David Chandler jumps the shark

[Dave Rogers]

They adopt strong support for flawed establishment research (Dr. Millette's study) while rejecting the research findings of the multiple accredited scientists who discovered nano-thermite in the WTC remains.

Actually, I accept whole-heartedly the finding that there were chips of material 100 microns thick in the remains of the WTC which released up to 7.5kJ/g heat when heated above 400ºC in air and contained elements including iron, oxygen and a small percentage of aluminium. The thing I reject is the nonsensical allegation that this indicates that (a) these chips contained thermite, and (b) these chips could somehow have been connected with the collapses of the buildings, which anybody educated in science to an undergraduate level can tell are completely groundless. And I also reject the whining of truthers who complain that whatever amount of invalid evidence they produce, it never seems to add up to a convincing argument.

Dave

 

[DGM]

............ which anybody educated in science to an undergraduate level can tell are completely groundless.


Dave

I wish you would revise this statement. I never attended a college/university and I can clearly understand the shortfalls of this study.

 

[GlennB]

I wish you would revise this statement. I never attended a college/university and I can clearly understand the shortfalls of this study.

Yeah. I'd pitch it at secondary school level, science classes at around age 14 or thereabouts?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I suppose I didn't really specify how far under graduate.

Dave

 

[ozeco41]

I'm not clear on how the steel knows that it was explosives and not fire that caused other parts of the structure to fail. Maybe Tony could elaborate on that.

Dave

That is a point I've raised on several occasions - Usually in the context of explaining that aspects such as "free fall' including "over G" episodes are features of a collapse mechanism. NOT of what started the collapse.

I've long held the opinion that "CD" and "Natural"(??) - and others such as "accidental" are means of starting a classes. From that point the mechanism self defines.

And the poor ruddy building AFAIK lacks tho cognitive faculty to decide between "CD started this so I need to fall at free-fall" and "This started naturally so no part of it can be at free fall" -

"Hey - Beam 456 - don't you dare go to free fall - this one was started naturally so we don't do free fall".

If I'm wrong - and if you are wrong Dave - it means that truthers have far better understanding of the psychology and cognitive behaviour of collapsing buildings.

 

[jaydeehess]

The thing I reject is the nonsensical allegation that this indicates that (a) these chips contained thermite,

yes, its not conclusive. Far from it.

and (b) these chips could somehow have been connected with the collapses of the buildings, which anybody educated in science to an undergraduate level can tell are completely groundless. And I also reject the whining of truthers who complain that whatever amount of invalid evidence they produce, it never seems to add up to a convincing argument.

Dave

Very much yes. Absolutly no scenario has been brought forth to explain exactly how thermite fits into a CD. There have been several suppositions. I have seen it opined that the box columns were filled with it, that thermite devices directed the hot gasses at columns, that it was used to cut connections, and most recently, that it was merely used as a fuse for conventional explosives.
Each of these then produce their own questions
If a huge amount was used how did it get put there and no one noticed, how could this all burn and no one noticed, why are there no obviously melted parts?
If only a small amount was used for fuses , how likely was it that unreacted thermite was found in a few small samples of tons of WTC dust? Its reason for being invoked in the first place by truthers was the lack of explosive sounds now its back but includes thermite. That just crazy

 

[beachnut]

...
For those regulars here and elsewhere with their own pro-establishment agenda, there will never be a winning proof good enough to justify a full on investigation of 9/11.

LOL, because 911 truth comes with BS, lies and fantasy.
Fantasy CD, fantasy thermie, fantasy silent explosives.
911 truth thinks opinions are evidence, and can't figure out why no one takes 911 truth seriously. A fringe few fall for the lies of 911 truth; and 911 truth is left making paranoid statements like this.

Where is the proof of thermite? There is no damage to WTC steel from thermite.

Where is the proof of CD? Gravity is the reason CD works; explosives are used to start, and gravity is the primary (E=mgh released) energy used. Fire started the gravity collapses on 911; 911 truth followers can't grasp the reality, physics, math of the event; and remain gullible followers, blindly believing in CD, thermite and silent explosives. 14 years of failure and all 911 truth followers can do is brag about proof they never had, never did, and never will have. Past, present and future eternal failure based on nonsense; and proof is right here; a sub-forum to discuss the dumbest 911 truth claims, all based on nonsense, and a movement based on the ignorance of the followers in key subject matter.
The cool part about know 911 truth is nonsense, all the tools we need to figure out 911 truth is BS, taught in grade school.

