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 May 09, 2015 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Southpark Fan wrote:
That is too bad it didn't help Aemilius. One thing, you need to make sure your computer is optimized; that is, no viruses, no programs running in the background wasting resources etc...

Not worth it. The kind of computers I have access to are all old (albeit plentiful) and I don't store information of any importance, for example.... the computer I'm on right now has a browser that's so old it can't even be upgraded! I just run them as they are until they fail and go grab another one. It's not that I can't afford a new one, it's more a philosophical/moral issue.

Southpark Fan wrote:

Maybe the work you have done has led to the story below Aemilius?

American Institute of Architects to reconsider WTC 7 Collapse
Victoria N. Alexander | May 7, 2015 | Digital Journal


Hah! Actually I'm a relative newcomer to all this, but I think (not meaning to blow my own horn, well.... maybe a little) if anything sets my analysis apart from the rest it's the top to bottom empirically verifiable and easily understandable nature of the animations that accompany it, they have a certain power.... there's simply no ambiguity there.

Southpark Fan wrote:

Anyway....

Expose the two frauds; firstly dismantle the fairy tale behind these events, and secondly, expose NIST for the fraud that it is.

The simple graphical target system analysis I've completed, and continue to refine*, not only empirically demonstrates that WTC7 had to have been brought down by some energetic materials having been physically transported inside the building, but also conclusively exposes (as revealed by the list of tenants and the nature of the buildings function) a single entity, literally the only entity that could possibly have carried it out in this once highly secured government facility that was in perpetual iron clad lockdown for many years prior to its destruction.... that entity is the Department of Defense/Central Intelligence Agency (really a single organization). Any parking enforcement cop could make an arrest based on it (the analysis) and any nickel and dime divorce attorney working out of a garage could prosecute it.... I guess that's all I need to know. Just based on that, I conjecture that nothing like that (any investigation or prosecution) is ever going to happen.

*This is just the latest version.... though I'm finding it increasingly difficult to think of anything more that could be added or that needs changing.

On a lighter note....

I was reviewing some of the ealier part of my exchange with Dr. Calverd over at TheNakedScientists where we were still hammering out what free fall is and what it isn't where he said "Not sure what program you are using to generate the animations but if I wanted to show this in Powerpoint I'd...."

To which I responded "Hah! I'm flattered you thought I was using a program but.... I am the program. I produced all the individual images that went into each animation...."

....now looking back at the thread and completed analysis I suddenly feel like that computer WOPR in the movie WarGames with Matthew Broderick (one of my favorites back then)....



Just having a bit of fun there.... take care.


Last edited by Aemilius on Tue May 19, 2015 11:27 am; edited 15 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8120

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2015 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the browsing speed issues.....

(btw/ that's the reason we still provide dial-up audios,
so you are not the only one who has speed issues)


To save dealing with it in this thread, here's
a new tips thread, inspired by your issues:

Getting Max Speed from Slow Internet
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7250

_________________
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: Sun May 10, 2015 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Fintan.... I'll check that out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Fintan, just wandering around the Temple this morning (really just talking to myself as much as anyone else)....

Fintan wrote:

Most accounts of that issue (free fall) are either far too technical or
mistakenly assume the lay reader is going to properly
understand the collapse dynamics.

Actually what's interesting to note is that as it turns out there can be no actual analysis of any collapse dynamics here as there can have been no actual collapse occurring during Stage 2 to analyse in the structural failure sense of the word. The previously well supported upper part of the building is simply seen suddenly going into free fall as if through air. As clearly shown by empirical analysis there are no collapse dynamics that can be analytically applied in this case to explain the empirically documented behaviour of the building since there is absolutely no mode or combination of modes of natural progressive gravity driven structural failure that can ever match or create the conditions required for gravitational acceleration to occur (except for bridges and other structures that pass through air that can potentially go into free fall following failure because the required conditions for it to occur exist inherently as a structural feature). There is only one thing that can convinicingly explain the gravitational acceleration of the upper part of WTC7 (or any structurally supported object really) as seen in the video and that is the complete and sudden removal of all support from beneath it, there is absolutely no other way. In other words.... the empirically established fact that there is no mode or combination of modes of natural progressive gravity driven structural failure that can explain the occurrence of free fall gravitational acceleration of the upper part of a steel frame building means that dynamic collapse analysis as a whole (building design, materials involved, heating, buckling, fracturing, overloading, load redistribution, torsional forces, lateral displacement, etc., etc.) may be omitted entirely from consideration as being able to explain it in any way.

Fintan wrote:

Are we really to believe the official account that the above
lattice of connected girders buckled at a free fall speed?!

No. The official account and the top to bottom empirically verifiable analysis are incompatible and only one can be correct. In order to believe the official account of the buildings behaviour including a period of gravitational acceleration being due to natural progressive gravity driven structural failure in the form of buckling one would first have to successfully break or show to be incorrect some aspect of the empirical analysis. I say this absolutely can not be done and so the official account must be false.... I'm afraid there's simply no other way to see it.

Fintan wrote:

There is an interesting point worth making
as a side note to your free fall stage analysis:

Quote:
" NIST knew very well, by the method that they were using, that an inward
movement of the top of the north wall would be interpreted as a downward movement
because they used a point "near the middle" of the top of the wall where they knew that
the wall had moved inward the greatest amount instead of using the northwest corner.

This enabled NIST to show an earlier "start time" of the descent of the north
face and a larger downward movement before the onset of free-fall."


Source


Right.... clever but it didn't do them any good because again as clearly revealed by empirical analysis neither Stage 1 (the collapse dynamics involved with an initial stage of slower than free fall buckling of the columns preceeding the observed period of gravitational acceleration) nor Stage 3 (the collapse dynamics involved with a final stage of slower than free fall buckling of the columns following the observed period of gravitational acceleration) can explain Stage 2 (the empirically confirmed observation of a well defined intermediate stage of gravitational acceleration) so they are both empirically ruled out as being even remotely responsible for the observed period of gravitational acceleration or even being a contributing factor....



