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.

 

The Heiwa Challenge

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Heiwa
 


UNLIKE the grim and awful reality of the HOLOCAUST, your alleged "challenge" is a joke.

And YOU are a fraud. Period.

I do not believe it to be discourteous in any way to point out the obvious, when it is apparent to all involved here. By a person's OWN ADMISSION!!!





posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Heiwa
 


UNLIKE the grim and awful reality of the HOLOCAUST, your alleged "challenge" is a joke.

And YOU are a fraud. Period.

I do not believe it to be discourteous in any way to point out the obvious, when it is apparent to all involved here. By a person's OWN ADMISSION!!!



Sorry, I and my Challenge are quite real and you apparently belong to the Holocaust deniers bigots. But I give you one CHANCE. Show me a real structure A that is destroyed when you drop top C on it as per rules of my Challenge ... and I'll give you Euro 10 000:-!



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Per your own challenge its 3.7 meters OR LESS! You should read your specifications a little closer.


I guess it flew right over your head that dropping it from less than 3.7m only gives you less kinetic energy upon impact. Remember how KE = PE when you figure the gravitational potential energy using a given height for it to free-fall and a given mass? What's your point? That you can accomplish the challenge without using all the advantages he threw at you to use? You can't accomplish it at all.


Originally posted by hooper
The requirements of the challenge have, of course, been met and exceeded in spades


What a clever linguist we have. "met and exceeded in spades." You put more effort into using flowery language than you do saying anything that makes sense. How have the requirements of the challenge been met, hooper? Explain what has passed its requirements.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Heiwa
 



Sorry, I and my Challenge are quite real and you apparently belong to the Holocaust deniers bigots. But I give you one CHANCE. Show me a real structure A that is destroyed when you drop top C on it as per rules of my Challenge ... and I'll give you Euro 10 000:-!


Its been done.

Calling persons holocaust deniers because they called you out on your phony challenge is detestable.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


It's simple, really.....Anders Bjorkman's alleged "challenge" is completely irrelevant, IF you wish to imply (as he is obviously) it has any bearing or relationship to the collapses of the WTC Towers.

BUT, that is exactly the type of game he is playing. Disingenuous, deceptive and designed to fool those who are gullible enough to fall for it, without a glance askew...(I know how you like the "flowery" language...)


He has already admitted it is meant more as a mocking, derisive (in his opinon 'indictment' attempt) at the events of 9/11, specifically the collapse of the Towers. By attempting to (falsely and disgustingly) compare people who understand the reality of 9/11 to "holocaust deniers", his crediblity goes right out the window --- I would think that should be obvious.



Frankly, I don't care....because regardless of a person's training, and life experience, mental illness cares little and can strike with no regard to a person's previous reputation or stature...so, whilst I care not a whit about the man, Bjorkman; as a fellow human I have to hold at least a little compassion for his plight. Much as one would 'feel' for Don Quixote, if he had been a real person....

...Google Anders Bjorkman and you will learn a lot....



Now....for examples of the REAL world, and buildings that collapse, without explosives, and demolish merely by having an area in the upper-to-mid-range compromised.....(much like was seen on 9/11)...




edit because of the darn fingers...."Out, damn'd spot!" ('Shakesbeer'...?)







[edit on 22 July 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 



What's your point?


That the "challenger" is not even familiar with the points of his own challenge so how can he sit in judgement of the enteries?

All points of the challenge have been met. One video did that quite simply and the events of 9/11, specifically the collapse of the tower, proves it beyond a doubt. If the challenger wants to submit that the collapse of the tower on 9/11 did not qualify because he imagines that other forces were involved then let him pay up and then he has a new challenge - prove 9/11 involved the purposeful use and placement of explosives and then maybe he can win back his money.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by dudly
 


What a load of bollocks!!

You take this seriously? Anyone who does doesn't understand physics, mass, inertia, momentum...scaling it down isn't a valid comparison...


Here, look, this is what they actually say!


It can be any size!


Utterly moronic, and not worth your time and effort to post. You'd think even high school physics students would see it's ridiculous, in the extreme....


No, it is not moronic. It is strange how many people think they understand physics.

The smaller it is the more difficult it will be to make collapse. Of course the bigger and heavier it is the stronger it will have to be to support its own weight. I didn't try the challenge. I built a model that would arrest because that is what I knew the real building should have done. Assuming the collapse would even start which it never should have.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

psik



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper


All points of the challenge have been met.


LOL! Pls re-submit relevant info as per rules and the cheque is in the mail.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 05:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heiwa
LOL! Pls re-submit relevant info as per rules and the cheque is in the mail.


I'm not sure how much more clear I can be. Your credit is not good with me. Cash or Paypal.

Thank you!

S. S.

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Six Sigma]



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by psikeyhackr
 


Well
.... thanks, I needed a chuckle.



First video? That goes into the vault when they create one for "Spectacular Fail of Concept Idea" category.

Or, the "He Just Doesn't Get It" sub-category.

(Sorry to be harsh...it IS your video, I realize; but it failed the applicability test. It has NO relevance to the Twin Towers' construction, it does not accurate re-create the dynamics...not even close as analogy...at all).


Second one (NOT yours, I hope?) is well off the mark, in so many ways....BUT, since it's on YouTube, it must be 110% 'true', right? Just 'cause some bloke says so? (Some bloke whose assumptions are flawed to begin with, therefore draws incorrect conclusions...)

The inanity of those people is astonishing.....



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heiwa
You see, my Challenge is impossible to win, as no structure A of any kind can be crushed into rubble B by a small part C of A. It is physically impossible. I have shown it and explained why on my website (but I was taught it at university already around 1968).


You have shown no such thing. The top section of building doesn't need to overcome the entire building mass. It only needs to overcome the structural integrity of the floor immediately below it. I have seen other people attempt to use the "a single one ounce domino can't knock down ten pounds of dominos" argument, and it didn't work for them either.


Anyone suggesting the opposite, like Bazant & Co, are worse than Holocaust deniers and similar bigots.


Dude, you tried to be cute but you only wound up with egg on your face. You failed with this stunt. Deal with it.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Calling persons holocaust deniers because they called you out on your phony challenge is detestable.


I just feel sorry for you! But, pls be my guest. My Challenge (topic!!) is still open! Meet it, and I'll pay you Euro 10 000:- . I doubt you can, like all Holocaust deniers.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Dude, you tried to be cute but you only wound up with egg on your face. You failed with this stunt. Deal with it.


LOL² ! You are Off Topic and probably mentally disturbed or worse. Here we discuss my famous Challenge. What are you trying to contribute?

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Heiwa]



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Heiwa
 


" You are Off Topic and probably mentally disturbed or worse. "


The same could be said for someone who continues to assail other posters with the tired , guttural , neanderthal smear-campaign known as 'holocaust denier' .

Simply because they disagree with you .



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heiwa

Originally posted by hooper

Calling persons holocaust deniers because they called you out on your phony challenge is detestable.


I just feel sorry for you! But, pls be my guest. My Challenge (topic!!) is still open! Meet it, and I'll pay you Euro 10 000:- . I doubt you can, like all Holocaust deniers.


I don't get it - where are you coming up with this "Holocaust Denier" stuff? Just because some person may think that your so-called challenge lacks sincerity how does that make one a Holocaust denier? Are you saying that the presentation of your alleged challenge is so self-evident that denial of the shoddy logic in its premise is equivalent to denial of a historical reality? That's just a wee bit presumptious on your, wouldn't you say?



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heiwa
LOL² ! You are Off Topic and probably mentally disturbed or worse. Here we discuss my famous Challenge. What are you trying to contribute?


Good grief, what are you, twelve years old? We showed your "one ounce domino can't knock over ten pounds of dominos" argument to be undefendable, and we showed your condition of "prove the Titanic could sink without using an iceberg as proof" argument to be intellectually dishonest, which is as on topic as on-topic gets. Your gleefully calling other people mentally disturbed and Holocaust deniers before running away giggling may make you feel better about yourself, but it does nothign to deminish the fact that you didn't think out this cute little game of yours all the way through. You can't accept the fact that it blew up in your face and it only makes YOU look bad, not me or anyone else.

I said it before and I'll say it again- if you need to rely on silly games like this to keep your conspiracy stories alive then you might as well go find another conspiracy to wallow in now. I doubt other conspiracy people here I.E. Bonez are going to ever be championing your cause.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heiwa
LOL² ! You are Off Topic and probably mentally disturbed or worse. Here we discuss my famous Challenge. What are you trying to contribute?


Mentally disturbed?? Pot... meet kettle!

These are quotes from you Andres......


"the pictures or rather the deformations look strange to me. Hollywood manipulations?"
- in regards to the photographs at the WTC

and your claim of WTC-7 demolished in a vacuum:


"Next question - how to create vacuum at bottom of WTC7? You have removed all personnel and NYFD (not witnesses) evidently. What do you do next? Right - your remove the air! And BLOUFF - the WTC7 is pulled!

Quite basic, really. "

forums.randi.org...

NIST personnel does not exit Andres???


"I have (incl. Sunder) + Comments, etc. They never reply! Confirms my suspicion that they do not exist. No real people can write such a rubbish report! "

Really... you wrote this:


"If several DIME 250 kgs bombs were planted in WTC by criminal perpetrators as part of an inside job, you only need one at every 3rd floor i.e. total say 30 or 40 to get the expected result!! Quite a lot 7500-10000 kgs but easy to smuggle in in paper boxes one at a time. Quick installation job, thus. "



10,000 kgs of explosives in paper boxes.....



Yes folks.... Heiwa is a no-planer!!


"As the plane impact is a fake, the jet fuel cannot have been arriving with the plane at 500 mph and stopped inside the tower on floor 82 within 0.3 seconds. So if jet fuel was burning in the tower, it must have been put there some other way, e.g. using the elevators beforehand transporting it up to floor 82. That's how I would have done it if I were a criminal terrorist carrying out 9/11. "



There are many more fantastic claims made by Mr. Björkman.....

but I think the point has been made.



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
You are confusing them Anders.....your scientific approach really has them baffled..they have no idea how to respond so choose their childish playground name-calling en masse in a vain attempt to silence you...

When I see this tactic employed(just the same tactic unsuccessfully used against tiffany in LA...) I see it it as an obvious sign of desperation, attempting "character assassination" rather than disproving you, which would be the smart thing to do...

They clearly cannot reproduce the impossible physics witnessed on 9/11, so resort to belittlement in a hope of deflecting from the actual topic....

This is standard practice whenever they are in a corner and cannot disprove a fact of physics which unfortunately for them, are fixed and pure.

Obviously you are correct.....if you werent they wouldnt have sent the Attack Dogs out.....

Nice challenge...your money is safe Anders.....



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by benoni
 


" Character Assassination " ?

Would this also include calling people 'holocaust deniers' , simply because they disagree with you ?

You scored really big with that lame attempt at reversal .



posted on Jul, 23 2010 @ 11:50 PM
link   
According NIST WTC 7 report the constant acceleration of the roofline is 32.196 feet/s² or 9.814 m/s² between time 1.75 and 4 seconds when the roofline velocity increases from 11.57 to 84.01 feet/s or 3.52 to 25.61 m/s! This acceleration is equivalent to gravity acceleration = 100% free fall drop. The average speed during this time is 14.56 m/s and the total free fall displacement is 32.77 meters. This makes controlled demolition the OFFICIAL position of NIST.
Anyone who does not understand this, simply does not understand what free fall drop means. Free fall drop means NOT DOING ANY WORK INCLUDING DESTROYING STRUCTURE BELOW AT ALL - OTHER THAN FALLING.
It evidently means that 32.77 meters height of structure below must have been destroyed completely for the roofline to free fall drop.




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join