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

FalseFlag said:
5 of 50. No question.
Click to expand...

It is your duty to show Cole's experiments, have validity, you have failed miserably, you even admitted Cole was wrong, you just can't admit it to yourself, motion the same, impacts different, energy values change the experimental results.
Not a hard concept for anyone but you and Johnathan Cole to understand.
Cole's experiments are thous falsified, for stupidity of over simplification and lack of logical Validity.
If the experiment doesn't agree with Logic, and math the experiment is falsified.
 
ProBonoShill said:
Cole is a complete moron and only those lacking in a basic understanding of simple physics would be dumb enough to believe his idiocy.

Ohh wait....
Click to expand...

Sadly from my perspective Cole is not a "complete moron". He is one of five engineers who I have encountered who post on the internet with the deliberate intention of using their professional knowledge to mislead. Not many after ~35K posts over ~8 years and about 5 forums but....that is five too many.

Two of them IMO "genuinely obsessed" truthers to the extent that their commitment to "the cause" overrides any thought of professional integrity.

One - from AU :mad: - a malicious troll but never active on this forum.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
It is your duty to show Cole's experiments, have validity, you have failed miserably, you even admitted Cole was wrong, you just can't admit it to yourself, motion the same, impacts different, energy values change the experimental results.
Not a hard concept for anyone but you and Johnathan Cole to understand.
Cole's experiments are thous falsified, for stupidity of over simplification and lack of logical Validity.
If the experiment doesn't agree with Logic, and math the experiment is falsified.
Click to expand...
Cole's experiments - 4 out of 5 of them - are based on a wrong mechanism.

So they are falsified BEFORE we even get to the logic or maths.

Somewhat like my first comment about T Szamboti's claims:
The paper referenced as Engineering Reality by Tony Szamboti is typical of many which look impressive in detail to the non-engineer. The complex calculations may even be correct but the base premises are faulty and the resulting conclusions can readily be demonstrated to be totally wrong.
Click to expand...
That was late 2007. Long before "Missing Jolt" and all those other examples of T Sz's "false starting premises" SOP. Which it seems Cole has adopted also. :rolleyes:

No point arguing about "which leaf" or "which tree" if you are in the wrong forest. And 4 out of 5 of Cole's experiments are in the wrong forest.
 
Fascinating how so many cranks on so many different subjects feel a such an urge to declare victory.

Moon hoax cranks do it. Chemtrail cranks do it. Jfk cranks do it and so forth.

Those cranks seem to think that they are in some form of competition which must be won at all costs regardless of any facts. It seems to matter not a whit if the hoax du jour is even vaguely sane. Our reptilian overlords spring to mind. Or the notion the everything is a false flag. After all, not a single air crash exists that has not been claimed as fake. The inevitable consequence is that no air crash exists at all.
 
ozeco41 said:
Sadly from my perspective Cole is not a "complete moron". He is one of five engineers who I have encountered who post on the internet with the deliberate intention of using their professional knowledge to mislead. Not many after ~35K posts over ~8 years and about 5 forums but....that is five too many.

Two of them IMO "genuinely obsessed" truthers to the extent that their commitment to "the cause" overrides any thought of professional integrity.

One - from AU :mad: - a malicious troll but never active on this forum.
Click to expand...

Well that leaves two options "Cole is a complete moron" or he's one of those "using their professional knowledge to mislead" either way, his credibility is sorely lacking. I've read some of his work, the engineers and scientists in various fields here at the ISF including yourself have taught me far more than he ever will.
 
FalseFlag said:
There have been more than 5500 posts in this thread and its predecessor, and no one has shown, by experiment, that Cole's conclusions are wrong.

It's time to put this conversation to bed.

Cole wins by default, and by virtue of his victory, the CD theory of the demolition of WTC1 and WTC2 is the most valid hypothesis.

+1 for Cole, Newton, firecrackers, and common sense.

Thanks for playing.
Click to expand...


Congratulations, you've won today's grand prize.

Which is... no new investigation, no political influence, no revision to history, no beautiful new bedroom set, and a fabulous vacation for Richard Gage in some exotic land, which you will pay for yourself.
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
There have been more than 5500 posts in this thread and its predecessor, and no one has shown, by experiment, that Cole's conclusions are wrong.

It's time to put this conversation to bed.

Cole wins by default, and by virtue of his victory, the CD theory of the demolition of WTC1 and WTC2 is the most valid hypothesis.

+1 for Cole, Newton, firecrackers, and common sense.

Thanks for playing.

In case you arrived late to the party, here is a link to the video that started it all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJNzaMRsN00
Click to expand...
In Cole’s experiment (3:30min.), he places (4) 1 /2” cement boards spanning 19” and places a 20# weight on them. Deflection is less than L/360. He drops the weight about 5 feet. It breaks through the first boards-floor and others that are about 4 inches apart. “In fact, dropping the steel weight on realistic supports always resulted in a deceleration and not acceleration, like we were led to believe.”


Cole’s experiment proves that if his weight drops = > 5 feet at each impact, the board-floors will not stop the weight from continuing to fall through the other boards-floor.
The tower floors dropped 12 feet at each collision, not 4 inches thus demonstrating, following his experiment’s conclusion, that the Tower’s accelerating falling floors could not have stopped the global progressive collapse.


This also shows that neither Cole’s experiment nor the natural global collapse of the Tower floors violate Newton’s laws of motion or engineering dynamics. It proves however that neither Cole nor FF know what they are talking about when they claim that this flawed experiment proves that the Towers floors were silently exploded.
 
Last edited:
FalseFlag said:
It's time to put this conversation to bed.

Cole wins by default, and by virtue of his victory, the CD theory of the demolition of WTC1 and WTC2 is the most valid hypothesis.
Click to expand...


The reason why the Truthers CD theory wins is because:

1. No visible evidence of CD explosions

2. No audio evidence of CD explosions

3. No seismic evidence of CD explosions

4. No evidence of CD hardware

5. Structural experts have concluded that fire, not CD explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings

6. Firefighters have concluded that fire, not CD explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings

7. Demolition experts have concluded that fire, not CD explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

Other than that, what's left?! Truther CD victory surrounded by total lack of CD evidence after 15 years.
 
BasqueArch said:
This also shows that neither Cole’s experiment nor the natural global collapse of the Tower floors violate Newton’s laws of motion or engineering dynamics. It proves however that neither Cole nor FF know what they are talking about when they claim that this flawed experiment proves that the Towers floors were silently exploded.
Click to expand...


I want to buy stock in the company that produces mufflers for CD explosives.
 
skyeagle409 said:
I want to buy stock in the company that produces mufflers for CD explosives.
Click to expand...

Even at a safe range one can feel the shock wave of such explosives throughout the body. The muffler company will have to not only mask the sound but also the blast wave.

Methinks the twoofers have never been anywhere near an actual explosion.
 
abaddon said:
Even at a safe range one can feel the shock wave of such explosives throughout the body. The muffler company will have to not only mask the sound but also the blast wave.

Methinks the twoofers have never been anywhere near an actual explosion.
Click to expand...
The "blast wave" IS the sound, and vice versa...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom