The Hulsey Report

Discussion in '9/11' started by Shinebox, Jun 20, 2018.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Correct. Peer review means it’s open to the scientific community in general so it’s unbiased by definifition. You should know that. All will have a chance to read it and critique it including you (if you believe you’re a peer) and all NIST members if they’re so inclined.

    You already made that clear. Why do you feel the need to post it ad nauseum?
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well again they have pretty lucrative government funded careers. Why would you expect them to jeopardize their careers for exposing NIST and the US government as frauds?
     
  3. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The problem is we have scientists violating science.

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...sics-is-pointless-without-experimental-tests/

    And this is simple stuff. It requires massive non-think to keep going. So how do we have education and non-think? Next year the babies born in 2001 will be graduating from high school. What kind of education have they had?
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2018
  4. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Better than your education it seems. At least they won't try to to demonstrate the physics involved when the twin towers collapsed by using washers, paper rings, and a wooden dowel.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2018
  5. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Delete.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2018
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I can’t disagree with any of the above but unfortunately careers often take precedence over honesty and integrity.
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I thought his demonstration was quite appropriate and quite intelligently devised for the “Physics for Dummies” crowd. A hell of a lot more intelligent than NIST’s promise to provide the model for the twin tower “collapse” that was never provided and instead admitting in a footnote that they never actually investigated the “collapse” because it was “inevitable”. Speaking of dummies, no wonder you’re trying to ridicule it, you didn’t get it.
     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2018
  8. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yeah.

    Washers representing the floors, paper loops representing the steel "between" (think about that for a minute) the floors, and a wooden dowel representing the steel core. Of course you think that's "appropriate" and "quite intelligent" because you have no clue. I'll have to tell structural engineers that you've found a cheap way to test design support loads and building safety instead of using calculations and computer simulations.

    Unbelievable.
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What's unbelievable is your pretense of a complete lack of understanding that the experiment was geared for a specific uninitiated audience even though I already explained it so even a simpleton would understand. It was never meant for structural engineers although some of the ones who claim to be engineers in this forum could probably take a lesson.

    Then again, I take it back, it's not unbelievable, it's standard game playing by you.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2018
  10. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    "Uninitiated" to what Bob? The physics involved when the twin towers collapsed? What exactly does that model and its results convey to the "uninitiated"? It leads them to believe that the collapse should have been arrested and that the model is a representation of the towers.

    I can't believe you think it was a good experiment. This is a new low for you.
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Go back and read for comprehension. It seems you're either pretending to be dense or you really are that dense.

    I can't believe you have zero understanding of what I post, so I'll go with you're pretending. I'm certain you're really not that dense.

    One who exhibits an incredible lack of understanding based on severe reading comprehension issues should not be insulting anyone else's intelligence.
     
  12. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That's where you're wrong Bobby. I understand that what you post is extremely stupid. That's why I keep pointing it out.
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can point out anything you like, unfortunately it rarely has anything to do with what I post. And that's why you perceive it as "stupid". Like I said, this is really old, you're always trying to spin what I post to pretend it means something entirely different then argue YOUR version of what I post then declare it "stupid". I read that time and time again, this is as phony as a 3 dollar bill.
     
  14. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Nah. Your claims really are stupid. That's the whole point.
     
  15. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There is no "spin" Bobby.

    You think his experiment was a good one. It was meant to show the physics involved in the twin towers and leads "the uninitiated" to believe that that the collapse should have arrested. The experiment uses washers as "floors", paper loops as the "floor supports", and a wooden dowel as the "core".

    You're just not intelligent enough to figure that out.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What's "stupid" is you trying to spin everything I post in order to try to defend the OCT.

    Yep, I think it was brilliant.

    And apparently you're not intelligent enough to figure out that:

    1. If such a simple structure can arrest a collapse how is it possible that 3 structures such as the WTC towers could not?

    2. How is it possible that all 3 towers "collapsed" through the path of highest resistance (according to the OCT) while the experiment shows that could not happen?

    3. Why did the experiment require a wooden dowel to keep all the collapsing material from falling to the side while there was no such thing in the 3 WTC towers that could keep the collapsing material from falling to the side yet it allegedly (according to the OCT) destroyed everything below it vertically in accelerating fashion, defying basic laws of physics?

    4. Where is any experiment or computer model (even a simple one) that could duplicate to any reasonable extent what happened to the 3 towers on 9/11? Oh yeah still waiting for NIST.

    Try not to challenge another person's intelligence when you show all you do here is play all sorts of childish games in the hope that you can convince someone who is not already convinced that the OCT is fact.
     
  17. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    If you can't figure out why the washer/paper loop/wooden dowel model is a terrible representation of the towers to figure something like that out, then you're not going to be able to understand the explanation.
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL. Good way to avoid all my questions. Say nothing but challenge my intelligence. You are such a transparent phony, do you really believe there's anything genuine in your posts that anyone with any reasonable level of intelligence can't see through you?
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    How about this experiment Bobby? How did the smaller, upper section being dropped collapse the whole thing?
     
  20. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Then after discussing the post above, you can explain how the video below goes AGAINST the results of the experiment you so dearly love.
     
  21. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    See above...
     
  22. Max Rockatansky

    Max Rockatansky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Messages:
    25,394
    Likes Received:
    8,166
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a conspiracy!
    [​IMG]
     
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yep thanks for showing how structure can be rigged for total CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

    These too:



    And that's the point.

    And also what happens when controlled demolitions don't work as planned:



    Again, where is the experiment that can duplicate or at least create a similar event as the 3 towers on 9/11?

    Why is it that there were at least 2 experiments with overstuffed fire hazards and exaggerated fires that failed to collapse steel framed structures?
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes 9/11 was a conspiracy, that's what the 9/11 Commission claims, the Bush administration claims and everyone with half a neuron knows. DUH! The issue here is why would anyone buy the official conspiracy theory given the massive contradictory, questionable and absence of evidence. Silly official conspiracy theorists trying to ridicule others by calling them conspiracy theorists.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2018
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Failed again Bob.

    Explain why the washer/paper loop/wooden dowel model is a better representation of the twin towers than Mick's model in the first video.
     

Share This Page