• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WTC dust

Status
Not open for further replies.
WTC Dust said:
This is the JREF forums, and clairvoyance is frowned upon here. Please don't claim to know what other people know. It makes you seem like a believer in the paranormal.
Click to expand...

When idiots make grossly incorrect statements, it is easy to infer their ignorance without having supernatural powers. For example, when you said the floors of the WTC were made with eight inch steel beams, you demonstrated your extreme ignorance about the construction of the WTC.

No steel beams in the floors? Hahaha! Wrong.
Click to expand...

Nope. Zero. The floors were lightweight concrete poured on a steel pans supported by lightweight trusses.

Now that you have confirmed that you are completely ignorant about the construction of the WTC, do you think that sane people should listen to anything that you say regarding the subject?
 
Last edited:
Lyrandar said:
Okay, let me turn this one back on you. Is there anything you can think of, any type of evidence or any specific points, which would qualify as proof that the DEW theory is false?

Incidentally, my primary problem with Dr. Wood is that she relies heavily on arguments from incredulity. She posts random observations from 9/11 on her website and claims that there is no way that plane crash and fire could cause them. She offers no conclusive proof of this, though, and she ignores the opinions of many others who believe it is actually possible.
Click to expand...

She doesn't ignore false ideas. She just doesn't put it on her website.

Example: There are no calculations about vaporization on her website because the WTC wasn't vaporized.
 
WTC Dust said:
I wasn't the one who proposed the mechanism. That person is Judy Wood. I'm suggesting that an effective debunking of Judy Wood would be nice to see from professional debunkers. Go ahead.
Click to expand...

Judy Wood never proposed a mechanism. So what the hell you you like us to debunk, genius?
 
Thunder said:
I know I said I would not get involved in this thread again, but I will again for this crap.

As I NYC govt. employee, I was able to get past some of the blockades and barriers that civilians could not. I was one block away from the rubble of WTC 7.

The pile, was at least 40-50 feet high. A good 4 stories. I did not take a picture, cause I was not a tourist when I went down there. I was doing my job.

10 foot high pile? Give me a break. This is a joke.
Click to expand...

40-50 feet above ground level? Or 40-50 feet from the bottom of the basement? Too bad you didn't take a picture.
 
Jono said:
I just showed you how demonstrably incorrect your "take" on this matter is. There can be no "reason you such a short pile" when that is not in any way reflective of what was. And there can be no "what used to be steel-became particles" when reality contradicts that with the hundreds of thousands of tons of huge steel members and debris that created the enormous piles.

Why do you assume the exact opposite of what is reality to be true?
Click to expand...

The building wasn't 100% destroyed. Some steel beams remained.
 
WTC Dust said:
I walked the entire length of Broadway, trying to get a peek. Not a bit of the pile was seen above that fence.
Click to expand...

You would have been able to see the 4&5 WTC buildings. Well, at least what was left of 4WTC.

Here is an image looking down Cortlandt.

FEMAphoto_WTC-109.jpg


4WTC is seen on the left. The building with the flag is 1 Liberty Plaza.

Now, as you can see, from this vantage point, he is at least 15' above street level.

I base this on this photo
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Wtc-photo.jpg

and this basic map
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/august2006/230806wtcplan.jpg

You can also use Ctrl +/- to zoom in abd out of the huge aerial photo, and see a large pile to the south (left) side of 4WTC.

And you couldn't see this above a 6' fence?
 
NobbyNobbs said:
WTC Dust --
I am truly and utterly fascinated by the ideas you are presenting. It seems that everyone here has jumped on you with derision and insults, before you've even presented your information. So unfair. Personally, I'd be interested in learning more about your position or methodology. Would it be ok to ask you a few questions with that in mind?

1. As a research scientist, what is your primary field of research? Are you independent, or part of a think tank?
2. Have you met Dr. Wood?
3. How long have you been interested in her work?
4. Do you plan on publishing your work?
5. Have you considered the debris pile below street level?
6. Have you considered the debris that fell outside the footprint?
7. Assuming for a moment that gravity was wholly responsible, how big would you expect the pile to be? Could you justify your answer mathematically?
8. Under the same assumption, how much dust would you expect to see? Again, could you please justify it mathematically?

Thank you so much. I apologize if any of these are too intrusive.
Click to expand...

1. My primary field of research has been 9/11 for these past years. I am independent.
2. I have met Dr. Wood.
3. I have been interested in her work since 2005.
4. Sure.
5. Yes.
6. Yes.
7. No. I'm not going to do extra work for no reason. Gravity didn't do it. That has been proved years ago.
8. Same answer.

These questions were not intrusive, but I hope you understand that I'm not going to do any calculations on theories that obviously don't work. I'll do calculations to refine a theory that might work, but doing calculations willy nilly just because someone asked me to is not worth my time. Why don't you do the calculations? I'll discuss your results with you.
 
WTC Dust said:
This is the JREF forums, and clairvoyance is frowned upon here. Please don't claim to know what other people know. It makes you seem like a believer in the paranormal.

No steel beams in the floors? Hahaha! Wrong.
Click to expand...

Hey there sparky, they used lightweight steel trusses, not beams.
 
bill smith said:
An old Truther once said that the best way to destroy a Truth Movement is to lead it. So do you think that Steven Jones and his colleagues could actually be Shills whose task it is to distract people from the Truth ?
Click to expand...

I think yes. They trotted him out when they were debunking so-called "cold fusion" that isn't actually cold.

Steven Jones' guffaw-inducing testimony? "Cold fusion must be fake because we couldn't reproduce the results in our laboratory."

OMG. This man is willing to rip his own credibility as a scientist into shreds, publicly admitting that he runs a crappy laboratory? He has no shame.

I would be embarrassed to admit to the world that I wasn't talented in the laboratory. The lab is where it counts!
 
WTC Dust said:
You are forgetting that under a gravity collapse, no floor could possibly fall more than twelve feet before meeting the floor below it. Twelve feet should be entered into the calculation, but you shouldn't waste your time on that.

Intact floors did not fall. Dust fell. The floors (and everything else) got turned into dust before it started falling.
Click to expand...

Blatant and palpable nonsense.

Dust would take much longer to hit the ground than the observed collapse time.

Relative surface area is a factor in calculating air resistance/fall times/terminal velocity. Which is why motes of dust, even dense ones, float around the room on the slightest air current.

Either you're trolling here or you have little scientific knowledge. What's your subject, by the way?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom