NIST Declines Debate with American Taxpaying Public

Nice deflection.

I didn't ask for a definition.
I asked what you thought the anomoly was.

It should tip you off that a Professor of Structural Engineering couldn't answer my question, not to mention one that's been studying the collapses since they occured. But more power to you if you think you're one up on this guy.

Don't you think that you're jumping to conclusions by saying "the SE COULDN'T answer my question?" More than likely he thought.." Oh great..another know nothing trying to engage me in some flake theory"

Btw, all of it was lost. Goes without saying, a lot of inertia. Tilted out about 17 degrees in roughly 2 seconds, accelerating as it moved outwards. Then it just stopped.

ooohh!...so 'sciencey' sounding.
So whats your point?---"planted charges failed to go off".."alien force beam stopped its movement"..what?

Originally posted by Vushta
ooohh!...so 'sciencey' sounding.
So whats your point?

I'm beginning to think you agree with me, and just have a very clever way of showing it.

If you understand what I just posted, I shouldn't have to tell you what the problem was. And the words I used were very basic physics terms.




PS - My emails to Mr. Astaneh-Asl in no way indicated that I did not follow the "official story". They were short and simple. "What happened to the angular momentum?" "Never looked into it. Couldn't tell you."

[edit on 8-7-2006 by bsbray11]

Nice deflection from answering the question.

Well.."you shouldn't have to tell me"....but why don't you anyway?

How are you arriving at the conclusion that the way the 'angular momentum' acted was an anomoly?

Paint a brief picture.

What would it have looked like if on 911 you're watching it happen and conclude.."Yup!..that looks exactly as it should"?

PS - My emails to Mr. Astaneh-Asl in no way indicated that I did not follow the "official story". They were short and simple. "What happened to the angular momentum?" "Never looked into it. Couldn't tell you."

"never looked into it" is indicative of "doesn't seem like an anomoly to me..why look into it?"

Originally posted by Vushta
How are you arriving at the conclusion that the way the 'angular momentum' acted was an anomoly?

Because Vushta, the rotational inertia would need to be stopped by some other force and there was no force to stop it. There WAS HOWEVER some sort of force that PULVERIZED IT TO DUST.

An object in motion... Nevermind. You apparently have no education.

BACK TO THE POINT OF THIS THREAD...

Why will the NIST not answer to ANY of this?

911research.wtc7.net...

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by Vushta
How are you arriving at the conclusion that the way the 'angular momentum' acted was an anomoly?

Because Vushta, the rotational inertia would need to be stopped by some other force and there was no force to stop it. There WAS HOWEVER some sort of force that PULVERIZED IT TO DUST.

An object in motion... Nevermind. You apparently have no education.

You're making the assumption that there were no other forces involved.
What are you basing this in?

Originally posted by Vushta
You're making the assumption that there were no other forces involved.
What are you basing this in?

It is not an assumption.

What force OTHER THAN gravity was present?

Bulldozers? Wind? Bombs?

What force was available to provide the necessary potential energy?

Footnote: Why am I arguing physics with this guy?

Vhusta... What are your qualifications to speak on energy?

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
BACK TO THE POINT OF THIS THREAD...

Why will the NIST not answer to ANY of this?

911research.wtc7.net...

I refer you to my post where I very clearly laid out why they won't answer to it. It's pretty straightforward.

As I said, write your own document disproving theirs.

Originally posted by Marid Audran

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
BACK TO THE POINT OF THIS THREAD...

Why will the NIST not answer to ANY of this?

911research.wtc7.net...

I refer you to my post where I very clearly laid out why they won't answer to it. It's pretty straightforward.

As I said, write your own document disproving theirs.

Like I said, give me $20,000,000 so I can hire a couple hundred scientists and give me access to the EVIDENCE and I will gladly have a document written and OPENLY reviewed that will lay this whole thing to rest.

Until then, I will defer to the document linked above in which many problems with the NIST report are outlined.

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Nope. I said everything I wanted to say in those 20,000 pages. I don't need to answer questions.

Then you are an elitist jerk who does not understand the scientific process. What kind of arrogant, crap, fascist answer is this?

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Nope. Again, I already said everything I had to say. Plus, if I start debating everyone who disagrees with the report I will never get anything else done. Just like if I started talking with everyone who agreed to the report I would never get anything done.

I have said FOUR TIMES I do not expect them to answer crap to me. Just one Q and A session or debate in a PUBLIC forum. Why so touchy and protective of these JUNK scientists?

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Not to mention that it will set precedent that I am willing to debate resolved issues with people who don't agree with it, thereby setting things up for me to never be able to feel comfortable with filing a report.

RESOLVED? Have you read the report? They leave an AWFUL large portion unresolved.

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Yep. And not only they believe. It's the way that it is. Do you have to talk with every person and explain every aspect of your job to just anyone? I know that I don't.

Again, you mis quote me to defuse a valid question. NICE WORK!

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Can't speak for them, but I would say personally, again, everything I had to say I said in the 20,000 page report. If you disagree with my findings, rather than just challenging them, why don't you do your own research as I did and publish your own 20,000 page report? It is always easier to criticise than to do.

They got PAID $20,000,000 to do the report so don't pretend I can just muster up the same resources to write a report. I DEFER TO OTHER EXPERTS WHO CLEARLY can point out MANY glaring issues/problems/distortions/lies in the NIST report.

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Nope. You don't "deserve" anything.

What kind of communist are you? I think the PEOPLE deserve something, including myself and ALL IT IS IS A FEW ANSWERS.

Originally posted by Marid Audran

Again, I said everything I had to say in that 20,000 page report. All of your questions should be answered. If they aren't answered, well, you are free to do your own research.

No, I am not because only THEY have access to the 7,000 video clips, 7,000 photos in a DB and the physical evidence. Your argument is PERFECTLY CIRCULAR and therefore MOOT.

Originally posted by Marid Audran
Those are my answers if I were them. Although I answered in the first person I had nothing to do with the report. I was merely giving you the answers that you would be given if they deigned to reply.

Marid

No, a couple said "we have scheduling conflicts" and the rest were to arrogant/fearful to even answer.

Next.