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 Seymour Butz
The answer to what?
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Utter failure to even try to discredit NIST's work is duly noted.
Keep up the good work.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Your utter failure to admit that you've been wrong, all along, that NIST never talked about those 2 pieces is duly noted.
BUT, if, as you claim, NIST just did a few tests to come to their conclusions, then it should be fairly easy to counter their explanation about what caused that thinning - yes it's in there.
So I would extend the same challenge to you - do you have anything that would discredit their statements?
Therefore, it was unkown what specific items (e.g., office furniture, office supplies, carpeting) were the sources of the corroding elements found in the scale, how long this process occurred, or at what temperature.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Utter failure to even try to discredit NIST's work is duly noted.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Well, did ya ever stop to think that maybe you never add anything to the discussion at hand?
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
NIST can't help you there, nor do I see how they ever could, given the many sources of sulfur bearing materials in the rubble.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The evidence and discussion you seek is in the referenced link. The proof is in the entire 4 pages of narrative, so it would be dumb to post the whole thing.
Originally posted by bsbray11
I'm done with you until you can show where NIST validated their truss failure hypothesis or anything else with actual testing and/or documented and verifiable calculations.
Originally posted by bsbray11
That is what's referred to as trying to "prove a negative."