FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
WTC7.... the Final Verdict is in on 9/11
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just kidding around there. Anyway.... I think it's been well over a year and a half now and over fifty thousand views over at the Cambridge University sponsored science forum and podcast TheNakedScientists with no criticism or refutation of any aspect of the (periodically updated) ANALYSIS or the veracity of any of the information it conveys. And over twenty thousand views here.... good (albeit sketchy) job Fintan. Maybe you were right to keep it in the General Discussion category.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8139

PostPosted: Sun Mar 27, 2016 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote




You really are one smug fucker, aren't you?

You're like Clever Hans - the horse who could do mathematics.
Give him a maths question like say 16 divided by four and he
would paw the ground four times to give you the answer.

Except that it turned out that all Clever Hans was doing was just
reading body language very well and knew when to stop pawing
the ground by picking up body cues.

I gave you full credit for coming up with great graphics which
illuminate the PROBLEM of the 2.5 seconds of WTC7 free fall.

But that the PROBLEM - not the SOLUTION.
The NIST engineers admitted and identified that problem.
Not you.
All you have done is simply restate the problem elegantly.

It's over six months since I challenged you to do more than
endlessly restate the blindingly obvious
PROBLEM.

Let me play your game here:

I have a theory that 3 + 6 = 9.
Prove me wrong. Go on.
Prove me wrong.
I am so frikkin smart.
Nobody can challenge me on this. Nobody.
I have posted all over the net that 3 + 6 = 9.
Nobody can challenge me on this. Nobody.
Jesus - i''m so fucking clever.
Nobody can challenge me on this. Nobody.

Are you getting it Amelius?

Six months ago I challenged you to do more than
endlessly restate the blindingly obvious PROBLEM.

This is what i got from you:

Hi Fintan....

You raise various issues as being important (along with a truckload of
random information and videos) but stop short of actually explaining how
or where any of them could be directly applied to the Analysis in such a
way as to impact the veracity of it or the conclusion it arrives at one way
or the other.


Why the fuck would I argue that WTC7 didn't free fall?
We all know it did!

The POINT is: WHY?

Got any suggestions? Any? At all?

Apparently not:

As I mentioned earlier, the only real challenge here, from the vantage point of the scientific method, is to provide another more plausible empirically verifiable analysis and conclusion that supercedes the prima facie empirically verifiable analysis and conclusion already provided, or, barring that, break the analysis by pointing out a specific perceived error or needed correction that would tend to negatively impact the veracity of the information conveyed (and by extension the conclusion arrived at) by simply copying and pasting one of the animations along with some accompanying discriptive text that says something like "This animation and accompanying descriptive text is incorrect/needs correction, the scenario would not play out as depicted/described and here's why...." followed by some sort of cogently elucidated explanation of the percieved error or needed correction.... those are the only ways the analysis can be defeated.


You haven't done any analysis.

Just illustration. That's all.

And apparently you haven't got a clue where to even start.

I'm just trying to figure out if you are actually that stupid,
or just suffering from some obscure form of OCD.

By the way, I have a claim which I bet you can't refute:

14 + 5 = 19.
Prove me wrong. Go on.
Prove me wrong.
I am so frikkin smart.
Nobody can challenge me on this. Nobody.

Jesus - i''m so fucking clever.
Nobody can challenge me on this. Nobody.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hah! Here's an analysis for you, it's a positive match....




.


Last edited by Aemilius on Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:11 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8139

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You seem to be having a small problem
getting that insult post above to work.

No Prob.
Let me help:




There ya go. That's better, eh?
You're entitled to get your insult on, I think.

No hard feelings. It's just that sometimes we encounter
folks on BFN who -like many- are just sleepwalking -
and we try to wake them the f**k up!

I'd be more impressed if you devoted your energies to, for example
reading Bazant & Zhou on the dynamics of steel structure collapse.
Educate yourself to try explain the 2.25sec period of WTC7 free fall.

I am going to repeat my post much earlier in this
thead for you or others actually trying to understand
what happened and thus counter the mainstream view:



KEY WTC7 QUESTIONS

1) How long should that 2.25 seconds of free fall have taken if there
had been resistance from the structure - as NIST's model claims?

Quote:

So what should the 2.25 seconds have been? 3.0 seconds? 3.5 seconds?
We need to quantify the time element to quantify the missing resistance.
The red line in the graph below marks the slope of free fall collapse rate:

Quote:




2) The simple NIST description used the words "essentially free fall ",
and described the resistance offered to that fall as "negligible".
We need some hard numbers, the fractions - not the words.


3) Simple models of the collapse marginalize the 58 perimeter columns
and tend to focus on the role of the gravity load-bearing 25 core columns.

Yes, blowing up core columns will help the building fall/implode straight down.
But will blowing up ONLY core columns enable free fall?? It would seem not.
Any evidence the perimeter was blown?
And, if not, so why didn't perimeter columns prevent the free fall??
Again, something's not adding up.


4) Simple models of the collapse ignore the east penthouse anomaly.

It's fall preceded that of the main structure. See NIST images below:

Quote:





So the mainstream explanation is that the WTC7 structure was already
collapsing internally
- even before it's perimeter was seen to drop.

I will let AE911Truth's David Chandler
argue against the NIST model:

Quote:
NIST claims that the collapse of their one key column led to a progressive collapse of the entire interior of the building leaving only a hollow shell.

The collapse of the building, seen in numerous videos, is described by NIST as the collapse of the "facade," the hollow shell.

They have no evidence for this scenario, however, and a great deal of evidence contradicts it. After the collapse of the east penthouse there is no visible distortion of the walls and only a few windows are broken at this time. Had the failure of interior columns propagated throughout the interior of the building, as asserted by NIST, it would surely have propagated to the much closer exterior walls and distorted or collapsed them.

(Major crumpling of the exterior walls, by the way, is exactly what is shown in the animations produced by NIST's computer simulation of the collapse.) But the actual videos of the building show that the exterior remained rigid during this early period.


Source


Tony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer raises even more
questions about the NIST's use of column 79 to explain collapse:


Quote:
The technical explanation is that floor beams expanded because of heat and ultimately pushed a single column, column 79 off of its seating. That, NIST says, caused the entire collapse of the building. But what NIST told the public in 2008 was the reason these columns were pushed loose is because they were unrestrained.

What was discovered last year in 2012 after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was granted, that claim was not true, that the columns were not unrestrained. In fact there were 3,896 shear studs holding those columns in place.

...The beams could not expand far enough and if they could expand enough, those stiffeners would stop that girder from falling off. They were bonded.

It would be sorta like me saying, I can put something thats a half inch wide and if i push it a half inch it will fall off this rail and thats not true. Thats what theyre saying, its that simple.


Source


In any event NIST still must admit that the structure fell at "essentially"
free fall rate. Could the 58 perimeter columns really buckle so as
to offer NO resistance? That's a stretch.

Furthermore, the east penthouse collapse was itself anomalous, says
Chandler's critique of WTC7 which is posted on AE911Truth:

Quote:
Shortly before the ultimate collapse of the building the east penthouse and the columns beneath it suddenly gave way.

NIST attributes the collapse of the east penthouse to the failure of a single column, in a complex scenario involving thermal expansion of beams supporting the column. But it is much more likely that at least two and possibly three supporting columns were "taken out" simultaneously. Three columns supported the east penthouse.

One of our German colleagues has pointed to evidence that the east penthouse fell through the interior of the building at close to freefall, evidenced by a ripple of reflections in the windows as it fell. Yet the exterior of the building retained its integrity.


Source


Well, if the east penthouse fell through the interior of the building
at close to free fall - then NIST and us skeptics must explain how
that happened and have a complex model which shows the structural
integrity implications of a near free fall event in the interior.

We can't say that collapse began when the building exterior moved.

Clearly, collapse began even BEFORE the penthouse fell inside WTC7.

But we can say that measurement of WTC7's fall rate began when
the building exterior started to move. We saw. We got data. Deal with it.

Because - no matter what is going on inside WTC7 - if the exterior
fell at free fall - then how come 58 perimeter columns somehow offered
ZERO resistance to the collapse!?

This don't add up. The mainstream explanation is a dud.

We need more than a simplistic collapse model.
We need a complex collapse model - with free fall.


We need our own alternative to this:

Quote:

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan wrote:
You seem to be having a small problem
getting that insult post above to work.

No Prob.
Let me help:




.


There's no insult there, or at least no more insulting than being called stupid or being compared to a horse. The photographs used in the analysis above weren't altered or retouched at all. Anyway, if you don't want people endlessly pointing out that you're microcephalic just write intelligently and refrain from calling normal people stupid or comparing them to horses or other animals.... pretty simple really.


Last edited by Aemilius on Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:12 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8139

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Aemilius:
no more insulting than being called
stupid or being compared to a horse.

I've had a good long think abut it.

And, you know - you're quite right.

I've apologized to the horse.

