23 of 23
23
Inside Job—9/11 Truth and other 9/11 Discussion (Merged)
Posted: 15 April 2009 12:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 331 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
VYAZMA - 15 April 2009 09:23 AM

Sorry Psikey. You witnessed the event.

I witnessed NOTHING.  I haven’t been to New York since before the towers were built.  I never saw them with my own eyes.  All I have seen are photographs and videos.

Considering that there is absolutely ZERO empirical,or tested evidence

Tell that to the Danish scientist that I provided the video link for.

What, Along with the planes impact, caused the towers to collapse?
Look…I’m giving you an out here!! Take it. Can you figure it out?

Read what I said about conservation of momentum.  I am not talking about what DID DO IT because I do not have any evidence for it.  I am talking about what could not have done it because I understand the physics of why it should not have happened.  I even built a physical demonstration.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

I haven’t seen any other video like it.  One would think that our engineering schools that charge $100,000+ for FOUR YEARS could have done much better in SEVEN YEARS.

Now understanding why it should not have happened involves needing to know the distribution of mass in a skyscraper.  It is certainly curious that WE DO NOT HAVE information on the distribution of steel and concrete in the WTC towers after SEVEN YEARS.  Now if you can’t comprehend what I have been saying about the distribution of mass then why don’t you stop responding?

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 April 2009 04:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 332 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  19
Joined  2009-04-11

Conspiracy theories are not really my thing…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2009 08:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 333 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
unholyblackdeath - 24 April 2009 04:08 PM

Conspiracy theories are not really my thing…

I presume PHYSICS isn’t either.

Atheists don’t seem to be up on it.

Darwin is presumed to be smarter than Newton.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2009 05:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 334 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  19
Joined  2009-04-11
psikeyhackr - 25 April 2009 08:06 AM
unholyblackdeath - 24 April 2009 04:08 PM

Conspiracy theories are not really my thing…

I presume PHYSICS isn’t either.

Atheists don’t seem to be up on it.

Darwin is presumed to be smarter than Newton.

psik

WTF are you going on about?  I just joined this conversation.  Maybe you have me confused with someone else?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2009 01:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 335 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  5
Joined  2009-04-27

Wow.

Backing up drastically:

This is a forum for rationalists.  Yes? 

Rationalists want to search for truth, not win arguments. 
Rationalists understand that they are subject to cognitive fallacies and biases, and they try to overcome them.
Rationalists honestly examine evidence that may disprove their theories.

Rationalists would be willing to read this
0616-911report.jpg
before judging what it says.

If you don’t want to bother, then what the heck are you doing here?

(Sort of generally directed at everyone.  Which won’t win me popularity points, I’m sure.  Also, this is in response to the first half of the thread.  Ignore if it’s gotten better.)

Okay.  Moving forward a bit:

Skeptics, you can try to state the obvious.  (Passing semi trucks: scale up by a thousand.)  But that erects defenses.  Instead, go along with the conspiracy theories.  Follow the assumptions logically.

For example, there’s pictures of the Pentagon plane.  There’s suspiciously little debris.  And the wings appear to be missing.  (“So… you’re saying it was planted as evidence?  And… someone forgot to attach the wings?”)

See how much better?

Help people learn to question, really question.  Because hindsight can be embarrassing for a lifetime.

[ Edited: 27 April 2009 03:20 AM by Kellan ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2009 06:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 336 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
Kellan - 27 April 2009 01:32 AM

Wow.

Backing up drastically:

This is a forum for rationalists.  Yes? 

Rationalists want to search for truth, not win arguments. 
Rationalists understand that they are subject to cognitive fallacies and biases, and they try to overcome them.
Rationalists honestly examine evidence that may disprove their theories.

Rationalists would be willing to read this

If you don’t want to bother, then what the heck are you doing here?

(Sort of generally directed at everyone.  Which won’t win me popularity points, I’m sure.  Also, this is in response to the first half of the thread.  Ignore if it’s gotten better.)

Okay.  Moving forward a bit:

Skeptics, you can try to state the obvious.  (Passing semi trucks: scale up by a thousand.)  But that erects defenses.  Instead, go along with the conspiracy theories.  Follow the assumptions logically.

Help people learn to question, really question.  Because hindsight can be embarrassing for a lifetime.

.
Do rationalists understand Newtonian physics?

Are skeptics skeptical about Newtonian physics?

Does the 9/11 Commission Report invalidate Newtonian physics.

