Is there any way to cure a truther?[W:2707]

[psikeyhackr]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Already I can say several significant things:

1) The mechanics are the tried-and-true Greening model, from his Energy Transfer paper. Very good stuff; elementary, but good. It's where I started, it's where a lot of people started, and a lot of people also developed it or similar models independently. It's far more crude than Bazant or Seffen's mechanics, although it is my opinion that it gives better results than Seffen's for a very precise reason, namely Seffen uses a modified Lagrangian which captures non-impulsive accretion, and both Bazant and Greening (though quite different) both use a standard Newtonian approach. Seffen claims his approach is superior to Newtonian, but his reason falls short in my opinion because the entrainment of debris and even hinge buckling to full compaction are inherently impulsive processes.

Oh yes, good old Frank Greening.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

JREF Forum - View Single Post - Offer to the Truth Movement: Let's Settle It

May 2008, five years ago. Tried and true. Dumb error on page three. Why didn't you give us a link Kat?

psik

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

We disagree. I won't mock you for your beliefs, and hope you won't mock me for mine. Neither of us could possibly be as crazy as a Mormon, or Scientologist. Right? You aren't either of those things, are you? Hahaha!


Like I say, I don't set out to defend the official story. I set out to figure out what I can. My assessment of my own progress is it's not much. But then I come to other forums and then I get a dose of real "not much". Where I find the same results as the official story, there's agreement. Mostly, there is very little overlap; the subject is very broad and my interests very narrow. I know things they don't know, just because I opened my ****ing eyes and looked. So, I don't defend the official sources, I do my own thing. Then defend that.


I came here to defend MYSELF, not the official story. If that's the way I'm painted and/or perceived, I can't help it. Much.

As corny as it sounds, I'm defending the truth in my own little corner of the world. The fact that I've spent indordinate amounts of time defending Bazant in conversation is solely a function of how stupid the common criticisms are. Please, sit down with me in my little corner if you want to REALLY know where Bazant ****ed up. Sorry, it's not glamorous - or even interesting outside the academic sense - and it isn't going to change anything in the grand scheme. It's not the smoking gun which so many crave.

Thanks for the invite, but as I've mentioned the esoteric trivia regarding theories of collapse doesn't really interest me. Even for a layman like myself the evidence of controlled demolition of some sort is overwhelming. The airplanes were just theatrical stunts for the masses.

You don't set out to defend the official story, and you try to figure out what you can. That is certainly fair enough. In the end, however, you choose to defend the official story. It seems like your area of discussion is the collapse of the towers, with not much said about the other buildings in WTC.

In trying to figure out what you can, have you studied any of the aviation related aspects to the official story?

 

[Kat Dorman]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Oh yes, good old Frank Greening.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

JREF Forum - View Single Post - Offer to the Truth Movement: Let's Settle It

May 2008, five years ago. Tried and true. Dumb error on page three. Why didn't you give us a link Kat?

psik

As I said in the very next paragraph:

...like EVERY single 1D model, the results are all in what you plug in...

I'm talking about the model, you're complaining about what he plugged in. Huge difference.

I also said:

- specifically to the resistive force, since mass distribution is of little interest.

 

[Kat Dorman]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

In trying to figure out what you can, have you studied any of the aviation related aspects to the official story?

Not studied. Some inevitable osmosis. The closest I came to that was following Russell Pickering's work.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Thanks for the invite, but as I've mentioned the esoteric trivia regarding theories of collapse doesn't really interest me. Even for a layman like myself the evidence of controlled demolition of some sort is overwhelming. The airplanes were just theatrical stunts for the masses.

You don't set out to defend the official story, and you try to figure out what you can. That is certainly fair enough. In the end, however, you choose to defend the official story. It seems like your area of discussion is the collapse of the towers, with not much said about the other buildings in WTC.

In trying to figure out what you can, have you studied any of the aviation related aspects to the official story?

We all know you haven't studied the aviation aspects you just lie your a** about them and repeat total BS made up by others!

 

[Kat Dorman]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Not studied. Some inevitable osmosis. The closest I came to that was following Russell Pickering's work.

And (duh) femr2's impact orientation study.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Jeez, it just occurred to me last night. How to combine computer precision with physical modelling that would probably prevent cheating via computer lies.

3D printing!

Use a 3D printer to produce each level of the north tower. The thickness of columns could be varied to the level of precision of the printer. Each level could be made as strong or as weak as desired. Empty spaces could be left to insert metal slugs or ball bearings to control the weight of each level. And the printing process would mean it would not be to difficult to do multiple tests. They could be repeated all over the world.

So how big are 3D printers to scale 208 ft by 208 ft?

psik

If the printer could make and object 2 feet by 2 feet then each level would be 1.5 inches tall. The floors would be pretty thin.

It would still be an expensive project but it would make it possible for the core and perimeter to maintain a consistent pattern without tremendous amounts of construction by hand which could not be as consistent.

psik

 

[Kat Dorman]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

If the printer could make and object 2 feet by 2 feet then each level would be 1.5 inches tall. The floors would be pretty thin.

It would still be an expensive project but it would make it possible for the core and perimeter to maintain a consistent pattern without tremendous amounts of construction by hand which could not be as consistent.

psik

Not a bad idea! Dutch architects to use 3D printer to print a house

(I'd try to go for more height than 1.5" per story, though; make it as big as possible. Unfortunately, there isn't much in the choice of materials.)

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Not studied. Some inevitable osmosis. The closest I came to that was following Russell Pickering's work.

Aviation side is full of holes. No Boeings where they were supposed to be, uncertainty regarding gate assignments, fake Flight Data Recorders, impossible stories regarding camel jockies and more.

Huge contradictions on the aviation side plus controlled demolition at WTC = an impossible story.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

aviation side is full of holes. No boeings where they were supposed to be, uncertainty regarding gate assignments, fake flight data recorders, impossible stories regarding camel jockies and more.

Huge contradictions on the aviation side plus controlled demolition at wtc = an impossible story.

total bs on your part!

 

[mike2810]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

total bs on your part!

Actually Q. I think he may have gotten something right.

"Huge contradictions on the aviation side plus controlled demolition at wtc = an impossible story.", by HD.

Lets break it down:
- There is no supporting documention so, what is the statement actually trying to say.
- The CT folks have many contradictions on the aviation side. The CT crowd can't agree if it was 747,drones, flyovers drones, other aircraft, or even if aircraft hit the buildings at all.
- The CT folks support an explantion of controlled demolition which has yet to be validated or acccepted outside the CT group.

Therefore the CT explanations are "an impossible story.":lol:

(not bad for someone who is not a "free thinker":mrgreen:

 

[Jango]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Quag's hate boner is showing again.

Edit: How about a conversation changer. This building talk is soooo boring, and pointless. There are, you know, more avenues to the 9/11 conspiracy than the frickin' buildings!

 

[Jango]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Actually Q. I think he may have gotten something right.

"Huge contradictions on the aviation side plus controlled demolition at wtc = an impossible story.", by HD.

Lets break it down:
- There is no supporting documention so, what is the statement actually trying to say.
- The CT folks have many contradictions on the aviation side. The CT crowd can't agree if it was 747,drones, flyovers drones, other aircraft, or even if aircraft hit the buildings at all.
- The CT folks support an explantion of controlled demolition which has yet to be validated or acccepted outside the CT group.

Therefore the CT explanations are "an impossible story.":lol:

(not bad for someone who is not a "free thinker":mrgreen:

There were four planes. Al-Qaeda terrorist hijackers were on the planes. Three planes hit buildings and the fourth went down into a field.

Nevertheless, there are areas that are suspicious, odd and need further examination.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Quag's hate boner is showing again.

Lol I do have a problem with this one don't I

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Aviation side is full of holes. No Boeings where they were supposed to be, uncertainty regarding gate assignments, fake Flight Data Recorders, impossible stories regarding camel jockies and more.

Huge contradictions on the aviation side plus controlled demolition at WTC = an impossible story.

