Steven Jones debates Leslie Robertson

Arus808 said:
Does it matter? What does a physicist have to do with molten metal?



because he is a quack and thank heavens, he's not spreading his ideals to impressionable minds.
Click to expand...

He may be a quack but what about all the onsite experts you just regarded? Physics is very relevent. Jones is an expert in archeometry too.
 
chipmunk stew said:
Yes, that would be Judy "Star Wars Space Beam" Wood. AKA, Judy "Keebler Elves" Wood. AKA, Judy "Billiard Balls" Wood.

She's a total kook.
Click to expand...

No not Judy Wood. Listen to the audio please. He cites a maths professor and a mechanical engineering one.
 
Laith said:
No not Judy Wood. Listen to the audio please. He cites a maths professor and a mechanical engineering one.
Click to expand...

Did you come here to actually discuss the collapse of the towers, or are you just interested in the personalities involved and their debating tactics? We've already had a couple of such visitors you know...
 
Laith said:
He may be a quack
Click to expand...

Then that ends it. If he's a quack, then anything he says, should be treated as the ramblings of one.

but what about all the onsite experts you just regarded?
Click to expand...

They are all on the back of hte NIST and FEMA reports. What about them?


Physics is very relevent. Jones is an expert in archeometry too.
Click to expand...
So? He wasn't there to investigate 9/11. So what does his "expertise" have to do with finding molten metal?

And AGAIN, why should Robertson know this?
 
SO I am half way through the pod cast, and Steven Jones has said nothing in anyway that Leslie cannot explain...Les is far from reeling at any point.

TAM
 
beachnut said:
Laith you need to read his paper here is one version online

http://worldtradecentertruth.com/vo...rldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf

Dr Thermite Jones is also a

Archaeometrist​

in listening to Jones or Robertson - the designer of the structure wins​

Jones knows nothing about stucture and steel etc... ​

Robertson does - by an order of magnitude​

Read Jones paper,, oops you could go deeper into the cult of truth​
Click to expand...

I have read his paper. Archeometry is actually very relevent when it comes to analysing samples.
 
T.A.M. said:
Judy woods calculations are based on the "Billiard Ball" model, where each ball has to reach the one below before it moves, etc...complete junk science, from what I can see...

Her latest theory, that a "STAR WARS" mini beam was responsible for the WTC collapse, makes here keebler elf "the WTCS are like trees" theory seem...almost scientific.

TAM
Click to expand...

I use the borthers in a tree model to debunk her

brother 1 is in a 110 foot tree at the top he falls and 2 tries to stop him but loose his grip instantly and begins falling with 1 who was only 10 feet above him, the new velocity of 1+2 is that velocity based on the momentum of 1 now with the the new mass of 1+2, 1+2 hit 3 and he instanly fails his grip broke his arm and now is with 1+2+3 headed for 4, 4 is a lot bigger yet 1+2+3 hit 4 and he also put up some resistance but is instantly accelerated or ripped and 1234 are now at that instant traveling as the new mass with a velocity porpotional to the momentum of 123, yes each collision stole some enegy breaking bones and ripping braches but took place conservign momemntum, no stops on this train as #5 looms to save the day, #5 moves and avoids the collison saving the last brother by using physics, he avoided the collison to live.

I left out how gravity is a force acting constantly on each, and as the brother 1234 accelerate to their doom, the constantly increasing speed will ensure a large impact equal to all the PE each had in his place in the tree minus energy expeled in breaking bones and branches and heat in any collisions.

brother 5 had taken pysics and move quickly knowing the energy of his brothers 1234 was greater than he could sustain!

Seem she kind of keeps her junk separte from clemson work, but witht the star war weapon think she may be hitting the funny farm soon!
 
The only engineers he has referred to is Gordon Ross, so far (20 minute mark).
 
Will you please stop derailing my thread with nonsense?

Could someone please give me the calculation showing complete collapse is inevitable after the failure conditions were reached?
 
Laith said:
I have read his paper. Archeometry is actually very relevent when it comes to analysing samples.
Click to expand...

not on explosive in buildings

did you miss his first paper? Papers?

so you baited us? thanks, post a little zinger and rope in the guys to tell us

So you have read all of Robertsons papers and letters on 9/11???
 
oh, and of course, the only journal he can pull out is dum da dum...the journal of 9/11 studies...the biggest sham of a journal I have ever seen.

Peer reviewed...please...Jones should be ashamed as a scientist to say the articles in that paper are peer reviewed.

TAM
 
Laith said:
So you cant. He wasn't planning to teach it. Why lie?
Click to expand...

so, I may have been mistakened - it may not be him (but I do remember a professor/university teacher being admonished for making students in his syllabus required to read some questionable papers on 9/11).

However, it still doesn't detract from the fact that it was his papers that got him into trouble.

So, again, why should Robertson know anything beyond the construction and design of the WTC towers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom