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.
Tags seismic , seismology

Reply
Old 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 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 12th September 2006, 04:54 PM   #2
Bell
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vol...micFurlong.doc

I'm seeking serious comment on the merits/demerits of this paper.
I doubt you do.
Bell 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 04:58 PM   #5
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Originally Posted by Dog Town View Post
Some one please post the Implosion world paper. I've lost the link!
http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/...ard_8-8-06.pdf
apathoid 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 12th September 2006, 05:08 PM   #6
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
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
defaultdotxbe 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 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.

Last edited by TruthSeeker1234; 12th September 2006 at 05:17 PM.
TruthSeeker1234 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 12th September 2006, 05:15 PM   #8
Skibum
Graduate Poster
 
Skibum's Avatar
 
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 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 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!

Last edited by Dog Town; 12th September 2006 at 05:22 PM.
Dog Town 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 05:30 PM   #11
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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.
Sword_Of_Truth 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 12th September 2006, 05:31 PM   #12
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 05:35 PM   #14
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,858
Originally Posted by apathoid View Post
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.
WildCat 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 12th September 2006, 05:35 PM   #15
TruthSeeker1234
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,756
Apathoid, this thread is about that paper.
TruthSeeker1234 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 12th September 2006, 05:37 PM   #16
steve s
Philosopher
 
steve s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,865
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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.
__________________
"Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken
steve s 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 12th September 2006, 05:37 PM   #17
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe 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 12th September 2006, 05:38 PM   #18
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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.
Sword_Of_Truth 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 05:40 PM   #22
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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.?

Last edited by apathoid; 12th September 2006 at 05:46 PM. Reason: typos
apathoid 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 12th September 2006, 05:42 PM   #23
HeyLeroy
Vegan Cannibal
 
HeyLeroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,573
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.
__________________
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.
HeyLeroy 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 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 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 05:47 PM   #26
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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.
Sword_Of_Truth 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 12th September 2006, 05:47 PM   #27
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe 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 12th September 2006, 05:48 PM   #28
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,811
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
T.A.M. 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 12th September 2006, 05:53 PM   #29
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
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 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 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 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 05:59 PM   #32
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 10,665
Originally Posted by stateofgrace View Post
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
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 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 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 12th September 2006, 06:00 PM   #34
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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?
__________________
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
defaultdotxbe 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 12th September 2006, 06:02 PM   #35
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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
defaultdotxbe 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 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"!

Last edited by Dog Town; 12th September 2006 at 06:06 PM.
Dog Town 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 12th September 2006, 06:03 PM   #37
apathoid
Government Loyalist
 
apathoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,787
Originally Posted by TruthSeeker1234 View Post
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).
apathoid 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 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 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 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 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 12th September 2006, 06:11 PM   #40
Bell
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,318
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
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?
Bell 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 11:40 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.