Merged Applicability of Bazant's model to the real world

[femr2]

Well...I would say at this point that femr2 and MT have pretty much been thoroughly debunked on the Bazant business.

ROFL. What on earth do you think has been *debunked* ?

Similar to the conservation of momentum fiasco that femr2 had a while back...

ROFL. Not at all. If that's all you have as *mud*, ROFL.

At this point this is what I am concluding about femr2's and MT's position(s)....feel free to add to this or correct me if I am wrong (only competent people need reply to this):

You don't know my position, clearly. ROFL.

1. Their position does not account for the limitations Bazant was intending for his model.

Nonsense statement. ROFL.

2. They focus on minor issues while ignoring the overall engineering picture of not just the model, but the actual collapse itself.

Nonsense. You clearly have no idea of my intent.

3. Their position rests on dubious conclusions from videos and photographs and fails to consider any contrary evidence and does not include any mathematical calculations at all.

You have no idea of my position.

If someone has additions/corrections to my conclusions about the position that the truthers are taking in this thread please feel free to post them.

You don't have a clue. You simply submit posts attacking individuals, and have nothing at all to say about the topic in hand. You're a whiner. By all means have your say about the limits of the applicability of the Bazant et al model(s) to the real world.

At this point I'm putting their arguments into the "debunked" category along with every other truther argument I have seen to date.

ROFL. What arguments would they be ?

 

[newton3376]

ROFL. What on earth do you think has been *debunked* ?


ROFL. Not at all. If that's all you have as *mud*, ROFL.


You don't know my position, clearly. ROFL.


Nonsense statement. ROFL.


Nonsense. You clearly have no idea of my intent.


You have no idea of my position.


You don't have a clue. You simply submit posts attacking individuals, and have nothing at all to say about the topic in hand. You're a whiner. By all means have your say about the limits of the applicability of the Bazant et al model(s) to the real world.


ROFL. What arguments would they be ?

Most of my replies to you now end up getting moved to AAH to be honest.....that's how highly I think of your posts.

Sorry but you are now lumped with the other truthers....you don't actually have any real arguments and as soon as anyone examines your claims in any depth they fall apart.

There is no need for me to duplicate the work that has already been done examining your claims and dismissing them...what has already been written by tfk, WD, and others is more then enough.

You have already said you have no intention of publishing...and I think we all know the real reason why....the fact is that you don't have any arguments or evidence that can withstand any real scrutiny.

Now...does anyone who has shown that they are actually competent have anything to add or correct concerning my conclusions about the truther positions presented in this thread?

 

[femr2]

Most of my replies to you now end up getting moved to AAH to be honest.....that's how highly I think of your posts.

You should stop writing nonsense posts and initiating derails that get shuffled off to AAH then.

Sorry but you are now lumped with the other truthers....you don't actually have any real arguments

Confirming your prior post was full of nonsense.

and as soon as anyone examines your claims in any depth they fall apart.

Nonsense.

There is no need for me to duplicate the work that has already been done examining your claims and dismissing them...what has already been written by tfk, WD, and others is more then enough.

ROFL. Such as ?

You have already said you have no intention of publishing...and I think we all know the real reason why....the fact is that you don't have any arguments or evidence that can withstand any real scrutiny.

ROFL. Such as ?

Now...does anyone who has shown that they are actually competent have anything to add or correct concerning my conclusions about the truther positions presented in this thread?

ROFL. What is *the truther position* in this thread ?

What does truther/debunker/... have to do with this thread ?

Your first point above...shuffle your dialogue off to AAH. Sounds like a reasonable idea. You have nothing to say except *address the arguer*.

I note you have answered none of my questions above. Not a surprise.

Have a nice day

 

[twinstead]

Yea, because if you have a problem with Bazant's paper the most logical thing to do it come on the internet and debate anonymous people on an obscure forum.

That'll show that incompetent Bazant, won't it femr2!!

 

[femr2]

Yea, because if you have a problem with Bazant's paper the most logical thing to do it come on the internet and debate anonymous people on an obscure forum.

That'll show that incompetent Bazant, won't it femr2!!

What is it that you imagine I have a problem with exactly ?

As I've said umpteen times...The paper provides adequate mathematical proof that there was enough energy available , even in the limiting case, for propogation to ground, given the stated initiating state.

If any of you folks misapply the details with the Bazant et al papers, then here is the logical place for highlighting such.

 

[Major_Tom]

Yea, because if you have a problem with Bazant's paper the most logical thing to do it come on the internet and debate anonymous people on an obscure forum.

That'll show that incompetent Bazant, won't it femr2!!

One of your anonymous people is named Ryan Mackey, a rocket scientist and vocal supporter of Bazant and the NIST.


Actually, it shows how incompetent the regular posters of JREF have been towards understanding the very material they have vocally supported.

 

[alienentity]

Femr2 - disagree with your assertions about the crush front and also the air overpressure velocities.

You're making a number of assumptions, I don't see any compelling evidence backing them up; in fact I think you've messed up the physics quite badly.

Hint: velocity of air has to do with pressure, not a linear relationship to velocity of crush front.

 

[Major_Tom]

This is an excellent clip by Xenomorph showing the two different collapse fronts moving down the west face.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Xenomorph911WTC#p/u/40/a2yKp39khqI


AE, hint: look before guessing.

 

[newton3376]

You should stop writing nonsense posts and initiating derails that get shuffled off to AAH then.


Confirming your prior post was full of nonsense.


Nonsense.


ROFL. Such as ?


ROFL. Such as ?


ROFL. What is *the truther position* in this thread ?

What does truther/debunker/... have to do with this thread ?

Your first point above...shuffle your dialogue off to AAH. Sounds like a reasonable idea. You have nothing to say except *address the arguer*.

I note you have answered none of my questions above. Not a surprise.

Have a nice day

You might want to read through this (and other) threads to see just how many things have been pointed out to you....this reminds me of the conservation of momentum thread LOL

End of the day you have not shown that Bazant or NIST didn't know what they were talking about.

Thats pretty much the conclusion of this rather long thread.

 

[TruthersLie]

This is an excellent clip by Xenomorph showing the two different collapse fronts moving down the west face.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Xenomorph911WTC#p/u/40/a2yKp39khqI


AE, hint: look before guessing.

The same xenomorph who has edited/doctored vidoes up of the collapse of wtc7 and some others?

You want to use his videos as "evidence?" Even though he has doctored/edited videos up and when confronted by it claims that they are what he has available and he sees no need to get the original vidoes? Really?

 

[Dog Town]

The same xenomorph who has edited/doctored vidoes up of the collapse of wtc7 and some others?

You want to use his videos as "evidence?" Even though he has doctored/edited videos up and when confronted by it claims that they are what he has available and he sees no need to get the original vidoes? Really?

Shhh...sit back and watch the "skooling", MT is dishing out, to the Mighty JREF'ers.

 

[femr2]

Femr2 - disagree with your assertions about the crush front

What assertions ?

and also the air overpressure velocities.

ROFL. I assume you are referring to this post...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6814337&postcount=1623

Looks like you have not understood. I'm disputing the Bazant calculated crush front velocity, based upon prior determination of it's actual progression velocity in the real world.

WTC1 SW crush-front reached effective terminal velocity about 4s after release, at a fairly constant 28m/s.

Real-world measurements show that the Bazant calculated velocity is...wrong.

Therefore their overpressure velocity, which they base upon their incorrect calculated crush front velocity is also wrong.

You're making a number of assumptions, I don't see any compelling evidence backing them up; in fact I think you've messed up the physics quite badly.

ROFL.

Start by measuring the crush front traversal rate...
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/wtc1-debris-ejecta-traversal-rate-linear-terminal-velocity-t237.html

Note dialogue with David Benson in there (one of the authors of the BLGB paper) who doesn't share your inept viewpoint.

Hint: velocity of air has to do with pressure, not a linear relationship to velocity of crush front.

ROFL.

I suggest you read BLGB and reference to their calc, in fact, here y'are...

Looks like you have an issue with BLGB, not me

Have a nice day.

 

[femr2]

You might want to read through this (and other) threads to see just how many things have been pointed out to you

LOL.

By all means highlight anything you please.

You're just waving your hands around making impotent accusations otherwise.

End of the day you have not shown that Bazant or NIST didn't know what they were talking about.

I've never said any such thing.

Thats pretty much the conclusion of this rather long thread.

You clearly don't understand the thread content. Start by having a look at who started the thread, and its intent.

Have a nice day.

 

[femr2]

The same xenomorph who has edited/doctored vidoes up of the collapse of wtc7 and some others?

You can't seriously be suggesting that the video is doctored ?

A video doctored to highlight a gravity driven crush front progression ? Hilarious.

There's a hundred copies of it kicking around. Go look at any of them.

I have a few copies if y'like.

Want links ?

Here's a copy...


Have a nice day.

 

[Carll68]

Man, I must need to go to the Optometrist, I could swear this sub section was titled 911 Conspiracy theories......

 

[Carll68]

femr2, can you kindly point out any Conpiracy or related Conspiracy Theory you see within the various Bazant studies?

If you can, by all means, let's talk about that.

If you can not, then let's move this thouroughly debunked nonsense to the correct forum of science and technology where it belongs.

 

[twinstead]

One of your anonymous people is named Ryan Mackey, a rocket scientist and vocal supporter of Bazant and the NIST.

So? Lots of people support lots of things. How does that change my argument? Bazant is the one you are implying is incompetent. Discuss it with him and the publisher of his paper. In the proper venue. Like a REAL scientist would. You have a problem with the NIST report? You have a veritable plethora of well-known scientists who contributed to the report to call incompetent or "in on it" to their faces. In the proper venue. Like a REAL scientist would. Go for it!

Actually, it shows how incompetent the regular posters of JREF have been towards understanding the very material they have vocally supported.

From what I can see, there are people who would argue that it is you who are incompetent, so this depends on ones viewpoint.

 

[twinstead]

femr2, can you kindly point out any Conpiracy or related Conspiracy Theory you see within the various Bazant studies?

femr2 is a member or the "no claimer" sect of the truther cult.

 

[tsig]

Yea, because if you have a problem with Bazant's paper the most logical thing to do it come on the internet and debate anonymous people on an obscure forum.

That'll show that incompetent Bazant, won't it femr2!!

The really funny thing is that Bazant doesn't even know a femr2 exists. While Bazant goes on with his life unruffled by this others are ranting and obsessing about his work.ROFL _ROFL ^ROCL*


*rolling on the ceiling laughing

 

[Carll68]

One of your anonymous people is named Ryan Mackey, a rocket scientist and vocal supporter of Bazant and the NIST.

Ya know, I have a problem with a surgery Jack the ENT performed on my Ossicles, so I am going to take this argument directly to Jim the Cardiologist...and over the internet no less!!

That'll get me the answers I need!