Invitation to Derek Johnson to discuss his ideas

[bill smith]

Your deletion of an important part of my post indicates that you are not as amused as you would like the Readers to believe Sabretooth.

 

[Toke]

Bill,
Your post leaves me with the impression that you could just as well be engaged in a discussion on whether superman or batman would win in a fistfight.

 

[Java Man]

Yes, I do expect a monolgue. I think I have been very clear about this: That I expect you to talk a little. And lay out your theory. You insinuated earlier that someone was stopping you from showing your full theory. Well, I intervened, reigned everybody in, and we are all giving you now all the attention in the
world, so you can tell your full theory.
You implied earlier that you have a theory which you consider "the most solid". We are dying to hear what it is.

So please - please! - get started already with your monologue! In the thread dedicated specifically to you and your full, solid theory!

What is stopping you?

This isn't that thread you know.

 

[Oystein]

This isn't that thread you know.

Right. That one over there is. It contains your username. Please post your theory there!

 

[dafydd]

Java Man seems to have a complete and most solid theory that would explain sulfidized steel, the collapses and everything. A complete theory.

Why don't you ask him what his full theory is?

Ho Ho.

 

[GlennB]

Bill,
Your post leaves me with the impression that you could just as well be engaged in a discussion on whether superman or batman would win in a fistfight.

Now that's just crazy talk. Unless Batman has some Kryptonite handy, obviously.

 

[Oystein]

Now that's just crazy talk. Unless Batman has some Kryptonite handy, obviously.

Isn't holding solid materials in your hand whilst fistfighting considered unsportsmanlike? oO

 

[Toke]

Now that's just crazy talk. Unless Batman has some Kryptonite handy, obviously.

Isn't holding solid materials in your hand whilst fistfighting considered unsportsmanlike? oO

Come on guys, Batman would of course coat his batsuit with a layer of sprayed on nano-kryptonite.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Come on guys, Batman would of course coat his batsuit with a layer of sprayed on nano-kryptonite.

And Superman would then collapse into his own footprint at freefall speed.

Dave

 

[Oystein]

And Superman would then collapse into his own footprint at freefall speed.

Dave

Since that would take about - clunkety-clunk - 100 seconds, Superman would still have time to dustify batman with X-ray vision and have him counted out first.

Which foot, anyway?? Ha!

 

[aggle-rithm]

This isn't that thread you know.

Right! You'd better hurry back over there and start avoiding the issue post haste!

 

[Sabretooth]

Since that would take about - clunkety-clunk - 100 seconds, Superman would still have time to dustify batman with X-ray vision and have him counted out first.

Which foot, anyway?? Ha!

 

[tfk]

Derek,

Where'd you go?

Have you got your sketch yet?

Before I suggested that you:

One thing that you might do first is to produce a sketch of the constraint & loading conditions at the moment of buckling …

You replied:

This is not a statement any engineer would make.

This is, of course, utterly wrong. This is exactly the sort of statement that any good engineer would make.

More important, it is exactly the action that any good engineer would take as the first step in any analysis.

You further stated, amidst a bunch of bloviating:

Telling me to sketch "constraint & loading conditions at the moment of buckling of any particular column that you..." is like telling me to breathe.

Great. Then you must have done this a long, long time ago, as the first step in your analysis.

And yet, I've been asking you for that sketch for 9 days now. No sketch.

One might jump to the conclusion that you're blowing hot air. Again.

___

Regarding your "Lagrangian energy dissipation"...

You stated that "it's time to discuss this topic". I invited you to begin.

Suddenly, after all this build-up, …

… nothing.

Silence.

Wow. Less than an overwhelming compelling argument.

Please begin this discussion.

Please do one thing for me, once you begin. Demonstrate that you had the slightest clue what you were talking about & not just blowing smoke.

Please list the various energy dissipation factors, pertinent to the collapse of WTC7, that are "velocity dependent". Since, of course, that's what "q-dot" means, in that term of that equation.

You are, of course, looking for "viscosity dependent" or "strain rate dependent" energy sinks.

Perhaps you should start by listing some such sinks.

Along with your highly developed estimates of their magnitudes, compared with other energy sinks that are dependent upon distance (ie., deformation), rather than velocity.


tom


PS.

TFK appears to be posing as an engineer.

No worries, Derek. The posing is evident to all.

But it's not that simple. I readily concede that you are not "posing" as an engineer. I'll accept that you got your degree.

The sad fact is that you are just not very good at it. Specifically, you get lost (literally lost) in arcane trivia, and have shown zero ability to step back & see a big, obvious picture.

That, and you're not an honest or particularly pleasant person.

 

[tfk]

Derek,

Where'd ya go?

You have some work to show...


tom

 

[T.A.M.]

Derek,

Where'd ya go?

You have some work to show...


tom

claims to "have a real job" and "a real life" unlike us (supposedly) in 3...2...1...

TAM

 

[SRW]

I know it must be difficult for Derek to answer every question as he failed to answer a very simple one I had for him but instead chose to cut and paste a novel from some other "engineer".

If you ever do return please answer in your own words or any reasonable facsimile of words you feel comfortable sprouting.

I deserve a reasonable answer to 1469!!!!!

 

[leftysergeant]

Remember these videos ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDVap83AEmc

Surely you are not going to try to tell us that that was massive steel are you ?

Okay, I get your point. Yes, they do look like massive solid steel beams, stacked up and tacked together with fillet wleds through less tan a tenth of their overall thicknes.

And they were, seconds before this, hidden in a cloud of smoke and dust being ejected upward through the core as the floors collapsed around it. During this collapse, the battering of tons of concrete against the core set up a "mechanical resonnance" which popped welds and rivets and whatever else held the columns upright and at a fixed distance from each other. Look up "mechanical resonnance." It is a fascinating subject. It brought down Galloping Gertie.

The dust you see obscuring the columns as they fall is a remnant of that which surrounded them during the pancaking of the floors.

 

[beachnut]

...
It is not clear what buckling failure of exterior columns is referred to in the preceding statement, and NIST previously stated …the beam displaced the girder at the interior end of the floor beam but did not displace the exterior frame at the other end of the floor beam." NCSTAR 1-9, p. 526.

If thermal expansion of the floor beams did not displace the exterior frame, then how would buckling of exterior columns occur?

http://www2.ae911truth.org/downloads/NIST_Analyses_Brookman.pdf
Did someone explain to Derek he plagiarized work from Brookman? One post he mentions Brookman, but this post he plagiarized and never sourced it; or did I miss it?

Why did he cut and paste, and fail to source it?

So his questions are Brookman's statements of woo.

Brookman said;

If thermal expansion of the floor beams did not displace the exterior frame, then buckling of exterior columns would not occur.​

Plagiarizer Derek asks;

If thermal expansion of the floor beams did not displace the exterior frame, then how would buckling of exterior columns occur?

Derek, does not make up the questions, he plagiarizes them.

Most of Derek's presentation is not his own work, why not plagiarize his questions from another engineer. Gage is a fraud with failed ethics as he lies his way to make a living, he sets the low standards for the blind followers like Derek.

The failed ethics must be why Derek fails to clean up the lies in his presentation and will not admit he has lies in his thermite did it woo presentation.

I...you or anyone else here could address ...the points raised in ... #1475?

...?

The points/questions you plagiarized? Why can't Brookman answer your questions, he has the melted steel evidence insanity you have; where is the evidence again? You guys lie, he put it in a failed paper you have lies in your presentation.

 

[SRW]

http://www2.ae911truth.org/downloads/NIST_Analyses_Brookman.pdf
Did someone explain to Derek he plagiarized work from Brookman? One post he mentions Brookman, but this post he plagiarized and never sourced it; or did I miss it?

Why did he cut and paste, and fail to source it?

So his questions are Brookman's statements of woo.

Brookman said;
Plagiarizer Derek asks;

Derek, does not make up the questions, he plagiarizes them.

Exactly which is why I pointed out 1469, his answer to my previous post was nothing more then Derek cutting and pasting from Brookman and Derek adding his own ass hat comments on to those. He mentions Brookman but does not explain that his answers come from that source. Within the statement he made, that prompted my first question, was another un-cited reference to Brookman. Which he plagiarized to answer my question. What a guy.

It appears he also took pages directly out of a textbook for another of his long and dull posts.

Derek Said:

I think it would be safe to say that my religion would absolutely approve of this. I agree with you though, I believe that I would find myself under a religious, as well as professional & ethical, obligation to get my facts straight

If my presentation is full of lies, then reply where and why and I will revisit each "lie" and double check with what you have given me as well as what is availible to me. I'm not trying to repeat lies, I'm trying to figure out why I've been lied to. I hope you are right, I hope Al Qaeda acted alone in doing ALL of this...no person alive will be more relieved than me.

Yet in this thread when given facts he does not double check them, he simply
and consistently ignores all evidence which contradicts the statements he makes in his video/presentation. Why Derek why?

If you really were interested in the truth you would listen to other opinions and at least attempt to challenge your thinking in light of the new information. Not you, like all the other punk truthers you continue to ignore what ever does not fit in with your world view. You are nothing new, same old BS.

 

[bill smith]

Okay, I get your point. Yes, they do look like massive solid steel beams, stacked up and tacked together with fillet wleds through less tan a tenth of their overall thicknes.

And they were, seconds before this, hidden in a cloud of smoke and dust being ejected upward through the core as the floors collapsed around it. During this collapse, the battering of tons of concrete against the core set up a "mechanical resonnance" which popped welds and rivets and whatever else held the columns upright and at a fixed distance from each other. Look up "mechanical resonnance." It is a fascinating subject. It brought down Galloping Gertie.

The dust you see obscuring the columns as they fall is a remnant of that which surrounded them during the pancaking of the floors.

Would you say that the standing 'items' are neatly rectangular like the columns were when they were constructed Sarge ?