• 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:
Actually, not in the slightest.

Up until now, I considered myself the second most knowledgeable person on the subject of what destroyed the World Trade Center, Dr. Judy Wood being the first.

Perhaps with my new research, I'll be #1 !! Not that I care, really. I'm just excited about my own findings. Dr. Wood is cool and will always be #1 in my book.

I'm presuming you haven't communicated with Dr. Wood, is all.
Click to expand...

Seriously, you know more than Leslie Robinson, Bazant and Zhou, the nist report and all the experts with weird initials after their names, things like, MS, PhD, MD and others?
Too make matters worse, you also say Dr. Wood is the only one that know more than you, seriously? I don't mind arrogant people as long as they can back it up. I hate arrogant people who have absolutely zero reason to be arrogant.

How many buildings have you designed? What's your degree in? This is not a reverse appeal to authority, anyone who claims absolute knowledge like you and your 'mentor', needs to back up your theories with your qualifications and they have to be an accredited university.

Now, armed with your degree, call a press conference to enlighten the world about what you know and how this was all pulled over our eyes. In fact, you need to have families that lost someone as well as some firefighters from the station hit hardest on the stage with you. You would end up with a Pulitzer.

And finally, one last snark and nine years, you could be an M.D. now or a real structural engineer.
 
Last edited:
Lxj said:
It did not turn to dust. If you're basing this fantasy on the collapse of the spire,
Just add www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4 and it debunks itself but the video below is of sufficient quality to easily see the steel drop down while the dust hangs in the air.

If you read the good Dr's website (Wood), she's uses a video like the one above to prove that the steel in the spire was dustified. I don't want to attack Dr. Wood as I believe she isn't all there and it's possible, people are taking advantage of her.

Take a look at this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqSLIPwZ430.

You can clearly see that the spire doesn't turn to dust, it collapses from the bottom so the vertical columns drops practically straight down and in doing so, the lighter dust hangs around for a few seconds. Take a good long look at the second video I posted, then, you tell me that you still think the steel, dustified.
Click to expand...

What about this one ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI&NR=1
 
You're poving my point

bill smith said:
What about this one ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI&NR=1
Click to expand...

Is that a joke? That is a great video that clearly shows the spire collapsing downward leaving the dust suspended there for a few seconds. Another cool thing about that video, is that you can see part of the perimeter wall peeling off in the background.

1) Do you really believe this or are you just jaqing off?
2) If you really believe this, what would it take to change your mind, if anything?

Edited for compliance with Rule 4 and Rule 11. Please do not post lengthy tracts available elsewhere, and stick to the topic of a given thread.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lxj said:
Is that a joke? That is a great video that clearly shows the spire collapsing downward leaving the dust suspended there for a few seconds. Another cool thing about that video, is that you can see part of the perimeter wall peeling off in the background.

1) Do you really believe this or are you just jaqing off?
2) If you really believe this, what would it take to change your mind, if anything?

Edited by LashL: 
Edited moderated content
Click to expand...

The mods are going to slice this up due to Rule 4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lxj said:
Is that a joke? That is a great video that clearly shows the spire collapsing downward leaving the dust suspended there for a few seconds. Another cool thing about that video, is that you can see part of the perimeter wall peeling off in the background.

1) Do you really believe this or are you just jaqing off?
2) If you really believe this, what would it take to change your mind, if anything?

Edited by LashL: 
Edited moderated content
Click to expand...

Whaddya got ? lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lxj said:
It did not turn to dust. If you're basing this fantasy on the collapse of the spire,
Just add www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4 and it debunks itself but the video below is of sufficient quality to easily see the steel drop down while the dust hangs in the air.

If you read the good Dr's website (Wood), she's uses a video like the one above to prove that the steel in the spire was dustified. I don't want to attack Dr. Wood as I believe she isn't all there and it's possible, people are taking advantage of her.

Take a look at this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqSLIPwZ430.

You can clearly see that the spire doesn't turn to dust, it collapses from the bottom so the vertical columns drops practically straight down and in doing so, the lighter dust hangs around for a few seconds. Take a good long look at the second video I posted, then, you tell me that you still think the steel, dustified.
Click to expand...

As the camera pans and zooms in and out in the second video, it is actually rather difficult to follow the spires in the haze.

I think the first is much clearer. A must-see for the Dustys, jammos and bills of this world.
 
This:




Just looks like a big pile of wet concrete...maybe a 100 lbs worth or more. Not sure how this picture proves it is even in your possession.

How did you obtain this pile?
 
Lxj, I suggest you split off the secondary topic to its own thread in the Conspiracy Theory subforum; it has nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 conspiracies. Also, it is against forum rules to post transcripts in their entirety; you should simply post an excerpt you feel will grab people's attention and then provide the link for them to do their own research. I'm sure many people here would be interested in responding, but almost no one would be interested in reading such a long-winded post.
 
So if the dust all over lower manhattan was steel dust, why didn't lower manhattan turn rust colored the first time it rained?
 
Dusty, if some of the steel was dustified, and some of it was not, surely there should be many partially dustified columns in the rubble pile. Have you found any half dustified columns in the pictures of the rubble pile?
 
sabretooth47 said:
This:


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_424124cd2ccf55f493.jpg[/qimg]

Just looks like a big pile of wet concrete...maybe a 100 lbs worth or more. Not sure how this picture proves it is even in your possession.

How did you obtain this pile?
Click to expand...

Yeah, wet mortar was my impression, or maybe partially hardened mortar or cement.
Could also be damp ashes of some kind.

The photograph lacks brightness and contrast, and of course context.
There is an unfinished brick-and-mortar wall. Will you find these at all much in lower Manhatten? Apparently, there is no daylight, so the photo was taken either indoors (likely) or outdoors at night (less likely), with artificial light.

It is not a dust deposit in situ. The surface is too rugged for that, and the pile slopes too steeply. Looks more like that trash has been shovelled there, or dumped from some container. Also, by and large the material appears to be too coarse to be labled "dust". Looks more an average particle size comparable to sand, mixed with finer material to account for the adhesion (ruggedness).
 
phunk said:
Dusty, if some of the steel was dustified, and some of it was not, surely there should be many partially dustified columns in the rubble pile. Have you found any half dustified columns in the pictures of the rubble pile?
Click to expand...


Steel dustified by the particular reverse-engineered alien technology DEW that destroyed the towers is rendered impervious to rust, phunk.
 
WTC Dust said:
That didn't work. How's this?
Click to expand...

Ah, thank you for reposting your image. The image is not accompanied by any data, so I can't comment on it.

The image itself appears underexposed, is of unknown origin (it's not a raw image) and is low-resolution. The contents of the image are unknown.

Will you be presenting any data? I hope so, for your sake.:)
 
Redtail said:
Nope, its been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Click to expand...

I don't see how this could possibly be true.

Words are easy to say. It's easy to lie with words. Not everyone is a liar, but you have to assume that anyone might be lying or making innocent misstatements all the time.

Compare this with physical evidence. It doesn't lie. I have discovered several different types of dust. I have documented that it is very likely World Trade Center dust. Since I have been studying the dust ever since the early days (remember Day 3 when I saw only a few tall pieces above a ten foot fence, but did see all those heavy fumes? remember in late December when the fumes were still going strong 100 days later?), obviously I have read and digested the available peer reviewed literature on the WTC dust, as well as reading the non-peer-reviewed work by Harrit, et. al.

My major finding is that the vast majority of the peer reviewed literature describes the lighter colored dust, and that Harrit, et. al, have reported on the darker colored dust. The darker dust is metallic and has rust spots. The two types of dust I found reconcile the descrepancy between Harrit's results and the vast majority of the other work on the dust. For this reason alone, my finding is important and will make a difference.

Notice that I'm telling you the results, but I'm not actually showing you the data or giving you the methods? This is the way that I'm being stingy. Why should I share the details when you mock the results and the experimenter and actually pay no attention to the details that I have documented for you?

I want you to pay attention, first, to where I found the dust. If you can't do that, then you won't appreciate the rest of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom