That was partly the purpose of the thread, and his challenge. He won though (uncontested) further enhancing the point.
No conclusion has been presented here, or anywhere that I can find. Assuming his beef is with the second law, it can only be proved or disproved through the application of F = MA. My bet is he is trying to sell F = Mv as his particular brand of snake oil but given no one wants actually show any calculations the issue remains problematic.
JREF is like Let's Roll in the sense that if you're not "on the team" and don't "sing the same fight song" you'll find yourself "banished to the locker room." It is quite the lockstep forum that like Let's Roll, if "team members" are harassed or disparaged like "non-team members" are, there are consequences. The concept of open-debate at either place is an illusion: you're free to agree with the accepted talking points but if you deviate from that static apparatus you will be castigated.
I'm not a physics professor but HE IS so, I'm out of my league there, but my question remains. Why didn't anyone try and 'kill two birds with one stone' and take his challenge. They could defeat his contentions, put to bed those 'kooks' and pick up a couple grand for their favorite charity, all in one felt swoop. Why didn't that happen?
I don't have a suggestion. The forums I frequent all have permanent debunkers stationed in the conspiracy section, which is where his debate would be moved & discussed in. There are only so many political boards and they've been infiltrated.
Because he wont tell anyone what the actual claim is - Randomly repeating "It violates Newton's laws of physics" is rubbish. It is up to him to show the values he is using to make the computation to show current published calculations are wrong Why wont he do that? Rather than you playing proxy for him - get him to pop in here and explain it
Given that from the official story side, there are statements like "total collapse was inevitable ....... " without including any sort of explanation as to exactly what may have happened post collapse initiation, I think it would be beneficial to have the official side supply some sort of expert analysis of the collapse events, in order to clear the air on this subject and provide answers, but what seems to be happening ( and very frustrating at that ) is both sides are pointing fingers saying Why doesn't he provide data? why indeed? Considering the fact that it was the mainstream media that first asserted that airliners used as weapons had been responsible for all the damage & destruction, WHY is it that the mainstream media has yet to supply any hard data to back it up?
Does it have to be in mainstream media to count? https://www.math.wisc.edu/~robbin/angelic/911.pdf This was one of the first studies http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf
The first paper, I'm going to have to take some time to check it out, however your second reference is the infamous "Bazant" paper and that has already been proven to be a farce. The bit that has yet to be accounted for is the probability of all the welds/bolts/pins within the tower structure, failing exactly on time in sequence to produce the observed result. who has the guts to actually address that one?
Imagine my surprise that a truther calls a study by MIT a 'farce' By the way,where's the 'proof' you claim that says it's a 'farce'?
Was Bazant working for MIT at the time he wrote that paper? May I also point out that within the "scientific" paper they admit to making assumptions such as the following: "None of the kinetic energy of the falling mass is diverted to other sinks (concrete pulverization, steel bending, etc." I don't know about anybody else here, but I have a very serious objection to "scientific" papers making assumptions of this nature.
So you make the assumption that the institution is perfect and never publishes any mistakes? Have you actually read the bit that I quoted and do you understand the importance of it? and note that nobody so far has actually addressed the issue of how it was that all of the connections within the building(s) failed in sequence in order to produce the observed result.
You are moving goal posts. You wrote: "however your second reference is the infamous "Bazant" paper and that has already been proven to be a farce." Please link to the source explaining how this has been proven to be a farce.
"progression" makes assumptions about the state of the structure that is being acted upon, sans assumptions, SEQUENCE is the correct word.
This entire thread is problematic. It's within forum guidelines, but IMHO it's intellectually dishonest. The reason why no one "debates" truther authorities is obvious: no one has time to debate nutcases. A better question is why do "truther" experts, who know they are pushing snake oil, want to debate anyone? I think it's for cheap publicity. Also, when they lose, they can tell their followers/donors this is "proof" they are being censored or whatever.
Please see https://www.metabunk.org/attachment...l-to-reviewer-and-second-submission-pdf.4684/ and note that the obvious bias "nobody has time to debate nut cases" is truly not appreciated. Do not shoot the messenger!
I know. Most of the people pushing this crap can not even summarize the evidence or information. Or even tell you which law is supposed to be violated
"No one has time?" NO ONE? I find that ridiculously impossible to believe. IMHO, the reason debate is so stifled is because of the implications of what facts it would present to the largely ignorant masses. The OP is merely one example of the larger and more complex issue (and censoring does indeed occur as a matter of routine). If it's only snake oil being peddled, it ought to be easy enough for the powers that be to nullify (honestly) the arguments being presented. That doesn't happen though, because IMHO, larger details of the obvious fraud would be apparent.
Have you seen anything by Johnathan Cole or David Chandler? Do you know about the challenge & cash prize offered by Ace Baker? The fact is, it is possible to say that the official story is WRONG without having specific indictments of individuals. I can not tell you what sort of explosives were used to destroy the WTC towers & 7 but its a given that explosives were used. Look at the destruction of these buildings, do you not have eyes? Our creator endowed us with minds, should we commit blasphemy by refusing to use them?
Most of the people dismissing any 'foul play' can't even argue a single point of contention to its logical conclusion without resorting to the traditional ridicule, or some other from of avoidance. The 'crap' that is maintained in the general public is only is itself loaded with 'crap', and is easily defeated. Now if only the masses would put their electronic gadgets down for two seconds and stop playing 'Angry Bird', or stop posting on their facebook pages every two minutes, and redirect some of that misplaced energy towards something constructive, we might have something. That doesn't happen though.
The official story IS wrong, indeed. If only a small percentage of people would take the time to look and put THAT on their facebook page, huh?
