Posted: Sep 14, 2019 6:09 am
Maybe I should drag myself out of retirement to post a summary critique of the Hulsey UAF Project for AE911Truth.
In brief it is a load of crap with results obviously fiddled to suit the needs of AE911.
It has serious errors of "big picture" of which these three are probably the worst examples:
1) Hulsey has throughout the process been making two claims - viz He would and now has proved (a) "Fire could not cause the collapse of WTC7" and (b) NIST was wrong. The first is a "global negative" claim which cannot be proved in the setting of this program - it requires every alternative collapse scenario to be falsified and he only tried a few. So all he can legitimately claim is "I, Hulsey, could not find a fire causes collapse scenario" And even that requires him to get the engineering correct - and he hasn't.
2) He has blatantly fudged parameters to make his simulation graphics more closely resemble the visual appearance of the real event. Recall that the NIST simulation is grossly exaggerated. Also remember that truthers seem to think that better visual representation means a more accurate model. Not so for a legitimate engineering model which for factors such as scaling will almost always NOT look like the real thing. Bottom line - he seems to be playing for the AE911 and truther audience. No way can a professor of engineering be ignorant of the characteristics of valid engineering models or simulations.
3) He has blatantly but without acknowledgement cut and past included the T Szamboti explanation of EPH collapse .. including the "dead give away" of at least one of Tony's high precision multi decimal place numbers. (Maybe we were not supposed to notice
) I'm not sure if I have posted it here but through the last several years of the project I've been expressing my opinion that T Szamboti was probably the puppet master and Hulsey the puppet. I'm now near certain that is true... which explains a lot of the AE911 truther style comments Hulsey makes and some of which have got into the report.
And those are only three "big picture" concerns. I could post several more kilobytes of detailed stuff - not my own work - as per my SOP I'm waiting to a number of others to do the "leg work" on the details. Call it "laziness" or "delegation"
In brief it is a load of crap with results obviously fiddled to suit the needs of AE911.
It has serious errors of "big picture" of which these three are probably the worst examples:
1) Hulsey has throughout the process been making two claims - viz He would and now has proved (a) "Fire could not cause the collapse of WTC7" and (b) NIST was wrong. The first is a "global negative" claim which cannot be proved in the setting of this program - it requires every alternative collapse scenario to be falsified and he only tried a few. So all he can legitimately claim is "I, Hulsey, could not find a fire causes collapse scenario" And even that requires him to get the engineering correct - and he hasn't.
2) He has blatantly fudged parameters to make his simulation graphics more closely resemble the visual appearance of the real event. Recall that the NIST simulation is grossly exaggerated. Also remember that truthers seem to think that better visual representation means a more accurate model. Not so for a legitimate engineering model which for factors such as scaling will almost always NOT look like the real thing. Bottom line - he seems to be playing for the AE911 and truther audience. No way can a professor of engineering be ignorant of the characteristics of valid engineering models or simulations.
3) He has blatantly but without acknowledgement cut and past included the T Szamboti explanation of EPH collapse .. including the "dead give away" of at least one of Tony's high precision multi decimal place numbers. (Maybe we were not supposed to notice
) I'm not sure if I have posted it here but through the last several years of the project I've been expressing my opinion that T Szamboti was probably the puppet master and Hulsey the puppet. I'm now near certain that is true... which explains a lot of the AE911 truther style comments Hulsey makes and some of which have got into the report. And those are only three "big picture" concerns. I could post several more kilobytes of detailed stuff - not my own work - as per my SOP I'm waiting to a number of others to do the "leg work" on the details. Call it "laziness" or "delegation"