Jowenko and his Van Gogh perceptions

[Undesired Walrus]

On the basis of this post http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2708699#post2708699, which I happened to laugh out loud at,
A Van Gogh expert will recognize a Van Gogh painting, but maybe if he sees a Rembrandt painting he is not really sure about it.
I suggest we come up with our own analogy, such as...

A Brain Surgeon will recognize a brain, but maybe if he sees a vagina he is not really sure about it.

Stephen Hawking will recognize the theory of evolution, but maybe if he sees a creationist argument he is not really sure about it.

[T.A.M.]

The analogy, as you have pointed out, is flawed. It assumes that Jowenko works in a field where what they do is unique to the individual...it is not. Demolition is a pretty standard fair, and while I am sure each firm has their own techniques, in terms of planting the charges, etc...the Demolition with collapse, is essentially the same, following the same principles...

TAM:)

[Mince]

On the basis of this post http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2708699#post2708699, which I happened to laugh out loud at,

I suggest we come up with our own analogy, such as...


Jowenko knows what he is talking about with WTC 7, because he agrees with us. Jowenko doesn't know what he is talking about with WTC 1 and 2 because he doesn't agree with us. Do these clowns listen to themselves speak or read what they post?

[T.A.M.]

yes that is exactly what they are trying to say, but it doesnt work. The fact is, that CONTROLLED Demolition occurs in essentially ONE standard way, the differences being minor, and not effecting the overall result.

1. Building support structure strategically weakened
2. Charges laid strategically.
3. Charges detonated
4. Building falls down.


TAM:)

[Civilized Worm]

A paranoid nut will recognise the government lying, but may not recognise the government telling the truth.

[Trifikas]

Jowenko knows what he is talking about with WTC 7, because he agrees with us. Jowenko doesn't know what he is talking about with WTC 1 and 2 because he doesn't agree with us. Do these clowns listen to themselves speak or read what they post?



This has always been the one that bugs me with the Jowenko argument. Since Jowenko believes that 1 & 2 weren't Purposly Demolished, You would have to assume 7 wasn't either. If the boogeymen were planning on taking out 7, and claiming it was debris from 1 & 2, you can't rely on a chaotic and unpredicable "natural" collapse, and would HAVE to put something in the towers to eject material to 7.

To me, at least, that makes Jowenko's observations self-contradicting, and dubious at best.

[boloboffin]

The reason Jowenko thinks 1 and 2 are simple collapses and 7 CD is because 7 falls from the bottom, while 1 and 2 fall from the top. I'm holding out hope that Jowenko will look at the final report and realize his error, because I haven't seen that he's examined the situation beyond the videos he's seen and looking at the floorplans.

But that's just me. Knuckleheads abound in every profession.

[gumboot]

The key thing about demolitions is that the ONLY difference between a building collapse and a controlled demolition is the controlled bit. A given building can only really collapse one way. It is dictated by physics and the building's structure. But as with any chaotic event of large scale, random events and variations can have significant effects. All a controlled demolition does is use the laws of physics and knowledge of the structure and the use of demolition techniques to control the collapse initiation and therefore where debris falls.

Aside from this, a controlled demolition and a collapse are exactly the same.

-Gumboot