Split Thread NIST did not utilize the scientific method?

[david.watts]

jaydee: Because its basically immaterial. NIST explained why it was immaterial. That said we have a girder that normally, at room temperature, supports its load on a foot long flange. Then it gets heated to several hundred degrees and pushed to where only what, 1 inch of flange (8% of the normal flange width) is now supporting the same load, on a seat that itself is also at several hundred degrees temp, a seat that is attached to a column that is also at several hundred degrees.
Do the engineers at AE911T really expect that this could/should/would not fail?

jaydee, I really was hoping you would read what I wrote. Top to bottom. I made it clear that I also regard it as immaterial.

 

[George 152]

1. Apparently everyone here dismisses entirely the evidence -- witnesses/audio -- of explosions.

2. Apparently everyone here believes NIST adhered to scientific method.

When a building is collapsing it makes sounds as stuff breaks.
Apart from the fuel explosions when the aircraft impacted there were no explosive explosions..
And yes NIST adheres to the scientific method. That's what they do

 

[George 152]

So why did they need to get rid of building 7 ?

And the rest of the buildings on the Plaza

 

[NoahFence]

Still here. This has taken more time than I thought it would. The biggest thing that has held me up are some things that I had in my head that I was not sure I recalled accurately and needed to 're-research.' Its been a few years since I was much more in touch with the happenings on 9/11. And if I have a chance at all here JREF, I know I do need to be accurate. You will certainly let me know if I am not. My hope is I can post in a few hours. The post will be in more than part.

Do you believe anything other than 19 hijackers + 4 aircraft = 9/11?

If the answer is no, you won't be accurate.

 

[NoahFence]

Ok beachnut, I don't give a damn whether or not path of least resistance is a pathological belief or not. Should I have said "path of greatest resistance?" It don't matter. Drop it. Can you not comment -- other than sarcastically -- on my response? "LOL," is that your best effort?

That's really all that's required.

 

[david.watts]

This thread has gotten way off track. It's purpose is specifically regarding claims of free fall acceleration in the observed behavior in the fall of the exterior of WTC 7, and whether any such observed behavior is only explainable by a controlled demolition. Other moribund threads should be used for unrelated claims and debate.

Yes, the thread is now no longer about free fall and CD. I said in my post that "I cannot prove a CD based on Free Fall." But, I was trying to when this started. We all know this back and forth has gone on for quite some time. My "conclusion" needed to be posted here. And a lot of what was in the conclusion needed to be in the context of the comments on this thread. Another thread can be started and that is fine with me. However, my "conclusion" also belongs here. If you have not read closely -- it is obvious others have not -- what I posted you will not understand what I was saying.

This subject of this thread was indeed originally about free fall and CD. I believe in the end I proved that WTC7 was indeed a controlled demolition based on other than free fall. That leads in general to what happened on 9/11. And bottom line is this is what this is all about. I hadn't planned on ending up where I did, if I had I would not have started with my CD/free fall "proof."

Thank you.

 

[jaydeehess]

jaydee: Because its basically immaterial. NIST explained why it was immaterial. That said we have a girder that normally, at room temperature, supports its load on a foot long flange. Then it gets heated to several hundred degrees and pushed to where only what, 1 inch of flange (8% of the normal flange width) is now supporting the same load, on a seat that itself is also at several hundred degrees temp, a seat that is attached to a column that is also at several hundred degrees.
Do the engineers at AE911T really expect that this could/should/would not fail?

jaydee, I really was hoping you would read what I wrote. Top to bottom. I made it clear that I also regard it as immaterial.

However your post ( which I quoted) asked a question, I replied with my thoughts on the issue.
In rereading your post in its entirety though, I do not see you stating this issue as immaterial. Perhaps that was in another post.

 

[beachnut]

jaydee: ... Do the engineers at AE911T really expect that this could/should/would not fail?

jaydee, I really was hoping you would read what I wrote. Top to bottom. I made it clear that I also regard it as immaterial.

You posted a lot of nonsense, and proclaim CD. You did not use the scientific method, and lie, saying NIST did not. CD, a conclusion based on ignorance. You proved you use no evidence. You use simile, hearsay, lies, and silly claims about NIST to support a fantasy.

When the towers collapsed, the evidence at the time of collapse lead to the cause of impacts and fire.

Since planes were used, we have who did it, a manifest is required, it took less than a day to investigate the passenger lists and figure out who did it. 19 idiots for some perverted branch of a religion, the branch of the spoiled Saudi. As a pilot you might understand how much energy an aircraft at 470 knots and 510 knots has, but then you came up with the physics fantasy, the path of least resistance law, where linebackers can't plaster a quarterback, because they take the path of least resistance at impact, and tackle the air. Wow.

When you get the evidence, we learn impacts and fire. And for 7, it was fire. I don't know a building that can survive a fire not fought. WTC 7 was totaled by fire before it collapsed. It was never going to be used again, even if it stood. A fact you can't grasp as you back in CD.

You ignore all evidence, make up lies and hearsay junk, wave your hands, claim CD. I have seen your body of work, you do fantasy.

You post lies, and never learn why they are lies. http://www.opednews.com/Diary/9-11-How-many-virtual-pro-by-David-Watts-080324-705.html

Your virtual proof of 911 as an inside job, based on "path of least resistance" and other made up claims and false junk. A failed proof, a proof of woo, at Op Ed News, where the big lie becomes the truth.

You can't do anything without bashing NIST, which debunks your silly proofs.

I give up. I cannot prove a CD based on free fall. But I do think that CD provides a much better explanation for the way/manner it collapsed.

You can't get anything right, you just pretend to accept free-fall means nothing.
You think your logic, by explaining the nonsense you base your claim on, can help you back in CD to change minds; at a skeptic forum?

You are on a crusade to spread CD, back CD in by explaining your way of thinking. It failed. Your conclusion is a fantasy. No evidence, ignoring evidence to a make the anti-intellectual CD claim.

 

[tsig]

Take a wild guess.

I see no merit in trying to read your mind.

 

[NoahFence]

This subject of this thread was indeed originally about free fall and CD. I believe in the end I proved that WTC7 was indeed a controlled demolition based on other than free fall. That leads in general to what happened on 9/11. And bottom line is this is what this is all about. I hadn't planned on ending up where I did, if I had I would not have started with my CD/free fall "proof."

Thank you.

Of course you did.

 

[tsig]

]BEACHNUT!! I GET IT!! THAT'S GREAT!! I JUST FIGURED OUT YOU ARE A TROLL FOR THE TRUTHER SIDE!! YOUR ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS REPLIES ARE AN ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT THE OFFICIAL STORY SIDE IS WAY OFF BASE OR OUT OF BOUNDS OR EVEN LOONY!! KEEP AT IT!! THAT'S GREAT!!

You'll have to post LOUDER.

 

[tsig]

Very good question. I obviously do not know. I can only speculate. I would guess that they waited until late afternoon to let the fires burn long enough to make the collapse at least plausible. I have wondered many times why they did not wait until after dark so that good video could not be taken; little chance building 7 would have been an issue. But perhaps, by waiting that long the fires might have expired making the collapse implausible. I don't think the purpose was to make it "look" like a CD. I think they really wanted to inflict as little damage as possible to the surrounding buildings. Actually I didn't miss it on 9/11. But I had forgotten. I remembered seeing it after I saw the WTC7 collapse video. Also, I believe it was never shown again on TV after 9/11. That is suspicious in and of itself.

Ultra evil conspirators with a heart of gold.

 

[beachnut]

Of course you did.

What convinced me, it was the long lost "path of least resistance law", used by 911 truth to prove they use the scientific method... because they say NIST didn't.

Silent explosives and thermite that leaves no evidence were two more super scientific methods used by 911 truth to prove ...

 

[jaydeehess]

Very good question. I obviously do not know. I can only speculate. I would guess that they waited until late afternoon to let the fires burn long enough to make the collapse at least plausible. I have wondered many times why they did not wait until after dark so that good video could not be taken; little chance building 7 would have been an issue. But perhaps, by waiting that long the fires might have expired making the collapse implausible. I don't think the purpose was to make it "look" like a CD. I think they really wanted to inflict as little damage as possible to the surrounding buildings. Actually I didn't miss it on 9/11. But I had forgotten. I remembered seeing it after I saw the WTC7 collapse video. Also, I believe it was never shown again on TV after 9/11. That is suspicious in and of itself.

First of all, no, collapsing after fires went out and the structure cooled would not be suspicious. Sagging beams would contract but of course would not return to being straight and could pull away from connections. Very recently a construction crane in Kingston, Ontario, Canada suffered due to a huge fire at its base. It remained standing but there was is a definite possibility of collapse remaining.

Second, the fact that a relatively unknown building collapsed 8 hours after the towers and resulted in major damage to another relatively unknown building, and WTC5 which was a total write off anyway, with absolutely no loss of life explains why it was lightly reported on. Same goes for the church that was destroyed and the Duechwelle Bank building and a few others. The Fitterman building, hit by WTC 7 debris was torn down but even AE911T cannot be bothered to report on that.

 

[david.watts]

Ok, and what was the reason for destroying the towers ?

Spanx, Quick answer: "SHOCK AND AWE!" It etched/tattooed the spectacularly horrific picture, or should I say "movie," into every persons mind AND psyche ... worldwide. It provided the "blank check"

Suppose the planes hit the towers at 3 in the morning and there was no video. No video of the absolutely mesmerizing crashing of the large US airline airplanes carrying helpless passengers and crew into the those GRAND, MAJESTIC, TWIN ICONS of AMERICA!! No video of those utterly spectacular(!!) and ghastly(!!) collapses of those icons of America with so many helpless people inside!!

With the video, they forever altered, etched, tattooed the psyche of humanity. Hearing about it on the radio just wouldn't cut it.

It is easy to see what they have done since and how easy it was for them to do it. Almost everybody: "Its the devil himself is in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan. Get Osama! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like!"

WMDs! "Mushroom clouds! Attack Iraq! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like! What(?), no WMDs? That's okay! They deserved it!"

I tried to make this as dramatic as I could to try to clearly point out that 9/11 was designed to be as dramatic as possible for the reasons above.

 

[jaydeehess]

What convinced me, it was the long lost "path of least resistance law", used by 911 truth to prove they use the scientific method... because they say NIST didn't.

Silent explosives and thermite that leaves no evidence were two more super scientific methods used by 911 truth to prove ...

Object "A" is falling, object "B" is directly under object "A". "A" hits "B" instead of avoiding the obvious resistance to its path that "B" would represent.

According to AE911T "A" should zig zag around "B".

 

[Spanx]

Thanks David, I think I have got it, building 7 was an insurance job and the towers were to start a war.

It all makes perfect sense now.

I can see how terrorists wouldn't be clever enough to work any of that out.

 

[Mudcat]

Suppose the planes hit the towers at 3 in the morning and there was no video. No video of the absolutely mesmerizing crashing of the large US airline airplanes carrying helpless passengers and crew into the those GRAND, MAJESTIC, TWIN ICONS of AMERICA!! No video of those utterly spectacular(!!) and ghastly(!!) collapses of those icons of America with so many helpless people inside!!

Umm... You do realize that New York is known the city that never sleeps for a reason, right?

 

[NoahFence]

Spanx, Quick answer: "SHOCK AND AWE!" It etched/tattooed the spectacularly horrific picture, or should I say "movie," into every persons mind AND psyche ... worldwide. It provided the "blank check"

Suppose the planes hit the towers at 3 in the morning and there was no video. No video of the absolutely mesmerizing crashing of the large US airline airplanes carrying helpless passengers and crew into the those GRAND, MAJESTIC, TWIN ICONS of AMERICA!! No video of those utterly spectacular(!!) and ghastly(!!) collapses of those icons of America with so many helpless people inside!!

With the video, they forever altered, etched, tattooed the psyche of humanity. Hearing about it on the radio just wouldn't cut it.

It is easy to see what they have done since and how easy it was for them to do it. Almost everybody: "Its the devil himself is in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan. Get Osama! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like!"

WMDs! "Mushroom clouds! Attack Iraq! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like! What(?), no WMDs? That's okay! They deserved it!"

I tried to make this as dramatic as I could to try to clearly point out that 9/11 was designed to be as dramatic as possible for the reasons above.

'Cuz terrorists have a long and storied history of subtlety.

Dolt.

 

[beachnut]

Spanx, Quick answer: "SHOCK AND AWE!" It etched/tattooed the spectacularly horrific picture, or should I say "movie," into every persons mind AND psyche ... worldwide. It provided the "blank check"

What a load of paranoid claptrap. proves your CD is a big exaggeration, aka a big lie, the big lie you push as the truth. This is how the NAZIs pushed lies.

Suppose the planes hit the towers at 3 in the morning and there was no video. No video of the absolutely mesmerizing crashing of the large US airline airplanes carrying helpless passengers and crew into the those GRAND, MAJESTIC, TWIN ICONS of AMERICA!! No video of those utterly spectacular(!!) and ghastly(!!) collapses of those icons of America with so many helpless people inside!!

LOL, no would doubt the fires did it if it happened at night. My fire chiminea looks anemic in the daylight, but at night my neighbor turns me in for a giant fire, the size of a lunch box, makes so much light, he can't grasp how tiny the fire is. Yes, no silly small fires claims if at night, the fires would look like the biggest office fires in history they were. But then you don't do science, you do woo.

But the idiot pilots can't fly at night, they would find the WTC but flying at night would be too hard for pilots who are idiots; But then you don't understand flying, as you think 77 did not hit the Pentagon, yet it was tracked by multiple RADAR sites. You live in fantasy.;

With the video, they forever altered, etched, tattooed the psyche of humanity. Hearing about it on the radio just wouldn't cut it.

LOL, you think someone you can't name did 911. Who? lol

It is easy to see what they have done since and how easy it was for them to do it. Almost everybody: "Its the devil himself is in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan. Get Osama! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like!"

Devil? UBL was spoiled Saudi, who had others do his work. A failed leader of murderers and idiots. Like 911 truth, followers who can't think for themselves.

WMDs! "Mushroom clouds! Attack Iraq! Send troops, weapons, whatever you need, spend as much as you'd like! What(?), no WMDs? That's okay! They deserved it!"

Iraq did not do it. You are drifting into more BS cause you can't use science, so you make up political claptrap reasons for your delusions of 911.

I tried to make this as dramatic as I could to try to clearly point out that 9/11 was designed to be as dramatic as possible for the reasons above.

Is that what you do, try to make it so dramatic to fool others with lies of "path of least resistance", "not much airplane debris found at the Pentagon", dramatic lies to spread a fantasy?
LOL...

They flew during the day because they were VFR pilots who could tune in a VOR and fly the way the direction the pointer was pointing. lol

They used big aircraft, which is extra credit murder. You apologize for 19 terrorists due to your complete ignorance of 911.

Remember, no video at night, zero, it does not work. No night coverage. lol, do you make this up as you go, or does Op Ed News have a playbook?