Wink

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan wrote:
Aemilius wrote:

....no more insulting than being called
stupid or being compared to a horse.

I've apologized to the horse.



.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Southpark Fan



Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Posts: 1432
Location: The Caribbean of Canada

PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 6:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Huge fire engulfs 2 towers of residential skyscraper in UAE (VIDEO)

:: When are they gonna pancake?

:: It should be collapsing into its own footprint at the speed of gravity any moment now. Or at least immediately after they set off the charges.

:: Can't blow pre-set charges yet - "Zee Plane" delayed in/by Brussels-NATO.

_________________
"Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend." - Bruce Lee
"Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth." - Buddha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawkwind



Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 730

PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 6:19 pm    Post subject: Just Go Away Reply with quote

I want to make a few points here. Kathy and Fintan are on the front line defending mothers and children against government intervention in Ireland. For you (Aemilius) to come here and have the audacity to insult your host with references to microcephalic people is just cruel and pathetic! I have great empathy for the poor Brazilian mothers forced to carry microcephalic children to full term while knowing that they have been infected by the Zika virus or the next generation of children in Ohio living with this affliction caused directly by lead contaminated water given with the full knowledge of the local government. For you, I have nothing but pity.

You have done nothing but regurgitate the same information even acknowledged by NIST and demand attention via passive aggressive or outright hostile posts. You played the same game of the other site you like to point out as a victory and your behavior has received the same praise as it has here. A whole lot of nothing! And in your smugness, you most likely think that you are justified.

Fintan and Kathy are very real people who have to be pushed very hard in order to push back and that is a respectable quality but you crossed a line and are so superior in your own mind that you think it can just go on forever. Wrong! Its boring and banal, Im being generous. Kindly do us all a favor and find another site to play your little games on and let the rest of us continue to find new issues that deserve to be intelligently discussed.

- Hawk

_________________
"Look up here, I'm in heaven. I've got scars that can't be seen. I've got drama, can't be stolen. Everybody knows me now." - David Bowie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hawkwind wrote:

For you (Aemilius) to come here and have the audacity to insult your host with references to microcephalic people is just cruel and pathetic!


Well, I didn't start it, he did. Disagreement had been expressed several times, but there were no insults exchanged prior to him just popping up recently and going on the attack calling me a smug fucker, accusing me of playing some sort of game, calling me stupid, implying I'm afflicted with some form of OCD and comparing me to a horse. That's the funny part, I mean, honestly.... Do I look like a horse to you?



hawkwind wrote:

I have great empathy for the poor Brazilian mothers forced to carry microcephalic children to full term while knowing that they have been infected by the Zika virus or the next generation of children in Ohio living with this affliction caused directly by lead contaminated water given with the full knowledge of the local government.


Right.... I have empathy for them too, and you're probably right about it not being a good idea to reference them (microcephalics). I really should have chosen a more appropriate model like Neanderthal, and it's actually a much closer match....



Remember, the photographs shown below have not been altered in any way. The straight horizontal red line clearly establishes scale and comparative cranial height between the two and the curved red line accurately compares the cranial dimensions, all showing that the cranial height and dimensions are volumetrically about the same for both the microcephaly model and the Neanderthal model (although the Neanderthal model does appear to have a greater cranial capacity in the occipital region than the microcephalic)....




Of course Fintan can take back his insult or not if he wants to, but I can't take anything back. You see, you can't take back a fact once it's been firmly established, not even an insulting one. So, I haven't technically insulted anyone really, just exposed a rather uncomfortable fact.... sorry about that.

.


Last edited by Aemilius on Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:23 am; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jimbo



Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 488

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dude chill. As one of your only champions here who cut and pasted your really brilliant analysis onto a site where it was, sadly, as all things 9/11 there, ignored. And I ain't gonna cut and paste that sucker ever again. Howzabout putting your talents into making a more easily re-viewable presentation and get the AE911 folks to present it. Meanwhile, Fintan did what he did and he was generous. You got him so excited at first he did say he'd do more for you but whatever, shit happened. And to be honest, 9/11 truth is toast, as quaint as the JFK assassination. The NWO conspiracies, little 9/11s. are coming at us like chocolates at Lucy in the chocolate factory. Meanwhile, talking shit to Fintan is really bad form. Might as well dis the Dali Lama or Bernie Sanders - Go Bernie! Want to join the conversation here, fine but please, enough. Peace.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gerrycan



Joined: 01 Feb 2014
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2016 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

".and no suspicious looking Frenchmen were spotted rigging for verinage"

Verinage wouldn't ever work on a steel frame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 7 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.