Retired NASA "expert" Inspires Balsamo Fraud?

[ozeco41]

I've been here for a much shorter time than you Ozzie but before I made an account I still visited JREF often (1-2 years before my join date). I can say with certainty that I've never seen a Truther (sic) fall into your 1st class. Alas, I really wish more WOULD fall into this category. A lot of them claim to be open-minded about the subject and claim that they'd be willing to change their minds but when I ask them what it would take to indeed change their minds they either a)don't answer or b)claim they would only change their minds with a "true independent investigation".

The demographic has shifted a lot since 2006-7. I think the parroting of "true independent investigation" reflects the narrow base of current truther lore focused in AE911. (that is the truther demographic we see here. Scott Sommers has a broader perspective on truthers in other arenas)

I would say that nearly all of the Truthers I come into contact with fall into your 2nd category and I agree that watts fits this category, but I don't see why david.watts is so different from the other Truthers on here. Personally I've only seen typical banal truther rhetoric and JAQing off from him about "questions" that have been answered ad nauseum by debunkers, science, engineering etc for over a decade. Most of the truthers I encounter exhibit the Dunning-Kruger effect and are simply incredibly credulous- they'll believe literally anything they read on Internet kook sites or what the charlatans at AE911 Truth feed them and ignore all logic and hard evidence which debunks their claims.

You are right - my fault my quick write up missed the distinction between those who genuinely believe and those whose posting suggests they are only playing games. See the recently departed resident trolls - all the departed ones had "other agendas" and I suggest that the remaining one is not primarily interested in seeking truth. So I have d.watts in that class because of the genuineness of his early posts plus some PM interaction we had. He then rapidly deteriorated into a standard truther. Details don't matter - my point "few of the current ones are IMO genuine deluded believers of their delusions".

I must concede that I simply do not have extensive enough training to debate technicalities with people like T Sz who are trained engineers that believe in the twoof (not many of these guys out there ) but I do know enough to realize that his argument fails miserably when it comes down to the fundamentals and that there's absolutely no logic or evidence involved in his base theory. Hence, I find no reason to be arguing with him or any other truthers about anomalies or trivialities in the first place.

I have two advantages - the obvious one that I am an engineer BUT the bigger advantage is that I have spent years managing engineers. A significant proportion if them tend to suffer "forest v trees" syndrome - get locked into details and lose the plot. And it is no different here than in the real world.

A different aspect of it is that a lot of hard science professionals (engineers being a subset) have very poor general reasoning skills. Almost a blind spot. You see it with many - including Tony Sz - challenge them over an error in logic or present a reasoned argument - and they respond to the logic error with "where is your math or your FEA" as if FEA can solve a logic error or they call reasoned argument "nothing but words" - to me a strong indication that reasoned argument is invisible. and I have met a few engineers or technical types on these forums who have that same blind spot. No point presenting them reasoned argument - they cannot compute it.

The other aspect for engineers is "glass ceiling' - they have a limit - usually the range of standard build safe new buildings applications of engineering. Applying base principles to the dynamic failure events of 9/11 at WTC is two orders more complex than their practical experience and they stumble.

I really don't get people like T Sz. How do you obtain an advanced engineering degree without (in a nonliteral sense) passing Critical Thinking or Logic 101?

Part of it for engineers is that they don't train in complex thinking ALSO they don't practice it especially if their work experience involves filling in the numbers on a standard software package and seeing the standard answer come out on the printer. WTC collapse dynamics is two orders more complex as I said earlier.

I'll see if I can remember to watch for examples as they arise in discussions.

 

[BCR]

Part of it for engineers is that they don't train in complex thinking ALSO they don't practice it especially if their work experience involves filling in the numbers on a standard software package and seeing the standard answer come out on the printer.

Excuse me!?!?

 

[tsig]

I've been here for a much shorter time than you Ozzie but before I made an account I still visited JREF often (1-2 years before my join date). I can say with certainty that I've never seen a Truther (sic) fall into your 1st class. Alas, I really wish more WOULD fall into this category. A lot of them claim to be open-minded about the subject and claim that they'd be willing to change their minds but when I ask them what it would take to indeed change their minds they either a)don't answer or b)claim they would only change their minds with a "true independent investigation".

