Physics drama in /r/badscience as conspiracy theorist shows up to discuss Newton's Third Law and how it applies to the WTC collapses. (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
96 ups - 27 downs = 69 votes
128 comments submitted at 17:37:09 on May 9, 2014 by Thaddeus_Stevens
I like how you have used the word conspiracy theorist to instantly try to discredit me.
It is hardly drama, it was someone being abusive to someone else for no apparent reason other than he disagreed with a comment.
>I really hope so, all the secrecy implies, is that i can walk into a NYC skyscraper with a box of matches and a few sheets of A4 paper and completely annihilate a highrise building
http://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/comments/23i86e/nistschosenmethodologyisnotmerelyfallacious/cgy1rz6
That's you. That's you being so oblivious to your own arrogant stupidity. Structural engineer for 20 years? With what, fucking Legos?
Edit: holy shit. Every other comment in your history is "stop ad homineming me" and "fallacy this fallacy that". Do you just keep a page open to reference fallacies so you don't have to defend your bullshit?
You seem to have forgotten the most important one, the fallacy fallacy. You failed, mate.
Edit: read these in reverse to discover my revelations
http://www.reddit.com/r/flashlight/comments/1muo29/someofmybudgetcollection/ccct55k
>The 502b and Sipek 86 (the mingin ones) are my pocket torches, they come everywhere with me, on me all day (Plumber/Gas Engineer) The 502b is water tight to 10 meters at least
Yup, now you're a plumber too.
http://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/comments/1u8z23/after8monthsofbwfneedadvicefor2_new/cefoigg
>Good question and i am not sure tbh, my increased strength has made aspects of my job easier (gas engineer) and i no longer have the arms of a 9 year old girl.
Wait, so now you're a gas engineer? But you just said you were a structural engineer! Man, you're so busy!
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1wy6i8/nisthidtheirwtc7computersimulationdata/cf6p0xl
>Are there any buildings in the US that are built to the same standard/design as the WTC7 building? if so, shouldn't every single one of them be immediately pulled down, as they are putting thousands of lives at risk.
Should someone with a masters in engineering and 20 years as a chartered structural engineer have a way of looking into this information? Or are you waiting for the YouTube video about it to come out?
http://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/comments/201jah/debunk_this/cg04wn8
>Put it this way, in the UK and all of Europe, universities that teach in the relevant subjects, architecture/engineering etc are told to completely ignore events that happened that day i.e. three steel framed buildings imploded due to fire because the official version is physically not possible, it goes against known and well understood fundamental laws of physics.
Not once in your comment history have you provided proof for this, though you've so far mentioned it at least ten times.
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/20otmi/exampleofothertallskyscraperswhich_burned/cg5t7or
>Complete rubbish and you know it, even NIST says this can not be correct, it is not sound science my friend.
So you believe NIST even though your other comments say you don't? How odd.
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/20otmi/exampleofothertallskyscraperswhich_burned/cg5nzn9
>I have a masters in engineering from a UK uni, you are either not from any where in UK/Europe and/or are just being deliberately deceptive for what ever reason. It is common knowledge, in fact a well known inside joke is showing the collapse of WTC7 to demonstrate a well done controlled demolition.
Wherein you say you have a masters in engineering, but nothing about structural engineering.
http://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/comments/20zcah/911officialscenariowhataboutthepools_of/cg9cj8p
>It either was trolling or you are staggeringly misinformed on a biblical scale, take your pick.
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2154q1/pakistanshelteredbinladenproveitthe_obama/cg9r701
>The bloke was dead before the year 2003, even main stream media in the UK printed this shit over 5 years ago he was kept alive by the US propaganda machine as a bogeyman to justify the war on terror, anyone with a brain cell can see through this now.
So you are allowed to insult people, but people can't point out when you're being ludicrous? Also, holy shit dude, you seriously lap up every fucking theory someone throws at you, don't you. Your constant screaming that "NIST IS NOT REAL SCIENCE THEY DONT REAL POP MECHANICS IS NOT REAL SCIENCE THEY DONT REAL FREE FALL FREE FALL COLLAPSES ALL DEFIED LAWS OF PHYSICS" yet you can't explain a single thing or way in which any laws are actually violated, is seriously detrimental to anyone believing you're more than some lonely hack that can't form a coherent thought.
You're not a structural engineer, nor a "chartered" one at that. Highly doubt you live in the uk as well. You're just an internet blowhard that likes to feel victimized because you have no friends and no life and need something to give you attention.
I'm done giving you attention. Have fun dying alone and miserable. Buhbye.
Fucking #rekt
The pros of being unemployed and getting irrationally invested in internet idiots, really.
Whatever the reason, that was fucking magnificent.
you should meet with /u/halfascientist
I approve of this guy.
>Sayeth one guy: "'It's boring so I'm not getting in to it' is a really shitty rebuttal." THAT'S BECAUSE IT ISN'T A REBUTTAL. IT'S ALSO A SHITTY LAMP. IT ISN'T A LAMP. IT ALSO MAKES A POOR WINTER COAT OR HOUSE PET. NOW WE'RE LEARNIN' STUFF. SWEET CHRIST I HATE BRINGING UP SOMEBODY'S TIRESOME CAUSE AND THEN HAVING TO GODDAMN TALK ABOUT IT.
I will always love this quote.
I appreciate your work. rekt doesn't even due it justice.
> Gas Engineer
The fuck's a gas engineer?
The people who go around installing and fixing various types of boilers.
Usually they're called HVAC engineers in my experience.
Damn, that was good.
I like how he didn't even bother to reply.
How could he? I mean he got utterly destroyed.
> I have a masters in engineering from a UK uni, y
Do UK universities even offer masters programs? I thought the masters was a US degree?
I'd have no idea. The only college I ever looked into in uk was an international art university, which turned out to be a degree mill with no job placement and absolutely appalling ratings from auditors.
They do. Although they differentiate between research masters (basically a pre-phd) and taught masters (your typical masters program). Both still give you the same diploma, though. I have a MSc from a UK university. Still have to do the "equivalency" thing when you get back to the states, though.
Well, why were you being abusive to /u/wcspaz? He was only trying to correct your stupidity.
Which bit did you think was stupid, i am happy to be corrected, whats with the abuse though?
They already explained it to you (and better then I could), so I'm not wasting my time explaining it again.
Yes, they offered their opinion, but what is your opinion? considering you are the one calling me stupid for some reason, you must have one, formulate your own opinion because it is not an open and shut case.
If you didn't want to be called stupid, you probably shouldn't have tried to disprove physics with a YouTube video.
Are you suggesting videos are not valid forms of education? or that you disagree with the video? or something else?
Yo, can you take a picture of your degree? Did you go to phoenix?
He's been a structural engineer for over 20 years, you are unlikely to teach him anything, he does calculations staggeringly more difficult than anything presented here and he does that every day of his life.
Top. Men.
More Comments - Click Here
Why do I get the feeling this is going to become a thing.....
> Did you go to phoenix?
Nope, Imperial College, it is in the UK.
Hahaha. I'm an Imperial grad.
More Comments - Click Here
I don't get how /r/conspiracy doesn't realise that it's liars like yourself that gives them a bad name, not outside influence
The video vastly oversimplifies the system to the point where he is treating it like it were a physics problem aimed at a 15 year old student, rather then an honest examination of the actual system.
Not once did he discuss how the buildings were structured in that lecture. Something which is a huge factor in the collapse of the building, particularly one that big. Buildings are designed to support weight in certain ways, if the weight rapidly shifts the way the building supports itself may no longer support the same amount of weight. Say if something crashed into the side of the building. Dismissing the fire as being insignificant is stupid too. Even if you believe the fire couldn't possibly be hot enough to melt the steel(I disagree) heating the steel to high temperatures can dramatically reduce it's ability to support large amounts of weight. Which can lead to collapses etc.
There are hundreds of factors at play in the collapse and he is too dismissive of them in this "analysis". A large building does not act the same as two small free bodies, there are a lot more forces at work. It's a complicated system and if you want it is deserving of more study. Just throwing your hands up and saying it's a conspiracy I have no answers just a lot of hunches if we is not enough to convince me of anything other then YOU don't know what happened. If he wants to be taken seriously then he should get a paper on 9/11 published and peer reviewed by the scientific community. I remain unconvinced he is offering a genuine perspective on the 9/11 tower collapse, rather just another conspiracy theorist with no genuine research that will hold up to a peer review.
I don't understand why you think youtube videos are valid forms of education. Anything that doesn't directly cite a non-discredited peer-reviewed source (preferably multiple sources) is highly suspect, and should be taken with a gain of salt. This includes most youtube videos, blogs, and all those other opinion pieces you guys love to cite.
> I don't understand why you think youtube videos are valid forms of education.
Of course they are valid forms of education, it depends on the content obviously, but you can learn all sorts from video, from learning to play the guitar to learning new languages.
Just because you disagree with the content, doesn't mean it is an invalid learning medium
Kind of missed the key point of /u/Coman_Dante's comment.
>Anything that doesn't directly cite a non-discredited peer-reviewed source (preferably multiple sources) is highly suspect, and should be taken with a gain of salt.
Your reference to learning a language or how to play an instrument has hee haw to do with youtube videos offering unsourced claims about a field.
My opinion is I agree with their opinion.
you offered your opinion, they discredited it by offering facts (just facts, not your facts, my facts or their facts - facts)
Consider holding a twenty pound weight above your head. Not so hard. Now consider catching a twenty pound weight dropped from ten feet above your head. Also you must fully decelerate it over a distance of a few inches. Much harder.
This is why buildings don't collapse in chunks. The force needed to hold the top of the building in place is orders of magnitude smaller than the force needed to decelerate the falling building.
> I like how you have used the word conspiracy theorist to instantly try to discredit me.
Pretty much, yes. There's a litmus test to help me determine whether I consider someone a 'conspiracy theorist' or simply of different opinion—and that thread was that test.
It's who you are though, you ignore facts and continue on blindly, an /r/conspiracy theorist.
I read your responses in the linked conspiracy thread, you ignored quite a bit and those who told you the truth got downvoted for it.
A theory is just that, a theory. The NIST report in regards the buildings, is a system of ideas intended to explain something, a theory, just because i do not fully agree with it doesn't make me a mad conspiracy nut job, it is nothing more than critical thinking.
People were labeled tin foil hat conspiracy nuts because 10 years ago they were saying the government were spying on all it's citizens, look how that turned out.
I do not blindly believe everything the government tell me, for good reason, that doesn't give people on the internet carte blanche to verbally abuse me because they disagree with that.
Where exactly is this verbal abuse? All anyone said in that thread is that you seem to be woefully misinformed about the basic concepts. And they said it in a much nicer way than many people would've. And you're all "STOP BULLYING ME!!1!1!" You're coming off as hysterical.
Also, instead of dicking around in here, why don't you start working on proving /u/WideLight wrong.
> Also, instead of dicking around in here, why don't you start working on proving /u/WideLight wrong.
Don't hold your breath. 5:1 odds (at least) that it never happens.
That seems a tad low. Here, I got this.
5:1 he responds but refuses to address your question because of more or more various bullshit reasons.
25:1 he responds with what looks like sounds points, but a cursory examination shows that they're riddled with problems.
50:1 he responds with sound, thoughtful evidence which engenders a rational conversation that is enlightening for all involved.
Maybe that last one should be a bit higher. Anyhow, let me know if anybody wants to make book.
What odds are you offering on him using a different unsourced youtube video? I want to put my money on that.
>A theory is just that, a theory. The NIST report in regards the buildings, is a system of ideas intended to explain something, a theory
That's not what the word theory means in this context. It's a system of ideas backed up by reproducible experimental evidence.
The NIST report is not valid science journal, it is not peer reviewed and they have not done any experiment that is reproducible, no test or data can be performed in another setting or be reproduced by another individual obtaining the same result as NIST, because their are non to be done.
My point still stands.
Congrats, you just outed yourself as the world's biggest bullshitter. Your trophy is in the mail, but be wary because the trophy might be a false flag.
Those are some mighty big claims. Care to back any of them up? I'll just remind you of /u/WideLight's challenge because it's remarkably similar to what I'm asking of you.
>I have a standing challenge for you, which you'll I'm sure never attempt. Provide each of the following to support your claims:
>* At least 3 instances of, as you say "unsupported conclusions" in the NIST reports. Complete with citations with report and page numbers and an explanation of why it is unsupported and what could be done to support or disprove.
>* At least 3 instances of, as you say "technical and logical inconsistencies" in the NIST reports, complete with citations of report and page number as well as any corroborating evidence to support the claim that they are inconsistent.
You are fucking delusional. The NIST report is backed by the American Society of Engineers among other recognized engineering groups. All of their research and conclusions are backed by citations. 4 of their researchers won NOBEL FUCKING PRIZES. And here you are saying
>The NIST report is not valid science journal
It sure as hell is more valid than some 16 year olds making a snazzy youtube clip and screaming 'cover up'.
You're insane. I hope, for your sake, you're less than 18. I can't believe there are real adults like you who are so close minded in the world right now.
But don't you know he's European? His history shows that he thinks all Americans are stupid and fed lies. Uk is superior for him.
> The NIST report is not valid science journal, it is not peer reviewed...
And the YouTube video was?
> And the YouTube video was?
A video.
Are you asking me a question?
You're questioning the validity of a source, then providing a source that doesn't even follow your own guidelines
Yeah but it's different.
> People were labeled tin foil hat conspiracy nuts because 10 years ago they were saying the government were spying on all it's citizens, look how that turned out.
No, they weren't call tin foil nuts. Ten years ago most people knew it was going on and didn't care. I don't know what persecuted world you lived in but that is a flat out lie in order to make /r/conspiracy sound like they actually know what they're talking about.
Tin foil nuts would be the moon is a hologram, fake moon landing, crop circles, etc. Those I would consider tin foil nuts 10 years ago.
>I do not blindly believe everything the government tell me, for good reason, that doesn't give people on the internet carte blanche to verbally abuse me because they disagree with that.
Calling you a conspiracy theorist when you subscribe to /r/conspiracy is not verbal abuse. Get over your victim complex.
>A theory is just that, a theory. The NIST report in regards the buildings, is a system of ideas intended to explain something, a theory, just because i do not fully agree with it doesn't make me a mad conspiracy nut job, it is nothing more than critical thinking.
I was talking about how you used the NIST report to show how they claim pancake theory doesn't work. Then say there must be some added element, which usually implies heavily that you mean controlled explosives. Which if you read the NIST report says they also disagree with the idea of controlled explosives used. So if you're going to use the NIST report, use it at least to do some research on the subject.
I also meant how you used the Empire State building as an example then it was stated how the size difference in planes and the fuel capacity are extremely different to a point where comparing them continues to show your ignorance.
The people who pointed out both those things received no rebuttal from yourself, let me guess "you're just asking questions" right? Or are you flat out ignoring the facts handed to you?
I don't even need to get into the bad science thread, I'm just using your own shitty conspiracy thread.
Government spying has pretty much been an open secret since forever. You think they weren't spying during the Cold War? What about during the second world war?
Are you really going to follow people around to every meta subreddit that makes fun of you? Because there's a lot of them. Two down, lots more to go.
Where should we go next? /r/YouGotTold? /r/AskEngineers? /r/ThePopcornStand?
I am subscribed to this subreddit, have for over 8 months.
Doubt it. Nowhere in your entire history is there a single comment ever in an SRD thread. I should know: I just read your entire history.
What were you reading, here is my posting history..
Data for the last 859 comments (MAX 1000)
Subreddit |Posts |Percentage
--------------------|--------------------|-------------------- /r/conspiracy | 289|33.64%
/r/911truth | 83|9.66%
/r/unitedkingdom | 45|5.24%
/r/television | 39|4.54%
/r/SubredditDrama | 31|3.61%
/r/formula1 | 30|3.49%
/r/technology | 29|3.38%
/r/worldnews | 28|3.26%
/r/buildapc | 23|2.68%
/r/undelete | 23|2.68%
/r/wicked_edge | 22|2.56%
/r/AskReddit | 19|2.21%
/r/funny | 12|1.40%
/r/pics | 11|1.28%
/r/flashlight | 11|1.28%
/r/bodyweightfitness | 10|1.16%
/r/BritishTV | 10|1.16%
/r/badscience | 9|1.05%
/r/IASIP | 8|0.93%
/r/britishproblems | 7|0.81%
/r/WTF | 7|0.81%
/r/pcmasterrace | 7|0.81%
/r/drunk | 6|0.70%
/r/tech | 6|0.70%
/r/todayilearned | 5|0.58%
/r/DIY | 5|0.58%
/r/videos | 4|0.47%
/r/conspiratocracy | 4|0.47%
/r/gifs | 4|0.47%
/r/Fitness | 4|0.47%
/r/IAmA | 3|0.35%
/r/ukpolitics | 3|0.35%
/r/gaming | 3|0.35%
/r/AthleticGirls | 2|0.23%
/r/Documentaries | 2|0.23%
/r/bestof | 2|0.23%
/r/technews | 2|0.23%
/r/UKPersonalFinance | 2|0.23%
/r/privacy | 2|0.23%
/r/ArchitecturePorn | 2|0.23%
/r/BitcoinMining | 2|0.23%
/r/Bitcoin | 2|0.23%
/r/BuyItForLife | 2|0.23%
/r/AskMen | 2|0.23%
/r/YouShouldKnow | 2|0.23%
/r/DoesAnybodyElse | 2|0.23%
/r/MMA | 2|0.23%
/r/sex | 2|0.23%
/r/childfree | 2|0.23%
/r/cordcutters | 2|0.23%
/r/showerbeer | 1|0.12%
/r/castiron | 1|0.12%
/r/ReinstateArticle8 | 1|0.12%
/r/Intelligence | 1|0.12%
/r/firstworldanarchists| 1|0.12%
/r/dadjokes | 1|0.12%
/r/chemicalreactiongifs| 1|0.12%
/r/news | 1|0.12%
/r/PrettyGirlsUglyFaces| 1|0.12%
/r/NoStupidQuestions | 1|0.12%
/r/Plumbing | 1|0.12%
/r/gameofthrones | 1|0.12%
/r/HighlightGIFS | 1|0.12%
/r/wikipedia | 1|0.12%
/r/Futurology | 1|0.12%
/r/aww | 1|0.12%
/r/RoomPorn | 1|0.12%
/r/hardbodies | 1|0.12%
/r/slowcooking | 1|0.12%
/r/explainlikeimfive | 1|0.12%
/r/WatchItForThePlot | 1|0.12%
/r/InternetIsBeautiful | 1|0.12%
/r/MorbidReality | 1|0.12%
/r/conspiratard | 1|0.12%
/r/malefashionadvice | 1|0.12%
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/userhistorybot USERNAME
Every one of those listed comments is from this thread, mate. If there were others, they were indistinguishable from the rest of your truther comments.
Jesus, that list told me more that I wanted to know...
Do you make posts staggeringly more interesting than anything presented here and you do that every day of your life?
Nobody has to attack you to point out how fucking mental you are. You do a damned good job of it yourself.
What's telling is how, when your false science was confronted in that thread with real science, you couldn't back yourself up and immediately played the victim card.
You're either a. A troll, or b. Another in a long line of conspiracy theorists that couldn't argue their way out of a wet paper bag because the wet paper bag is probably a hologram that accepts the official story.
Get bent, fuck off, have a nice one.
You're obviously wrong about the whole 9/11 thing, but what's irking me now is that you're completely wrong about what constitutes an ad hominem.
An ad hominem is a type of red herring. It's when you bring up something about your opponent that is irrelevant to the subject and try to force the conclusion that he is wrong.
People pointing out that you are ignorant, as in this comment:
>> Your reply here and the bulk of the thread I linked to in the OP are rife with text-book examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect. You know so little about what you're talking about that you're not even able to recognize how little you know.
... is absolutely not an ad hominem, it's just an observation (and an accurate one).
People insulting you and calling you stupid is not an ad hominem.
Stop calling out logical fallacies you are incapable of recognizing, OK?
> Stop calling out logical fallacies you are incapable of recognizing, OK?
He has been a logician for over 20 years, you are unlikely to be teaching him anything, he solves logic problems staggeringly more difficult than anything presented here and he does that every day of his life.