View Single Post
Old 3rd December 2015, 11:39 AM   #350
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
I’ve looked through this thread and have not found any post by Mr. Szamboti that matches your spin.
Well, the best way not to find what you don't want to find is not to look all that hard.

Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
Chandler's graph for WTC 7 shows a short flat line of zero velocity because he started the program before the building started coming down so he would not miss anything.

Once the building is moving in his measurement it is in free fall right from the start.
Whereas we actually see (a) the building has an initial, and apparently significant, period of constant velocity fall, and (b) the acceleration appears on the graph to vary quite considerably rather than being "in free fall right from the start".

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
What I see are plot variations which are so minor, that they are not worthy of consideration.

There are certainly no time deviations dramatic enough to suggest that WTC7 was meeting enough resistance to argue against freefall.
It's painfully obvious from the graph that Tony's claims about what the graph says are wrong. As usual with Tony's lies, he doesn't actually need to tell them, because they don't help his case; but he lied, not about the actual movement of WTC7, but about what the graph shows.

Originally Posted by Criteria View Post
Surely Mister Rogers you are not back to disputing both Mr. Szamboti and the NIST regarding the proof that WTC7 sustained 8 storeys of freefall?
The fact that you reached the above conclusion from a statement that basically agreed with a part of your original point, specifically that the later deviations from linearity are not significant, indicates that you don't have the faintest clue what's going on here. I don't feel like explaining it to you yet, so please give me a good laugh with your next statement of indignant misunderstanding.

Dave

ETA: I think I've found a new way to confuse truthers. Agree with a minor and insignificant point they've made, and they'll be so obsessed with disagreeing with debunkers that they'll immediately disagree with themselves. Try it, folks!
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 3rd December 2015 at 11:42 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top