Them where are the aircraft that you claim were not used in the attack?

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Them where are the aircraft that you claim were not used in the attack?

For a person to observe that there is no crashed Boeing in a field, it is not necessary for that person to know where an Boeing alleged to have been in that field is at any given time. Is that really so difficult for you to comprehend?

I look out my front window and observe that my friend Joe's car is not in my front yard. Do I need to know where Joe's car is to be able to make that observation? No. Grow up Oozle. You ask juvenile questions for a 48 year old missleman.

FYI, there is ACARS evidence that puts the airplane playing UA93 that day somewhere in Illinois 30 minutes after it supposedly crashed at Shanksville.

Do I know where it is or was? Heck no. Somebody probably does, but I sure as hell do not.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

For a person to observe that there is no crashed Boeing in a field, it is not necessary for that person to know where an Boeing alleged to have been in that field is at any given time. Is that really so difficult for you to comprehend?

I look out my front window and observe that my friend Joe's car is not in my front yard. Do I need to know where Joe's car is to be able to make that observation? No. Grow up Oozle. You ask juvenile questions for a 48 year old missleman.

FYI, there is ACARS evidence that puts the airplane playing UA93 that day somewhere in Illinois 30 minutes after it supposedly crashed at Shanksville.

Do I know where it is or was? Heck no. Somebody probably does, but I sure as hell do not.

Only the plane did crash into the field something you are woefully unable to comprehend.
You look out the window and probably think that Joe's car was stolen by the ebil govt.
ACARS does not do as you say, but then you have no clue what ACARS is and are just repeating BS you got from truther sites with 0 comprehension.
Of course you don't know you don't know anything!

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

For a person to observe that there is no crashed Boeing in a field, it is not necessary for that person to know where an Boeing alleged to have been in that field is at any given time. Is that really so difficult for you to comprehend?

I look out my front window and observe that my friend Joe's car is not in my front yard. Do I need to know where Joe's car is to be able to make that observation? No. Grow up Oozle. You ask juvenile questions for a 48 year old missleman.

FYI, there is ACARS evidence that puts the airplane playing UA93 that day somewhere in Illinois 30 minutes after it supposedly crashed at Shanksville.

Do I know where it is or was? Heck no. Somebody probably does, but I sure as hell do not.

Sorry, I am confused now.

Are you saying that the aircraft in question never existed, or that they are all secretly being hidden somewhere?

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Sorry, I am confused now.

Are you saying that the aircraft in question never existed, or that they are all secretly being hidden somewhere?

He's saying the answer to that question is irrelevant all that matters is that you drink the Kool-Aid and believe despite all evidence that there was no planes

 

[mike2810]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

The "truthers" take on ACARS is alleged. It has not been proven to be correct.

I am not going to take the time to provide links. This issue has been debated before. It lives mainly in the "truthers" wold.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Sorry, I am confused now.

Are you saying that the aircraft in question never existed, or that they are all secretly being hidden somewhere?

I am reasonably certain that the aircraft in question indeed existed.

I am not certain that the flights 11 & 175 were scheduled to fly that day, because some BTS data claims they were not. We know there was controversy from the start that AA11 was somehow shown to be using 2 different gates at Logan. Boston Globe covered it early on. We know that on that morning 2 different flights separated by about 15 minutes or so, used the callsign UA175 with Logan Ground Control.

I know from a guy flying out of Newark that morning that on the concourse he was on, there was nobody at all manning the security checkpoints. We have anecdotal evidence that 93 was boarded from the ramp, and not through a jetway. Unusual circumstance.

There is also conflicting data regarding AA77 gate assignment and position on the ramp that morning.

All that is circumstantial evidence conflicting with the official story.

We know that of all the people who called 911 in New York that morning to report the first strike at WTC, most if not all of those callers reported that it was a "small" airplane, not an airliner. That conflicts with the official story.

We know from video, photo, and witness statements that there was no crashed Boeing in the field at Shanksville.

Where were those airplanes? Damned if I know. But if you check out the 25 October 2012 blog at Woody Box you will discover that the ACARS data shows the airplane that was supposedly UA93 that morning was still logged into the system and was somewhere in Illinois 30 minutes after it supposedly crashed in Shanksville.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

I am reasonably certain that the aircraft in question indeed existed.

I am not certain that the flights 11 & 175 were scheduled to fly that day, because some BTS data claims they were not. We know there was controversy from the start that AA11 was somehow shown to be using 2 different gates at Logan. Boston Globe covered it early on. We know that on that morning 2 different flights separated by about 15 minutes or so, used the callsign UA175 with Logan Ground Control.

I know from a guy flying out of Newark that morning that on the concourse he was on, there was nobody at all manning the security checkpoints. We have anecdotal evidence that 93 was boarded from the ramp, and not through a jetway. Unusual circumstance.

There is also conflicting data regarding AA77 gate assignment and position on the ramp that morning.

All that is circumstantial evidence conflicting with the official story.

We know that of all the people who called 911 in New York that morning to report the first strike at WTC, most if not all of those callers reported that it was a "small" airplane, not an airliner. That conflicts with the official story.

We know from video, photo, and witness statements that there was no crashed Boeing in the field at Shanksville.

Where were those airplanes? Damned if I know. But if you check out the 25 October 2012 blog at Woody Box you will discover that the ACARS data shows the airplane that was supposedly UA93 that morning was still logged into the system and was somewhere in Illinois 30 minutes after it supposedly crashed in Shanksville.

So you have no idea, and believe that the aircraft never existed. Or maybe they did.

Is it any wonder I laugh at most conspiracy theorists? They mostly believe nothing other then everything is a lie.

So N334AA, tail number for AA11, built in 1987 did not exist.

And this is not a picture of it in 1988.

And that is not a picture of it, taken in 1990.

And this is not it in 2000.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

So you have no idea, and believe that the aircraft never existed. Or maybe they did.

Is it any wonder I laugh at most conspiracy theorists? They mostly believe nothing other then everything is a lie.

So N334AA, tail number for AA11, built in 1987 did not exist.

And this is not a picture of it in 1988.

And that is not a picture of it, taken in 1990.

And this is not it in 2000.

Your reading comprehension is way substandard Oozle. I said 5 minutes ago that I am reasonably certain that they did exist. That means I do not know with certainty that they existed, but I assume they did, I believe that they did.

All your beautiful pictures prove nothing. Don't know how much experience you have around aircraft, but you would be surprised what a paint job will do when it comes to deception. I used to know 2 guys that had 3 of the same type airplane, all with the same paint job, all with the same N number. They were in the smuggling business, and used those paint jobs to deceive the authorities.

It was amazingly easy.

Why don't you address the substance of the post Oozle? Too tough?

The substance of the post is that many many details, many large details, contradict the official story that you still believe 11 years later. :doh

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

All your beautiful pictures prove nothing. Don't know how much experience you have around aircraft, but you would be surprised what a paint job will do when it comes to deception. I used to know 2 guys that had 3 of the same type airplane, all with the same paint job, all with the same N number. They were in the smuggling business, and used those paint jobs to deceive the authorities.

Actually, my experience and training is in shooting down airplanes, not flying them.

So now these are repainted aircraft. Just how far back does this conspiracy go? 1987? 1988? That means that while President Reagan was supporting the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan, his administration was already creating a plot to get into a war with them over a decade later.

 

[Quag]

Re: Is there any way to cure a truther?

Actually, my experience and training is in shooting down airplanes, not flying them.

So now these are repainted aircraft. Just how far back does this conspiracy go? 1987? 1988? That means that while President Reagan was supporting the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan, his administration was already creating a plot to get into a war with them over a decade later.

Now you are starting to understand the typical thought process (or lack thereof) of your typical CT'er, HD is a prime example.
Simple fact is the evidence is undeniable (except for those who are in denial) that the 4 planes were hijacked and crashed as described. Truthers, however do not give a damn about facts, only misinformation, innuendo, speculation and lies