reply to post by -PLB-
-PLB- : Excellent. I see that you figured out yourself how your "atomic clock time-stamp" for those images in the OP was actually a bunch of
non-sense, and NIST is actually saying that there can be errors. Good job
Another one (constantly the same ones) that does not want to read what is written, or probably does not have the faintest idea how to read and
interpret this kind of references correctly :
You linked to my screenshot from the NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, WTC Investigation report, and you majestically failed to understand, or i.m.h.o. faked to
misunderstand why I did the fat black line underlining of that text in paragraph 3.1.1. Photograph Tools, the first screenshot by me, in your above
quoted text of mine.
My WTC7-NIST+LDEO-timing-nr3 link above :
---- Recalling that uncertainties for times of the major events based on the television broadcasts are estimated to be 1s, it can be seen from
Table 3-1 (linked to by me above) that the two aircraft impact times derived by NIST and LDEO now agree within the combined uncertainties
Come on, prove to us that you know where to find these combined uncertainties.!
Or go waste your time on another forum, where you can impress members with quasi intelligent but baseless posts, insulting everyones intelligence all
the way to the exit.
As usual, you do not give any solid explanation why you posted those few sentences, you do not even dare to defend your own words and give us pointers
about what you insinuate, your only hope when posting baseless drivel like that above post, is that a few gullible and easily distracted readers will
now scratch their heads and ask themselves if its worth their time to read a bit more into my posts, since such a superior debater/poster as you act
to be, seems to be so sure that the OP is a raving idiot, in a somewhat more polite expression, but nevertheless, I must be an idiot to waste so much
of my last years on earth on this 9/11 seismic subject.
Are you really believing that your tactic will convince anyone here?
You guys must be quite desperate, it starts to leak from your keyboards.
You are getting nervous, and desperate, since you know that you can not win a dispute with me over this subject. And if you think you can, bring it on
Facts, arguments, but not these constant insults, and not a single serious argument.
You people are seriously wrecking this forum.
And giving this 9/11 board a web wide bad reputation, post by insulting post.
For those that don't want to waste anymore time on these types of charlatans, lets give you the hints to find the combined uncertainties NIST worked
1. Look it up in my above posted REFERENCES post, in my own remarks in my WTC7 collapse seismogram 5a. It's clear as glass noted on the left and
right borders/sides of the LDEO timeline printed in there :
Right side : Error margin +/- 1 sec max. for visual of video/photo (by NIST)
Left side : Arrival of signals at LDEO : 17 sec.
Left side : Delay Error margin +/- 1-2 sec (by LDEO)
That's a maximum combined uncertainty of 2 seconds. In case that it was in reality for the Cianca photo that max error margin, the onset of that
first pack of peaks is still starting somewhere 17 seconds back on that graph from the point where the needle started to write the Cianca event. The
first distinct oscillation of the needle.
And the onset of the huge peaks starts about 7 seconds in front of the same Cianca event on the graph.
"".....and collapse of WTC7 were determined with 1 sec accuracies.""
""It is not only important to assign relative times for photographs and videos, but also to provide an indication for how accurately they are known.
For this reason, timing uncertainties were estimated for each time determination and included in the databases.""
The Cianca photo was a very accurate timestamped one, since that moment in time was recorded not only by him, but by many video cameras from private
filmers, but even more from news crews. As you can read in my screenshots, when there is one particular well known event filmed or photographed by
many cameras, then the whole row of photos from one single camera, has a calculated error margin which is the lowest possible, under 1 sec error
margin. The more measurements related to an atomic clocked event you possess, the better your fault margin for THAT event. In this case, the first
3. Read the NIST report screenshot I posted with paragraph number 3.1 and 3.1.1 and its text in it, again, but realize yourself that for example all
the 115 Cianca photos NIST had received from him, were ALL 102 seconds off from the real actual time on 9/11, but their software package re-calculated
with one single button press, for all of them their real atomic clock connected times.
See my : NIST Nicolas Cianca timings-2
See my :WTC7-NIST+LDEO-timing-nr2
(read the by me blacked out text lines : ---- generally less than 1 s.)
(---- estimated uncertainty is 1 s.)
See all my timing related drawings and screenshots.
And then he and his ilk will still act as if they are right, without ever offering a single coherent sentence to refute the text in my NIST
Or bring a coherent argumentation to the table to refute the obvious conclusion you have to arrive at when you start to understand what is laid before
you, in so many sentences already :
That some huge external force was introduced, starting 17 seconds before the eastern penthouse roof was moving a single inch in Manhattan.
Which had nothing to do with any kind of acceptable gravitational collapse onset.
First came the explosion(s) that cracked the columns from inside, then the cutter charges that accompanied and initiated the, also by NIST reluctantly
admitted, 2.3 seconds free fall.
Anyone that understands the conditions for a free fall, will know that you have been tricked, into starting endless wars and endless greed.
It is coming to every street now, the poor are flooding the system.....
Your masters have abandoned you, they bought huge penthouses or villas in Dubai, Hong Kong, Jakarta, ranches in South America, they relocated to safe
hiding places, because they know they left America and Europe with one single possibility left, bleeding its youth and elderly into poverty.
You see it being done to you, and you do not act.........? You are the next victim, but you are conditioned to keep your hopes high, till it hits you
personally, at last, frontal in the face.
reply to post by Reheat
Good god, do you ever stop insulting every intelligent poster here?
To address you with your own baseless drivel, you are the only one who constantly collect pieces of horse manure and post it here.
There's not one single rebuttal in all your insults.