It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
tezza.....200 pounds is 29 gallons.
200 pounds!!! Wow....that's one minute of fuel! Big deal!
Originally posted by weedwhacker
If NIST made a small error in their calculations, then they made an error....a trivial error!!
Originally posted by HLR53K
200 / 62,200 = .00322. That's a .322% error. Sure computers make errors and it should have been checked, but seriously, it's a 1/3 of a percent.
Originally posted by tezzajw
It is not a trivial error.
The NIST model has created 200 pounds of jet fuel from nothing.
It is not possible to create matter from a model. This flaw should have been detected by the algorithm, but it wasn't.
Somewhere in the model's code, part of the algorithm is wrong. This is very clear, as the output results do not match the input parameters. Given that the algorithm is wrong, then ALL other calculations that are determined by the NIST model are questionable.
The NIST computer model is wrong.
1) It gave incorrect results for the jet fuel dispersion.
2) It gave incorrect results for the airplane debris dispersion.
3) It did not predict that an engine would exit the tower.
People who believe the official story can not take the NIST report as gospel, when it is wrong. W R O N G.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Well, tezza....why not try to dissect the comuter model then, eh?
BTW....Melbourne is a beautiful city.....can I come live with you?????
Originally posted by HLR53K
I do agree that it's strange that the model added 200 lbs. of fuel. I wonder if the equations were interative?
Originally posted by weedwhacker
NO, I haven't been to Melbourne in the last decade....sorry to hear it's not as nice as I remember....but, I will still try to come visit, regardless!!!!
Originally posted by weedwhacker
don't you think the weight of the antennae on the roof contributed, along with the added weight of the floors above the damage point? (i.e., the impact pont).
Do you not realize that fire tends to burn upwards? I'm talking about flames here, of course....lots of JET-A was introduced into the buildings....
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Originally posted by bsbray11
And they have always refused to model the global collapses or offer any insightful information as to how th eyprogressed all the way to the ground in the manner that they did.
It's less than truthful to state that they have refused to model the global collapses.
They have stated from the beginning that the global collapses COULD NOT be modelled due to computer limitations. The chaotic nature of the collapse would overwhelm Big Blue, from what I understand.....
This has never been refuted.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
it stands to reason, that the fires, from the atomized fuel, and the compustibles within the building, sustained the fires.
Originally posted by jfj123
Ultima claimed that a lot of people supported him. .
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jfj123
Ultima claimed that a lot of people supported him. .
Thats really mature, seems more like trolling.
Ultima claimed that a lot of people supported him. I just thought I'd give you a chance to express your support if you indeed give it.
I'm just trying to be fair to ultima I understand if you don't want to answer the question.