24 hours later, and it's already a wasteland...
Seriously, you guys. One lousy day passes, and look at my thread.
I've already reported, as promised, but frankly this was inevitable and I'm not sure this Superfund site can now be salvaged. Present already are something on the order of 50 posts ranging from off-topic to pointless bickering to naked insult. That goes for "debunkers"
and Truth Movement malcontents. You should be ashamed.
Before I move on, let me just clarify a few things for those who responded.
To
Heiwa -- who actually made a good effort to stay on topic and remain unabusive -- your interpretation of my model is simply not correct. In the impact of upper mass and lower mass, the quantity to use is, in fact, momentum. Not energy. This is because, again, it is an inelastic collision. In undergraduate Physics you should have learned about Focault pendulums and the like. The reason one does not use energy is because energy is difficult to track in an inelastic collision, but momentum is very easy to track. Momentum also relates
directly to stress which is the dominant parameter in building destruction.
As follow-up, I should remark that this thread is
not about your own models. You have numerous threads, some currently active, already commited to their discussion. Your performance is required there. Not here.
To
Homeland Insurgency, your claim that I'm making a case for explosions in the Towers (at impact??) is just plain stupid. No further comment is needed.
To
RedIbis, you might want to watch this part anyway. What I'm doing here is not a defense against no-planers. That's just an example. What I'm doing is walking through a process, using those claims as a foil. That's all. Now, the process I'm walking through is the one that you need a lot of help with, namely how does one create
theoretical evidence.
When scientists don't have the easiest bits and pieces, this is the process we follow -- modeling and physical reasoning. Say we want to study the core of the Earth, or stars, or what have you, we don't just throw up our hands and say "darn, I'll never know." We start with what we do know, or what we can reasonably describe, and see what happens.
That's the process I walk through here. I don't have any aircraft fuel at my house. I don't have any steel columns. I don't know precisely what the plane was made of. But I don't need
any of these things. These are all items that are pretty well understood, and so it's a piece of cake to come up with a representative model. As a result, even without the tiniest fragment of any of the objects under consideration, I can come up with an estimate good to +/- 20% or so. That's what I demonstrate here. I produce an estimate of impact pressure, impulse, and required speed to cause structural damage, and I verify that those predictions are correct.
This is how science is done. Obviously having actual pieces is better, but that's not the whole story. Not by a long shot. Evidence is simply anything we can observe, and reconstruction is a completely valid way to gather that evidence.
This has all been explained to you endlessly before. I only go through it here to clarify for everyone else. Further complaints to this effect are distinctly off-topic.
Regarding overall behavior, this is precisely the reason I took to a different form of medium in the first place. The Internet discussions are dead. Have been dead for years. This thread and the misbehavior in it should leave no doubt whatsoever, as if any remained, that the reason people are confused is because they want to be confused. This is why the Truth Movement hardly exists outside the Internet -- this is an environment where such attitudes are common.
I had an interesting experience taping these shows, and it is this: It feels very, very silly to discuss such ideas
in real life. Actually talking, with an adult. Even though both of us knew implicitly that the Truth Movement claims were nonsense, it was actually embarrassing to treat them as though they had any speck of validity whatsoever.
This is consistent with what I've seen in real life. Were it not for the Internet, I doubt I'd know the Truth Movement now or ever existed. My brushes with it in real life are limited to two miniscule chance sightings -- a lonely flyer in San Francisco, and a few seconds of Mr. Rodriguez on C-SPAN. So why? Why does the Truth Movement exist here, and nowhere else?
My theory about this is simple: We "debunkers" have been treating the argument as an actual debate, a place to learn and to sharpen our arguments. (Well, some of us, anyway.) The Truth Movement, in contrast, treats the argument as social networking. This should have been obvious from the beginning: Think of the "Big Top" approach, where no-planers, many-planers, space-beamers, you name it all fit into one Movement. Think of all the "Fill In the Blank for 9/11 Truth" organizations. And think of the absolutely
dismal output from all of them. As I reference once in a while,
ref once researched the origin of 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, and found that every single idea that we encounter today emerged in mere days after the event -- before any hard data existed at all -- and only the slightest evolution has happened since.
If this theory is correct, it explains why the Truth Movement never went anywhere. Those who tried to capitalize on it, invariably failed. Their growth models were wrong. Everyone interested in their product who might stumble across it was
already in the Movement, and already had a similar idea. Every time they tried to break into the real world and gather more attention, they found they'd already peaked. It wasn't a case of reaching more people or closing a deal, it was instead the case that everyone who'd ever be on board got there on their own, with no convincing. And so what started on the Internet, remains on the Internet -- a "guild" of like-minded people playing a big game, with almost no impact on the world outside. The few who have profited from this either follow traditional models of crank theory evolution, ala Icke and Griffin, or those who are full-blown entertainers with a built-in audience like Alex Jones. The rest of you, frankly, have nothing. Never have. No hypothesis, no evidence, no papers, no valid results.
The shows I taped with Ron are not aimed at you. They're aimed at people who actually want to learn. I encourage each and every one of you to become one of these people, but change starts from within.
So far I've received exactly one comment over e-mail, from the increasingly marginalized Cap'n Bob. His complaint is that it was a rigged debate -- but it's not a debate at all. I'm showing you some new tools. I'm not debating with you at all. I frankly don't care about your ideas, all I want to know is
how you got them. If you arrived at them in a logical and repeatable fashion, then I'm interested, whether you're a Truther or not. But if not, if you focus on the result and not the method, then I already know you're not approaching the problem logically, and I don't care what you believe. That's your problem. It's not my job to make you believe anything.
So, with that cleared up, let's try to return to topic.
Regarding constructive criticism, yeah, I have a lot of experience with public speaking but little with broadcast. I thought about wearing a lab coat, but I didn't have any dry ice or a Jacob's ladder around...
Framing, well, that's how the producer wanted it. Except for standing, that was my call. I had a lot of material to get through with a lot of uncertainty in how the show would run, and we only did one take. I think faster on my feet. And as
Gravy correctly pointed out, it was meant to be more lecture than discussion.
If we do more shows I'll take your suggestions and try to do better. We all learn by doing, and I learned quite a bit from the experience. I still hope you all find it useful. Two more shows to come. Thanks again for your interest, and double thanks to those of you paying attention and discussing in good faith.
I will try to dig up referencies to it.(books by czech 2WW historian) And one of british carriers had czech armor-plating on deck. 
