ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 26th May 2016, 07:09 PM   #2721
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
How long did NIST day it took for WTC 7 to collapse?
I vividly remember you running away from that, as well as this.
So stop lying.
I could care less what NIST says about the total collapse time. I'm not running away from anything.
FalseFlag 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:10 PM   #2722
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Looks like your still attempting to do it.
What do you claim I am trying to do? Please post proof to support your claim.
FalseFlag 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:15 PM   #2723
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
What do you claim I am trying to do? Please post proof to support your claim.
I'll answer that question. Make a reasonable claim the government did it, if not them,someones, anyones, other than those 19 hijackers whom actually did it.
Steve001 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:19 PM   #2724
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by Steve001 View Post
I'll answer that question. Make a reasonable claim the government did it, if not them,someones, anyones, other than those 19 hijackers whom actually did it.
Support a new investigation if you really want an answer.
FalseFlag 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:26 PM   #2725
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
What do you claim I am trying to do? Please post proof to support your claim.
Your trying to claim a knowledge that can disavow the professional opinion of an expert while not being an expert while posting stupid videos, from the missing jolt heads, who have not proven there was no jolt, because they use to low a sample rate to determine the jolt, given the energy values involved.

The Jolt would have traveled to the foundation and back in 0.2 Seconds, they use a sample rate of roughly 5 seconds.

How do you detect an 0.2 movement with a 5 second sample rate?

Do you realize How clueless the missing Jolt clowns are the speed of compression energy in steel is 5900 meters per second, the Jolt occurs and is over before it can be seen, by the low sample rate used By Chandelier, Tony S. or Cole's samplings.

They some how forgot to calculate the speed the energy would travel though the Material
the energy travels though, in looking for the missing Jolt, and totally screwed up the sample rate and math. The Jolt occurs, just they are too clueless to be expected to detect it.
By the time they look at it, It's over.
Crazy Chainsaw 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:27 PM   #2726
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,825
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Maybe.

Maybe.

The last one has nothing to do with the first two.
The first two cause the last one.
LOL
Man. Just wow.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:28 PM   #2727
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Support a new investigation if you really want an answer.
What would this "new investigation" entail?

Please be specific and state how it would be done.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:29 PM   #2728
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,825
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
I could care less what NIST says about the total collapse time. I'm not running away from anything.
You lied about the collapse time, and just now lied about not caring. If you didn't care, you wouldn't have Harped on it.
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:30 PM   #2729
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
from the missing jolt heads, who have not proven there was no jolt,
There was a jolt. See? Here it is.

FalseFlag 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:31 PM   #2730
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
What would this "new investigation" entail?

Please be specific and state how it would be done.
I don't do re-runs. My response is already in this thread.
FalseFlag 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:31 PM   #2731
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,825
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Support a new investigation if you really want an answer.
We already have an answer.
Try to keep up
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:33 PM   #2732
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
I don't do re-runs. My response is already in this thread.
No you have not. Show where you have answered my post completely.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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
Old 26th May 2016, 07:37 PM   #2733
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
There was a jolt. See? Here it is.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped.../Joltcola1.png
Thank you for admitting Cole is nuts, if there is a Jolt Cole is wrong, and his experiments are wrong.
Crazy Chainsaw 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
Old 27th May 2016, 02:17 AM   #2734
Ape of Good Hope
Graduate Poster
 
Ape of Good Hope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,474
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
I don't do re-runs.

Incorrect:

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
What I think does not matter.
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
It does not matter what I think.
Ape of Good Hope 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
Old 27th May 2016, 06:11 AM   #2735
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Support a new investigation if you really want an answer.
I know the answer. Now it's up to you and persons just like you to call for a new investigation by writing to your state representative.
Steve001 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
Old 27th May 2016, 07:06 AM   #2736
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 10,794
It is extremely important that one realize that applied science, such as engineering, is not, unlike art, subject to opinion.
While "I know good art when I see it, and that isn't it" is as good a philosophy as any, "I'm not an expert, but I know competency when I like it" entertains no reality.
Mother nature has never bowed to wishful thinking.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn 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
Old 27th May 2016, 07:56 AM   #2737
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,858
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
It is extremely important that one realize that applied science, such as engineering, is not, unlike art, subject to opinion.
While "I know good art when I see it, and that isn't it" is as good a philosophy as any, "I'm not an expert, but I know competency when I like it" entertains no reality.
Mother nature has never bowed to wishful thinking.
FF uses English prose retorts and banter to contradict science and engineering. Itís like using a banana for a bat in baseball.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.
BasqueArch 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
Old 27th May 2016, 09:02 AM   #2738
Crazy Chainsaw
Illuminator
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,728
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
FF uses English prose retorts and banter to contradict science and engineering. Itís like using a banana for a bat in baseball.
I thought it was like using a blond wig for a helmet in American foot ball, and that would explain other aspects of his behavior?
Crazy Chainsaw 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
Old 27th May 2016, 02:20 PM   #2739
Mentalpygmy
Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 35
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
I could care less what NIST says about the total collapse time. I'm not running away from anything.
Looks like it from the Lurkers gallery.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Mentalpygmy 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
Old 27th May 2016, 09:54 PM   #2740
ProBonoShill
Master Poster
 
ProBonoShill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,112
Originally Posted by Mentalpygmy View Post
Looks like it from the Lurkers gallery.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Chalk up one more from the science side!
__________________
"CD does not prove 9/11 was an inside job. It only proves CD"- FalseFlag
ProBonoShill 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
Old 27th May 2016, 10:44 PM   #2741
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
FF uses English prose retorts and banter to contradict science and engineering.
From http://literarydevices.net/prose/ -
Quote:
Prose Definition

Prose is a form of language that has no formal metrical structure. It applies a natural flow of speech, and ordinary grammatical structure rather than rhythmic structure, such as in the case of traditional poetry.

Normal every day speech is spoken in prose and most people think and write in prose form. Prose comprises of full grammatical sentences which consist of paragraphs and forgoes aesthetic appeal in favor of clear, straightforward language.
Um...let's think about this.

You claim I write in English prose. So, you're admitting I use normal, everyday speech with full grammatical sentences to contradict your twisted scientific and engineering claims.

OK. Thanks for pointing that out. I always thought it was obvious, but thanks for confirming it.

Quote:
It’s like using a banana for a bat in baseball.
No, it's more like using a brain to apply logic and reason to a situation and then separate facts from hardcore BS.

Last edited by FalseFlag; 27th May 2016 at 10:54 PM.
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 12:10 AM   #2742
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
I have run from nothing. I simply won't answer your nonsense because I know it's pointless. You see what you want to see. Period.
It's not MY nonsense that you won't answer.

YOU brought up the "explosions visible" in the video that YOU presented as evidence for one of you lame assertions.
Not me.

I merely asked you state "where you see the explosions that YOU claim are in this video."

That should be trivial. something like "at mm:ss of the video, vertically X% down from the top, horizontally Y% across from the left side."
__

And, who do you think you're kidding about "you won't answer because I won't see it."

You didn't bring up this video in a response to me.
I watched your video, to see what you consider to be "evidence".

You cited something doesn't even appear in the video.
You are incompetent in identifying what you see.

If you think that you are the competent one, and that I am the incompetent one, show everybody.

Show everyone where are the explosions in the video that YOU brought to the discussion.

Or not...

It really will not hurt your reputation.
It's not possible to hurt "the dead".
tfk 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
Old 28th May 2016, 12:31 AM   #2743
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
No. We both do. The difference is that one of us isn't ignoring it.


Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
You keep emphasizing the "fact" that you are an engineer. It's irrelevant, and here's why.


Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Imagine a person is an apple farmer. They have been one for their entire lives. They hand you an orange but they insist it's an apple...
And your analogy collapses into its own footpring. "at free fall speed".
LoL.

You have a clueless concept of what an expert on apples would say.

An expert on apples would never say, "this orange is an apple".
That is what someone who is clueless about the difference between apples & oranges might say.

YOU might say that.
Not because you're clueless about the difference between apples & orange.
But because you don't give a rat's butt about the truth.

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Imagine a person is a mathematician with a PhD. The mathematician says that 1 + 1 equals 876.
An expert in math would never say this.
But this is exactly what Twoofers say ... daily.

Because they are clueless amateurs.
Amateurs like you.
Clueless like you.

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Now, imagine some anonymous person posts something on the internet. The person claims to be an authority on a subject, but that person routinely makes claims that a non-expert can see is wrong.
Presumably you're talking about me, here.

OK, champ. Provide one sentence that I've written that you feel you can prove that I'm wrong about.

Then have at it.
Prove me wrong.

Let's see what you can do.

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Your expertise is meaningless when you deny basic principles of physics.
There's a bold, and bold-type, claim.
Let's see you back it up, boy.

Specify the basic principle of physics that I've denied.
State how I denied it.
State what the correct principle is.
Prove what you say.

Stop yelling clueless taunts from the cheap seats, boy.
Step in the ring.

Last edited by tfk; 28th May 2016 at 12:33 AM.
tfk 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
Old 28th May 2016, 10:01 AM   #2744
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Originally Posted by tfk
ONE of knows how to do middle school physics.
ONE of us doesn't.

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
No. We both do.
OK, here's a simple opportunity for you to prove it.

NIST provides, in Fig. 12-76, an empirical equation for the drop of the roofline of WTC7 vs. time. It is:

[Eqn. 1] z(t) = 379.62 (1 - e(-0.18562 t)3.5126)

where z = the drop of the roofline from its original position.



