But the real problem with his nonsense claim is:
a) He shows a faked up picture of WTC tower
What are you talking about? faked up picture?
for which he does not comprehend the physics.
Oh contrare I have corrected you plenty of times
So Oz no one believes you when you have nothing to support such rubbish.
b) I do comprehend the physics of the real WTC on 9/11 event;
No you dont. You did not comprehend what I said. I had to draw a picture for you. I never have to draw a picture for an engineer regarding fundamental physics 'principles', however you and kat I do, just like I have to do that with debunkers. Must be another 911 freak coincidence I imagine
c) I can explain it in any necessary detail;
the core had negligible resistance is defined as hand waving not explaining, and explaining does nothing to help your case at this point unless it also includes a sufficiently detailed counter argument to the topple arguments. DUH it fawed down is not a sufficient counter argument and you need not know how to even use a pencil to make an argument that lame. Its a 2 prong issue you either sufficiently argue both or leave one out and you lose.
d) He knows that I can explain and he cannot;
Not only did I explain in a manner that any 'real' engineer can understand I even went so far as to post pretty pictures to represent the points being made, just like I have to do with debunkers, the irony huh.
e) The real physics did not result in topple;
Not toppling is not a function of real physics except in the land of Oz where real physics is whatever Oz says it is. Sorry no one is biting, well your groupies and socks will cheer you on of course, but then they arent engineers any more than you are.
f) For a simple reason - the tilted bit fell down too fast for the topple to "win" AND
Yes in fact that reason is so simple it completely hand waves and ignores the counter 1000 pound gorilla counter argument leveled against you. Not that I blame you for wanting to shut it down because then you would actually have to show some real engineering skill. You know like real engineers do.
g) The reason it fell - "all columns failed"
and it aw faw down, yes we get that Oz, what a magnificent piece of engineering analysis Oz. I see a no-bell prize! LMAO
- ALSO removed the pivot which was needed to cause the tilt/topple.
Maybe in the land of Oz but in the real world another pivot forms.
So that much is reality and it is all pretty basic stuff which he denies without any reasoned basis for his false denials.
Dream on Oz, I addressed everyone of your failures with counter arguments that I had to simplify to the point a child could understand and yet you pretend they do not exist. What a coincidence just like the government does.
WHILST
h) His invented model shows topple WITHOUT any explanation as to why it topples.
What model? You mean you need me to teach you what causes a building to topple. Look I have no reason what so ever to believe on any level I am talking with an engineer on the other end of my keyboard since engineers take this principles for granted while yo ujust cant seem to grasp the concept.
i) AND all of that is an evasive smokescreen'
huh? I laid the cards on the table and spelled it all out for you, try dropping in on planet earth next time you buz around the neighborhood.
j) His claim that I have shown to be wrong is NOT that his silly model did topple
Its time to wake up from your dream Oz, you have shown no such thing what so ever, hell you didnt even try and constantly repeating your fantasy will not make it a reality, not that that reason will stop you any time soon.
k) His false claim is that WTC Collapse should not have stopped toppling.
My claim is that the top section should have toppled. I gave you pretty pictures to show you both cause and effect and the applicable principles in physics, you hand waved it off and you gave me nothing what so ever but a gaurantee from the land of Oz that there is no other 'possible' way for the top section to descend
Reality is that it did stop so for him to prove that what did in fact happen should not have happened puts him in an absurd position.
...and he has no argument to get himself out of the corner he put himself in.
And no amount of lies or insults directed at me or Kat will change that fact. He has no argument to support his false claim.
I made the argument and no amount of denial on your part will change that. It took you kids 10 years to catch up with me regarding bazant and sleazer and from what I have seen it will take you the rest of your lives to catch up with this one.
No Oz the sky is not blue despite what is does, which is to look very blue. Nothing you can say will change that and nothing you can say will change the fact you have been sufficiently countered and failed to rebut.
Let the repitition and truther attacks begin.
Anytime you want to have a serious debate let me know.
