If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Part II

[turingtest]

I'm not bailing. There are far too many lulz yet to be had.

Great; I look forward to the many more sure to come from you.

 

[FalseFlag]

Witnesses heard freight trains and thunder, why do you ignore them? Why do you ignore the 10 seconds of collapse before "freefall", the NIST didn't?

Thunder? Really? Freight trains? Trains, maybe. Freight trains? In lower Manhattan? Um...no.

Thunder.

OK.

I had no idea the lulz would come so quickly.

Were you alive in 2001? If so, what part of the world were you in? If you were anywhere near NYC, you would have known the skies were perfectly clear. The heat of the summer broke on Monday, and on Tuesday the weather was just spectacular. The morning of 9/11, before 8:45, was amazingly beautiful.

 

[DGM]

Thunder? Really? Freight trains? Trains, maybe. Freight trains? In lower Manhattan? Um...no.

Thunder.

OK.

I had no idea the lulz would come so quickly.

Were you alive in 2001? If so, what part of the world were you in? If you were anywhere near NYC, you would have known the skies were perfectly clear. The heat of the summer broke on Monday, and on Tuesday the weather was just spectacular. The morning of 9/11, before 8:45, was amazingly beautiful.

I was born in 1959. I'm talking about what witnesses reported. I was in Boston on 9/11. I had friends in NYC and lost one in the South tower.

I also know the wife of the pilot of flight 11 (lives in the next town over from me).

ETA: I'm not going to repeat the account but my friends husband recorded the crash of UA 175(from north of Battery Park). I buried the tape a few years later because that was all we had.

 

[ProBonoShill]

At one point I took this forum seriously. The posts of the skeptics changed all that. I just can't make myself argue with people who continually reject the most obvious facts.

So, I don't consider myself a troll, but don't think for a minute that I'm going to take any of your posts seriously. I'm way past that, and you are the ones to blame for it.

LOL nobody cares. How's that new investigation coming?

Another year of failure is upon you, do better.

 

[ProBonoShill]

Eyewitnesses heard explosions, or what they thought were explosions. Eyewitnesses experienced the forces from explosions.
WTC7 fell at freefall for 2.25 seconds. NIST never explains this.

This was already addressed and you ran away from it like a coward.

See here

 

[ProBonoShill]

I'm not bailing. There are far too many lulz yet to be had.

I see, so you're more interested in hanging out here for lulz than working on your new investigation, no wonder nobody takes twoofers seriously.

 

[FalseFlag]

no wonder nobody takes twoofers seriously.

This is wrong. If I can get a "twofer" I always take advantage of it. I like free stuff.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

This is wrong. If I can get a "twofer" I always take advantage of it. I like free stuff.

Twoofer, as in Some one lying and unreliable, false and fraud.

Not two for one.

9/11 twooferism is a desease of having no correctly functional brain cells to think with, and using every loser twoofer argument, remember you agreed you, and Cole are wrong.

 

[FalseFlag]

Twoofer, as in Some one lying and unreliable, false and fraud.

Not two for one.

9/11 twooferism is a desease of having no correctly functional brain cells to think with, and using every loser twoofer argument, remember you agreed you, and Cole are wrong.

Where did I agree that Cole and I were wrong? Please copy and paste the exact text from the post you claim exists. If you find one post where I claim that both Cole and I are wrong I will give you credit for a "twofer". I guess you could call it a "twoofer twofer".
And the lulz just keep coming.

 

[ProBonoShill]

This is wrong. If I can get a "twofer" I always take advantage of it. I like free stuff.

Well that's quite obvious by your refusal to get a second job and pay for your own investigation. Some truther you are.

 

[pgimeno]

Give an example of these "obvious facts" we reject.

ETA: "Tho should never doubt Cole" is not a fact.

Eyewitnesses heard explosions, or what they thought were explosions. Eyewitnesses experienced the forces from explosions.

Yes, an explosion from jet fuel falling down the elevator shaft caused eyewitnesses to experience its forces. Yes, the plane impact was an explosion, and its forces were experienced by several witnesses. Yes, gas explosions did happen, and were experienced too. Who has rejected that, apart from you?

WTC7 fell at freefall for 2.25 seconds. NIST never explains this.

Of course we deny that NIST never explained it. Because they did.

But yes, more accurate measurements indicate a bigger acceleration than free fall. It's you who rejects this fact.

Sounds like you're projecting.

 

[Belz...]

I'm not bailing. There are far too many lulz yet to be had.

They're not laughing with you, FalseFlag.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Wait, what?
The standard truther line, and I'm assuming your as well, is that the collapses looked like CD, which is highly suspicious. Now you're saying that they were carried out in a way completely (100%) different from other controlled demolitions, yet they ended up looking exactly the same.
How does that work, exactly?

Gravity.

To my utter lack of surprise, this is a pitifully inadequate response.
I invite you to refute the growing chorus accusing you of trolling, and post a more detailed, useful and productive reply.

At one point I took this forum seriously. The posts of the skeptics changed all that. I just can't make myself argue with people who continually reject the most obvious facts.

So, I don't consider myself a troll, but don't think for a minute that I'm going to take any of your posts seriously. I'm way past that, and you are the ones to blame for it.

Would you rather skeptics here modelled their answers on your own? One-word non sequiturs that don't address the points raised at all?
I can't speak for anyone else here, but I'm here for useful, constructive and educational conversations. Your responses here do not fulfill any of those criteria.
You have a clear choice here, IMHO. You can either sink down or rise above. Content yourself with sniping and flounces, or model the kind of behaviour you would like to see in others.
Up to you, old bean.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

(The direction motion will be the same. The (impacts won't be.) )Why would you waste your time doing this? Cole is not demonstrating impacts; he is demonstrating direction of motion. In your experiment, accelerations will be similar, the directions will be similar, and the sequences of the net forces will be similar, regardless of what two objects you drop on another.

Right there, POST 570, in the ( )You admitted that energy values will change the interaction of two masses, in earths gravitational field, and the results of any experiments governing the two Masses.

You can do and say what ever you want, but in that post you expressed the very reason Cole's
Experiments are wrong, his energy values are ridiculously off from the real event, so he can not model motion after first impact.

Experiment A must have similar energy values to experiment B, or the experiment is in error,
And motion after impact will change.

You have shown you are unwilling or unable to grasp that simple concept, so there is no reason to waste time on you.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Where did I agree that Cole and I were wrong? Please copy and paste the exact text from the post you claim exists. If you find one post where I claim that both Cole and I are wrong I will give you credit for a "twofer". I guess you could call it a "twoofer twofer".
And the lulz just keep coming.

See post 1556 for your answer, no point in reposting it and wasting more time.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

That's certainly my take-away from the childish "you first" thing. If FF was really after the truth about what happened that day, and sincerely thought it was some nefarious conspiracy that was not accounted for in the "official story," confirming it by checking in person with experts, going outside the Internet bubble, would be a minimal effort he would undertake, the least he could do. But he avoids that, because the important thing isn't, in fact, what happened, it's winning an Internet argument. I'm not even sure that, for folks like FF, 9/11 is any more real an event than any other Internet game- the bubble is all there is.

You've hit the nail on the head with the hilighted portion of your post.

It's incomprehensible that a rational, thinking person who believes what FF is proposing would stop so short of fact checking as to never contact an unbiased source to verify the legitimacy of those beliefs.

Courage of convictions is obviously not one of his traits...or he's just plain old BSing us.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

Those are the two key points:
1) It is an act; AND
2) trolling - specifically the "pretending" version of trolling AKA "Poe".

It's really hard to see it as anything other than an act given his posting history.

Like bin Laden planning the 9/11 attacks then having the buildings collapse, I'm sure it's work out beyond his wildest dreams

So there is little point in going along with the act:
... he is not likely to run out of dodges or evasions.

I agree but barely.

There still are lurkers who might stumble across threads like this leaving the impression that FF made a valid point if no one opposes what he's implied. Conspiracy talking points are always silly little claims similar to his implied claim regarding what the signers of Gage'$ smoke screen of a petition believe.

Id' rather have people see he has no answer than accept the point was valid, regardless of whether he's trolling or "truthing".

My older brother has fallen victim to some really dumb crap lately and the quotes/links he sends me are always the same thing. Misinterpretation, misrepresentation and out right lies regarding facts many people are too lazy to check before believing.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

At one point I took this forum seriously. The posts of the skeptics changed all that. I just can't make myself argue with people who continually reject the most obvious facts.

So, I don't consider myself a troll, but don't think for a minute that I'm going to take any of your posts seriously. I'm way past that, and you are the ones to blame for it.

Uh huh...

I'm sure the feeling is mutual for many posting and lurking here.

But hey, laughing from the straight jacket of 9/11 "truth" is still laughing right?

 

[beachnut]

At one point I took this forum seriously. The posts of the skeptics changed all that. I just can't make myself argue with people who continually reject the most obvious facts.

So, I don't consider myself a troll, but don't think for a minute that I'm going to take any of your posts seriously. I'm way past that, and you are the ones to blame for it.

Another lie. All you post are lies, and failed claims from nuts like Cole. Okay, Cole might not be nuts, he might be stupid on 9/11 issues; take your pick. Why is Cole always wrong? Perfect record of nothing of value from Cole.

You never took this forum seriously, you are upset with your fantasy failing, so you post BS...

I know this challenge will go unanswered until the end of time, but good luck, anyway.

So many skeptics on this forum insist the truther movement is dead. I think it's alive and well, and continuing to gain momentum.

Let the personal attacks begin. I know that is what will happen, because that is all the skeptics have.

You lied. You did not come here to take the forum seriously and your 1700 plus posts of BS prove your claims are evidence free claptrap, at best.

 

[ozeco41]

Cole might not be nuts, he might be stupid on 9/11 issues; take your pick. Why is Cole always wrong?

Cole - like Szamboti - is qualified as an engineer. It is NOT POSSIBLE that Cole or Szamboti can make the nonsense claims they do make AND be advised many times of their errors AND still refuse to correct the errors...


...unless that are being deliberately untruthful.