You can see from the data that this curve fits the data far better than the velocity vs. time graph, shown in figure 12-77.



Use Eqn 1, above to generate:
the velocity vs. time equation
the acceleration vs. time equation
calculate the terminal velocity.

Show the graphs of the first two equations vs. time.

Show the data points from Fig. 12-77 on the empirical velocity graph & explain why they don't fall exactly on the velocity vs. time curve.

Saying that you understand physics is easy.
Now, show me.
tfk 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
Old 28th May 2016, 11:55 AM   #2745
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by tfk View Post
It's not MY nonsense that you won't answer.

YOU brought up the "explosions visible" in the video that YOU presented as evidence for one of you lame assertions.
Not me.

I merely asked you state "where you see the explosions that YOU claim are in this video."
Why? You will just ignore what can clearly be seen.

Quote:
If you think that you are the competent one, and that I am the incompetent one, show everybody.
Why? You are doing all of the work for me. You're doing a great job, too.
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 11:58 AM   #2746
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by tfk View Post
Stop yelling clueless taunts from the cheap seats, boy.
Step in the ring.
TFK is on tilt.
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 12:00 PM   #2747
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by tfk View Post
Saying that you understand physics is easy.
Now, show me.
Why? How can I prove I understand physics to someone who spends so much time twisting it to suit their own personal fantasies and delusions? Why would I waste my time?
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 12:13 PM   #2748
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,993
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Why? How can I prove I understand physics to someone who spends so much time twisting it to suit their own personal fantasies and delusions? Why would I waste my time?
But wait. It is your affirmative claim that you do not understand physics AT ALL.

Why would anyone who does care what you think?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   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
Old 28th May 2016, 12:35 PM   #2749
DaveThomasNMSR
Muse
 
DaveThomasNMSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 862
Here you go.

Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Why? How can I prove I understand physics to someone who spends so much time twisting it to suit their own personal fantasies and delusions? Why would I waste my time?
It wouldn't be a waste of time at all. You can PROVE you understand physics simply by using popular programs like Microsoft Excel (or Office Libre Calc, available for free) to compute the 1st and 2nd derivatives of the NIST equation posted by TFK.

I was able to do so - a little tricksy, but extremely doable. Here is my result for acceleration, sans the vertical values.



All you have to do to prove some physics competency is to reproduce this acceleration graph from NIST's equation. I'm giving you a big boost by showing you the shape of the acceleration curve (you can check your work against this).

What is the value of acceleration at the ??s?

If you are incompetent at physics, you won't supply an answer.



Last edited by DaveThomasNMSR; 28th May 2016 at 12:42 PM.
DaveThomasNMSR 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
Old 28th May 2016, 01:09 PM   #2750
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,214
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
It wouldn't be a waste of time at all. You can PROVE you understand physics simply by using popular programs like Microsoft Excel (or Office Libre Calc, available for free) to compute the 1st and 2nd derivatives of the NIST equation posted by TFK......................
Have you seen the Peanuts comics where the teacher speaks? That's what FF took from the highlite.

__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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
Old 28th May 2016, 01:53 PM   #2751
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
1. Is the intent of your graph to disprove NIST and Chandler's claims of 2.25 seconds of freefall?

2. Do you agree that your graph shows positive acceleration (not 0) for about 4.8 seconds?

3. Do you agree that the positive acceleration, when using normal conventions, means that the object being measured has a downward (normally negative) acceleration? We can use the values in your graph, we just need to agree on a convention. I propose that since the building was falling, whatever positive value exists in your graph is actually negative if we use a standard convention. Do you agree to this?
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 01:58 PM   #2752
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,773
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
1. Is the intent of your graph to disprove NIST and Chandler's claims of 2.25 seconds of freefall?

2. Do you agree that your graph shows positive acceleration (not 0) for about 4.8 seconds?

3. Do you agree that the positive acceleration, when using normal conventions, means that the object being measured has a downward (normally negative) acceleration? We can use the values in your graph, we just need to agree on a convention. I propose that since the building was falling, whatever positive value exists in your graph is actually negative if we use a standard convention. Do you agree to this?
This will get funny. FF has ventured into science I'd fetch my popcorn but it's bedtime in these parts.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB 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
Old 28th May 2016, 03:45 PM   #2753
DaveThomasNMSR
Muse
 
DaveThomasNMSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 862
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
1. Is the intent of your graph to disprove NIST and Chandler's claims of 2.25 seconds of freefall?
No, it's to show that I can do physics, including evaluating derivatives with calculus.
Quote:

2. Do you agree that your graph shows positive acceleration (not 0) for about 4.8 seconds?
Well, since I am using the graphs and equations mentioned just a while earlier in this very thread, I used my reading comprehension to note the key phrase "Figure 12-76 Downward displacement of north face roofline as WTC7 begins to collapse."

Downward Displacement means that the roofline is "falling", and ultimately that the acceleration will be positive if the object falls downwards with increasing downward velocity. In my graph, this is the case for just under 5 seconds.

Quote:

3. Do you agree that the positive acceleration, when using normal conventions, means that the object being measured has a downward (normally negative) acceleration? We can use the values in your graph, we just need to agree on a convention. I propose that since the building was falling, whatever positive value exists in your graph is actually negative if we use a standard convention. Do you agree to this?
I agree with the highlighted portion above. We are talking about downward displacement, downward velocity, and downward acceleration.

Now, what is the value of the line with the ??s?

Your physics competency is "on the line" here.

DaveThomasNMSR 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
Old 28th May 2016, 04:47 PM   #2754
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
No, it's to show that I can do physics, including evaluating derivatives with calculus.
No. At best, it means you can google online calculators.

Why don't you post a link to the website you used, and paste the exact equation you used. Post screenshots to show each step. Then, copy and paste a picture of the graph of the equation.
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 07:39 PM   #2755
DaveThomasNMSR
Muse
 
DaveThomasNMSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 862
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post

No, it's to show that I can do physics, including evaluating derivatives with calculus.
No. At best, it means you can google online calculators.

Why don't you post a link to the website you used, and paste the exact equation you used. Post screenshots to show each step. Then, copy and paste a picture of the graph of the equation.
No. I didn't use a "website". I used a useful piece of analysis software, Office Libre's Calc application, along with my knowledge of how to evaluate first and second derivatives, and the utility of these important quantities in physics.

So, No. The exact equation I used has already been posted several times. I used my "insider" knowledge of physics to transform that equation into velocity and acceleration profiles (the latter, along with another copy of the exact equation, appears here).

It's not my job to walk you through what I did, step by step.

It's YOUR job to prove that you have even a minimal grasp of the physics involved.

Can you derive these fundamental quantities (velocity, acceleration) from the given exact equation?

If not, then what makes you think you are the least bit qualified to pass judgment on experienced physicists and engineers?

Lurkers are getting plenty of LOLs while you stumble, FF.

Can you use Excel?

Can you take a simple derivative?

DaveThomasNMSR 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
Old 28th May 2016, 08:48 PM   #2756
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
*snip*

Can you use Excel?

Can you take a simple derivative?
Why won't you post your data?

Why won't you post your steps?

If you were so certain that you were correct, you would want to make sure as many people as possible could review your work and get the same results.

Well, at least that is how it should work, but you're a skeptic, and obfuscation is what you thrive on.

Last edited by FalseFlag; 28th May 2016 at 09:05 PM.
FalseFlag 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
Old 28th May 2016, 08:57 PM   #2757
AJM8125
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,399
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Why won't you post your data?

Why won't you post your steps?
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
It's not my job to walk you through what I did, step by step.

It's YOUR job to prove that you have even a minimal grasp of the physics involved.

Can you derive these fundamental quantities (velocity, acceleration) from the given exact equation?
__________________
AJM8125 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
Old 28th May 2016, 10:23 PM   #2758
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,228
Originally Posted by DaveThomasNMSR View Post
I was able to do so - a little tricksy, but extremely doable. Here is my result for acceleration, sans the vertical values.

http://www.nmsr.org/wtc7-accel.gif

All you have to do to prove some physics competency is to reproduce this acceleration graph from NIST's equation. I'm giving you a big boost by showing you the shape of the acceleration curve (you can check your work against this).

What is the value of acceleration at the ??s?

If you are incompetent at physics, you won't supply an answer.


Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
Why won't you post your data?

Why won't you post your steps?
Because that would defeat the purpose of the exercise, obviously. It's being fun to see him prove the point.
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno 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
Old 29th May 2016, 09:52 AM   #2759
FalseFlag
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Because that would defeat the purpose of the exercise, obviously. It's being fun to see him prove the point.
The only purpose of the exercise is to deflect attention away from the fact that skeptics deny any and everything that goes against their fantasy.

It's pure nonsense to make any sort of claim that a person needs to do calculus busy work in order to understand physics.

Skeptics can only play their game when the most simple facts are obscured by unnecessarily complexity. That is what they are trying to do here. It's easy to see, and I'm not playing the game.
FalseFlag 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
Old 29th May 2016, 10:01 AM   #2760
AJM8125
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
AJM8125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 19,399
Originally Posted by FalseFlag View Post
The only purpose of the exercise is to deflect attention away from the fact that skeptics deny any and everything that goes against their fantasy.

It's pure nonsense to make any sort of claim that a person needs to do calculus busy work in order to understand physics.

Skeptics can only play their game when the most simple facts are obscured by unnecessarily complexity. That is what they are trying to do here. It's easy to see, and I'm not playing the game.
Are the Stundies still running?

__________________
AJM8125 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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.