Boston said:
Yah I think thats were a lot of disagreement lies. To me they are arguing the invisible
Stop you there. There are some things visible that aren't being seen.
and acting like its definitive, even though those invisible things that "may" have occurred don't lead to an accurate depiction of the collapse.
In the case of the billiards break, it may not be necessary to depict perfectly what happened.
That accurate depiction being the test of the hypothesis, and it failed, in both models.
And here is a case in point. It matched the timeline, and there was a small error towards the end of the simulation. That's like 100%, and then 95%, which you are calling a
fail. Serious, man, you
cannot be
being.
Its kinda odd they chose to focus on arguing something for which there is absolutely not one shred of physical evidence. How can you even respond to that within a reality based discussion.
Hey, there was hours of video and pictures of a f------g great pile of rubble. What
are you talking about?
I think we should stick to discussing what we can see happening
I'm happy to discuss what you think you see happening because our perceptions differ so greatly. You really
do not see what I
do see, I
get that. This isn't a time to
stop talking.
rather than what some folks would like to assume happened before or after the events for which we do have some evidence.
Yup, the pent house collapsed, why, no idea, how far down past the parapet wall did it go, no idea.
That just shows where you, in particular, cannot live with what you know it must mean. It's an abrogation of your stated responsibility to discover truth.
But we can see a kink develop nice and perfectly before all four corners go nice and perfectly.
And this your get-out clause. They
lied, and the simulation
failed.
It pretty clear the collapse of WTC1 occured over several floors.
Then it is quite clear that any calculation using a single floor drop is a complete waste of time and effort, isn't it?
This also applies to WTC2. It looks like the far side fell further faster than the side we see, otherwise it wouldn't have been able to take a 20 degree tilt. And
the side we see falls two floors.
Truthers are ill-advised to try to "calculate" any of this, when they have trouble actually seeing what there is to be actually seen in the first place.
It's that "six blind men asked to identify an elephant" scenario.