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

FalseFlag said:
Freefall is an issue because it was observed. Without a valid explanation of what was observed, their conclusions are incomplete and possibly not valid at all.
Click to expand...
I said "Let me congratulate FalseFlag on once again succeeding in creating a derail." I did NOT say I would follow your derails.

"Freefall is an issue because it was observed." FALSE - for reasons already posted

" Without a valid explanation of what was observed," Valid explanations are not needed by honest people for any relevant purpose. Those who are part of the target audience should be aware of the basic truths of physics. And it is NOT the role of NIST to train persons in either physics or honesty. Satisfying truther dishonesty is NOT a valid goal for a public authority. And specifically it is NOT in the NIST objectives.

" their conclusions are incomplete and possibly not valid at all" Utter and dishonest nonsense. Reasons already posted.

You should know my "Two Posts ROE"
You have ONE more chance to say something sensible and honest. I do not fall for Poes OR feed trolls.
 
DGM said:
True. It's more of a "give him a shovel to dig his own grave" thing. At this point I think he might be coming out the other side. :D
Click to expand...
I understand - its not hard to read where most of the players are coming from.

And those who have tongue in cheek v those who treat him as serious.

On the topic of "digging" - we should soon get an opportunity to have a bit of a metaphorical "dig"


..at those who accept "averaging G" BUT deny "over G" :D
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
No. We are talking about the freefall that anyone can see for 2.25 seconds. We are talking about building 7.
Click to expand...

See, this is the problem with you dolts.

The "exterior columns" meme is in relation to the twin towers, not WTC 7.
That's what I was responding to.
You weren't talking about WTC 7. You were talking about the twin towers.


Again, and read slowly and please answer the question.

Do you know why reality has only one narrative, while you people have many?
 
NoahFence said:
See, this is the problem with you dolts.

The "exterior columns" meme is in relation to the twin towers, not WTC 7.
That's what I was responding to.
You weren't talking about WTC 7. You were talking about the twin towers.


Again, and read slowly and please answer the question.

Do you know why reality has only one narrative, while you people have many?
Click to expand...

Freefall was observed during the collapse of WTC7. When freefall is mentioned, we are talking about WTC7.
 
FalseFlag said:
NIST was charged with investigating the collapse. A thorough investigation would have attempted to explain this.
Click to expand...

That's does not answer my question.
The period of free fall (including the measured over g excursions) was a total of 2.25 seconds occurring a few seconds AFTER the entire building exterior began moving and a full ten seconds after the first outward sign of collapse.

Why does this particular period of time require explanation? It's a bit of minutia that has no bearing on NIST's task of developing code recommendations.

Your response suggests that you would not be satisfied unless NIST could explain where every piece of the building ended up.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Why does this particular period of time require explanation?
Click to expand...
It was part of the collapse. If you ask someone to investigate something, they need to explain all of it. If not, the investigation is not complete.

It's OK, though. We know the investigation is incomplete and inaccurate. You can help get a new investigation by going to www.ae911truth.org and signing the petition.
 
FalseFlag said:
It was part of the collapse. If you ask someone to investigate something, they need to explain all of it. If not, the investigation is not complete.

It's OK, though. We know the investigation is incomplete and inaccurate. You can help get a new investigation by going to www.ae911truth.org and signing the petition.
Click to expand...

B.S. it's a bit of minutia. It's no more important than determining exactly why steel beam X ended up at xyx coordinates.

So, again why is it important to know why an already fully moving structure collapsing at less than g later achieved g.?
 
jaydeehess said:
NIST mentioned free fall. It was of no consequence but since a fringe subset of people wanted it mentioned, NIST mentioned it. That never made it important.
Click to expand...

LOL. Freefall can only happen under certain conditions. These conditions contradict the official explanation given by NIST.
 
FalseFlag said:
It was part of the collapse. If you ask someone to investigate something, they need to explain all of it. If not, the investigation is not complete.

It's OK, though. We know the investigation is incomplete and inaccurate. You can help get a new investigation by going to www.ae911truth.org and signing the petition.
Click to expand...

Its impossible to explain everything, because of the millions of variables in a collapse. Anyone with half a brain will understand this.

If a bridge collapses, what do you want the investigators to investigate? How the bridge collapsed, or or how every single part of the bridge ended at their final position?

If a plane crashes, do you want to investigate how each and every single part ended on the ground, or what caused the plane to crash?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom