• 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.

Tony harasses Bazant

OK

Maybe it is time SOMEONE told him that he is using the model wrongly........

.....err.....:o

I thought one or two of us had told him. Once or twice.
Perhaps a salient bit is what Tony doesnt say.
He doesn't mention that Bazant ever uses, or implies, the term "limiting case".
Since one limiting case would be to use all parameters at their max values, Tony's complaints are all rendered moot.
 
Of course I can.
You don't have the standing to review it, though.

You're right, but others do have standing, so why don't you post it? I know what I think does not matter, but there are real experts who would love to see you prove your claims by performing an experiment.

Are you afraid to have a credible expert review your experiment?

So to avoid redundant effort, I'll just present it as my testimony when the new official-yet-independent investigation starts.

Can you tell me when that will be, so I can keep the time open on my calendar?

I can't give you an exact time. What I can say, with a high degree of certainty, is that it will happen much quicker when/if the members of forums such as this stop stonewalling it.
 
I agree because if Larry Silverstein had made such a comment on video, he would have been serving time in prison for illegally blowing up a building in New York City.

What person would be so stupid as to admit on video, that he was responsible for illegallly blowing up buildings in New York City?

Answer: Osama bin Laden





That is correct, and I am beginning to think that Tony is just here for having fun and nothing else.

.
Assuming I am correctly interpreting, I quite agree.. Let's make it 20 in Science!!!!
 
You're right, but others do have standing, so why don't you post it? I know what I think does not matter, but there are real experts who would love to see you prove your claims by performing an experiment.

Are you afraid to have a credible expert review your experiment?



I can't give you an exact time. What I can say, with a high degree of certainty, is that it will happen much quicker when/if the members of forums such as this stop stonewalling it.

You first have to find your credible expert, I know truthers don't have any.
 
What I can say, with a high degree of certainty, is that it will happen much quicker when/if the members of forums such as this stop stonewalling it.


Can you perform and then post a real-world experiment that supports your claim?
 
Perhaps a salient bit is what Tony doesnt say.
He doesn't mention that Bazant ever uses, or implies, the term "limiting case".
Since one limiting case would be to use all parameters at their max values, Tony's complaints are all rendered moot.

Agreed - with the pedantic point it is "worst values" which define the limit - and not always "max". But I think that was what you intended anyway.

And the reality with Tony's claims is even broader - all of his claims I am aware of with one exception he starts from false premises which support his pre-determined conclusion.

My first internet post (Nov 13/14 2007) said this:
The paper referenced as Engineering Reality by Tony Szamboti is typical of many which look impressive in detail to the non-engineer. The complex calculations may even be correct but the base premises are faulty and the resulting conclusions can readily be demonstrated to be totally wrong.
He has remained with "false premises" as his SOP - including "Missing Jolt" which is why he cannot/dare not recognise the error.

The only exception I am aware of is the paper with Szuladzinski and Johns where - for once - he got the starting premises correct. In a paper which is of zero relevance in 2016 discussion.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom