|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:17:37 GMT -5
How does Manzella account for all the MATT system data he posted showing torso acceleration through impact?
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:19:59 GMT -5
He just answered that question.
Why do you keep avoiding the AMM3D data since you've known about it for awhile?
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:24:19 GMT -5
He just answered that question.Why do you keep avoiding the AMM3D data since you've known about it for awhile? His answer is a lie. You can see the rotational data in the screenshot.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:28:52 GMT -5
So why do you ignore the AMM3D data?
Silence is a good enough answer for me. Brian wasn't the one that came up with the kinematic sequence concept. But Kelvin came up with the bullshit multiple firing theory based upon Jamie which is debunked by AMM3D.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:29:36 GMT -5
He just answered that question.Why do you keep avoiding the AMM3D data since you've known about it for awhile? His answer is a lie. You can see the rotational data in the screenshot. Great picture! Only you and Tapio could possibly make those numbers out.
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:30:09 GMT -5
So why do you ignore the AMM3D data?Silence is a good enough answer for me. Brian wasn't the one that came up with the kinematic sequence concept. But Kelvin came up with the bullshit multiple firing theory based upon Jamie which is debunked by AMM3D. I don't believe it. You have no proof AMM3D is right.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:30:31 GMT -5
Keep the focus on MATT Jeffy becuase you know AMM3D blows up your guy. I suspect another research a thon with AMM3D and Tapio!
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:31:24 GMT -5
So why do you ignore the AMM3D data?Silence is a good enough answer for me. Brian wasn't the one that came up with the kinematic sequence concept. But Kelvin came up with the bullshit multiple firing theory based upon Jamie which is debunked by AMM3D. I don't believe it. You have no proof AMM3D is right. So video is the ultimate proof? You have no proof that AMM3D is wrong (except Tapio of course, but he isn't saying how). The world is flat, your eyes prove it.
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:32:04 GMT -5
His answer is a lie. You can see the rotational data in the screenshot. Great picture! Only you and Tapio could possibly make those numbers out. Brian said there was no rotational data provided by the Motion Reality analysis of Jamie. There clearly is. So he lied. If I could have read the data I wouldn't have needed to measure it off the screen.
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:33:25 GMT -5
I don't believe it. You have no proof AMM3D is right. So video is the ultimate proof? You have no proof that AMM3D is wrong (except Tapio of course, but he isn't saying how). The world is flat, your eyes prove it. Tapio raises valid questions. You are just blabbering.
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 12:40:21 GMT -5
Oh, and Manzella never answered the torso acceleration question raised by the MATT data, which is, I believe, what drove lia off the reservation.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jan 13, 2013 12:46:06 GMT -5
Oh, I understand. There are two systems that say the AMM data is wrong. How do you know which of them is right? How does Kelvin account for the AMM3D data? Bigger question since that's a pillar of his thoughts. Nobody uses Tapio's system so how you count that as one is ridiculous. Don't you idiot understand that laws of physics tells us that those measurements CAN'T BE RIGHT!!! Everyone who understands even a bit about that sees it right away, but not this one true believer, who got nothing else than believes... nothing else. No understanding, no knowledge.. just true believe to his god who can't make mistakes. I just wait that someone wakes up in his forum and ask two or three important questions. That whole thread will be deleted right after that.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jan 13, 2013 12:57:00 GMT -5
Why don't you raise the questions great Oz? Basic logic tells me you're biased and your machine isn't stabile.
So Jeffy extrapolated his numbers from video? Now I know why the data was so screwed up. Like father (Kelvin) like son (Jeffy).
Keep the focus away from AMM3D Jeffy. Good strategy.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jan 13, 2013 13:06:36 GMT -5
Why don't you raise the questions great Oz? Basic logic tells me you're biased and your machine isn't stabile. So Jeffy extrapolated his numbers from video? Now I know why the data was so screwed up. Like father (Kelvin) like son (Jeffy). Keep the focus away from AMM3D Jeffy. Good strategy. All you say just tells us you are stupid. And our device is very accurate. Being stable got nothing to do with measurement results, but for you those things can be hard to understand.. as well as everything else. If you can't see what is wrong with that data, no one can help you. It needs only little bit of thinking and asking if they can be like that. Just told it to Jeffy and I believe he's now rolling on floor and laughing ;D
|
|
|
Post by jeffy on Jan 13, 2013 14:21:20 GMT -5
Why don't you raise the questions great Oz? Basic logic tells me you're biased and your machine isn't stabile. So Jeffy extrapolated his numbers from video? Now I know why the data was so screwed up. Like father (Kelvin) like son (Jeffy). Keep the focus away from AMM3D Jeffy. Good strategy.You have no idea whether or not the data was "screwed up". I put the focus on AMM3D over a year ago right here at Richies's! Tapio raised good questions then and none of them have been addressed by anybody. Why should I suddenly change my mind just because another set of suspect data is posted? richie3jack.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=2981And why don't you ask Manzella about the MATT data that vindicated Tapio? richie3jack.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=3941
|
|