Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttals on YouTube by Chris Mohr

Status
Not open for further replies.
But there was a hole punched through several rings of the Pentagon so how did that happen?
Click to expand...

American Airlines flight 77 was hijacked by radical islamic terrorists, and flown at full speed into the building, causing the massive damage seen on video and photo, ultimately causing the collapse of a sizeable chunk of the building.
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, the modelled images differ from the actual observed collapse in significant ways. I presume that's what you're talking about.

Do you think NIST's computer generated images were generated primarily to look good on TV news programs? Same deal.

Dave
Click to expand...

I don't know why NIST provided such obviously inaccurate images. Speculation would be worthless in that regard, but at least we agree that the images are not a realistic depiction of the collapse, and that's the important point here.
 
mrkinnies said:
The only way gravity could have done this is for the building to have lost ALL support across the entire floor plan at some point below the collapse area. This would needed to have have happened instantaneously
Click to expand...

PHASERS ON VAPORISE.:rolleyes:
 
Edx said:
PHASERS ON VAPORISE.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So what do you think of the Verinage technique then Edx? I mean, it works by taking away the supports of an entire floor simultaneously to allow the upper mass of the building to drop. They do this using hydraulics or pulleys. Are you arguing with this or do you think they use phasers here too?
 
RedIbis said:
I don't know why NIST provided such obviously inaccurate images.
Click to expand...

Presumably, to demonstrate the output of their collapse simulation, so that third parties could assess in what respects it modelled the collapse accurately, and in what respects it didn't.

RedIbis said:
Speculation would be worthless in that regard, but at least we agree that the images are not a realistic depiction of the collapse, and that's the important point here.
Click to expand...

We do not agree on any such thing, nor is it an important point. The images agree with some features of the collapse, and disagree with others. To reduce that to a black-and-white statement that they either are, or are not, a realistic depiction of the collapse, and imply that if they are not then they are of no value, is wanton stupidity.

Dave
 
Edx said:
Interesting, because I've heard you truthers claim a lot over the years (not exhaustive)...

Pancake collapses cant happen - they can.
That steel floors are practically impervious to fire - they arent
That steel doesnt collapse in a fire - it does
That steel cant warp or bend in a fire - it can
That steel floors cant pancake collapse in a fire - they can and have
Rapid onset collapses only happen in demolitons - They don't.
Free fall proves demolition - 1. demolitions are not free fall. 2. The towers did not fall in free fall anyway
That no one would believe that WTC7 would collapse - Everyone relevant (like firefighters on the scene) knew it would collapse
That no one was conserned about progressive collapse or pancake collapses from fire before 911 - they have.
That reports of molten metal and molten steel are suspicious - its actually completely unremarkable and there's plenty of other similar reports in other fires.
That people reporting explosions is uncommon in fires - Actually its not just common in fires, but even when its not regarding a fire and even when they use words like "blast" and "sounding like bombs" and even when they already know the sounds they are talking about aren't bombs.
Click to expand...

Just going to quote part of my previous post..
 
Dave Rogers said:
Presumably, to demonstrate the output of their collapse simulation, so that third parties could assess in what respects it modelled the collapse accurately, and in what respects it didn't.



We do not agree on any such thing, nor is it an important point. The images agree with some features of the collapse, and disagree with others. To reduce that to a black-and-white statement that they either are, or are not, a realistic depiction of the collapse, and imply that if they are not then they are of no value, is wanton stupidity.

Dave
Click to expand...

The real pork in the wanton stupidity is defending an image which has no bearing on reality. I would even doubt you have ever assessed in which respects NIST's model was inaccurate.
 
mrkinnies said:
So what do you think of the Verinage technique then Edx? I mean, it works by taking away the supports of an entire floor simultaneously to allow the upper mass of the building to drop. They do this using hydraulics or pulleys. Are you arguing with this or do you think they use phasers here too?
Click to expand...

Verinage works by removing supports (NOT ENTIRE FLOORS) in 1 or 2 floors with cables and hydraulics. Explosive demolition is also not free fall either because they are not trying to remove all matter below the building, they strategically remove supports and allow the building to collapse into itself.

According to the truth movement the 2.25 seconds of free fall could only have happened if the matter below the collapsing floors were removed, they claim explosives were used and the idea of buckling (ie.what was proposed by NIST with no disagreement outside of trutherdom) is nonsence.

Therefore truthers must think that 8-stories worth of building was VAPORISED - like a Star Trek weapon - INSTANTLY and also they did this so QUIETLY it wasn't picked up in the numerous cameras perfectly situated to capture any detonations.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
Well then there's really nothing I can do to help you out if you have trouble understanding the phrase 'on top of'.
Click to expand...

So, will you next be going after our new truther with his definition of symmetry? Or do you agree with mrkinnies that the fall of WTC7 was symmetrical?
 
Dave Rogers said:
No, the real wanton stupidity, as I said, lies in assuming the results of modelling are either entirely true or entirely worthless.

Dave
Click to expand...

An image which in no way reflects actual video images of the collapse is worthless. The stupid is in your defense of it. NIST's images teach us nothing of the actual collapse.
 
Disbelief said:
So, will you next be going after our new truther with his definition of symmetry? Or do you agree with mrkinnies that the fall of WTC7 was symmetrical?
Click to expand...

Your call for perfection not withstanding, yes the collapse appeared symetrical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom