I found the missing Jolt.

[jaydeehess]

Only CD could cause an even with the horizon collapse. A fire induced failure scenario cannot possibly cause it. This is really simple and it is amazing that you are having a hard time with it.

To Tony Szamboti this
\/
is a horizontal line.

 

[FalseFlag]

You've inadvertently posted it twice already, but whatever.

Please refresh my memory.

 

[FalseFlag]

He is, and they were not. He's sure.

You could have looked up the definition of acceleration before making a fool of yourself.

Please explain why his claims are wrong. Skeptics claim I don't know anything about physics, so please teach me. I want to learn the ways of the skeptics.

 

[FalseFlag]

Paranoia and egocentrism are both observable traits of truthers.

Please explain how my post supports your claim.

 

[FalseFlag]

Dodging the question is an observable trait of truthers.

Providing the correct answer to a question is not dodging it. Perhaps skeptics should just give in and finally admit that when they accuse a truther of "dodging the question" what they really mean is that they can't handle the truth.

 

[Axxman300]

Please explain why his claims are wrong. Skeptics claim I don't know anything about physics, so please teach me. I want to learn the ways of the skeptics.

Your path to enlightenment begins here:


http://www.50states.com/cc/

and in your case I suggest attending a few meetings here:

http://www.aa.org/

You're welcome.

 

[FalseFlag]

Someone call AE911Truth.

Tell 'em we've found their missing dolt.

Just for the record, when all you have left in your magic bag of deceit is an ad hominem attack, it means you got your *** handed to you. Even the lurkers know this.

 

[FalseFlag]

Your path to enlightenment begins here

No. No. No.
Why did you give me a link to colleges and universities that would teach actual physics? I want to learn skeptic physics, where freefall does not exist, and acceleration means whatever you want it to be. Come on, show me the dark side of the "force".

 

[DGM]

No. No. No.
Why did you give me a link to colleges and universities that would teach actual physics? I want to learn skeptic physics, where freefall does not exist, and acceleration means whatever you want it to be. Come on, show me the dark side of the "force".

Show evidence this is what skeptics believe.

 

[jaydeehess]

It's actually both, and it's pretty easy to tell which poster belongs to which group.
.........
I'm bringing this up because it just needs to be said. I know the deal. Some of the posters here believe this nonsense because they don't have the capacity to understand or deal with the truth. The others are paid to spread the nonsense. I know no "skeptic" is going to admit this, but privately at least admit to yourself that I know what is going on.

This whole line that all the exterior columns had to be blown at once is ridiculous in light of the factual video.

The kink forms first, that is to say before global vertical movement. ALL north side floors tilt. For THAT to happen the exterior columns of the north face must all be failing sequentially from the kink outwards, which MUST be occurring BEFORE the east and west walls fail and the entire building is moving vertically downwards. At that point a significant number of exterior columns of the north face have already buckled or begun to buckle. In addition, the SW corner is long gone.

Just how is it necessary then for exterior columns to be explosively removed, and which ones of those not already compromised?

Hi, FF.
Which am I then?
I could use a laugh.

 

[GlennB]

Please explain why his claims are wrong. Skeptics claim I don't know anything about physics, so please teach me. I want to learn the ways of the skeptics.

I already told you how. All you have to do is look up the definition of "acceleration" in the physics sense rather than the everyday sense. Google will get you there in about 30 seconds.

 

[jaydeehess]

No. No. No.
Why did you give me a link to colleges and universities that would teach actual physics? I want to learn skeptic physics, where freefall does not exist, and acceleration means whatever you want it to be. Come on, show me the dark side of the "force".

???? Has anyone ever stated that acceleration is not a change in velocity over time?

"constant acceleration" however seems open to debate by you. In my world of physics a graph of velocity versus time would show a straight line through EVERY point on the graph for "constant acceleration", whereas in your physics those points seem to not need be on the line at all.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Just for the record, when all you have left in your magic bag of deceit is an ad hominem attack, it means you got your *** handed to you. Even the lurkers know this.

Providing the correct answer to a question is not dodging it. Perhaps skeptics should just give in and finally admit that when they accuse a truther of "dodging the question" what they really mean is that they can't handle the truth.

Physician, heal thyself!

Please explain how my post supports your claim.

I can go one better, and show you:

I wish I had the morals to turn down money to spread the lie, but I know I don't. I know if someone dumped a truck full of cash in front of me I would become a paid shill, just like the ones here. The difference is that I would do a better job.

At least I'm honest about it. Yes, I realize the irony in saying I'm honest, but would make a great liar. Oh, well. A fact is a fact.

I'm bringing this up because it just needs to be said. I know the deal. Some of the posters here believe this nonsense because they don't have the capacity to understand or deal with the truth. The others are paid to spread the nonsense. I know no "skeptic" is going to admit this, but privately at least admit to yourself that I know what is going on.

 

[FalseFlag]

Show evidence this is what skeptics believe.

I submit most of the posts in this subforum. I'm not going to point any of them out because it's a waste of time. You are just going to ignore the obvious.

 

[FalseFlag]

Hi, FF.
Which am I then?
I could use a laugh.

Nope. I can make a general statement, but I can't be specific and point out a member. It is a violation of the forum rules.

Nice try.

 

[jaydeehess]

It is either a sad group or a bunch of paid hacks who can't afford to admit to it. I would bet on the latter as it is the only thing that really makes sense and is why I said I feel sorry for you. Most people would have to be in a bad situation before they would deny reality and would only be doing it to survive. With that said I won't keep shoving it in your faces.

It's actually both, and it's pretty easy to tell which poster belongs to which group............

I'm bringing this up because it just needs to be said. I know the deal. Some of the posters here believe this nonsense because they don't have the capacity to understand or deal with the truth. The others are paid to spread the nonsense. I know no "skeptic" is going to admit this, but privately at least admit to yourself that I know what is going on.

Nope. I can make a general statement, but I can't be specific and point out a member. It is a violation of the forum rules.

Just to clarify, you are saying you know which is which and therefore which I am, but you cannot do so publicly because of forum rules. Right?

Nice try.

I was trying something was I? don't worry, rhetorical question, I understand what your paranoid world view dictates.

 

[jaydeehess]

No. No. No.
Why did you give me a link to colleges and universities that would teach actual physics? I want to learn skeptic physics, where freefall does not exist, and acceleration means whatever you want it to be. Come on, show me the dark side of the "force".

???? Has anyone ever stated that acceleration is not a change in velocity over time?

"constant acceleration" however seems open to debate by you. In my world of physics a graph of velocity versus time would show a straight line through EVERY point on the graph for "constant acceleration", whereas in your physics those points seem to not need be on the line at all.

Now that we have the "Which am I" post taken care of as much as is possible, how about addressing this one FF?

 

[Dave Rogers]

An important question for Tony

Tony, you continue to evade a series of questions I've asked you, and I'd like to press you on them, but I realise that there's a far more important one that you need to answer for your own sake. Why, on a forum in which you want to convince people that your view of events is the truth, have you resorted to provable lies?

I'll just review what the provable lies were.

The building comes down even with the horizon and Dave somehow thinks the word symmetric is inappropriate.

This is a statement that is not substantiated by the post to which it replies, nor by any other post in the thread.

Did you notice Dave actually tried to say the building's core could have started collapsing from its center outward due to fire, essentially throwing NIST's column 79 and east to west progression under the bus?

And this is clearly a blatant lie. You cannot claim that you were unaware I did not say these things; you responded to the posts in which you state that I claimed them. So your lies are provable, and I'm sure are clear to all the honest posters in and readers of this thread. So, my question again: Why, on a forum in which you want to convince people that your view of events is the truth, have you resorted to provable lies?

Now you can respond to this in many ways. You could of course not respond at all, leaving the accusation unchallenged. Or you could challenge it on the grounds that your comprehension is so poor that you actually believed I said things I did not, though again this is hardly a helpful strategy in promoting a position that ultimately depends on an appeal to your own authority. (Please, please don't pretend you're not doing that. You've repeatedly accused anyone who disagrees with you of being ignorant and unintelligent, which is tantamount to a claim that you should be believed because your understanding of events is superior to that of others; a classic appeal to your own authority.) Or you could claim that you haven't lied, which will simply make it clear that either you're an habitual liar who lies to cover his own lies, or you're incapable of understanding what a lie is. Or you could change the subject and try and cover your back with the usual storm of lies, insults and accusations, which I think is the most likely outcome. But all these responses would make it quite clear that you're not worth engaging with.

So unless you're capable of admitting your own lies, I can't be bothered with you any more. The next post of yours I reply to will be the one in which, or one after the one in which, you honestly answer my question: Why, on a forum in which you want to convince people that your view of events is the truth, have you resorted to provable lies?

Dave

 

[tfk]

OK. You tell us what happened.

Pick a start time, and then tell us what the acceleration was at .25 second intervals until the collapse could no longer be measured.

Show us what really happened.

Post your data so the results can be duplicated and verified.

You claim you are an engineer who understands physics and who knows what actually happened, so you should already have this data available. All you should need to do is copy and paste it so we can see it. Right? Show us how NIST is wrong.

Thanks in advance.

I'll get to your reply soon enough, Junior.

Now, you're supposed to be showing us where are the explosions in those videos that you claimed were happening in WTC7.

Why don't you do YOUR job first.

THEN, I'll be happy to answer your questions.

 

[jaydeehess]

............ Why, on a forum in which you want to convince people that your view of events is the truth, have you resorted to provable lies?

Dave

I like the "no deformation" bit. I could have sworn that at the beginning, WTC 7 has a horizontal roofline, and that all the floors were also horizontal, yet before collapse is global in nature, (that is to refer to the time when the east and west exteriors have joined in the collapse along with the north exterior failures) both the roof line and all the floors of the north side are no longer horizontal. Maybe its an optical illusion?