Siesmic Evidence Proves Inside Job?

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 04:52 PM

http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vol...micFurlong.doc

I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper.

Bell · 12th September 2006, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vol...micFurlong.doc

I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper.

I doubt you do.

Dog Town · 12th September 2006, 04:54 PM

Some one please post the Implosion world paper. I've lost the link!

Sword_Of_Truth · 12th September 2006, 04:57 PM

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear--misleadingly--as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves--blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower--start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.

Another swing and a miss, Lieteller1234.

apathoid · 12th September 2006, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by Dog Town

Some one please post the Implosion world paper. I've lost the link!

http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/...ard_8-8-06.pdf

defaultdotxbe · 12th September 2006, 05:08 PM

what are the qualifications of these men to be analyzing seismic data? scholors for "truth" lists ross as being a mechanical engineer, doesnt show furlong at all

are there any seismologists who say seismic evidences supports explosives?

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:13 PM

Hold up guys, you need to read the paper I linked. It is not about the seismic data from the collapses, it is about the seismic data from around the time of jet impacts. The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit.

He uses the radar data and the seismic data, both tied to UTC. I am genuinely curious what the debunk of this will be.

Skibum · 12th September 2006, 05:15 PM

Quote:

I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper.

IMO, one the of the biggest demerits is that it was written by "scholars" from the "truth" movement. That alone makes me seriously question its validity without having to even read the whole thing.

Dog Town · 12th September 2006, 05:20 PM

Quote:

The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit.

What's to debunk? Huge explosions SECONDS before impact? Bahh!
Try again!

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

what are the qualifications of these men to be analyzing seismic data?

One point made in the paper is that the energy of impact would be almost completely absorbed by the tower. A mechanical engineer is the perfect person to know that.

More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact.

Sword_Of_Truth · 12th September 2006, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

One point made in the paper is that the energy of impact would be almost completely absorbed by the tower. A mechanical engineer is the perfect person to know that.

A structural engineer would be better. But you have a hard time with those, doncha?

Quote:

More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact.

Since we have already proven it would be impossible to plant explosive charges in the manner you describe, this would indicate that Ross is off by several seconds.

apathoid · 12th September 2006, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Hold up guys, you need to read the paper I linked. It is not about the seismic data from the collapses, it is about the seismic data from around the time of jet impacts. The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit.

He uses the radar data and the seismic data, both tied to UTC. I am genuinely curious what the debunk of this will be.

I, for one, am not reading anymore mindless retarded BS from amateur researchers. I dont care if he has an astrophysics PhD, this man is not qualifed to study seimic data.

You do realize what the implications are of arguing that there were significant seismic events before the airliners struck, correct? One of those implications being setting off massive charges in the basement 56 and 102 minutes before the collapse(or demolition if you'd like)
I've never seen explosives go off and freeze in time for an hour or more. Explain, and dont tell me to read to piece you linked.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Ross is off by several seconds

Where is he off? Is the UTC data wrong, or what?

WildCat · 12th September 2006, 05:35 PM

Originally Posted by apathoid

I, for one, am not reading anymore mindless retarded BS from amateur researchers. I dont care if he has an astrophysics PhD, this man is not qualifed to study seimic data.

You do realize what the implications are of arguing that there were significant seismic events before the airliners struck, correct? One of those implications being setting off massive charges in the basement 56 and 102 minutes before the collapse(or demolition if you'd like)
I've never seen explosives go off and freeze in time for an hour or more. Explain, and dont tell me to read to piece you linked.

It's all quite simple. The explosions were timed so that they went off nearly perfectly in sync w/ planes originating hundreds of miles away to go off at nearly the precise time the towers were struck by the planes. Then, many minutes later, thermite was lit to cut the core columns because the basement explosions were just for show and... oh crap I give up. I can't make any sense of this completely idiotic conspiracy scenario.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:35 PM

Apathoid, this thread is about that paper.

steve s · 12th September 2006, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact.

You're ignoring the fact that it's impossible to accurately determine the time of the impacts down to the exact second. We can say it was hit at 8:46, but to state the exact second is impossible.

You're being totally disingenuous, Lieteller.

Steve S.

defaultdotxbe · 12th September 2006, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

One point made in the paper is that the energy of impact would be almost completely absorbed by the tower. A mechanical engineer is the perfect person to know that.

couldnt it be equally argued that any explosives would also be absorbed by the tower?

what did the 1993 bombing register ont he richter scale? oh thats right, it didnt

Sword_Of_Truth · 12th September 2006, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Where is he off? Is the UTC data wrong, or what?

Ross is wrong.

We know there were no explosives in the building, ergo the first seismic spike is that of the aurcraft impacts.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:39 PM

I'm just trying to study this paper. Steve S brought up accuracy. Accuracy is a valid criticism. You're saying that the data available are not precise enough to support the conclusion. The margin of error is too great. OK. If true, that's valid.

Dog Town · 12th September 2006, 05:39 PM

Quote:

I can't make any sense of this completely idiotic conspiracy scenario.

Yeah, when ever I try to shave w/a razor that dull I cut myself.
When I cut into lot's of layers of onion my eyes well-up.
Freaken strange. Does this work? Are we on here? Test... one.. two! *thump*

stateofgrace · 12th September 2006, 05:40 PM

So according to Ross, who is not civil engineer, not a structural engineer, not an architect, not an explosives expert, not qualified in anyway to talk about buildings, thier construction or destruction has now come up with some nonsense that explosions that took place before the planes hit, brought them down later.

Brilliant!!!!

Don't you wonder why people just laugh at this rubbish?

apathoid · 12th September 2006, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Where is he off? Is the UTC data wrong, or what?

I am not going to extend you the courtesy of reading the paper you linked, because all you've done the last 2 days is play dodgeball and tap-dance. However, I have a couple of questions about the piece and I'd appreciate an answer.

a. What is the time of onset of seismic waves at WTC1? WTC2?
b. What is the recorded time of AA11s disappearance from radar?
c. What is the recorded time of UA175s disappearance from radar?

Have these times been coroberated by several sources?

What type of clocks were used for the times of b. and c.?

HeyLeroy · 12th September 2006, 05:42 PM

If there was such seismic activity before the impact, wouldn't all the video cameras aimed at the towers show some sort of camera-shake?

Truthseeker, what would be the point of bringing down the towers with explosives after the planes hit? It's not like they could've rebuilt 'em.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:43 PM

Sword was fallacious

Quote:

We know there were no explosives in the building, ergo the first seismic spike is that of the aurcraft impacts.

No, Sword, you're assuming the conclusion to support the conclusion. Circular reasoning.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:47 PM

Table 4
AA Flt 11
2001 LDEO 8:46:26 Original seismic
2005 LDEO 8:46:29 Revised per NIST contract
2004 NIST 8:46:30 Artificial
2001 FAA 8:46:35 Rejected by Commission
2004 Commission 8:46:40
2002 NTSB 8:46:40

UA Flt 175
2002 NTSB 9:02:40 Rejected by Commission
2001 LDEO 9:02:54 Original seismic
2005 LDEO 9:02:57 Revised per NIST contract
2004 NIST 9:02:59 Adjusted per TV
2004 Commission 9:03:11
2001 FAA 9:03:14 Rejected by Commission
NIST sponsored revised seismic times added.

Sword_Of_Truth · 12th September 2006, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

Sword was fallacious

No, Sword, you're assuming the conclusion to support the conclusion. Circular reasoning.

Not at all, it's been proven conclusively that there were no explosives in the building in another thread here.

defaultdotxbe · 12th September 2006, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact.

even more to the point, seismic waves do not travel from point to point instantly, and they travel different speeds through different materials (and different densities of those materials) ross and furlong lack the ability to account for such variations, and therefore can and will miss any alternative explanation for the time differences

T.A.M. · 12th September 2006, 05:48 PM

I have to agree with them, Truthseeker. I would not trust anyone but a seismologist (if that is what they are called), an expert in reading them, to interpret the data.

An EEG is a comparable example. Would you want anyone besides a Neurologist reading them and intepreting what they mean or indicate?