A natural progressive gravity driven collapse of the building including a period of gravitational acceleration like that described by the NIST (seen from the south with column 79 failing first on the right) is conclusively shown to be an absolute physical impossibility by irrefutable empirical analysis and when we model the entire sequence there is clearly no point at which the conditions required for gravitational acceleration to occur arise as the scenario plays out....



I'm going to see about maybe incorporating this into the analysis. It's complete right now, but there may be a place for it.... off now to listen to your interview with Richard Gage.


Last edited by Aemilius on Fri May 22, 2015 8:41 am; edited 18 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2015 1:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Fintan (and all)....

So I notice that eighteen days later and with over a thousand views (and perhaps more significantly over seven months over at the Cambridge University sponsored TheNakedScientists forum with over thirty-five thousand views to date) there have been no questions about or objections to the analysis of any kind.

My thinking is that if no other substantial or compelling existing evidence can be specified or introduced by anyone as possibly changing or having some impact on the veracity of the analysis or its conclusion and that if no conceivable logically conjectured possible evidence that might be discovered in the future can be specified or introduced by anyone as possibly changing or having some impact on the veracity of the analysis or its conclusion it would seem a perfectly reasonable suggestion that the 9/11 - THE TRIAL section of the 9/11 - THE FINAL VERDICT forum be opened for the posting of the ANALYSIS. I'm ready for trial.... right now.

If that happens I'll repost the analysis there retitled WTC7 - Analysis and Conclusion stripped of comments made in the General Discussion thread for the sake of a more focussed discussion confined to consideration/debate of the correctness or incorrectness of any given aspect of the analysis or conclusion along with empirical evaluation of any offered additional evidence (existing or conjectured) that may serve to either confirm or deny the veracity of it as a whole.

If that doesn't happen I would (very respectfully) request some brief explanation of where the perceived analytical or logical error in the analysis is or what posting guidlines were not followed that lead to its being denied in order that I may correct the error and proceed.

Thanks, and looking forward to reading of your decision either way.... Emile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2015 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hah! I couldn't resist....

"I am the Program"

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8120

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Damn - they changed the url of the image in your
post above Aemilius. Will upload a permalink.
Done lols Laughing


It is probably pretty damn timely
that you are encouraging us to take up
the 9/11 issue in regard to WTC7.

What makes the WTC7 issue the lead-in to a "trial", some might ask?

Because, when you get right down to it, the WTC issue, based on data
collected and analysed by NIST is actually the only 9/11 issue we could
ever hope to put before any judge.

The context of such a motion before a judge - would be this:

To request a criminal review of the WTC7 fire/collapse -
because it was impossible for such as building to free-fall during collapse,
unless a human agency had enabled the officially observed period of
free fall by the WTC7 building.

That's a prima facie case, right there.
In other words, that's basic grounds
for demanding an new investigation.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.


Last edited by Fintan on Fri May 22, 2015 4:13 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8120

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2015 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So give me a few days to pull it together
and for sure the WTC7 issue legitimately
would be the first order of business for the
trial process. Exclamation

The challenge --which I'd like to hold back on
until that forum section is opened - is to come up
with a plausible human mechanism which can
explain that free fall.

And that's Not Easy. Even with humans involved.

_________________
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
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Fri May 22, 2015 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great stuff, just haven't had time lately to much more than skim it.

"You ARE the program..." Where have I heard that before? Razz

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2015 2:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Acknowledged and happy birthday Fintan.... take as much time as you need. I have a couple of minor revisions/additions I'm thinking of making to the analysis and maybe even writing a brief preface too before I post it but other than that there's not a great deal for me to do. After all, this is the same hilariously simple eighth grade level empirically ironclad analysis that has sat (and continues to sit) unrefuted in any way by anyone over there at TheNakedScientists forum including at least two Cambridge University educated members who hold a PhD (the one in physics and the other in neuroscience) for coming up on eight months now with no argument, no criticism, no questions or comments, no correction.... nothing.

I've been over this damn analysis at least a thousand times (probably several, obsessed with it really) and I already know no error can be found, but even if I was wrong, even if it were possible I'd missed something, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind whatsoever that someone would have pointed it out by now after all this time. When it comes to this analysis it really all boils down to an extraordinarily simple either/or sort of thing really....

Either there is some error in the simple analysis that can be pointed out showing it to be incorrect or there is not.... to date there has not been any error pointed out so both the analysis and its accompanying inescapable conclusion remain empirically unassailed and continue to stand as empirically established fact.

Anyway, PM me when you're about to open the 9/11 - THE TRIAL forum and we'll give it a go.... it could still be interesting.


Last edited by Aemilius on Sat May 23, 2015 11:11 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aemilius



Joined: 14 Mar 2015
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2015 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rumpl4skn wrote:
"You ARE the program..." Where have I heard that before? Razz


Maybe here.... I am the Program
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rumpl4skn



Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2950
Location: 36� 3'N x 86�40'W

PostPosted: Sat May 23, 2015 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aemilius wrote:
Rumpl4skn wrote:
"You ARE the program..." Where have I heard that before? Razz


Maybe here.... I am the Program


Was just kidding. "You are the program" is a lyric in a song of mine. Cool

http://rickmanwiller.com/CDET-old/F06-IGot2Go.mp3

Lyrics: http://rickmanwiller.com/CD/Ly-06.htm

_________________
"No matter what happens, ever... there's ALWAYS at least one reason. And the top reason is ALWAYS money."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
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 2 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.