Not able to produce one piece of evidence to support CD, 911 truth remains a faith based religion of woo. Hearsay, lies, and opinions rule the evidence bin for 911 truth, which is equal to the bit-bucket

 

[jaydeehess]

"pro-establishment agenda"

That really did make me laugh

 

[DGM]

"pro-establishment agenda"

That really did make me laugh

This always reminds me of the Wizard of Oz. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

 

[GlennB]

"pro-establishment agenda"

That really did make me laugh

Yeah. I'd pay good money to see Dubya and/or Cheney nailed for some major crime. Blair too, and others.

 

[jaydeehess]

This always reminds me of the Wizard of Oz. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Had AE911T, TSz, and the general 911TM simply said that they considered the failure of col 79 in the manner that NIST posited in their "most probable scenario" unlikely and that therefore col 79 must have been subject to high explosive, or additional heating with thermite, they'd have been in a much better position.

However, oh no, they cannot do that as it would grant that NIST had gotten something correct. That the collapse followed a progression, the first visible indication of which is the hole in the rooftop, the western progression of rooftop infalling, and that this began in the location of column 79.

Instead we have this massive, complex, and wholly unnecessary, "free fall = CD", "all the columns under the 8th floor had explosives" plus TSz's "column 79 was cut near the top of the building to make it look like col 79 failed due to the fires down below" , "thermite fused high explosives", "thermite made into a high explosive", "BBC spilled the beans on WTC 7", "Pulled" etc., etc., etc. (and continue re: WTC1, WTC2, and the Pentagon)

 

[jaydeehess]

Yeah. I'd pay good money to see Dubya and/or Cheney nailed for some major crime. Blair too, and others.

I know that if someone wished to do it they would find me saying here and elsewhere, many times, that from my Canuck perspective, GWB will go down as the worst POTUS in history thus far.
,,, and Cheney was worse as VPOTUS, Rice was out of her league, Rumsfeld even much worse than Rice. The only one with any grasp of his job was Colin Powell, and the admin/CIA embarrassed the h out of him at the UN.

 

[JSanderO]

Had AE911T, TSz, and the general 911TM simply said that they considered the failure of col 79 in the manner that NIST posited in their "most probable scenario" unlikely and that therefore col 79 must have been subject to high explosive, or additional heating with thermite, they'd have been in a much better position.

However, oh no, they cannot do that as it would grant that NIST had gotten something correct. That the collapse followed a progression, the first visible indication of which is the hole in the rooftop, the western progression of rooftop infalling, and that this began in the location of column 79.

Instead we have this massive, complex, and wholly unnecessary, "free fall = CD", "all the columns under the 8th floor had explosives" plus TSz's "column 79 was cut near the top of the building to make it look like col 79 failed due to the fires down below" , "thermite fused high explosives", "thermite made into a high explosive", "BBC spilled the beans on WTC 7", "Pulled" etc., etc., etc. (and continue re: WTC1, WTC2, and the Pentagon)

This sums up the absurdity of their 7wtc position.

 

[jaydeehess]

This sums up the absurdity of their 7wtc position.

It, of course, has analogues wrt WTC 1, WTC2, the Pentagon, and Shankeville crash site.

 

[ozeco41]

Had AE911T, TSz, and the general 911TM simply said that they considered the failure of col 79 in the manner that NIST posited in their "most probable scenario" unlikely and that therefore col 79 must have been subject to high explosive, or additional heating with thermite, they'd have been in a much better position.

That is the generic weakness of their whole position - esp AE911 and T Szamboti.

IF they ever got a ""New Investigation" with "subpoena powers" imagine T Szamboti being questioned under oath by a reasonable competent legal type.

They would simply collect his hundreds of published false technical assertions and go through them seriatem with two questions:

1) Reads Statement "n"
2) "Did you make that statement "n" Mr Szamboti?"
3) "Is your assertion "n" true Mr Szamboti?"

Which leaves T Sz with two options - lie and continue to claim that it is true OR admit it is false. ( For those who get a blood lust - I doubt the "court" would action the contempt of lying under oath. Once his credibility was destroyed that would be sufficient for the issue "case" - "investigation" - under review.)

Do a couple of dozen of those and end of any credibility of the witness. Same thing if Gage was in the witness box.

Any truther seriously thinking that they could achieve something in a formal investigation process really should read what happened when M Behe tried his creationist lies in "Kitzmiller v Dover"

That link goes to a description of the case. Dig up the judgement and relevant bit of the transcript for the gory details - read it as a possible "Rational people v AE911Truth" - the analogy creationists v biological science is IMO very good analogy for "Reality of 9/11 v truther nonsense"

 

[JSanderO]

That is the generic weakness of their whole position - esp AE911 and T Szamboti.

IF they ever got a ""New Investigation" with "subpoena powers" imagine T Szamboti being questioned under oath by a reasonable competent legal type.

They would simply collect his hundreds of published false technical assertions and go through them seriatem with two questions:

1) Reads Statement "n"
2) "Did you make that statement "n" Mr Szamboti?"
3) "Is your assertion "n" true Mr Szamboti?"

Which leaves T Sz with two options - lie and continue to claim that it is true OR admit it is false. ( For those who get a blood lust - I doubt the "court" would action the contempt of lying under oath. Once his credibility was destroyed that would be sufficient for the issue "case" - "investigation" - under review.)

Do a couple of dozen of those and end of any credibility of the witness. Same thing if Gage was in the witness box.

Any truther seriously thinking that they could achieve something in a formal investigation process really should read what happened when M Behe tried his creationist lies in "Kitzmiller v Dover"

That link goes to a description of the case. Dig up their judgement for the gory details - read it as a possible "Rational people v AE911Truth" - the analogy creationists v biological science is IMO very good analogy for "Reality of 9/11 v truther nonsense"

For sure some of their affirmative statements such as free fall acceleration of 7wtc can only be explained as CD of 8 stories of columns at once.. would be tossed out in a NY minute.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I know that if someone wished to do it they would find me saying here and elsewhere, many times, that from my Canuck perspective, GWB will go down as the worst POTUS in history thus far.
,,, and Cheney was worse as VPOTUS, Rice was out of her league, Rumsfeld even much worse than Rice. The only one with any grasp of his job was Colin Powell, and the admin/CIA embarrassed the h out of him at the UN.

+1.

I think the problem too many conspiracy theorists have, and certainly one common among 9/11 truthers, is that they can't distinguish between "The USA and Israel do bad things" and "Only the USA and Israel do bad things."

Dave

 

[ozeco41]

+1.

I think the problem too many conspiracy theorists have, and certainly one common among 9/11 truthers, is that they can't distinguish between "The USA and Israel do bad things" and "Only the USA and Israel do bad things."

Dave

False generalisations and false global exclusions are endemic in "Truther Logic" - often structured as false dichotomies.

Here is a very recent example of a well known truther making those errors:

I am saying there is evidence of additional terrorists being involved in the three NYC building collapses on Sept. 11, 2001.

I have serious concerns about the motivations of those on this forum who insist that there is no evidence of involvement of additional terrorists and that no additional investigation is necessary.

...and yes I know - bare assertions and a strawman. Nobody has decreed that there should only be one bit of false logic per claim.

 

[Notconvinced]

Disregarding the egregiously non-physics language that gives away your total cluelessness...

How do you know this? Have you done any calculation.



Formally, you claim



A > B



Where

A = The kinetic energy dissipated by structural resistance, crushing, etc

B = The kinetic energy won from PE by descend through some vertical space "y"



Do verify that A > B, you need to estimate A and B and at least provide a lower numerical bound for A and an upper numerical bound for B.

Have you done this? If yes, please show the numbers!

If not, explain how else you know that some A is greater than some B!

Because I've normalized the variables to roughly equivalent floors (mass and stability), and importantly know that if the actual numbers were to deviate to any degree, they would deviate toward arrest as the 'upper block impact floor' would be lighter and damaged and the 'lower block impact floor' would be more massive and stable. The released KE of B is naught if the work it might have done is used to crush the upper section, thereby rapidly depleting v.
It's like Bazant's limit case, except I didn't ask COM to wait till the bottom.


Sent from our shared looking glass platform

 

[GlennB]

The released KE of B is naught if the work it might have done is used to crush the upper section, thereby rapidly depleting v.

The upper falling block began at 0 mph, you seem to forget. If its residual speed after impact is > 0 mph then the next impact has that as bonus KE, plus additional mass. More energy is bound to be available at the second impact, yet more for the third, and so on.