Real 9-11 Research

[smeagol]

Don’t sweat it mookster, I would also be mad if I found out the leaders of my cult believe that:

- 9/11 was concocted by Europeans
- Apollo did not land on the moon (but a secret rocket did)
- That politicians are in the occult
- Forced inoculations
- TIVO controls your mind

[Don Quixote]

I wouldn't go so far as to label Truthers as a cult. To cite a few examples, they lack strong centralized leadership that demands loyalty (e.g., The Moonies, Jehovah's Witnesses). They don't really have a doctrine of salvation, and there doesn't appear to be any program designed to separate people from their families or dollars.

On the other hand, they do tend to require that we suspend critical thinking, accept questionable methodology and "proofs," and they have a strong shared belief that anyone outside of their "group" is not only wrong, but brainwashed/on the take/possessed. This is evident in many cult groups.

[ChumpDumper]

Software Engineers and Math Majors for Truth®

[RandomGuy]

Don’t sweat it mookster, I would also be mad if I found out the leaders of my cult believe that:

- 9/11 was concocted by Europeans
- Apollo did not land on the moon (but a secret rocket did)
- That politicians are in the occult
- Forced inoculations
- TIVO controls your mind

I actually know a guy on myspace that firmly believes that "they" are into numerology and sacred numbers, and further that "they" send messages to each other through internet news headlines.

He started a whold thread about it in the political forum there "Bizarre Pattern", and used a headline about a Spurs win "Duncan scores 22 in win over [Suns?]" to "prove" that they are sending messages regarding the number 22 and that an attack was imminent on Dec 22, 2007.

It didn't happen of course, and when I pointed out that if you searched the news for all different types of numbers, the number 22 fell pretty much in line with all the other numbers in terms of how often they were used in news headlines and stories, he just said he saw the pattern anyways.

He is fully obsessed with the numbers 9 and 11, and thinks that combinations and multiples, i.e. 22, have some meaning for the occult leaders of the evil global conspiracy/elite.

Smart guy overall, but the tone of his posts is generally hostile and insulting.

I honestly think the guy is a borderline schizophrenic.

[Nbadan]

Unfortunately for you, gravity is constantly accelerating objects towards the center of the earth.

So for each momentary deceleration offered by any given floor, you then get another 3.4 meters of acceleration by gravity.

At least you are finally trying to wrap your brain around it.

I see the problem, you don't understand physics.....when I multiplied the collapsing debris by a constant factor of 9.8 that is the effect of velocity of gravity on earth of anything with mass, your not gonna speed up or slow down gravity on earth by adding or taking away mass....

[ChumpDumper]

Does gravity not accelerate mass as it falls?

Is there no ulative effect of that acceleration since the building never stopped falling?

[Nbadan]

Which is precisely about how long it took for the buildings to collapse.

Your 'video proof' is amateurish and assumes that all the debris fell at free fall speed, that not what anyone said...also, I noticed that you have failed to address my video analysis of the WTC7 free fall speed (how convenient) , a building not hit by planes...let's watch that again...

[Nbadan]

Does gravity not accelerate mass as it falls?

Not unless you've discovered a new law of physics

In physics, gravitational acceleration is the acceleration of an object caused by the force of gravity from another object. In the absence of any other forces, any object will accelerate in a gravitational field at the same rate, regardless of the mass of the object. On the surface of the Earth, all objects fall with an acceleration of somewhere between 9.78 and 9.82 m/s² depending on la ude, with a conventional standard value of exactly 9.80665 m/s², (approx. 32.174 ft/s2).

Wikipedia

[been there seen that]

The Basics: Critical Thinking, Informal Logic, The Scientific Method

The Basics
Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit
Michael Shermer on the Scientific Method
A "theory" in science is like a guess or a hunch, right?
Michael Shermer: Not all wrong theories are equal.
Distinguishing science and pseudoscienceBad Science: Dr. Ben Goldacre's excellent blog http://www.badscience.net/
A Field Guide to Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking Mini Lessons
A Guide to Logical Fallacies
A simple guide to common logical fallacies
Fallacy Watch: How to Read a Poll
Denialism Blog: How to be a crank
Propaganda and debating techniques (Thanks, anticonspiracy911)
The Woo-Woo Credo
7 Stupid Thinking Errors You Probably Make (identifying sources of bias)
Study: How Warnings about False Claims Become Recommendations

[ChumpDumper]

Does gravity not accelerate mass as it falls?

On the surface of the Earth, all objects fall with an acceleration of somewhere between 9.78 and 9.82 m/s²

So the answer is yes - gravity accelerates mass as it falls.

What does that little 2 mean after the m/s?

[Nbadan]

So the answer is yes - gravity accelerates mass as it falls.

What does that little 2 mean after the m/s?

...an acceleration that RG seems to claim speeds up with more mass...I, on the other hand, used a 9.8 constant in my calculations....

...The metre (or meter) per second squared is the SI derived unit of acceleration. It is a measure of magnitude and can be a scalar measure or, when associated with a direction, a vector, for example by having sign positive or negative. The unit is written in symbols as m/s2, m·s−2, or m s−2. It may be better understood when phrased as "metre per second per second"—in other words, the increase in speed (in metres per second) that is achieved each second. Since the newton equals one kilogram metre per second squared, the metre per second squared is the same unit as the newton per kilogram...

[Nbadan]

I remember mouse or some other twoofer type making a big stink about the Citgo station tape's not being released. I did a quick Google and found it had actually been released a month before and showed very little -- and definitely wasn't the smoking gun it was claimed to be.

Please tell us what tapes you are now going on about.

The Citgo tape, which did not show any impact, was eventually release through a FOIA request after 3 years, but the gov'ment is still holding up to 85 other tapes of the pentagon attack..



Flight77info

....after 7 years, any reasonable person would ask, why?

[Nbadan]

[ChumpDumper]

...an acceleration that RG seems to claim speeds up with more mass...I, on the other hand, used a 9.8 constant in my calculations....

...The metre (or meter) per second squared is the SI derived unit of acceleration. It is a measure of magnitude and can be a scalar measure or, when associated with a direction, a vector, for example by having sign positive or negative. The unit is written in symbols as m/s2, m·s−2, or m s−2. It may be better understood when phrased as "metre per second per second"—in other words, the increase in speed (in metres per second) that is achieved each second. Since the newton equals one kilogram metre per second squared, the metre per second squared is the same unit as the newton per kilogram...

So how fast would 30 acres of office building be falling after two seconds?

[ChumpDumper]

The Citgo tape, which did not show any impact, was eventually release through a FOIA request after 3 years, but the gov'ment is still holding up to 85 other tapes of the pentagon attack..



Flight77info

....after 7 years, any reasonable person would ask, why?

You aren't a no-planer, so why do you care?

[Nbadan]

So did a plane hit the pentagon?

Well, let's look at some of the physical evidence from the crash site...

Close up view of pentagon wreckage...





Now a picture of Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200, model # N644aa taken about a month before 911



the debris seems to match up perfectly...here's a close up



I don't think there is any doubt that it was a 757-200 that struck the Pentagon...forget the videos...

[Nbadan]

You aren't a no-planer, so why do you care?

I'm just trying to prove to no-planers that they are fighting a losing battle....

[DarrinS]

I'm just trying to prove to no-planers that they are fighting a losing battle....

Unless they started putting flight data recorders (with pit voice recorders) on cruise missles.

[RandomGuy]

Does gravity not accelerate mass as it falls?

Not unless you've discovered a new law of physics

Oh that is a kodak moment.

In the rush to prove "controlled demolotion", gravity does not accelerate falling objects.

I'm addding that to my siggy.

[RandomGuy]

For the physics challenged I will break it down very very simply.

Consider the speed of a falling object accelerated by gravity. Ignore all other factors for this explanation.

At the instant it starts falling, its speed is zero. It has no kinetic energy, and no momentum.

Let it fall for one second, and the speed of that object is then 9.8 meters per second, as Dan's ill-understood expedition to wikipedia shows.

What is the speed of the object after two seconds?

The calculation is pretty simple. 9.8 times 2, or 19.6 meters per second.

The falling object was accelerated by gravity at a constant rate.

The object has fallen for two entire seconds, and we can determine the ending speed.

In each unit of time (or distance for that matter) we need to know the initial speed and the accleration, and we can find the ending speed.

Now for the part Dan can't wrap his mind around:

As the object picks up speed, the kinetic energy goes up by a squared factor.

That is, if you double the speed, you get FOUR TIMES the kinetic energy .

Triple the speed, you get NINE TIMES the kinetic energy .

Quadruple the speed, you get SIXTEEN TIMES the kinetic energy .

Now for a pop quiz for our budding physics hotshot.

Dan, how far did that object fall in two seconds?

[RandomGuy]

To help Dan finally understand how kinetic energy works, I have officially changed my avatar, for his ease of reference.

Note the variable term on the right side of the equation dan, the v for velocity.

If you double the velocity or v sub 1 is equal to 2*v sub 0

You can then get, by subs ution, (2*v sub 0) times (2*v sub 0) or to simplify 4*v sub 0

Since the mass and the "1/2" term are constants, that means that the "KE" or Kinetic Energy term on the other side is highly sensitive to the velocity of the object, since that is the term that is squared.

Hope that helps.

[Nbadan]

Oh that is a kodak moment.

In the rush to prove "controlled demolotion", gravity does not accelerate falling objects.

Why are you taking this so personal RG? you know that I meant that gravity affects objects of any mass by a ~9.8 constant on earth, I've said that over and over and over again in this thread....but go ahead and be selective... it really undermines you to anyone who has read this thread....

[DarrinS]

In my world, gravity is about 32.2 feet/sec^2.

9.81 meters/sec^2 is for Canadians, Europeans, and students.

[Don Quixote]

it really undermines you to anyone who has read this thread....

I actually can follow RandomDude pretty well. And, based on his work here, I have gained a ton of respect for him.

[Nbadan]

I actually can follow RandomDude pretty well. And, based on his work here, I have gained a ton of respect for him.

Considering your thoughts on Muslims taking over Europe that's not saying a whole lot.....