Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Occam's Razor is about as simple as a concept can get.
Which probably explains your incessant attempts to use it so "hammerfistedly".
Occam's Razor DOES NOT absolve naive, whining debunkers in any way, shape or form. The coincidences surrounding the event are insurmountable. It's a conspiracy.
Occam's Razor is about as simple as a concept can get.
Then why do you seem to have so many problems describing it correctly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
The coincidences surrounding the event are insurmountable. It's a conspiracy.
If that were actually the case, you would be able to provide some kind of evidence of such. To date, you have provided absolutely nothing but paranoia, hearsay and complete falsehoods.
I can only think of 2 buildings over 1,000 feet tall in the entire world that have ever had a plane flown into them, and they both collapsed, no other examples to contrast this with and suggest that the design, materials, interior explosives or construction of the building had anything to do with it.
You people are so imaginative.
Simply model the north tower with 5 stories removed, 91 thru 95. That is more damage than airliner impacts and fore could possibly have done.
If 15 stories dropped 60feet could not destroy 90 intact stories then the problem is resolved.
Before 9/11 scientists could do computer simulations of kilometer wide asteroids impacting the planet at 25,000 mph. But we are all supposed to belive this skyscraper collapse simulation cannot have been done long ago.
That is one reason why this 9/11 Affair is such a joke.
Computers everywhere getting more powerful and cheaper and this trivial crap cannot be resolved.
Scientists can't talk about planned obsolescence and economists can't compute what every nation loses on the depreciation of automobiles every year. So much intellectually trivial junk left unresolved. Jet planes flying across the country at 500+ mph for 50 years and we are supposed to believe measly skyscraper collapses can't be completely analysed and explained in detail if they were possible.
Duh, we don't have the computing power to simulate a skyscraper at less than 200 mph. Yeah Right!
Quote:
In the most recent 100-million-cell calculation, the teraflops used 8,192 of its 9,000 processors. The entire calculation lasted 18 hours. Sandia has done similar calculations on its high performance computers, including a 54-million-cell simulation of a comet striking the ocean. In 1994, Crawford and Sandia scientist Mark Boslough accurately simulated what would happen when Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 plunged into Jupiter's atmosphere. Months later, the world's astronomers watched the Sandia-predicted event unfold in real life through the Hubble space telescope.
Then why do you seem to have so many problems describing it correctly?
Quote:
Occam's razor is the logical principal that states that*one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed, or when it's put in its "simplest" terms:*the simplest explanation is the best one.
Quote:
The*razor*states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate.*
Occam's Razor!
Of course, the simplest explanation is there are WAY too many coincidences for it to be just a "coincidence".
Get ready for it.....because that's
OCCAMS RAZOR!!
Omgzzzzz really? See how that works?
Quote:
if that were actually the case, you would be able to provide some kind of evidence of such. To date, you have provided absolutely nothing but paranoia, hearsay and complete falsehoods.
I wonder why that is?
Because you are content with letting everything zing off of you? That could be one reason.
Occam's razor is the logical principal that states that*one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed, or when it's put in its "simplest" terms:*the simplest explanation is the best one.
Exactly. That means that a building being destroyed after a 767 airliner hits it at 500 MPH is far more likely to be the truth than a secret legion of hundreds government agents stealthily burning down the towers using a magical form of thermite that gives off neither heat nor smoke, especially when there is no proof that a secret legion of agents nor a magical thermite compound exist in the first place.
This is the part where you dance around your complete lack of proof while repeating "Occam's Razor!" another half dozen times or so.
I think we can safely declare this topic closed once and for all.
It's funny how both sides keep saying the other side has "NO evidence" even when they both lay out evidence.
You're absolutely right. But this exact phenomenon alone is why there needs to be a balls-to-the-wall independent investigation. But this cultivates the thought...would any investigation that could possibly incriminate our federal government EVER see the light of day.
I think the absolute "debunkers" have virtually lobotomized themselves to escape any possible epiphany. The dismiss even the [i]thought[\I] of such a reality.
No amount of physics or mathematical formulas, equations, and redrawn scenarios will be able to accurately depict what happens when you fly a 747 into the side of one of the world's tallest skyscrapers.
There really is no way to to write a formula or accurately predict what exactly will happen.
The north tower consisted of thousands of components. The exact behavior of every component can never be predicted.
But if other forces than airliner impact and fire were involved in the destruction of the towers then any simulation which does not contain those forces will deviate considerably from what was observed on 9/11. That would be PROOF that there were other forces.
And that is the problem for people who prefer to BELIEVE the Official Story.
The deviation from what airliner impact and fire could do is far too obvious in the video and that is what makes the 9/11 Affair so ridiculous. Engineering schools should lose their accerditation over this but they are integral parts of the social structure now. This society cannot function without science and technology. So the problem is the average person does not know enough about science.
Not being able to see the relevance of the distribution of mass down the towers is pathetic.
Of course, the simplest explanation is there are WAY too many coincidences for it to be just a "coincidence".
By definition, anythings that happen at the same time are "coincident."
Sometimes they are mere coincidence... i.e. not connected to each other by a chain of causality.
None of the coincidences of 9/11 are mere coincidences.
The simplest explanation is that the events of 9/11 were caused by a terrorist attack performed by 19 Arab hijackers under the control of Al Qaeda.
There is no alternative explanation that is less than two orders of magnitude more complex... or that can withstand the most minimal critical scrutiny.
The simplest explanation is that the events of 9/11 were caused by a terrorist attack performed by 19 Arab hijackers under the control of Al Qaeda.
There is no alternative explanation that is less than two orders of magnitude more complex... or that can withstand the most minimal critical scrutiny.
It is the simplest from the perspective of human actions.
But humans do not control the Laws of Physics?
It must be explained how airliners weighing less than 200 tons including 10,000 gallons of fuel can destroy buildings over 400,000 tons in less than 2 hours and make them collapse straight down in less than 30 seconds.
Any conspiracy theory which cannot account for that is garbage and does not come close to satisfying Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation which accounts for the facts is most probable. It does not matter if it involves the simplest human action and people do not like it.
There is no escaping the fact that skyscrapers must hold themselves up so the distribution s of steel and concrete must be taken into account in any collapse analysis.
psik
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
