If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II

FalseFlag said:
Has anyone performed an experiment to prove that Cole's conclusions are wrong?
Click to expand...

You do realize, don't you, that there are other ways to show something wrong, right? Experiments are not required.

FalseFlag said:
So, in your world, an experiment that replicates the motions observed during the collapse of two 110 story buildings is irrelevant?
Click to expand...

Cole's irrelevant experiments replicated the motions of the tower collapse in one respect. I'll grant you that. Cole mimicked the general direction of the collapse. The towers fell down.

If there are any other claims for relevance for Cole, you'd need to support them with evidence. Got any? You didn't for your acceleration claim; perhaps you have for these.
 
Cole's video, a trap capturing overwhelming ignorance of 9/11 truth nuts in comments

Cole's models failed to model the WTC again.

Is Cole making up insane models to see how many idiots comment with support on his video? Is he faking being a 9/11 truth nut so he can laugh at the overwhelming ignorance of those who blindly believe the BS in his video?
 
FalseFlag said:
Has anyone performed an experiment to prove that Cole's conclusions are wrong?

If so, can someone please point me to it? There's like over 3000 posts in these two threads, and I haven't been able to find any experiments that prove Cole is wrong. It seems like it would be so easy. I mean, there are so many posts with words claiming Cole is wrong, so there must at least a few posts with experiments to support those words. Right?

I mean, I just saw a thread that lists the credentials of many of the skeptics here. It seems like with all that "expertise", performing one experiment proving Cole is wrong should be an easy task to accomplish. Right?
Click to expand...

I'm standing out in a field. I see a fresh steaming pile of BS. I don't have to perform an experiment to prove it is a pile of BS. All I have to do, is to speak out loud, and say: "Look, there is a big fresh pile of streaming BS." At this point, intelligent people will agree with me, and say: "You're right, that is a really big pile of BS."
 
FalseFlag said:
Has anyone performed an experiment to prove that Cole's conclusions are wrong?

If so, can someone please point me to it? ...

I mean, I just saw a thread that lists the credentials of many of the skeptics here. It seems like with all that "expertise", performing one experiment proving Cole is wrong should be an easy task to accomplish. Right?
Click to expand...


Yes, multiple experiments have been performed that conclusively prove that Cole is completely wrong.

But we have a problem. Since you are unable/unwilling to respond to most of the technical points that I've made & are unwilling to disclose your background, your new tactic is to ignore everything I post.

This is, whether or not you acknowledge it, a transparent act of your tossing in the towel & admitting defeat.

But since you refuse to answer my questions, please explain to me why you believe that I should bother to tell you about these experiments, or to lead you to them?

Here's the path around our problem:
1. You tell us - honestly - your educational & work background.
2. You answer, say, 4 out of the 12 or so questions I've asked you in various posts.

3. As soon as you do that, I'll direct you to an experiment that conclusively proves that Cole is wrong.
4. If that one doesn't do it, then there is a second one that might.

To anyone with half a brain, either one alone ought to do the trick. But I've given up trying to underestimate your honesty or abilities in these matters.

Note that there are 1000s of candidate experiments that I could show anyone who was trying to learn, that would do this job. But YOU, being resolutely determined to remain ignorant, have shown that you are unable to connect the analytic dots to understand why they prove Cole wrong.

So, Bad Boy. Whachu gonna do...?
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
Has anyone performed an experiment to prove that Cole's conclusions are wrong?

If so, can someone please point me to it? There's like over 3000 posts in these two threads, and I haven't been able to find any experiments that prove Cole is wrong. It seems like it would be so easy. I mean, there are so many posts with words claiming Cole is wrong, so there must at least a few posts with experiments to support those words. Right?

I mean, I just saw a thread that lists the credentials of many of the skeptics here. It seems like with all that "expertise", performing one experiment proving Cole is wrong should be an easy task to accomplish. Right?
Click to expand...

If you actually understood what Cole is really claiming -- which is not really what you keep parroting about "motion" from the first few minutes of the video -- you would also understand that you HAVE been shown both experiments and real-world cases that prove Cole's conclusions are wrong. Furthermore, you been given excruciatingly detailed explanations for WHY they're wrong, and anyone who understands the effects of scale shouldn't need those experiments, anyway.

I suppose you could be an example of Poe's Law. but perhaps it's more like Seger's Law: Willful ignorance is indistinguishable from stupidity.
 
DGM said:
Why would anyone bother? Is there anyone actually paying attention to Cole?

You do know this is an election year? If your cause had any following, someone would have picked it up. You got nothing.
Click to expand...
Sure they would have. /sarcasm

You know, because the media outlets are free, completely open, and completely independent from any corporations or other outside control. The media always tells us everything we need to know, and everything they tell us is true and 100 percent accurate.

*facepalm*
 
jsfisher said:
You do realize, don't you, that there are other ways to show something wrong, right? Experiments are not required.

Cole's irrelevant experiments replicated the motions of the tower collapse in one respect. I'll grant you that. Cole mimicked the general direction of the collapse. The towers fell down.

If there are any other claims for relevance for Cole, you'd need to support them with evidence. Got any? You didn't for your acceleration claim; perhaps you have for these.
Click to expand...

If you could post an experiment to prove Cole wrong you would. The problem is that you can't defy the laws of physics, and neither could WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7. Experiments will only prove that Cole's conclusions are right. That's why neither you, nor anyone else, will ever try to perform an experiment to prove Cole wrong. It can't be done because you can't defy the laws of physics. Bummer, huh?
 
Argumemnon said:
Have you made any effort to understand why that's not needed?

Oh, wait. You already admitted to trolling, here.
Click to expand...

Oh, please do tell me why Richard Feynman is right, but he's wrong when it comes to Cole. Please do tell me why I should ignore something that can clearly be seen, and why I should instead rely on the intense BS that is served up here by the skeptics pretending to be experts.
 
MileHighMadness said:
I'm standing out in a field. I see a fresh steaming pile of BS. I don't have to perform an experiment to prove it is a pile of BS. All I have to do, is to speak out loud, and say: "Look, there is a big fresh pile of streaming BS." At this point, intelligent people will agree with me, and say: "You're right, that is a really big pile of BS."
Click to expand...

What would you do if someone disagreed with your observation? You would prove what was on the ground in the field by comparing it to what you saw come out of a bull. That would be how to prove that what you saw was actually what you saw, right?

If you had no idea what BS was, and two people tried to tell you what it was, who would you give more credibility to? Would you believe the person who simply told you what it was, or would you believe the person who showed you what it was?

Hmmmmmm?
 
tfk said:
Yes, multiple experiments have been performed that conclusively prove that Cole is completely wrong.
Click to expand...
Post a link to these experiments. Why is this so hard? Post a link.

I already explained why I won't answer your posts, or anyone else's. I'm not playing your games. I will not admit defeat, because I am not defeated. I just know it's stupid to keep wasting time playing your games.
 
WilliamSeger said:
If you actually understood what Cole is really claiming -- which is not really what you keep parroting about "motion" from the first few minutes of the video -- you would also understand that you HAVE been shown both experiments and real-world cases that prove Cole's conclusions are wrong. Furthermore, you been given excruciatingly detailed explanations for WHY they're wrong, and anyone who understands the effects of scale shouldn't need those experiments, anyway.

I suppose you could be an example of Poe's Law. but perhaps it's more like Seger's Law: Willful ignorance is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Click to expand...
Please perform an experiment to show your claims are correct.

If you need help it should be easy to get it considering how many "experts" are on this forum.
 
FalseFlag said:
Oh, please do tell me why Richard Feynman is right, but he's wrong when it comes to Cole. Please do tell me why I should ignore something that can clearly be seen, and why I should instead rely on the intense BS that is served up here by the skeptics pretending to be experts.
Click to expand...

Your admitted trolling tactic of contantly asking others to do work for you, like a child asking "why?" repeatedly, has not only gotten old but also transparent and boring.

FalseFlag said:
Please perform an experiment to show your claims are correct.
Click to expand...

Make some effort for yourself.
 
FalseFlag said:
Post a link to these experiments. Why is this so hard? Post a link.

I already explained why I won't answer your posts, or anyone else's. I'm not playing your games. I will not admit defeat, because I am not defeated. I just know it's stupid to keep wasting time playing your games.
Click to expand...

WOW just WOW... FF you are quite the player... making demands that people prove A, B or C... provide links and refuse to accept or perhaps understand explanations that have been given you.

Do you understand why mechanical experiments using small models cannot tell what was going on in the big large event. Certain things DO NOT SCALE and just change the 3 physical dimensions will not demonstrate much of anything... certainly not everything. Sure... gravity is always present... gas laws don't change... but you cannot SCALE mechanical things to understand "the physics".

Do you understand why that is so?
 
JSanderO said:
WOW just WOW... FF you are quite the player... making demands that people prove A, B or C... provide links and refuse to accept or perhaps understand explanations that have been given you.

Do you understand why mechanical experiments using small models cannot tell what was going on in the big large event. Certain things DO NOT SCALE and just change the 3 physical dimensions will not demonstrate much of anything... certainly not everything. Sure... gravity is always present... gas laws don't change... but you cannot SCALE mechanical things to understand "the physics".

Do you understand why that is so?
Click to expand...

I demand that you provide proof that I didn't understand!
 
JSanderO said:
WOW just WOW... FF you are quite the player... making demands that people prove A, B or C... provide links and refuse to accept or perhaps understand explanations that have been given you.

Do you understand why mechanical experiments using small models cannot tell what was going on in the big large event. Certain things DO NOT SCALE and just change the 3 physical dimensions will not demonstrate much of anything... certainly not everything. Sure... gravity is always present... gas laws don't change... but you cannot SCALE mechanical things to understand "the physics".

Do you understand why that is so?
Click to expand...

You bring up the issue of scale once again, yet you claim that I refuse to accept or don't understand explanations that are given. It's too bad you don't understand irony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom