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

MicahJava said:
By "pancake collapse", do you mean the floors failing first and then dragging the core structure down with it? If so, how on earth can that still be a viable explanation with the North Tower antenna dropping before the perimeter?
Click to expand...

The Core drop would release floors inside the tube, but it was axial miss alinement that allowed the core drop, and mass is mass, floor failure is caused by mass overloading not by structure.
 
No support for Cole's dumbed down experiments, after hundreds of posts proving overwhelming ignorance is required to believe Cole. 9/11 truth can't do science - a requirement for membership in the movement of woo, 9/11 truth, the 14 years of failure, no evidence, and idiotic claims; continues with a fringe of a fringe few who fail to think for themselves.

Why has FF failed to do more than expose no skill at physics, and science in general.
 
Last edited:
NoahFence said:
NIST's collapse time that you laughably think is on or around 6 seconds.
Click to expand...

1. That is not a logical fallacy. At best, it's nothing more than an error.

2. Pick any collapse time you want. Pick a time between 2.25 seconds and infinity. It does not matter what time you pick. Why? Simple. The roof line collapsed at freefall for approximately 2.25 seconds. The total collapse time is not nearly important as the 2.25 seconds of freefall.

:D
 
beachnut said:
No support for Cole's dumbed down experiements. 9/11 truth can't do science - it is required for member ship in the movement of woo, 9/11 truth, the 14 years of failure, no evidence, and idiotic claims.

Why has FF failed
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that everybody agreed that NIST's "optical illusion" theory was wrong because you can see the antenna dip before the perimeter on videos taken from every angle.

Here is a comprehensive list of North Tower collapse footage with corresponding Youtube links: http://www.911conspiracy.tv/1_WTC.html

Here is a tool that allows you to examine Youtube videos frame-by-frame: http://rowvid.com/

EDIT: It would appear that you edited your comment to be a generic anti-truther statement rather than the claim that the antenna fell *with* the perimeter upper portion of the North Tower, and not before.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
I was under the impression that everybody agreed that NIST's "optical illusion" theory was wrong because you can see the antenna dip before the perimeter on videos taken from every angle.

Here is a comprehensive list of North Tower collapse footage with corresponding Youtube links: http://www.911conspiracy.tv/1_WTC.html

Here is a tool that allows you to examine Youtube videos frame-by-frame: http://rowvid.com/
Click to expand...

Does it matter? There was no CD, and Cole's work, and his claims are dumber than dirt.

How does the tilting antenna work for Cole's fantasy of CD? Are you CD believer?
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
Are you seriously suggesting that "nobody here will prove" that there's something seriously wrong with that logic?
Click to expand...
There are almost 4500 posts in two threads on the subject of Cole's video and no one has yet to do this. Feel free to do what no one else has whenever you're ready.
 
beachnut said:
Does it matter? There was no CD, and Cole's work, and his claims are dumber than dirt.

How does the tilting antenna work for Cole's fantasy of CD? Are you CD believer?
Click to expand...

If there was no CD, than certainly NIST won't reject my latest FOIA request for transcripts of their interviews with the fire chiefs who directed the evacuation of WTC 7. What's there to hide?

I am not a "believer" in anything.
 
FalseFlag said:
1. That is not a logical fallacy. At best, it's nothing more than an error.

2. Pick any collapse time you want. Pick a time between 2.25 seconds and infinity. It does not matter what time you pick. Why? Simple. The roof line collapsed at freefall for approximately 2.25 seconds. The total collapse time is not nearly important as the 2.25 seconds of freefall.

:D
Click to expand...

Yes and any unsupported rock wall can do that, so freaking what?
 
MicahJava said:
I was under the impression that everybody agreed that NIST's "optical illusion" theory was wrong because you can see the antenna dip before the perimeter on videos taken from every angle.

Here is a comprehensive list of North Tower collapse footage with corresponding Youtube links: http://www.911conspiracy.tv/1_WTC.html

Here is a tool that allows you to examine Youtube videos frame-by-frame: http://rowvid.com/

EDIT: It would appear that you edited your comment to be a generic anti-truther statement rather than the claim that the antenna fell *with* the perimeter upper portion of the North Tower, and not before.
Click to expand...

The first video looks like the building fell as a unit; what is the difference, there was no CD, and Cole's claims are idiotic evidence free. Cole's experiments must be a joke and Cole has to be doing BS experiments to fool idiots so he can read comments by idiots who believe his CD nonsense.

The failed thread is an attempt to push fantasy by Cole, and expose the lack of physics skill in 9/11 truth followers.

FF has failed to come up with support for Cole's failed claims. Must be a prank to see how many useless posts can be made to get replies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom