30 of 91
30
Any scientific evidence to support official WTC 7 fall theory?
Posted: 19 May 2013 10:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 436 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
psikeyhackr - 19 May 2013 08:08 AM
Lois - 18 May 2013 12:00 AM

Of course we question the official conclusion and we’re open to facts that would contradict it. But, unlike CTs, we expect real science to show that the conclusions are suspect. We don’t accept flimsy theories that nobody in his right mind would put forth.  That’s the difference between atheists and people like you.  You are hoist by your own petard. 

Lois

Are you admitting that you don’t expect scientists to PROVE their conclusions?

You accept without proof but require what you regard as PROOF to doubt, but do not actually have to understand it for yourself?

You have turned science into a religion with a priesthood of scientists and regard that as logical.

Ever heard of the Conservation of Momentum?

psik

Yes, I have.  Have you heard of these?

Paranoia,  a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. “Everyone is out to get me.”) Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. For example, an incident most people would view as an accident or coincidence, a paranoid person might believe was intentional.

Paranoid personality disorder: characterized by irrational suspicions and mistrust of others.

Schizoid personality disorder: lack of interest in social relationships, seeing no point in sharing time with others, anhedonia, introspection.

Schizotypal personality disorder: characterized by odd behavior or thinking.

Histrionic personality disorder: pervasive attention-seeking behavior including inappropriately seductive behavior and shallow or exaggerated emotions.

Narcissistic personality disorder: a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Characterized by self-importance, preoccupations with fantasies, belief that they are special, including a sense of entitlement and a need for excessive admiration, and extreme levels of jealousy .

[ Edited: 19 May 2013 10:33 AM by Lois ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 437 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  459
Joined  2012-07-02

I’m impressed you took the time to diagnose psikey so thoroughly, Lois. Can he be helped? wink

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 10:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 438 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Robert Walper - 19 May 2013 10:34 AM

I’m impressed you took the time to diagnose psikey so thoroughly, Lois. Can he be helped? wink

I’m afraid he’d have to recognize the problem and want to be helped.  But Paranoia is notoriously difficult to treat.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 11:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 439 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  459
Joined  2012-07-02
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:40 AM
Robert Walper - 19 May 2013 10:34 AM

I’m impressed you took the time to diagnose psikey so thoroughly, Lois. Can he be helped? wink

I’m afraid he’d have to recognize the problem and want to be helped.  But Paranoia is notoriously difficult to treat.

Lois

And just how did you come by that information? *looks at you suspiciously, backing away slowly* :p

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 11:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 440 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

I got reprimanded for making a similar diagnosis awhile back.  Everybody initially agreed with me, then someone felt guilty and retracted their feelings.
So everyone felt bad and some apologized to Psikey.  I sure as heck didn’t.
He is obviously “off”. 
I couldn’t agree with you more Lois and Robert.  It’s a joke.  What a disruption! Same with all these CTs….

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 03:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 441 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  427
Joined  2013-02-16
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:30 AM
psikeyhackr - 19 May 2013 08:08 AM
Lois - 18 May 2013 12:00 AM

Of course we question the official conclusion and we’re open to facts that would contradict it. But, unlike CTs, we expect real science to show that the conclusions are suspect. We don’t accept flimsy theories that nobody in his right mind would put forth.  That’s the difference between atheists and people like you.  You are hoist by your own petard. 

Lois

Are you admitting that you don’t expect scientists to PROVE their conclusions?

You accept without proof but require what you regard as PROOF to doubt, but do not actually have to understand it for yourself?

You have turned science into a religion with a priesthood of scientists and regard that as logical.

Ever heard of the Conservation of Momentum?

psik

Yes, I have.  Have you heard of these?

Paranoia,  a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. “Everyone is out to get me.”) Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. For example, an incident most people would view as an accident or coincidence, a paranoid person might believe was intentional.

Paranoid personality disorder: characterized by irrational suspicions and mistrust of others.

Schizoid personality disorder: lack of interest in social relationships, seeing no point in sharing time with others, anhedonia, introspection.

Schizotypal personality disorder: characterized by odd behavior or thinking.

Histrionic personality disorder: pervasive attention-seeking behavior including inappropriately seductive behavior and shallow or exaggerated emotions.

Narcissistic personality disorder: a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Characterized by self-importance, preoccupations with fantasies, belief that they are special, including a sense of entitlement and a need for excessive admiration, and extreme levels of jealousy .

This is all totally irrelevant to the question. Psikey actually bothered to experimentally investigate your hypothesis and explanation for the collapses. You are full of scorn for his method, assumptions, calculations and results. But where is your experimental validation for the explanation you think is so obvious, you who claim to have the vast majority of scientific expertise behind you? It is nowhere. As Psikey suggests, 9/11 scientists are like religious fundamentalists—far more so than “CTs”. More than a decade has passed and these 9/11 scientists have still not been able to show that this collapse effect actually exists on any day other than 9/11.

[ Edited: 19 May 2013 03:52 PM by jomper ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 05:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 442 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2415
Joined  2007-07-05
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:30 AM

Narcissistic personality disorder: a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Characterized by self-importance, preoccupations with fantasies, belief that they are special, including a sense of entitlement and a need for excessive admiration, and extreme levels of jealousy .

So explain why any of that keeps an experiment from being done in 11 years?

But then of course religious people could say the same things about atheists.

And presumably you are saying this man has the same problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

But I said 9/11 presents a psychological issue some time ago.

http://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html

So why aren’t scientists doing experiments to eliminate the psychological issue?

[10,506]
psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 05:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 443 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2415
Joined  2007-07-05
jomper - 19 May 2013 03:48 PM

This is all totally irrelevant to the question. Psikey actually bothered to experimentally investigate your hypothesis and explanation for the collapses. You are full of scorn for his method, assumptions, calculations and results. But where is your experimental validation for the explanation you think is so obvious, you who claim to have the vast majority of scientific expertise behind you? It is nowhere. As Psikey suggests, 9/11 scientists are like religious fundamentalists—far more so than “CTs”. More than a decade has passed and these 9/11 scientists have still not been able to show that this collapse effect actually exists on any day other than 9/11.

Yes, that is what makes this situation so absurd.

The experiments to test the possibility of collapse should be so much simpler than all of this psychological drivel.  So what does it say about the psychology of the people who don’t want to do the tests?  And then talk about 1/1000th scale models weighing 450 tons.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 09:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 444 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Robert Walper - 19 May 2013 11:00 AM
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:40 AM
Robert Walper - 19 May 2013 10:34 AM

I’m impressed you took the time to diagnose psikey so thoroughly, Lois. Can he be helped? wink

I’m afraid he’d have to recognize the problem and want to be helped.  But Paranoia is notoriously difficult to treat.

Lois

And just how did you come by that information? *looks at you suspiciously, backing away slowly* :p

The personality disorder information is freely available online.  As for paranoia being difficult to treat, a psychologist friend who has treated several paranoid people relayed this information to me. 

Don’t worry, I’m not in the field of psychology. wink

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 May 2013 09:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 445 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
psikeyhackr - 19 May 2013 05:53 PM
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:30 AM

Narcissistic personality disorder: a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Characterized by self-importance, preoccupations with fantasies, belief that they are special, including a sense of entitlement and a need for excessive admiration, and extreme levels of jealousy .

So explain why any of that keeps an experiment from being done in 11 years?

But then of course religious people could say the same things about atheists.

And presumably you are saying this man has the same problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

But I said 9/11 presents a psychological issue some time ago.

http://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html

So why aren’t scientists doing experiments to eliminate the psychological issue?


[10,506]
psik

They are..  There is a tremendous amount of research being done on people with paychological problems, including paranoia and the paychology behind conspiracy theories. What makes you think there isn’t?

You might start here for an overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory_of_history

And here:

George, John; Laird M. Wilcox (1996) American extremists: militias, supremacists, klansmen, communists & others Prometheus Books pg 267

Transparency and conspiracy: ethnographies of suspicion in the new world order. Harry G. West, Todd Sanders. pp 4.

Cass R. and Vermeule, Adrian, Conspiracy Theories (January 15, 2008). Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03; U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199; U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585 (Accessed January 29, 2010) 15.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 May 2013 05:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 446 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  427
Joined  2013-02-16
Lois - 19 May 2013 09:36 PM
psikeyhackr - 19 May 2013 05:53 PM
Lois - 19 May 2013 10:30 AM

Narcissistic personality disorder: a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy. Characterized by self-importance, preoccupations with fantasies, belief that they are special, including a sense of entitlement and a need for excessive admiration, and extreme levels of jealousy .

So explain why any of that keeps an experiment from being done in 11 years?

But then of course religious people could say the same things about atheists.

And presumably you are saying this man has the same problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

But I said 9/11 presents a psychological issue some time ago.

http://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html

So why aren’t scientists doing experiments to eliminate the psychological issue?


[10,506]
psik

They are..  There is a tremendous amount of research being done on people with paychological problems, including paranoia and the paychology behind conspiracy theories. What makes you think there isn’t?

You might start here for an overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory_of_history

And here:

George, John; Laird M. Wilcox (1996) American extremists: militias, supremacists, klansmen, communists & others Prometheus Books pg 267

Transparency and conspiracy: ethnographies of suspicion in the new world order. Harry G. West, Todd Sanders. pp 4.

Cass R. and Vermeule, Adrian, Conspiracy Theories (January 15, 2008). Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03; U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199; U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585 (Accessed January 29, 2010) 15.

So I assume from all this psychobabble you are coming out with that you cannot actually address the point psikey is making when he says

The experiments to test the possibility of collapse should be so much simpler than all of this psychological drivel

So again: where is your experimental validation for the explanation you think is so obvious, you who claim to have the vast majority of scientific expertise behind you?

It is nowhere.

And yet you’re still a true believer in the cult of 9/11 science.

More than a decade has passed and 9/11 science believers like you have still not been able to show that this collapse effect you worship actually exists on any day other than 9/11.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 May 2013 08:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 447 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2415
Joined  2007-07-05
Lois - 19 May 2013 09:36 PM

You might start here for an overview:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory_of_history

I am not talking about history because I do not give a damn who did it or why.

The word “physics” is not mentioned on that page.

Human beings cannot change physics.  That is the issue here.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 May 2013 04:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 448 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  459
Joined  2012-07-02

Hey psikey, when you did your drop test with paper and washers, explain to everyone why not one single piece of paper or washer fell sideways in your model.

Your model is as ‘weak as possible’, therefore you’re not lying again and there isn’t in fact a rigid pole from top to bottom, right? And this pole isn’t anchored to surrounding structures beside your model, right?

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 May 2013 12:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 449 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2415
Joined  2007-07-05
Robert Walper - 20 May 2013 04:21 PM

Hey psikey, when you did your drop test with paper and washers, explain to everyone why not one single piece of paper or washer fell sideways in your model.

Your model is as ‘weak as possible’, therefore you’re not lying again and there isn’t in fact a rigid pole from top to bottom, right? And this pole isn’t anchored to surrounding structures beside your model, right?

Well it never occurred to me that anyone would be so unintelligent as to not see the obvious.

The dowel does not participate in the collapse.  However it is a factor in the “as weak as possible” construction.  The paper loops and washers cannot be stacked as high as 20 levels without the dowel because they will fall over.  As soon as the structure tilts more weight is put on one side of the lower paper loops which are then crushed on that side and the entire stack falls over.  I tried it multiple times.  The dowel is necessary to keep the weight evenly distributed around the “weak as possible” paper loops.

The WTC was designed to withstand winds of 150 mph.  I don’t think my model could handle that even with the dowel. 

[10,776]
psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 May 2013 01:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 450 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  459
Joined  2012-07-02
psikeyhackr - 21 May 2013 12:58 PM
Robert Walper - 20 May 2013 04:21 PM

Hey psikey, when you did your drop test with paper and washers, explain to everyone why not one single piece of paper or washer fell sideways in your model.

Your model is as ‘weak as possible’, therefore you’re not lying again and there isn’t in fact a rigid pole from top to bottom, right? And this pole isn’t anchored to surrounding structures beside your model, right?

Well it never occurred to me that anyone would be so unintelligent as to not see the obvious.

The dowel does not participate in the collapse.  However it is a factor in the “as weak as possible” construction.  The paper loops and washers cannot be stacked as high as 20 levels without the dowel because they will fall over.  As soon as the structure tilts more weight is put on one side of the lower paper loops which are then crushed on that side and the entire stack falls over.  I tried it multiple times.  The dowel is necessary to keep the weight evenly distributed around the “weak as possible” paper loops.

The WTC was designed to withstand winds of 150 mph.  I don’t think my model could handle that even with the dowel. 

psik

So your ‘weak as possible’ model has a (relatively) massive single piece structure running through it while being anchored to other supporting structures.

In other words, not only does your model fail all the other factors I’ve mentioned, it’s not even a free standing structure to begin with. Hint: the WTC towers are free standing structures, your model is not.

It is beyond belief you design a model with additional supporting structures that you admit are there to prevent it from collapsing for your test, and then claim your model not collapsing as proof a larger free standing structure shouldn’t have either.

 Signature 

“When your arguments are…ashes. Then you have my permission to cry.”

Profile
 
 
   
30 of 91
30