I would say that nearly all of the Truthers I come into contact with fall into your 2nd category and I agree that watts fits this category, but I don't see why david.watts is so different from the other Truthers on here. Personally I've only seen typical banal truther rhetoric and JAQing off from him about "questions" that have been answered ad nauseum by debunkers, science, engineering etc for over a decade. Most of the truthers I encounter exhibit the Dunning-Kruger effect and are simply incredibly credulous- they'll believe literally anything they read on Internet kook sites or what the charlatans at AE911 Truth feed them and ignore all logic and hard evidence which debunks their claims.

I must concede that I simply do not have extensive enough training to debate technicalities with people like T Sz who are trained engineers that believe in the twoof (not many of these guys out there ) but I do know enough to realize that his argument fails miserably when it comes down to the fundamentals and that there's absolutely no logic or evidence involved in his base theory. Hence, I find no reason to be arguing with him or any other truthers about anomalies or trivialities in the first place.

I really don't get people like T Sz. How do you obtain an advanced engineering degree without (in a nonliteral sense) passing Critical Thinking or Logic 101?

You learn to crank out rote answers to rote questions with no real understanding of the principles, most of my engineering classes were this way, who do you think gets all those "Cs"?

 

[ozeco41]

You learn to crank out rote answers to rote questions with no real understanding of the principles, most of my engineering classes were this way, who do you think gets all those "Cs"?

Some grow out of it. Some don't get the opportunity. Some can't.

No doubt other professions have the same sort of demographic spread of reasoning skills. The problem with engineers shows up in 9/11 discussion because 9/11 is essentially engineering or applied physics.

 

[weedwhacker]

Rob Balsamo: The Keyzer Soze of Trutherism!

I just got it, had to watch The Usual Supects again!! Brilliant reference, except...the Kevin Spacey character was a LOT smarter than R. Balsaman....oops, R. Balsamic...I mean, R. Balsamo.

 

[weedwhacker]

I may have "accidentally" () stirred him with a couple of comments.
Told him I wasn't interested in his alphabet soup of acronyms for aircraft locating technology.
Then he posted a "plot" of a departure - taxi to take-off - which showed the take-off over open ground several hundred meters away from and parallel with a 10,000 ft concrete runway.

As a non-pilot I dared to suggest that the plane probably took off from the runway and the locating technology was either wrong or wrongly interpreted. Somehow I don't see a large civil airliner taking off from open fields - but what would I know I'm not a pilot...

I laughed out loud here. Of course you are referring to that long-ago debunked nonsense from the "PfffT" about the AAL 77 SSFDR information? Specifically, the inaccurate latitude/longitude position info that is inherent in the design of the IRS of that era, before GPS-updating was commonplace?

Oh yes...R. Balmastic...err, I mean, R. Balsamo tried to milk that little bit of non-issue for all it was worth. Is he still on about it??

 

[Reheat]

This thread has gotten more attention than Ballsucker deserves, but there are several things to remember about this idiot...

He is over 40 years old, (I think about 42 IIRC) with the bulk of his experience being as a flight instructor probably in a Cessna 150 or equivalent. He flew with a Regional Airline (Commuter) for a short while and apparently has some time in a King Air. It's quite obvious that he's never flown an aircraft with semi modern equipment with a glass cockpit type setup. He has no practical experience with INS or GPS, but pretends that he knows everything there is to know in the field of aviation.

When he first started with this garbage it was quite obvious that his knowledge of even some of the basics was deficient. Witness his original idiocy regarding "ground effect" that would not have allowed AA 77 to fly closed to the ground on it's approach to the Pentagon. He got thoroughly embarrassed at Pprune due to that faux pas.

He exaggerates the number of supporters in his little cult of other idiots. Some that he touts as members of his cult may or may not support much of his nonsense. Other than an initial interview with many of them who expressed some doubts about the 9/11 events there is no evidence that the bulk of them support most of his nonsense. Just like DRG every single one of his points of contention regarding 9/11 events is full of fraud. Every single one of them are full of exaggerations, falsehoods, and/or outright lies or distortions.

He is no longer a credible 9/11 twoofer at all even among other twoofers. His effectiveness has steadily declined and there are very few who listen to anything he has to say or has said in the past. One of his worst mistakes was teaming up with the CIT idiots. If anything destroyed his credibility it was that venture into madness.

As has been pointed out repeatedly he uses socks everywhere he appears even on his own Web Site. He has used dozens everywhere he's ever made an appearance.

Engaging him in any type of rational discussion is fruitless and a waste of time. Giving him any type of attention merely inflates his already bloated ego, but I guess for some it is a way to pass time. It would be best IMHO to just allow him to talk with himself as anything he says or does is a losing proposition and no longer a threat to anyone other than himself...

