5 of 5
5
Jonathan Kay - Among the Truthers
Posted: 06 June 2011 09:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 61 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2424
Joined  2007-07-05
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 12:00 PM

Since you took it as a personal victory that I “ran away”,.

Victories in Newtonian are for people trying to play ego games.  That psychological BS is for kids.

This is about scientific kid’s stuff.  Newtonian physics is 300 years old.

People that can’t figure out grade school physics 42 years after the Moon landing just deserve to be laughed at.

When you can build a self supporting model that can be completely collapsed by the fall of its top 15% or less then I may take you seriously.  The fact that you even said most of the of the core was still standing was just laughable.  I have seen that video plenty of times.  Your CLAIM could only sound plausible to someone who had not seen it.

How can anyone know how much most of the core consisted of when we NEVER hear how many feet of horizontal steel were in the core?  We are never shown a layout of how the horizontal beams were arranged in the core.  The important information that is missing about those buildings merely demonstrates what a farce this entire business is.

And then Purdue joined the fray with their supposed SCIENTIFIC simulation of the north tower impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cddIgb1nGJ8

They show the horizontal beams in the core but then they have the core columns remaining stationary during the plane impact even though the NIST report provides empirical data indicating the south tower moved 15 inches due to the plane impact and then oscillated for four minutes.

So either Purdue or the NIST is being totally unscientific.  LOLLOLLOL

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 June 2011 10:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 62 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  29
Joined  2010-09-08

I have seen that video plenty of times

So why did you demand that I went to the effort to provide you a link?

The fact that you even said most of the of the core was still standing was just laughable

Just as I predicted… you would deny being able to see the clear majority of the inner core still intact.

People that can’t figure out grade school physics 42 years after the Moon landing just deserve to be laughed at.

This is what you do when you have no answer for something. You mention something about grade school physics and start talking about something else other than what was raised against you. The south core was still standing and wasn’t resisting against the destruction of the floors and the outer columns on the south tower and you also have nothing to say about the lack of booms.

The demolition hypothesis fails at the drawing board. This is why nobody in science takes the twoofers seriously, because anyone with a reasonable mind can understand the common sense reasons why it WASN’T a controlled demolition.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 June 2011 05:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 63 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4850
Joined  2007-10-05
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 10:24 PM

...anyone with a reasonable mind can understand…

There’s the key phrase. Give it up kennykjc. You are not dealing with a reasonable person.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 June 2011 06:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 64 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
DarronS - 07 June 2011 05:31 AM
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 10:24 PM

...anyone with a reasonable mind can understand…

There’s the key phrase. Give it up kennykjc. You are not dealing with a reasonable person.

I thought psik was a Mensa member…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 June 2011 08:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 65 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2424
Joined  2007-07-05
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 10:24 PM

I have seen that video plenty of times

So why did you demand that I went to the effort to provide you a link?.

Because YOU CLAIMED that most of the core was still standing.

Do you think you can CLAIM anything you want and not have to provide supporting evidence and expect everyone to believe you?

The fact that you even said most of the of the core was still standing was just laughable

Just as I predicted… you would deny being able to see the clear majority of the inner core still intact.

Since they were so easy to find I did find it amusing that your excuse was that you would not take the time.  LOL

I provided the links.  You are free to explain how you see most of the core.  There were 47 core columns but toward the top I only see ONE.  So you need to claim vast psychologically predictive powers but don’t say anything about what is actually in the video.

psik

[ Edited: 07 June 2011 08:56 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 June 2011 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 66 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2424
Joined  2007-07-05
DarronS - 07 June 2011 05:31 AM
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 10:24 PM

...anyone with a reasonable mind can understand…

There’s the key phrase. Give it up kennykjc. You are not dealing with a reasonable person.

Yeah right!  LOL

But I haven’t seen you or anyone else build a self supporting physical model that can be completely collapsed by its top 15%

I guess atheists don’t think experiments have anything to do with Science and Reason.

All they can resort to is psychological BS to try and convince other people that they are stupid.  LOL

Are you saying it makes sense that the core columns don’t move in the Purdue impact simulation?

That is the problem with computer simulations.  They do not have to obey the Laws of Physics.

Physical models cannot escape the Laws of Physics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

psik

[ Edited: 07 June 2011 10:23 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 June 2011 10:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 67 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2424
Joined  2007-07-05
George - 07 June 2011 06:18 AM
DarronS - 07 June 2011 05:31 AM
kennykjc - 06 June 2011 10:24 PM

...anyone with a reasonable mind can understand…

There’s the key phrase. Give it up kennykjc. You are not dealing with a reasonable person.

I thought psik was a Mensa member…

I let my membership expire years ago.

Oh yeah, they told us that our IQs would drop 40 points if we let the membership expire.  LOL

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 June 2011 10:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 68 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2010-09-11

I’m sad to say that I used to fervently believe in a version of the 9-11 conspiracy.  I even wrote a paper on it while in college shortly after it happened. I was never gullible enough to think that the Bush Administration actually planned the attack, but I did think they knew something was coming and kept it quiet to start a war. I still think that it is possible that someone in the Bush administration knew it was coming, but I now think it is more probable that 9-11 happened due to incompetence.

I’m glad to see that Kay is acknowledging that Truthers are from both the left and right spectrum.  I hate how people like Chris Matthews always tries to push the Birthers are on the right, Truthers are on the left narrative.

I have to disagree with him on the internet thing though.  We don’t technically have pen pals, but we do chat and post on message boards with people from many different countries and through this process I do think that we gain a more informed view of the rest of the world.

I also don’t think that people always just isolate themselves towards sources that they agree with.  I think a lot of people intend to do that, but discussion boards tend to allow people to see the other point of view even if they weren’t seeking them out.  I think the internet has been instrumental in getting people to turn away from religion.

Profile
 
 
   
5 of 5
5