TAM

apathoid · 12th September 2006, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

even more to the point, seismic waves do not travel from point to point instantly, and they travel different speeds through different materials (and different densities of those materials) ross and furlong lack the ability to account for such variations, and therefore can and will miss any alternative explanation for the time differences

Terrific point. Exactly why seismic data needs to be interpereted by people who are specially trained at doing so....and those people find nothing out of the ordinary about the plane impacts.

Dog Town · 12th September 2006, 05:54 PM

Quote:

I have to agree with them, Truthseeker. I would not trust anyone but a seismologist (if that is what they are called), an expert in reading them, to interpret the data.

My pdf reader is wacky can't read this now, but it has experts that were near GZ running seis equip. Check it out!

http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/...ard_8-8-06.pdf

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 05:58 PM

T.A.M., Ross isn't interperting the seismic data, he is saying that it occured before the plane hit. I might not know what an EKG means, but I certainly know that it does not tell anything about the patient before it's hooked up and running.

rwguinn · 12th September 2006, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by stateofgrace

So according to Ross, who is not civil engineer, not a structural engineer, not an architect, not an explosives expert, not qualified in anyway to talk about buildings, thier construction or destruction has now come up with some nonsense that explosions that took place before the planes hit, brought them down later.

Brilliant!!!!

Don't you wonder why people just laugh at this rubbish?

BACK THE ^&%$ Off! You are making the same mistake that the Lost Marble people are. I will not tolerate blanket disparagement of my profession.
Yes, a mechanical engineer is the best person to analyze a dynamic event. An appeal to authority requires that the authority be credible. Structural Engineers, Civil Engineers and Archetects design things not to move. Mechanical engineers deal with motion.
That said. ME's also do HVAC and a number of other things that do not involve massive, or even miniscule collisions. I would need to see the dredentials and registrations of this Ross character before I declare him qualified.
Now, I'm off to read his paper.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 06:00 PM

Quote:

seismic waves do not travel from point to point instantly, and they travel different speeds through different materials (and different densities of those materials) ross and furlong lack the ability to account for such variations, and therefore can and will miss any alternative explanation for the time differences

No, this is a non-sequitor. Seismic wave cannot travel backwards in time. If the waves indeed occur prior to the jet impact, they must have been caused by something else. Propagation times are a red herring.

Next.

defaultdotxbe · 12th September 2006, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

T.A.M., Ross isn't interperting the seismic data, he is saying that it occured before the plane hit. I might not know what an EKG means, but I certainly know that it does not tell anything about the patient before it's hooked up and running.

if he is not interpreting the data how is he reaching his conclusion that the seismic event occurred before the plane impact?

defaultdotxbe · 12th September 2006, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

No, this is a non-sequitor. Seismic wave cannot travel backwards in time. If the waves indeed occur prior to the jet impact, they must have been caused by something else. Propagation times are a red herring.

Next.

unless the seismometers were on the 78th floor of the WTC propagation time IS an issue

Dog Town · 12th September 2006, 06:03 PM

Quote:

if he is not interpreting the data how is he reaching his conclusion that the seismic event occurred before the plane impact?

Same as it ever was...Google for "Scholars"!

apathoid · 12th September 2006, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234

No, this is a non-sequitor. Seismic wave cannot travel backwards in time. If the waves indeed occur prior to the jet impact, they must have been caused by something else. Propagation times are a red herring.

Next.

Its actually not a non-sequitir, and I'd lay off of pointing out fallacies because you have yet to correctly identify one, making yourself look more foolish than you already are(if thats possible).

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 06:07 PM

Well, propagation times are relevant, in that LDEO needs to take them into account when giving their time reading. The waves take x time to get to the station. But they are expert in that, and the time readings are theirs, not Ross and Furlong's.

TruthSeeker1234 · 12th September 2006, 06:09 PM

And yes, that was a non-sequitor. If Ross was wrong about a propagation time, it does not follow that jet impacts caused the wave. If the wave occurs prior to the impact, it must have been caused by something else regardless of how long it takes for that wave to travel to point b.

Bell · 12th September 2006, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

BACK THE ^&%$ Off! You are making the same mistake that the Lost Marble people are. I will not tolerate blanket disparagement of my profession.
Yes, a mechanical engineer is the best person to analyze a dynamic event. An appeal to authority requires that the authority be credible. Structural Engineers, Civil Engineers and Archetects design things not to move. Mechanical engineers deal with motion.
That said. ME's also do HVAC and a number of other things that do not involve massive, or even miniscule collisions. I would need to see the dredentials and registrations of this Ross character before I declare him qualified.
Now, I'm off to read his paper.

Uhm... what happened here?

12th September 2006, 04:52 PM	#1
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Siesmic Evidence Proves Inside Job? http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vol...micFurlong.doc I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 04:54 PM	#3
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Some one please post the Implosion world paper. I've lost the link!
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862

12th September 2006, 04:58 PM	#5
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918	Originally Posted by Dog Town Some one please post the Implosion world paper. I've lost the link! http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/...ard_8-8-06.pdf
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918

12th September 2006, 05:08 PM	#6
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	what are the qualifications of these men to be analyzing seismic data? scholors for "truth" lists ross as being a mechanical engineer, doesnt show furlong at all are there any seismologists who say seismic evidences supports explosives?
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

12th September 2006, 05:13 PM	#7
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Hold up guys, you need to read the paper I linked. It is not about the seismic data from the collapses, it is about the seismic data from around the time of jet impacts. The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit. He uses the radar data and the seismic data, both tied to UTC. I am genuinely curious what the debunk of this will be.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Last edited by TruthSeeker1234; 12th September 2006 at 05:17 PM.

12th September 2006, 04:54 PM	#2
Bell Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 21,050	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vol...micFurlong.doc I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper. I doubt you do.

12th September 2006, 04:57 PM	#4
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,494	On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear--misleadingly--as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves--blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower--start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs. Another swing and a miss, Lieteller1234.

12th September 2006, 05:15 PM	#8
Skibum Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,659	Quote: I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper. IMO, one the of the biggest demerits is that it was written by "scholars" from the "truth" movement. That alone makes me seriously question its validity without having to even read the whole thing.
Skibum Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,659

12th September 2006, 05:20 PM	#9
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Quote: The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit. What's to debunk? Huge explosions SECONDS before impact? Bahh! Try again!
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Last edited by Dog Town; 12th September 2006 at 05:22 PM.

12th September 2006, 05:27 PM	#10
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Quote: what are the qualifications of these men to be analyzing seismic data? One point made in the paper is that the energy of impact would be almost completely absorbed by the tower. A mechanical engineer is the perfect person to know that. More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:30 PM	#11
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,494	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 One point made in the paper is that the energy of impact would be almost completely absorbed by the tower. A mechanical engineer is the perfect person to know that. A structural engineer would be better. But you have a hard time with those, doncha? Quote: More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact. Since we have already proven it would be impossible to plant explosive charges in the manner you describe, this would indicate that Ross is off by several seconds.

12th September 2006, 05:31 PM	#12
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Hold up guys, you need to read the paper I linked. It is not about the seismic data from the collapses, it is about the seismic data from around the time of jet impacts. The paper asserts that the seismic spikes which are attributed to the jet impacts actually occured many seconds before the jets hit. He uses the radar data and the seismic data, both tied to UTC. I am genuinely curious what the debunk of this will be. I, for one, am not reading anymore mindless retarded BS from amateur researchers. I dont care if he has an astrophysics PhD, this man is not qualifed to study seimic data. You do realize what the implications are of arguing that there were significant seismic events before the airliners struck, correct? One of those implications being setting off massive charges in the basement 56 and 102 minutes before the collapse(or demolition if you'd like) I've never seen explosives go off and freeze in time for an hour or more. Explain, and dont tell me to read to piece you linked.
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918

12th September 2006, 05:34 PM	#13
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Quote: Ross is off by several seconds Where is he off? Is the UTC data wrong, or what?
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:35 PM	#14
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 59,856	Originally Posted by apathoid I, for one, am not reading anymore mindless retarded BS from amateur researchers. I dont care if he has an astrophysics PhD, this man is not qualifed to study seimic data. You do realize what the implications are of arguing that there were significant seismic events before the airliners struck, correct? One of those implications being setting off massive charges in the basement 56 and 102 minutes before the collapse(or demolition if you'd like) I've never seen explosives go off and freeze in time for an hour or more. Explain, and dont tell me to read to piece you linked. It's all quite simple. The explosions were timed so that they went off nearly perfectly in sync w/ planes originating hundreds of miles away to go off at nearly the precise time the towers were struck by the planes. Then, many minutes later, thermite was lit to cut the core columns because the basement explosions were just for show and... oh crap I give up. I can't make any sense of this completely idiotic conspiracy scenario.

