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

[FalseFlag]

Remember the pizza stands experiment? That one was successful in replicating the motions in the WTC.

No, it wasn't. There was no crush up, as the Bazant paper claims there must have been.

You see what I see. You just deny it. The top mass falls all the way to the bottom, yet it does not crush up. That is what proves the Bazant paper wrong. It also is what makes the experiment different from what actually happened. The top mass is still intact in the experiment. This does not match what was observed.

 

[FalseFlag]

e-bubble here on the internet

 

[Porkpie Hat]

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/55621485.jpg

 

[pgimeno]

No, it wasn't. There was no crush up, as the Bazant paper claims there must have been.

So what? The experiment still replicates the motion observed in the WTC towers. Cole is not neutral.

You see what I see. You just deny it. The top mass falls all the way to the bottom, yet it does not crush up. That is what proves the Bazant paper wrong. It also is what makes the experiment different from what actually happened. The top mass is still intact in the experiment. This does not match what was observed.

The top mass is also intact in the firecrackers experiment. That also doesn't match what was observed. Your point?

 

[WilliamSeger]

No, it wasn't. There was no crush up, as the Bazant paper claims there must have been.

You see what I see. You just deny it. The top mass falls all the way to the bottom, yet it does not crush up. That is what proves the Bazant paper wrong. It also is what makes the experiment different from what actually happened. The top mass is still intact in the experiment. This does not match what was observed.

So you agree with Cole and Chandler that Verinage demolition is completely impossible:



You see what I see. You just deny it.

 

[FalseFlag]

Now you are acting childishly obtuse.

Actually, it's more like middle-aged obtuse.

 

[FalseFlag]

So you agree with Cole and Chandler that Verinage demolition is completely impossible:



You see what I see. You just deny it.

I see a concrete building falling according to the laws of physics, just like the three WTC buildings did.

I see deceleration where there should be deceleration. I see a mass of approximately one size destroying a mass of a similar size.

You also don't get to use verinage anymore, remember? You don't get to compare concrete buildings with steel-framed high rises. Please see the thread about the Dubai fires in case you need to clear that up.

 

[beachnut]

Cole lies, 9/11 truth follower fail

So you agree with Cole and Chandler that Verinage demolition is completely impossible:



You see what I see. You just deny it.

Cole's failed models can't do that. Cole is wrong, proved wrong by a real building, not a model.

Is Cole a fraud fooling idiot, or an idiot on 9/11 issues.

 

[ProBonoShill]

I will if you will. You go first.

Why we would we waste our time doing that, you're the one desperately looking for a new investigation, that's your job champ.

Why are truthers so lazy and always looking for others to do their work for them?

 

[ProBonoShill]

Is FF still trolling?

Still?

He's been doing that since his arrival, I think he's a giving sort of person and wants to provide as much free comedy as he can until the inevitable suicide by mod.

Seems he's running out of steam lately though and letting the lurkers down, so many posts dodged and questions unanswered. I guess he's not really interested in a new investigation after all.

 

[abaddon]

Try me. Post the emails and see what my reply is. Of course you won't, and no one else will, because the emails don't exist.

Once again, a puerile demand which cannot be satisfied and you know it.

I do not have those emails because they did not involve me in any way, shape or form. You know this.

Thus your demand is simply one which cannot be fulfilled. This is exactly why you make said demand of me.

Furthermore, the evidence to date is that you will simply dismiss any such evidence with a handwave. The leopard does not change it's spots. Despite the fact that many right here in this tread are demonstrably qualified to reject your/Cole's nonsense, you have simply ignored that fact.

There is no good reason to expect any change in that behaviour which you exhibit.

 

[abaddon]

No, I did not use a hand wave to dismiss rwguinn's credentials. I used brainwaves. It was easy. You might want to try it, too.

You claim to have no credentials at all. What qualifies you, of all people, to dismiss a subject matter expert out of hand?

 

[abaddon]

You don't need to.

Nothing to be presented in that regard.

 

[FalseFlag]

I do not have those emails because they did not involve me in any way, shape or form. You know this.

Whoever has the emails is the one who needs to post them.

*facepalm*

 

[FalseFlag]

You claim to have no credentials at all. What qualifies you, of all people, to dismiss a subject matter expert out of hand?

The expert is the one who does the discrediting. I simply recognize it.

 

[ProBonoShill]

The expert is the one who does the discrediting. I simply recognize it.

How can you recognise it if you're not an expert?

 

[FalseFlag]

How can you recognise it if you're not an expert?

When an expert makes a claim that completely disregards a concept that anyone can understand, that expert destroys their credibility.

Example: A person with a PhD in Astronomy claims the sun is not a star. A person does not need to be an expert to know that the sun is a star. The "expert" has destroyed their credibility by making such an absurd claim.

The "experts" on this forum have destroyed their credibility by continually making claims that anyone can see are wrong.

 

[beachnut]

When an expert makes a claim that completely disregards a concept that anyone can understand, that expert destroys their credibility.

Example: A person with a PhD in Astronomy claims the sun is not a star. A person does not need to be an expert to know that the sun is a star. The "expert" has destroyed their credibility by making such an absurd claim.

The "experts" on this forum have destroyed their credibility by continually making claims that anyone can see are wrong.

Which ones are wrong? lol

Relative to your claims on 9/11, you are claiming the sun is a flower; and you brag you are not an expert.

LOL, what it this? Is this a drinking game for a frat house? What are the rules?
Are you using? http://bitterempire.com/justified-drinking-game-didnt-know-needed/
What is the game, as you mock the murder of thousands? You don't have a conscience, or evidence.

 

[ozeco41]

No, it wasn't. There was no crush up, as the Bazant paper claims there must have been.

That misses the point. All but one of the Coles experiments use "column in line" mechanisms which did not happen at WTC on 9/11. The other one also uses wrong mechanisms but a different error.

The fact that Bazant's "crush down crush up" model does not apply to WTC does not make Cole right. That is the fundamental logic error of false dichotomy that so many truthers rely on. Currently T Sz is relying on it on a couple of other forums by (allegedly) disproving Norsdenson's explanation for WTC7.

The false logic goes this way: "Someone claims it is 'A' - you or the truther claims it is 'B' and proves that 'A' is wrong - then asserts THEREFORE I am right - it is 'B' "

Childish false nonsense no matter how many times it is quoted and no matter how many debunker side arguments Cole, you or Szamboti prove to be false.

(Debunkers have probably published far more false rebuttal arguments than truthers have published reasoned claims. Think about that folks. And - before you pre-emptively shoot me - remember "Why to white sheep eat more than black sheep?" )

"27 Debunkers got it wrong THEREFORE I am right" is utter nonsense.

You - or whoever - makes the claim bears the burden to prove that claim correct. And no matter how many opponents get rebuttal wrong the claim still needs proof.

You see what I see. You just deny it. The top mass falls all the way to the bottom, yet it does not crush up. That is what proves the Bazant paper wrong. It also is what makes the experiment different from what actually happened. The top mass is still intact in the experiment. This does not match what was observed.

There are several fatal issues for "crush down crush up" if applied to WTC Twin Towers collapses. BUT you are still missing the point(s) which is(are) fatal to the Cole's nonsense.

 

[Here_to_learn]

When an expert makes a claim that completely disregards a concept that anyone can understand, that expert destroys their credibility.

Example: A person with a PhD in Astronomy claims the sun is not a star. A person does not need to be an expert to know that the sun is a star. The "expert" has destroyed their credibility by making such an absurd claim.

The "experts" on this forum have destroyed their credibility by continually making claims that anyone can see are wrong.

Actually, It's even more interesting. You see, the Astronomer is a member of the group Daring Astronomers For Truth, and has also published two video clips that models the output of the sun:

First one about UV output from the sun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps80qZbbdbM
Then we have one about the heat output from the sun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz7wtTO7roQ

As you can see from the clips, no star was involved. Also, remember to watch the clips all the way to the end, otherwise you may not comment on them.

Now, you cannot just say that "anyone can understand" that the claim about the sun is incorrect - you must submit a youtube video where you show that the sun does not output UV light and that the output from the sun does not heat the earth.


I'm temporarily leaving lurking mode just to say that following these kind of threads gives me several things - I get more information on how to counter stupid arguments, I learn more a number of different subjects, it impresses me to see the patience of those spending their time explaining the world, and from time to time I laugh at some of the posts. Thank you and keep up the good work!