 

[weedwhacker]

Hello everyone....I'm also a member of MetaBunk, and it seems that (possibly) Rob Balsamo just signed on there, under the username 'SpaceCowboy' (Oddly familiar, that!)

Here is a link to the thread:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pi...ld-be-uncontrollable-at-observed-speeds.2933/

(Move to Page 4, if you're interested).

 

[Redwood]

Hello everyone....I'm also a member of MetaBunk, and it seems that (possibly) Rob Balsamo just signed on there, under the username 'SpaceCowboy' (Oddly familiar, that!)

Here is a link to the thread:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pi...ld-be-uncontrollable-at-observed-speeds.2933/

(Move to Page 4, if you're interested).

The man of a thousand sock-puppets!

 

[NoahFence]

I see the same cast of characters, only now with "expertise" in aircraft maneuverability as well as "engineering".

What a Frickin joke.

 

[beachnut]

Hello everyone....I'm also a member of MetaBunk, and it seems that (possibly) Rob Balsamo just signed on there, under the username 'SpaceCowboy' (Oddly familiar, that!)

Here is a link to the thread:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pi...ld-be-uncontrollable-at-observed-speeds.2933/

(Move to Page 4, if you're interested).

He has no clue the outboard ailerons are locked out?

Wow, the fake Vg diagram again.

 

[jaydeehess]

I was based LGA when that accident happened. I was shooting a visual to LGA 31 and saw the smoke from the accident. I have been caught in wake turbulence a few times in and out of JFK, LGA, EWR... and used my rudder to full deflection... side to side multiple times... in all types of airplanes. I have never lost a vertical stab yet.

A rather schizophrenic post by our ol' friend. He claims that an aircraft operating outside it capabilities will break up. Posts an example of an aircraft that did suffer a catastrophic separation of vert stabilizer, then tells us that he performed the very same control procedures that led to that crash.
Is he trying to debunk himself?
He demonstrates that it is not a given that pushing an aircraft's limits will cause catastrophe. It might, it might not, I suspect that there are too many variables.

It is quite possible that flt 175 had suffered permanent wing loading damage. It is possible that had this ten second long stress continued for a longer time period, that it would have suffered catastrophic airframe damage.
Obviously a suicidal pilot does not give a #### about the continued safety or flight capability of the aircraft. He had a mission that precluded a go around at this point, do or die, or perhaps more apropos, do AND die, whatever it took in the way of control commands would be used. If the plane broke up and spread high speed debris and fuel over the vicinity of the WTC while fire fighters were trying to get at WTC1 that's still a success in his mind. If he kills people on the ground, it a success in his mind. Even if all he does is kill everyone on board its still a success in his mind.

What part of "suicide flight" does Rob Balsamo not fully understand?

As for skilled pilots not being able to hit a target wider than any runway they have ever used; were they trying to do so AND preserve the airframe! If so they were not behaving in the role of suicidal pilot.

 

[George 152]

Hello everyone....I'm also a member of MetaBunk, and it seems that (possibly) Rob Balsamo just signed on there, under the username 'SpaceCowboy' (Oddly familiar, that!)

Here is a link to the thread:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pi...ld-be-uncontrollable-at-observed-speeds.2933/

(Move to Page 4, if you're interested).

Unbelievable

 

[jaydeehess]

At the moment "Spacecowboy" shows a "banned " status.

That did not take long! I thought he had only been suspended for a bit for not being polite in his responses to others.

I read through a couple of threads in which he participated and its quite obvious he had no intention of addressing several pertinent issues including several errors he has made concerning other aircraft incidents.

 

[jaydeehess]

The claims of Balsamo/PfT have been thoroughly addressed and debunked by a pilot posting on metabunk.org.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ea...-9-11-truth-vg-diagram-video.3160/#post-94332

He points out a case in which a 737 exceeded V_d+44 and survived without damage.
PfT claims that UAL175 maintained V_d+80 but it is illustrated that it was below V_d+44 until less than 14 seconds prior to impact and only reached V_d+80 , four seconds prior to impact. The last radar return shows the plane at V_d+87, which is immediately prior to impact.

 

[weedwhacker]

Yeah, and he's back again today (well, date was 21 March in the U.S. Pacific time zone).

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ea...truth-vg-diagram-video.3160/page-3#post-96181

And this "gem", shilling for yet another of his ridiculous videos:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ea...truth-vg-diagram-video.3160/page-3#post-96182

 

[Childlike Empress]

This thread has gotten more attention than Ballsucker deserves, but there are several things to remember about this idiot...

He is over 40 years old, (I think about 42 IIRC) with the bulk of his experience being as a flight instructor probably in a Cessna 150 or equivalent. He flew with a Regional Airline (Commuter) for a short while and apparently has some time in a King Air. It's quite obvious that he's never flown an aircraft with semi modern equipment with a glass cockpit type setup. He has no practical experience with INS or GPS, but pretends that he knows everything there is to know in the field of aviation.

When he first started with this garbage it was quite obvious that his knowledge of even some of the basics was deficient. Witness his original idiocy regarding "ground effect" that would not have allowed AA 77 to fly closed to the ground on it's approach to the Pentagon. He got thoroughly embarrassed at Pprune due to that faux pas.

He exaggerates the number of supporters in his little cult of other idiots. Some that he touts as members of his cult may or may not support much of his nonsense. Other than an initial interview with many of them who expressed some doubts about the 9/11 events there is no evidence that the bulk of them support most of his nonsense. Just like DRG every single one of his points of contention regarding 9/11 events is full of fraud. Every single one of them are full of exaggerations, falsehoods, and/or outright lies or distortions.

He is no longer a credible 9/11 twoofer at all even among other twoofers. His effectiveness has steadily declined and there are very few who listen to anything he has to say or has said in the past. One of his worst mistakes was teaming up with the CIT idiots. If anything destroyed his credibility it was that venture into madness.

As has been pointed out repeatedly he uses socks everywhere he appears even on his own Web Site. He has used dozens everywhere he's ever made an appearance.

Engaging him in any type of rational discussion is fruitless and a waste of time. Giving him any type of attention merely inflates his already bloated ego, but I guess for some it is a way to pass time. It would be best IMHO to just allow him to talk with himself as anything he says or does is a losing proposition and no longer a threat to anyone other than himself...

Quite a mouth full for somebody who still sports a signature link to one of the most obvious pieces of disinformation pseudo-science ever constructed, and even under his own "name".

 

[LSSBB]

Quite a mouth full for somebody who still sports a signature link to one of the most obvious pieces of disinformation pseudo-science ever constructed, and even under his own "name".

Is that another "Witty aside?"

How to know a debunker is correct: a conspiracist calls it disinfo.

Please, some construcive criticism.

I say a plane full of victims and their murderers hit the Pentagon. Proved me wrong.

 

[beachnut]

Quite a mouth full for somebody who still sports a signature link to one of the most obvious pieces of disinformation pseudo-science ever constructed, and even under his own "name".

Talk used to debunk the debunking of CIT. Poor CIT, unable to get anything right about 911. Ignoring radar, FDR, and DNA to make up lies dumbed down for 911 truth followers who can't do science. CIT have to be in the top 10 big failures of 911 truth world of woo. Why can't 911 truth followers do math?

911 truth followers can't supply evidence to support Balsamo's fake Vg diagram. So, they Gish Gallop with tangential opinions. Weak attack on debunking CIT's lies of woo on 911, the topic is Balsamo's fraud. Love the special math 911 truth super failed pilot Balsamo, holding at 11.2gs corrected to 34gs when the answer is less than 2.5gs; pilots who can't do math, so they do fake Vg diagrams - some of the best of 911 truth lies and fantasy.

As usual no evidence flows from 911 truth followers, unable to support lies from CIT, 911 truth followers do nothing but spread more lies to defend the old failed lies of multiple impossible flight paths created in the worse investigation in history, done by CIT never trained investigators.

Guess 911 truth followers can't do the math to see all CIT flight paths are fake? Like the fake Vg diagram used to fool 911 truth believers, the flight paths from CIT are worse than fake. 12 years of failure with matching support. [/typing practice]

 

[BCR]

As usual no evidence flows from 911 truth followers, unable to support lies from CIT, 911 truth followers do nothing but spread more lies to defend the old failed lies of multiple impossible flight paths created in the worse investigation in history, done by CIT never trained investigators.

Guess 911 truth followers can't do the math to see all CIT flight paths are fake? Like the fake Vg diagram used to fool 911 truth believers, the flight paths from CIT are worse than fake. 12 years of failure with matching support. [/typing practice]

Although "retired", I still stop by JREF to see if there is anything new. I even drop into P4T every now and then. The last I heard of Capt'n Bob, he was using a female sockpuppet on a Facebook page. Same old crazy with the boys, and nothing but the same old delusional rants. After 12 years, "911 Truth" with regards to the Pentagon elicits a yawn at best. Surprised you guys are still even making the effort.