Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: Martin Sheen: 9/11 Questions 'Unanswered,' Building 7 'Very Suspicious' [View all]
This started when I responded to your assertion that "Bjorkman had refuted Bazant". And then used Bjorkman's own self-serving assessment of the match to describe Bazant's dissection of Bjorkman's idiocy as "the most shameful Closure in
history". While attributing that brainless quote to one of "Bazant's peers".
I've said that Bjorkman refuted Bazant's explanation. Now, you can disagree with Bjorkman's refutal as much as you want. That doesn't change the fact that Bjorkman, in fact, presented a refutal. See? Fact. Period. His paper with his refutal was published by "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics". The same applies for James Gourley and others. At least six peer reviewd articles questioning Bazant and the official explanation were published by the same newspaper in which Bazant published his nonsense. You have a problem with that? Take it to "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics". I'm stating a fact here.
Next, imagine that I, with zero mechanical engineering knowledge, was citing Bjorkman's defense of NIST, & you, with ~40 years mech engineering experience, was championing Bazant's dissection of NIST.
Why am I supposed to believe you have ~40 years mech engineering experience? I don't know you. For all that I know, you could be Bozo. Even if you have "~40 years mech engineering experience", how the hell am I supposed to know you're in fact a qualified professional?
Appeal to authority won't work with me. Specially coming from an anonymous guy I've met a couple of times in a thread...
And, while you will go to the effort of posting cartoon characters, you will not produce a single serious answer to any of my serious arguments.
Which "serious arguments", for Christ sake? Just read your posts. You don't have "serious arguments", your argumentation basically consists in "I have a ~40 years career as a professional engineer and you are an idiot." Why should I take you seriously? In fact, you didn't present arguments - and I would expect them from a engineer with a "~40 years career". You just attacked me like a spoiled child.
(Pssst, OC. Just between you & me. Wanna know a really juicy bit of irony? Your post, that started this whole thing, to zappaman was indignantly - one might say "accusatorially" - entitled "As I expected, you have no answers."
Very nice to see you noticed that. Care to answer my question? Because I'm still waiting for one. What is the "engineering community" that supports Bazant's fairy tale?
You say "you give my opinion absolutely no value". LoL, I expect nothing else. I have zero expectation that you'll ever give my opinions any weight. After all, I'm an experienced mech engineer & the subject is "mechanical engineering". Being a Truther, OF COURSE you're never going to give my opinion any weight.
I don't buy this oversimplified binary division of "regular people vs "truthers". It certainly lacks legitimacy. That's not the reason I don't give your opinion any weight. That happens because you lost any expectation of good faith from me since your first post. I don't know if it's commons for ~40 years career engineers to start discussions by harassing, insulting, attacking and ridiculing people instead of simply presenting arguments. But, it's not common in my circle. That's why. I disagree a lot with several people in this thread that do not agree with my views regarding the official explanation for 9-11. But I do respect them and their opinions, because, well... they behave like normal human beings in conversations, not like dogs with rabies.
I was even starting to believe you were being honest about "damage control" and "starting with the wrong foot". Until I found this gem:
Everything is exactly as it should be, OC. / You say stupid Truther things. / I'll show to the rest of the readers that they're stupid. /
The universe is in order.
You're pathetically arrogant, I must tell you that. That doesn't bother me, for it feels childish and shallow. But, really, don't expect me to interact with you. I do the best I can to avoid people like you in my life. Don't see any reason why I should make any effort to have a dialogue with you.
Bye.
I've said that Bjorkman refuted Bazant's explanation. Now, you can disagree with Bjorkman's refutal as much as you want. That doesn't change the fact that Bjorkman, in fact, presented a refutal. See? Fact. Period. His paper with his refutal was published by "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics". The same applies for James Gourley and others. At least six peer reviewd articles questioning Bazant and the official explanation were published by the same newspaper in which Bazant published his nonsense. You have a problem with that? Take it to "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics". I'm stating a fact here.
Next, imagine that I, with zero mechanical engineering knowledge, was citing Bjorkman's defense of NIST, & you, with ~40 years mech engineering experience, was championing Bazant's dissection of NIST.
Why am I supposed to believe you have ~40 years mech engineering experience? I don't know you. For all that I know, you could be Bozo. Even if you have "~40 years mech engineering experience", how the hell am I supposed to know you're in fact a qualified professional?
Appeal to authority won't work with me. Specially coming from an anonymous guy I've met a couple of times in a thread...
And, while you will go to the effort of posting cartoon characters, you will not produce a single serious answer to any of my serious arguments.
Which "serious arguments", for Christ sake? Just read your posts. You don't have "serious arguments", your argumentation basically consists in "I have a ~40 years career as a professional engineer and you are an idiot." Why should I take you seriously? In fact, you didn't present arguments - and I would expect them from a engineer with a "~40 years career". You just attacked me like a spoiled child.
(Pssst, OC. Just between you & me. Wanna know a really juicy bit of irony? Your post, that started this whole thing, to zappaman was indignantly - one might say "accusatorially" - entitled "As I expected, you have no answers."
Very nice to see you noticed that. Care to answer my question? Because I'm still waiting for one. What is the "engineering community" that supports Bazant's fairy tale?
You say "you give my opinion absolutely no value". LoL, I expect nothing else. I have zero expectation that you'll ever give my opinions any weight. After all, I'm an experienced mech engineer & the subject is "mechanical engineering". Being a Truther, OF COURSE you're never going to give my opinion any weight.
I don't buy this oversimplified binary division of "regular people vs "truthers". It certainly lacks legitimacy. That's not the reason I don't give your opinion any weight. That happens because you lost any expectation of good faith from me since your first post. I don't know if it's commons for ~40 years career engineers to start discussions by harassing, insulting, attacking and ridiculing people instead of simply presenting arguments. But, it's not common in my circle. That's why. I disagree a lot with several people in this thread that do not agree with my views regarding the official explanation for 9-11. But I do respect them and their opinions, because, well... they behave like normal human beings in conversations, not like dogs with rabies.
I was even starting to believe you were being honest about "damage control" and "starting with the wrong foot". Until I found this gem:
Everything is exactly as it should be, OC. / You say stupid Truther things. / I'll show to the rest of the readers that they're stupid. /
The universe is in order.
You're pathetically arrogant, I must tell you that. That doesn't bother me, for it feels childish and shallow. But, really, don't expect me to interact with you. I do the best I can to avoid people like you in my life. Don't see any reason why I should make any effort to have a dialogue with you.
Bye.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
103 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Martin Sheen: 9/11 Questions 'Unanswered,' Building 7 'Very Suspicious' [View all]
Little Star
Nov 2012
OP
There seems to be quite an obvious discrepancy between "no-planer" claims and reality
William Seger
Feb 2013
#14
I don't need an expert to tell me that a Boeing 757 can't convert into a 20 in alluminium piece.
ocpagu
Feb 2013
#41
Didn't a turbofan powered plane go over 750 mph at less than 1000 feet back in the 1950's?
Make7
Feb 2013
#76
"Please understand that you're not the first person to have raised this poorly-supported claim"
ocpagu
Feb 2013
#70
Your inability to figure out what happened to the plane doesn't prove anything
William Seger
Feb 2013
#63
The same can be said about your inability to explain what happened to the plane.
ocpagu
Feb 2013
#69
Have you ever seen the remains of a NASCAR vehicle after hitting a wall at 1/3 the speed of this
AtheistCrusader
Jun 2013
#100
What's that have to do with your assertion that the black boxes were not found?
zappaman
Feb 2013
#85
But I said, "the only known example of a bridge collapsing in a 40 mph wind"
William Seger
Feb 2013
#36
Bazant doesn't actually use any estimate of the acceleration in his analysis
William Seger
May 2013
#98