Search results

What makes anyone think NIST or the government edited this? It looks like an in-camera edit, meaning the camera was stopped and then someone restarted it when the east penthouse collapsed, and the timecode picked up where it left off. The collapse didn't happen at 17:03, it happened at 17:20.

I dunno, y'all. As an informed layman, I tell people that each building got destroyed by a descending debris shield that blew away everything in its path. How much detail does the general population need to know? It's like, people generally accept that an object from space did away with the...

Wikipedia is just based on whatever can be reliably sourced. If for example an engineering/technology magazine did an update on the Towers' collapse mechanism and spoke to experts, then you could use whatever is said in that article to improve the Wikipedia article (provided the magazine is...

I encourage improving the Wikipedia article, but any changes/improvements to the section need to be rigorously referenced to either a reliable secondary source (e.g. a paper in a peer-reviewed general engineering journal) or a notable author with relevant expertise (e.g. a tall-building engineer...

It would be interesting to know if the conclusions are any different for researchers who live along the Eastern Seaboard vs. elsewhere!

For me, the criticism of science dies the moment people suggest that science actually does that, and that science is a religion.

This is an interesting discussion. Generally regarding conspiracy beliefs, I'd say "kernel of truth" doesn't apply if the belief is merely an alternative explanation of real observations. I agree, it renders the phrase meaningless. So, there's a kernel of truth to Massive Election Fraud (there...

I would agree with previous commenters that this isn't a kernel of truth. It's taking a kernel of truth (someone's physical appearance) and falsely interpreting that truth. The person's physical appearance and the lizard-people belief are entirely unconnected by anything true. As soon as someone...

You should have said you're a high school teacher. Apparently very impressive.

The article mentions "the numerous photographs of what appear to be columns cut by shaped charges." There's only numerous photos of the one column like that, right? Not columns? "Occam’s razor suggests that the BBC had some foreknowledge of an unprecedented global event." Okay, that just made...

I love how he immediately challenges Marc's qualifications -- Who are you and how are you qualified to challenge an architect with zero engineering training? Oh, you have engineering training? Since you won't say exactly what kind, this will be my last reply. :rolleyes: Of course this is a...

Believers positively swoon over advanced degrees and impressive job titles (provided those "experts" are supporting their beliefs). There's nothing actually impressive about a Master's degree or Ph.D. other than the person's endurance for staying in school and writing an extremely narrow thesis...

Funny how believers behave so consistently across the board, for example using same language patterns. Those guys in suits "instantly disappeared"...the tic-tac UFO exhibited "instantaneous acceleration"...The support for Building 7 was "instantaneously removed" and the building entered "instant...

The problem with discussing quantum mechanics is that you can't make any definitive, non-interpretational statements beyond how the Schrödinger equation predicts a system will evolve. I've always thought the "blind men and the elephant" is a great analogy here. One blind man says, "Clearly there...

:rolleyes: My point stands regardless.

If someone wishes there to be yellow in this image, they aren't going to zoom in to check. They'll just believe their eyes.

I agree with FatPhil that this is an unjustified assumption. First, the angle is changing so rapidly in Gimbal (compared to GoFast for example), that even assuming the angle is correct within one frame leaves an uncertainty of 5–10%. Second, I suspect that the angle indicator reflects the angle...

It was?

Sure, but I don't think we're seeing the actual object, we're seeing the heat released by the object, plus the glare resulting from that heat.

For a little while I was pretty intent on the object in Gimbal being Venus — its angular diameter is in the neighborhood of 50 arc-seconds, and Venus' angular diameter varies between 10 and 66 arc-seconds. You can also find some amateur IR photos of Venus that include significant glare. I've...