. You by no means need to be certified to work in Human Resources and there are some very good Human Resource people who aren't certified. However, those of us that are certified are more respected in our field. That's all I'm saying.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest