• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Freefall is not evidence for Controlled Demolition

GlennB said:
Multi-quote doesn't seem to be working here, but it was JREF's Oliver, over at LCF. In trying to ban his IP they banned much of Germany



eta: Blimey. Some names from the past to conjure with there, names you don't see around any more.
Click to expand...

I once tried to register at a forum and was denied. I sent an email and apparently they blocked an entire group of ip addys because they had banned one person. It had the effect of blocking me and about a quarter of all users of my ISP.
 
jaydeehess said:
PfffT has an intermediary step. Anyone they suspect of questioning the site dogma gets posts shunted to a subforum for "debate". All other subforum posts are not to be questioned.
Click to expand...

That was the first step at both LCF and the UK 9/11 forum - create a ghetto which was the only place for designated 9/11 skeptics to post. Even then we were likely to get banned, and any debate related to mainstream Truther sections had to be re-started in the ghetto, which was a mess of course.

And so, left with only themselves to discuss the subject, the forums died pdq.
 
Criteria said:
Pat-on-the-back group think and bullying have always been a favourite pastime here.

That should not come as a surprise since you have done much to support the "persona non grata" attitude you speak of.
Click to expand...

Got some proof of the GTnBullying, or is that an opinion/speculation like remote control, the the delusional remote control and thinking Balsamo is an aviation authority?

Group think, aka failed group think is 9/11 truth in action, or lack of action. Failed group think using lies, failed opinions, and fantasy claims as evidence.

Bullying, sticks and stones, or is it evidence? I guess evidence to support the real 19 terrorists did 9/11 would be considered bullying and group think to the fantasy claims you have on 9/11. Truth is bullying for the lies 9/11 truth has, in 911 truth fantasy world of woo.

You, MM, and your aviation expert Balsamo can't figure out what hit the Pentagon, how will you support the CD fantasy? How does Free fall for a seconds fit for the 18 second 7 WTC collapse after fires were not fought for hours.

With internal failure many seconds before the roofline falls, why is freefall not expected. Has anyone seen the faster than freefall chain falling.
 
Please return to the topic, which is neither other forums nor previous members of ISF/JREFF.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Bump for FF. Show your freefall fysiks understanding here.

Hint: no one has been able to show that freefall means CD. Read the whole thread to see why. Especially the posts with pictures. They each mean a thousand words. Or 1024. Not sure...
 
FalseFlag said:
OK. I will take your word for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=c600UompC-I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-nbfeGjwZU&feature=player_embedded

Do either of those videos show that the NIST model matches the actual collapse? No. If the NIST models don't match what was observed, we need a new investigation.
Click to expand...

I did watch the videos.
Do either of them show the NIST model matched the actual collapse? No, they don't.
Do they show how this was determined? Any workings? Any sign of how they synchronised the two graphics? No. So they prove nothing, except for the idea that whoever made these videos did so with a pre-conceived agenda. An honest person would show how this conclusion was arrived at.
Do either of these videos show that freefall = CD, which was the original question? No.
You've proved something here, FF, but it wasn't what you intended to prove....
 
Nobody's ever produced an accurate simulation of the collapse of the Tay Bridge that reproduces all the collapse features noted by William McGonagle. I think we should re-investigate that, at enormous expense and with full subpoena power.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Nobody's ever produced an accurate simulation of the collapse of the Tay Bridge that reproduces all the collapse features noted by William McGonagle. I think we should re-investigate that, at enormous expense and with full subpoena power.

Dave
Click to expand...

The Illuminati have been paying fortunes over the years to stifle this idea, mostly to avoid having to listen to the poem again.
 
GlennB said:
The Illuminati have been paying fortunes over the years to stifle this idea, mostly to avoid having to listen to the poem again.
Click to expand...

And yet it features themes central to the purpose of the NIST investigation.

"For the stronger our houses we do build,
The less chance we have of being killed."

Dave
 
LSSBB said:
"..no one has been able to show that freefall means CD."
Click to expand...

Freefall acceleration is evidence of zero resistance to the force of gravity.

CD creates the necessary conditions for freefall acceleration to occur.
 
Criteria said:
Freefall acceleration is evidence of zero resistance to the force of gravity.

CD creates the necessary conditions for freefall acceleration to occur.
Click to expand...

So does misalignment caused by other mechanisms such as heat expansion... asymmetrical loss of support leading to tilting and mis alignment / bypassing of columns. And this accounts for the observed motion.
 
Criteria said:
Freefall acceleration is evidence of zero resistance to the force of gravity.

CD creates the necessary conditions for freefall acceleration to occur.
Click to expand...
JSanderO said:
So does misalignment caused by other mechanisms such as heat expansion... asymmetrical loss of support leading to tilting and mis alignment / bypassing of columns. And this accounts for the observed motion.
Click to expand...

In the case of WTC7, which had a perimeter enclosing an area the size of a football field, you propose that what occurred was a vast, simultaneous, “mis-alignment” extending over a height of at least eight stories, to all vertical support, triggered by the consequences of heat expansion.

By what reality-based science could that have occurred?
 
Last edited:
Criteria said:
In the case of WTC7, which had a perimeter enclosing an area the size of a football field, you propose that what occurred was a vast, simultaneous, “mis-alignment” of all the vertical support because of heat expansion.
Click to expand...

Thank you for highlighting the key word that makes your argument a strawman fallacy. It makes it so much easier to see what you're doing wrong.

Dave
 
ozeco41 said:
:thumbsup: And even that example in its simplest isolated form ain't as straight forward as it looks.

And this one:
...goes up a layer or two of complexity. The squeaky noises you may hear are the rusty Mk1 Skull Embedded Grey-cell Module - '41 vintage - deciding whether or not to comment. :)

Meanwhile:

On a related tack.

Look at many arguments denying "over G" whilst asserting (both sides) that the acceleration averaged "G".

That is the shortest - and almost certainly unintended - argument I've seen for "over G occurred" ;)

:runaway
Click to expand...

Found it:
http://inspiringscience.net/2013/04/15/falling-faster-than-gravity/

This is, imho a simplified lab demonstration of the factor involved in the excursions above g in the collapse of WTC 7.
 
Criteria said:
Freefall acceleration is evidence of zero resistance to the force of gravity.

CD creates the necessary conditions for freefall acceleration to occur.
Click to expand...

CD is the ONLY thing that creates those conditions? What If I go to the roof of a building and drop a penny off of it? No CD, yet there's free fall.
 
NoahFence said:
CD is the ONLY thing that creates those conditions? What If I go to the roof of a building and drop a penny off of it? No CD, yet there's free fall.
Click to expand...

If your penny has a line attached to it running to the ground and a person snaps the line down, and if one simply measures the time to contact with the ground and uses that to calculate the acceleration then you will get a greater than g value.

Measure the distance traveled at intervals of 1s and you will see differing values, if one measures every 0.1s you will get still different values. Measure every 0.05s and get different values again.

Gee, how's that happen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom