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.
Only the mathematically and scientifically incompetent would make such an assertion. And it is simply a bald assertion since you have demonstrated not even an incipient capacity to undertsand or challenge it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
NIST won't release a comprehensive model of the collapse and their excuse is "because it can jeopardize public safety"...So by that logic, who cares, right? The math is there for all to see ANYWAY!!
You have been pointed to a comprehensive model of the collapse. You have made no effort to demonstrate that you understand it.
That is currently the end of this particular argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
So either you or NIST is full of crap. But that's a false dilemma and not one that works in your favor.
Yes it is a false dilemma. Those are not the only two options.
Only the mathematically and scientifically incompetent would make such an assertion. And it is simply a bald assertion since you have demonstrated not even an incipient capacity to undertsand or challenge it.
You have been pointed to a comprehensive model of the collapse. You have made no effort to demonstrate that you understand it.
That is currently the end of this particular argument.
Yes it is a false dilemma. Those are not the only two options.
If NIST's reasoning is that they won't release their model for concern of public safety...how is this sufficient? How is that logical if there is a mathematical model, in plain view, that is right and exact? Anybody can use this model, no?
If NIST's reasoning is that they won't release their model for concern of public safety...how is this sufficient?
Don't know. Don't care. I do not depend on NIST for my understanding of the collapse of the WTC towers. Whatever their concerns are with their own model is entirely uninteresting to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
How is that logical if there is a mathematical model, in plain view, that is right and exact? Anybody can use this model, no?
Don't know. Don't care. I do not depend on NIST for my understanding of the collapse of the WTC towers, and do not particularly care what their reasoning is for not releasing something (assuming for no good reason that actually is their reasoning in the first place).
Yep. Anybody who understands it, at least.
So, pages back you've lauded NIST for their "amazing" detailed and comprehensive report. Now, you don't care about their reasons for not releasing their model? If you hold their report in such high regard then certainly you would be bowled over by their simulation of the collapse.
If their math is correct....they should have no problems whatsoever demonstrating it. Why don't you email NIST and let them know the math is infallible and you can help them release the model.
Because anybody that can understand the model to begin with, and provided they wanted to use such knowledge to terrorize, they'd have no problems putting the model together themselves, right? Kind of like you just did...you got it all figured out.
Are we in the presence of rarefied air here? I'm beginning to feel like I am.
So, pages back you've lauded NIST for their "amazing" detailed and comprehensive report.
It is in fact a brilliant piece of work, completely adequate to proving their thesis. Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
Now, you don't care about their reasons for not releasing their model? If you hold their report in such high regard then certainly you would be bowled over by their model of the collapse.
I am confident that I would, yes.
It is still superfluous for anybody who already understands the engineering issues involved,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
If their math is correct....they should have no problems whatsoever demonstrating it. Why don't you email NIST and let them know the math is infallible and you can help them release the model.
Why would I bother? Seriously? What possible interest would I have in influencing NIST to release anything more than they have already released?
You see... here in the real universe there is a concept called "adequate to the task." And smart people understand that there is a point of diminishing returns beyond which any additional investment of resources is pointless... especially when the people making the demands have already demonstrated that they're not capable of profiting from the release anyways. It would be like reciting Tennyson to a pool of trout. That alone renders your suggestion idiotic.
So... on the one hand such a release is incapable of swatting the tendentious gnats of the truther movement, and on the other hand could serve to actually increase the risk for Americans if the models got in hands of terrorists (who are already proved to be smarter than truthers by several orders of magnitude). Not really a tough decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
Because anybody that can [i][b]understand[\b][\I] the model to begin with, and provided they wanted to use such knowledge to terrorize, they'd have no problems putting the model together themselves, right? Kind of like you just did...you got it all figured out.
Just as anybody that can understand a nuclear warhead can use such information to build their own, or anybody who understands a fertilizer truck bomb, or how to make ricin, or sarin gas.
It is still idiotic to expect an organization chartered to protect us from such threats to publish the blueprints.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
Are we in the presence of rarefied air here? I'm beginning to feel like I am.
Oh... trust me. Truthers suck the oxygen out of just about every conversation in which they engage. That you are only just now starting to recognize it is a reflection of the difference in oxygen demand by regular brains and the truther versions.
They released the structural drawings of WTC 7 (which had inaccuracies) and all parameters used for the sim.
Close enough. Certainly enough to settle the issue for anybody who understands the tiniest bit of physics and engineering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
Is there a shortage of structural engineers in the middle east? I am sure there are plenty willing to offer their services.
I'm sure there are too. Why would you wish to help them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin_Muzik_NJ
They were trying to avoid scrutiny...that's the long and short of it.
Don't be idiotic. Why would anybody try to do something that is on its face absurd? Truthers are a known quantity. You guys could scrutinize your own elbow and be convinced it was conspiring against your knee.
Science is now in the hands of the police, for safe keeping!
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.