12th September 2006, 05:37 PM	#16
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 More to the point, it doesn't take any sort of expert at all to know that the seismic spike produced by a jet impact cannot occur before the jet impact. You're ignoring the fact that it's impossible to accurately determine the time of the impacts down to the exact second. We can say it was hit at 8:46, but to state the exact second is impossible. You're being totally disingenuous, Lieteller. Steve S.
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	__________________ "Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken

12th September 2006, 05:38 PM	#18
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,494	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 Where is he off? Is the UTC data wrong, or what? Ross is wrong. We know there were no explosives in the building, ergo the first seismic spike is that of the aurcraft impacts.

12th September 2006, 05:39 PM	#19
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	I'm just trying to study this paper. Steve S brought up accuracy. Accuracy is a valid criticism. You're saying that the data available are not precise enough to support the conclusion. The margin of error is too great. OK. If true, that's valid.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:39 PM	#20
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Quote: I can't make any sense of this completely idiotic conspiracy scenario. Yeah, when ever I try to shave w/a razor that dull I cut myself. When I cut into lot's of layers of onion my eyes well-up. Freaken strange. Does this work? Are we on here? Test... one.. two! thump
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862

12th September 2006, 05:40 PM	#21
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 3,843	So according to Ross, who is not civil engineer, not a structural engineer, not an architect, not an explosives expert, not qualified in anyway to talk about buildings, thier construction or destruction has now come up with some nonsense that explosions that took place before the planes hit, brought them down later. Brilliant!!!! Don't you wonder why people just laugh at this rubbish?
stateofgrace Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 3,843

12th September 2006, 05:42 PM	#23
HeyLeroy Vegan Cannibal Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,567	If there was such seismic activity before the impact, wouldn't all the video cameras aimed at the towers show some sort of camera-shake? Truthseeker, what would be the point of bringing down the towers with explosives after the planes hit? It's not like they could've rebuilt 'em.
HeyLeroy Vegan Cannibal Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 5,567	__________________ Cows are in large numbers, and do not serve any other purpose, other than to eat grass, and moo -- makaya325 I ♥ my kids. I ♠ my dog. I ♣ my baby Harp Seal.

12th September 2006, 05:43 PM	#24
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Sword was fallacious Quote: We know there were no explosives in the building, ergo the first seismic spike is that of the aurcraft impacts. No, Sword, you're assuming the conclusion to support the conclusion. Circular reasoning.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:47 PM	#25
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Table 4 AA Flt 11 2001 LDEO 8:46:26 Original seismic 2005 LDEO 8:46:29 Revised per NIST contract 2004 NIST 8:46:30 Artificial 2001 FAA 8:46:35 Rejected by Commission 2004 Commission 8:46:40 2002 NTSB 8:46:40 UA Flt 175 2002 NTSB 9:02:40 Rejected by Commission 2001 LDEO 9:02:54 Original seismic 2005 LDEO 9:02:57 Revised per NIST contract 2004 NIST 9:02:59 Adjusted per TV 2004 Commission 9:03:11 2001 FAA 9:03:14 Rejected by Commission NIST sponsored revised seismic times added.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:48 PM	#28
T.A.M. Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 20,795	I have to agree with them, Truthseeker. I would not trust anyone but a seismologist (if that is what they are called), an expert in reading them, to interpret the data. An EEG is a comparable example. Would you want anyone besides a Neurologist reading them and intepreting what they mean or indicate? TAM

12th September 2006, 05:53 PM	#29
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe even more to the point, seismic waves do not travel from point to point instantly, and they travel different speeds through different materials (and different densities of those materials) ross and furlong lack the ability to account for such variations, and therefore can and will miss any alternative explanation for the time differences Terrific point. Exactly why seismic data needs to be interpereted by people who are specially trained at doing so....and those people find nothing out of the ordinary about the plane impacts.
apathoid Guest Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,918

12th September 2006, 05:54 PM	#30
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Quote: I have to agree with them, Truthseeker. I would not trust anyone but a seismologist (if that is what they are called), an expert in reading them, to interpret the data. My pdf reader is wacky can't read this now, but it has experts that were near GZ running seis equip. Check it out! http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/...ard_8-8-06.pdf
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862

12th September 2006, 05:58 PM	#31
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	T.A.M., Ross isn't interperting the seismic data, he is saying that it occured before the plane hit. I might not know what an EKG means, but I certainly know that it does not tell anything about the patient before it's hooked up and running.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 05:59 PM	#32
rwguinn Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 11,098	Originally Posted by stateofgrace So according to Ross, who is not civil engineer, not a structural engineer, not an architect, not an explosives expert, not qualified in anyway to talk about buildings, thier construction or destruction has now come up with some nonsense that explosions that took place before the planes hit, brought them down later. Brilliant!!!! Don't you wonder why people just laugh at this rubbish? BACK THE ^&%$ Off! You are making the same mistake that the Lost Marble people are. I will not tolerate blanket disparagement of my profession. Yes, a mechanical engineer is the best person to analyze a dynamic event. An appeal to authority requires that the authority be credible. Structural Engineers, Civil Engineers and Archetects design things not to move. Mechanical engineers deal with motion. That said. ME's also do HVAC and a number of other things that do not involve massive, or even miniscule collisions. I would need to see the dredentials and registrations of this Ross character before I declare him qualified. Now, I'm off to read his paper.
	__________________ "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

12th September 2006, 06:00 PM	#33
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Quote: seismic waves do not travel from point to point instantly, and they travel different speeds through different materials (and different densities of those materials) ross and furlong lack the ability to account for such variations, and therefore can and will miss any alternative explanation for the time differences No, this is a non-sequitor. Seismic wave cannot travel backwards in time. If the waves indeed occur prior to the jet impact, they must have been caused by something else. Propagation times are a red herring. Next.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 06:02 PM	#35
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 7,474	Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 No, this is a non-sequitor. Seismic wave cannot travel backwards in time. If the waves indeed occur prior to the jet impact, they must have been caused by something else. Propagation times are a red herring. Next. unless the seismometers were on the 78th floor of the WTC propagation time IS an issue
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

12th September 2006, 06:03 PM	#36
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Quote: if he is not interpreting the data how is he reaching his conclusion that the seismic event occurred before the plane impact? Same as it ever was...Google for "Scholars"!
Dog Town Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,862	Last edited by Dog Town; 12th September 2006 at 06:06 PM.

12th September 2006, 06:07 PM	#38
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	Well, propagation times are relevant, in that LDEO needs to take them into account when giving their time reading. The waves take x time to get to the station. But they are expert in that, and the time readings are theirs, not Ross and Furlong's.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 06:09 PM	#39
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756	And yes, that was a non-sequitor. If Ross was wrong about a propagation time, it does not follow that jet impacts caused the wave. If the wave occurs prior to the impact, it must have been caused by something else regardless of how long it takes for that wave to travel to point b.
TruthSeeker1234 Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,756

12th September 2006, 06:11 PM	#40
Bell Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 21,050	Originally Posted by rwguinn BACK THE ^&%$ Off! You are making the same mistake that the Lost Marble people are. I will not tolerate blanket disparagement of my profession. Yes, a mechanical engineer is the best person to analyze a dynamic event. An appeal to authority requires that the authority be credible. Structural Engineers, Civil Engineers and Archetects design things not to move. Mechanical engineers deal with motion. That said. ME's also do HVAC and a number of other things that do not involve massive, or even miniscule collisions. I would need to see the dredentials and registrations of this Ross character before I declare him qualified. Now, I'm off to read his paper. Uhm... what happened here?