WTC dust

[Oystein]

DEW is not my theory, and I won't support it other than to point out that it hasn't been debunked effectively (to my knowledge).

What is your theory? Do you have any?

Put up or shut up. Debunk her theory, and I'll drop it like a stone. Just don't tell me gravity did it, because I don't like to laugh that hard this early in the morning.

What is Mrs. Wood's theory? She says "Directed" "Energy" "Weapons" did it, but she explicitly refuses to say what direction, what type of energy, what amount of energy, what source of energy, and what kind of weapon.
In other words, she makes no claims abot DEW at all - the term is wholly undefined, and so is her theory. There is no theory, and hence there is nothing that can be debunked.



However we have placed boundaries on the amount of energy and its possible locations. These turn out to be waaaaaaaay outside the reach of today's (known) technology. Mrs. Wood asserts, without proof, that unkown technology exists that must exceed the capabilities of known technology by at least a factor of 100,000.
It is impossible to disproof an unknown assertion.

 

[Oystein]

I've interviewed dozens of eyewitnesses, some of whom are my closest friends. They talk about the dust. Some of them saw what looked like a plane. Some of them did not...

What do you conclude from the full body of eyewitness testimonies thus related first-hand to you? Was there a plane, or was there no plane?

 

[Oystein]

...
The energy weapon theory, which I'm willing to drop instantly as soon as it is effectively debunked, says that the energy came from the material itself. In other words, the weapon tapped into the energy that is contained within the material and used this energy to destroy the WTC buildings and damage others. You wouldn't have to pay ConEd.

I'm guessing the closest thing in fictional work that describes the weapon is the "flux capacitor" used in Back to the Future. Remember how the professor throws a banana and a beer can inside it in order to generate 2.1 gigawatts of power? Something like that.
...

He didn't write that, did he? OMFSM!!!

WTC Dust, what kind of energy are you talking about "that is contained within the material"? What physical principals would be applied to tap it?
If that technology existed, why isn't somebody getting filthily reach by putting all those darned oil sheiks out of business, by tapping into the energy contained in material?

Oh, and what is your proof that technology exists and was employed on 9/11?

 

[Thunder]

He didn't write that, did he? OMFSM!!!

told you it wasn't worth it.

 

[Oystein]

Are you Judy Wood's monkey?

It occurred to me about 15 minutes ago that WTC Dust might be Judy herself

 

[DGM]

It occurred to me about 15 minutes ago that WTC Dust might be Judy herself

Well at least I'm not the only one.

 

[WTC Dust]

Provide calculations showing that the pile should have been higher or admit that you have nothing.

OK. How about a very simple example that is only approximately true, just to get you into the ballpark?

Let's ignore the walls of the WTC and just pretend that the WTC was made up of floors only. 4 inches of concrete. Let's say 8 inches of steel beams. 4+8=12.
12X110=1320 inches, or 110 feet.

Piled up perfectly with no gaps or imperfections, just the flooring would have been 110 feet in the sky. That's 9-10 stories tall, which would have been visible above a ten foot fence from two blocks away 3 days after the attacks.

All this is silly to talk about, because floors didn't fall. Dust that had very recently comprised the material that made up a floor was falling, but nothing like an intact floor was ever falling during the final destruction of WTC 1 and 2. "What used to be a floor" was falling, but so was everything else that used to make up the World Trade Center.

The reason you had such a short pile at Ground Zero is because almost the entire building became dust. No, they didn't sell the steel to China. What used to be steel spread out over lower Manhattan in the form of particles.
Not much was left to pile up (compared to the mass of the buildings).

 

[cntdrv55]

The reason you had such a short pile at Ground Zero is because it was spread out over 16 acres.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[alienentity]

The reason you had such a short pile at Ground Zero is because almost the entire building became dust. No, they didn't sell the steel to China. What used to be steel spread out over lower Manhattan in the form of particles.
Not much was left to pile up (compared to the mass of the buildings).

No. Not true. In fact false!

'A shipment of scrap steel from New York's collapsed World Trade Center will arrive in Shanghai tomorrow, according to media reports. The steel was bought by Shanghai Baosteel Group Corp. and several other domestic mills, which are always eager to buy scrap metal.
"Baosteel Group, the nation's largest steel firm, has purchased 50,000 tons of the scrap steel from 'Ground Zero,' the ruins of the September 11 terrorist attack, at no more than US$120 each ton, according to yesterday's Beijing Youth Daily. ... Most of the scrap will be recycled into ingots, but part of the relics will be molded into WTC souvenirs, the paper said.

"Another shipment of 10,000 tons of scrap from the WTC arrived in India earlier this month, reported Shanghai Morning Post. The metal will be melted down and recycled into kitchenware and other household items, the paper said.
"India bought its lot at US$120 per ton from the New Jersey scrap processor Metal Management, which purchased 40,000 tons of the debris at an auction held by the New York City government. Dealers estimated that the WTC disaster created more than 300,000 tons of scrap metal."'

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/china_baosteel.htm

50,000 tons to China, 50,000 tons to India. That's 100,000 tons accounted for and bought right there.

So of course you're wrong, but what's worse, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

But wait, there's more!
'The Port Authority estimates more than 200,000 tons of steel was used in the World Trade Center's construction. Of that total, more than 168,000 tons has been salvaged from Ground Zero thus far, according to the New York City Office of Emergency Management.'

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46411,00.html

 

[dtugg]

OK. How about a very simple example that is only approximately true, just to get you into the ballpark?

Let's ignore the walls of the WTC and just pretend that the WTC was made up of floors only. 4 inches of concrete. Let's say 8 inches of steel beams. 4+8=12.
12X110=1320 inches, or 110 feet.

Piled up perfectly with no gaps or imperfections, just the flooring would have been 110 feet in the sky. That's 9-10 stories tall, which would have been visible above a ten foot fence from two blocks away 3 days after the attacks.

All this is silly to talk about, because floors didn't fall. Dust that had very recently comprised the material that made up a floor was falling, but nothing like an intact floor was ever falling during the final destruction of WTC 1 and 2. "What used to be a floor" was falling, but so was everything else that used to make up the World Trade Center.

The reason you had such a short pile at Ground Zero is because almost the entire building became dust. No, they didn't sell the steel to China. What used to be steel spread out over lower Manhattan in the form of particles.
Not much was left to pile up (compared to the mass of the buildings).

You clearly have no idea how the WTC was constructed. There were no steel beams in the floors. Why should anybody listen to anything you say if you can't even get the basics right?

You also fail to take into account the fact that the WTC was built in a "bathtub" multiple stories deep and the fact that the debris was spread over an area much larger than the footprints of the buildings.

You fail, twoofer.

 

[alienentity]

You see, WTC Dust, where you have made a terrible error is making a blatantly false statement, in your first major offering of 'evidence'..

Just to reiterate, you falsely stated (or lied) 'No, they didn't sell the steel to China'

If your approach is going to rely on blatant lies, then you truly waste everyone's time and are a farce.

Shame on you for being so dishonest about basic facts. What a disgrace to honest inquiry...

ETA I'm putting you on ignore, can't be bothered to engage in your nonsense any further. Goodbye.

 

[WildCat]

The reason you had such a relatively short pile at Ground Zero is because almost the entire building became dust did not fall in its own footprint but was scattered over 8 square blocks.

ftfy

 

[WTC Dust]

Unless you explain how this could be done (which you nor Judy Wood can, of course,) there really is nothing to debunk. If you really cannot understand that, there is no possible way that you're research scientist.

You've got it exactly backwards.

I'm not out to prove a darn thing. I'm out to discover something. My activities are that of a research scientist. I am attempting to account for previously undescribed phenomena.

Anyone who still believes an airplane crash can turn a steel building into powdery dust is naive, gullible, not good at science, something. Most people who watched those videos said something like, "Wow! I didn't know an airplane crash could do that to a building! I did not expect that to happen!"

Me, too, only I didn't change my mind. I didn't say, "Well, the videos show a plane, and everyone else seems to accept the plane crash theory. They must be right." I had more confidence than that. There is absolutely nothing about an airplane crashing into a steel building that can cause all that dust. Fire, ok. Damage, yes. Dust? No.

 

[BigAl]

The reason you had such a short pile at Ground Zero is because almost the entire building became dust. No, they didn't sell the steel to China. What used to be steel spread out over lower Manhattan in the form of particles.
Not much was left to pile up (compared to the mass of the buildings).

You are wrong on all points.

I watched the steel beams being hauled out on flatbed trucks for weeks after 9/11.

 

[Oystein]

...
It will be interesting to see if our research scientist proposes a beam that initiates a nuclear reaction in the iron. That should be good for a Stundie.

Looks like he already did:

There is a lot of energy contained within matter itself. It's not like you'd run an electric cord and power the device using ConEd. The energy for the destruction of the WTC didn't come from an airplane crash or explosions, but it came from somewhere.

The energy weapon theory, which I'm willing to drop instantly as soon as it is effectively debunked, says that the energy came from the material itself. In other words, the weapon tapped into the energy that is contained within the material and used this energy to destroy the WTC buildings and damage others. You wouldn't have to pay ConEd.

I'm guessing the closest thing in fictional work that describes the weapon is the "flux capacitor" used in Back to the Future. Remember how the professor throws a banana and a beer can inside it in order to generate 2.1 gigawatts of power? Something like that.
...

 

[BigAl]

You've got it exactly backwards.

I'm not out to prove a darn thing. I'm out to discover something. My activities are that of a research scientist. I am attempting to account for previously undescribed phenomena.

Anyone who still believes an airplane crash can turn a steel building into powdery dust is naive, gullible, .

You never saw the pile, did you?

 

[Oystein]

told you it wasn't worth it.

Too late

 

[dtugg]

You've got it exactly backwards.

I'm not out to prove a darn thing. I'm out to discover something. My activities are that of a research scientist. I am attempting to account for previously undescribed phenomena.

Anyone who still believes an airplane crash can turn a steel building into powdery dust is naive, gullible, not good at science, something. Most people who watched those videos said something like, "Wow! I didn't know an airplane crash could do that to a building! I did not expect that to happen!"

Me, too, only I didn't change my mind. I didn't say, "Well, the videos show a plane, and everyone else seems to accept the plane crash theory. They must be right." I had more confidence than that. There is absolutely nothing about an airplane crashing into a steel building that can cause all that dust. Fire, ok. Damage, yes. Dust? No.

No way you're actually a scientist. Well, I guess your hero Judy Wood really has a PhD so anything is possible. But she is mentally ill. What is your excuse?

 

[WTC Dust]

Yep. Bananas and beer cans did it. Kudos, WTC Dust, you da top joker man.

If you were attempting to account for previously undescribed phenomena, you would utilize every resource available.

Tell me, what do you know that can turn billions of pounds of steel into caustic dust?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

credit where credit's due

You've got it exactly backwards.

I'm not out to prove a darn thing.

Gotta hand it to you, WTC Dust. You have succeeded in not proving a darn thing.

My activities are that of a research scientist.