I have downloaded the NIST NCSTAR1 report.  It is 10,000 pages and I never attempted or intended to read the entire thing.  I have searched it for various information and have possibly read a total of 300 pages though not in sequence.  Only in areas where they discussed things I deemed relevant to the physics of the problem.  The trouble with the NCSTAR1 report is that it does not provide adequate information on the skyscraper.  They do not even specify the total mass of concrete.  We are not told the number and weights of the perimeter wall panels.  How are we supposed to do competent physics without that?

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=55445

Do people need to read government reports to understand grade school physics?

Do the laws of physics care about conspiracies?  Can people conspire to change the laws of physics?

Do atheists believe in PHYSICS?  Believe NOTHING, Understand what is Relevant!

People keep defining the problem in relation to the government and conspiracies.

PHYSICS doesn’t give a damn about the human race.

psik

PS - Plenty of people who claim to be Rationalists are merely Rationalizers.

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2009 08:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 337 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1995
Joined  2008-09-18

Unholyblackdeath, I just want to reassure you that psikeyhacker is incorrect to claim that physics supports his arguments. I hold a master’s degree in physics and so I took some time explaining the physics to him some months back. He ended up denying the physics when it contradicted his claims. I have him on ignore now.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2009 10:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 338 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  323
Joined  2009-02-18

Popular Science magazine did a very detailed, but understandable critique on this subject some time ago. As in most conspiracy theories, the pool of individuals with knowledge of the evil plan grows expotentially over time until there are thousands of folks keeping their mouths buttoned up. Not possible.

Note that POPSCI also debunked the ‘FEMA Death Camps’ in another recent article. Of course, the people who believe in this stuff are immune from logic.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2009 10:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 339 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
Chris Crawford - 27 April 2009 08:19 AM

Unholyblackdeath, I just want to reassure you that psikeyhacker is incorrect to claim that physics supports his arguments. I hold a master’s degree in physics and so I took some time explaining the physics to him some months back. He ended up denying the physics when it contradicted his claims. I have him on ignore now.

Now this is interesting.  I don’t recall you ever claiming to have a masters in physics before.

Now I will have to go back and look more closely at your posts.  But what did you ever say was incorrect about FALL OF PHYSICS?

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewreply/52039/

Wait a minute.  You said this:

Your calculation also errs in treating the material as having a fixed velocity. The velocity of all the material is increasing as it falls.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewreply/52223/

I have 4 speed lines in FALL OF PHYSICS that compare the changes in the velocities before and after impact in each of 4 cases, and now you are claiming to have a masters in physics.  ROFLMAO

psik

[ Edited: 27 April 2009 09:27 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2010 09:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 340 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05

What does an actual gravitational collapse on a self supporting structure look like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c&feature=channel

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2010 06:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 341 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4142
Joined  2008-08-14
psikeyhackr - 26 March 2010 09:56 PM

What does an actual gravitational collapse on a self supporting structure look like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c&feature=channel

psik

I haven’t, or will not follow your link. I’d like to think that you are revisiting this topic with tongue in cheek Psikey. Because otherwise the implications are dreary for you.

 Signature 

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

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2010 11:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 342 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2291
Joined  2007-07-05
VYAZMA - 27 March 2010 06:36 AM
psikeyhackr - 26 March 2010 09:56 PM

What does an actual gravitational collapse on a self supporting structure look like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c&feature=channel

psik

I haven’t, or will not follow your link. I’d like to think that you are revisiting this topic with tongue in cheek Psikey. Because otherwise the implications are dreary for you.

It is certainly dreary for some of us.

Being NORMAL is so comforting isn’t it?

See if you can find the total weight of a floor assembly.  The concrete slab is easy to compute, 600 tons.  So why can’t you find the weight of all of the corrugated pans and 35 and 60 foot trusses after EIGHT YEARS?

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2012 11:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 343 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  14
Joined  2012-07-06
unholyblackdeath - 24 April 2009 04:08 PM

Conspiracy theories are not really my thing…

With all due respect, if you’re reading this thread, then conspiracy theories are your thing.  Regarding 9-11, either there was a government conspiracy, or a conspiracy of Muslims with boxcutters.  The buildings didn’t just fall down on their own.  Somebody planned and plotted for their demise.  That is the definition of a conspiracy.  You get to pick one conspiracy or the other to believe in, unless you honestly have no opinion, which is not a bad thing.

“The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.” - J Edgar Hoover

 Signature 

Oh, mother, don’t be so Sentimental. Things explode every day. - Monty Python

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2012 04:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 344 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5187
Joined  2010-06-16

Sanchez, you may notice that this is a very old thread - Last post before yours was over two years ago.  Unholyblackdeath hasn’t been around for a couple of years so he probably won’t see your quite valid argument.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
   
23 of 23
23
 
‹‹ Eveyone a humanist?      Your Work and You ››