[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
And no, your opinion of 15 s, 22 s, or whatever damn thing you are claiming yesterday or today, does not count here. It is not a question of opinion.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Billy, if you don't like screenshots, pause the video at the 11.5 second mark. You will see that there is a portion of the tower that is taller than the adjacent 22 story building still standing. This would not be the case if the building had collapsed in 10 seconds, or 11 seconds, or even "within 12 seconds". No amount of flapping your wings about admissibility or 2+2 degens or arguing about collapse time models and extrapolation changes this very basic fact.
Full and clear video has been posted. You called it gorgo-tubz and refused to look at it and address it, you lying little ****.
Lol
"Gorgo-tubz"
Lol.
The word "evidence" by definition excludes things that are not evidence.
Examples of evidence:
Detailed analysis of a video anybody can reproduce.
Authored, official documentation published for public record.
Examples of non-evidence:
Lame fuzzy screenshot that shows nothing.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
"Gorgo-tubz"
Lol.
The word "evidence" by definition excludes things that are not evidence.
Examples of evidence:
Detailed analysis of a video anybody can reproduce.
Authored, official documentation published for public record.
Examples of non-evidence:
Lame fuzzy screenshot that shows nothing.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
"Detailed analysis of a video anybody can reproduce."
This was posted multiple times, before the so-called lame fuzzy screenshot. You ignored it, refused to give a view on it, then dismissed it.
Stop being a lying little turd, you already have enough personality defects, you don't need any more.
Right. But we do not require anything more for the factual info of the collapse times. Both official narrativists and their detractors agree on the collapse time, within reasonable uncertainty.
And no, your opinion of 15 s, 22 s, or whatever damn thing you are claiming yesterday or today, does not count here. It is not a question of opinion.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Repeating the argument from authority fallacy yet again.
There is no chance he ever admits he is wrong and lying. None. The only exercise now is seeing how ridiculous the charades he goes through to protect his brain from the cognitive dissonance get.
Are you not entertained
Multiple clear videos of the collapse all show the same thing, btw. There was no cherry-picking of fuzzy screenshots or anything else. I can post multiple clear videos showing the same thing.
edit to add an easy example:
Drop starts at 59. Pause at 1:11 (12 seconds) to see that the remaining building is still taller than WTC7.
Collapse starts at 0:00. Pause at 12 seconds to see height is still taller than WTC7.
Collapse starts at 17 seconds. Pause at 29 to see significant portion of building remaining.
Collapse starts at 30 seconds. Pause at 42 to see remaining structure is still taller than WTC7.
Billy pretending this is even remotely controversial is HILARIOUS.
Billy we are LAUGHING at you. Snap out of it.
Looks like "Detailed analysis of a video anybody can reproduce", Billy.
Same ones you've been ignoring and dismissing for the last month and are now claiming were never posted.
"Detailed analysis of a video anybody can reproduce."
This was posted multiple times, before the so-called lame fuzzy screenshot. You ignored it, refused to give a view on it, then dismissed it.
Stop being a lying little turd, you already have enough personality defects, you don't need any more.
Because it does not show collapse time.
It does not show collapse, in fact.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Collapse starts at 0:00. Pause at 12 seconds to see height is still taller than WTC7.Collapse starts at 17 seconds. Pause at 29 to see significant portion of building remaining.Collapse starts at 30 seconds. Pause at 42 to see remaining structure is still taller than WTC7.Billy pretending this is even remotely controversial is HILARIOUS.Billy we are LAUGHING at you. Snap out of
Towers turned to dust.
Went puft.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Not quite. I am saying some bad fuzzy photo which is unclear as to what it shows is not strong enough to prove the collapse time.Quick reminder:1. NIST faqs. 9 and 11 s.2. NIST final report. Within 12 s.3. Bezant report. 9 seconds.4. Eagar report. Within 10 seconds.5. Chandler video evidence (billy calc). 10 s.On the other hand:1. Gorgo fuzzy photo.Sent from my SM-A366B using T
1. There were several videos.
2. The videos were sufficiently clear to see skyscrapers collapsing, and how long they took to collapse.
3. You are arguably the most intellectually dishonest person I've ever engaged in this Forum.
4. Go Lakers!!!
1. There were several videos.
2. The videos were sufficiently clear to see skyscrapers collapsing, and how long they took to collapse.
3. You are arguably the most intellectually dishonest person I've ever engaged in this Forum.
4. Go Lakers!!!
Who has the collapse time correct?
NIST [ ]
Eagar, Prof of engineering MIT [ ]
Bez, not happy mondays, the guy gorgo rates as ace expert [ ].
Or
You [ ].
As a degen gambler I understand you may well wager the latter. I think the sensible money is on the former.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
No. An appeal to authority fallacy occurs when a person insists an argument is correct simply because it is made by an authority with no other evidence, especially while ignoring contrary evidence. This is precisely what you are doing. Precisely. This is a textbook appeal to authority fallacy.I haven't seen someone lose every point they try to make so thoroughly since Brian J
Logically Fallacious is an excellent book. I bought the e-book about seven years ago.
Collapse starts at 0:00. Pause at 12 seconds to see height is still taller than WTC7.Collapse starts at 17 seconds. Pause at 29 to see significant portion of building remaining.Collapse starts at 30 seconds. Pause at 42 to see remaining structure is still taller than WTC7.Billy pretending this is even remotely controversial is HILARIOUS.Billy we are LAUGHING at you. Snap out of
And just so you know these all show about a 10 second "collapse" time. That is, with a presupposed collapse.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Why is there a bunch of building still standing after 11 seconds then?
Who has the collapse time correct?
NIST [ ]
Eagar, Prof of engineering MIT [ ]
Bez, not happy mondays, the guy gorgo rates as ace expert [ ].
Or
You [ ].
As a degen gambler I understand you may well wager the latter. I think the sensible money is on the former.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
More proof of your utter, complete, thorough intellectual dishonesty.
It's not Eager, Bez, Chandler et al versus Me and Gorgo.
It's Eager, Bez, Chandler et al versus Video footage from multiple sources of the event in question.*
*models versus video footage
Billy, what are the collapse models that have been proposed and which ones are invalidated by the Bezant/NIST timings in your view?
Who has the collapse time correct?
NIST [ ]
Eagar, Prof of engineering MIT [ ]
Bez, not happy mondays, the guy gorgo rates as ace expert [ ].
Or
You [ ].
As a degen gambler I understand you may well wager the latter. I think the sensible money is on the former.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Yet another argument from authority. LOL you will never learn.
Reminder: billy, you are the only one on your side. EVERYONE is laughing at you.
More proof of your utter, complete, thorough intellectual dishonesty.
It's not Eager, Bez, Chandler et al versus Me and Gorgo.
It's Eager, Bez, Chandler et al versus Video footage from multiple sources of the event in question.*
*models versus video footage
They are not even models, they are just numbers asserted with no explanation of how they were measured or derived. The one exception is Chandler, but his measurements are for only the first 4 seconds of the event, the rest is an extrapolation, a.k.a. the BillyShears model.
Not one of the numbers billy clings to for dear life has any methodology described or endpoints defined. Not one.
The bare minimum for a reliable measurement, mind you.
Not one.
