• 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.
Dragonrock said:
Not if the object being impacted is mostly empty space. But even in impacts with solid object the behavior isn't as you describe. Just like what is shown on that oft linked video of the F4 hitting the brick wall.

Lazy troll is lazy
Click to expand...

Mostly empty space? Are you kidding? Steel exterior beams (covered in aluminum cladding), steel spandrel plates, and windows, and you call that "mostly empty space"?

You're telling me that a plane crashed into the WTC, but missed hitting the steel on the exterior, and I call schenanigans on that. At least the parts of the plane that hit the steel should have bounced backwards and they don't, at least not in the videos of 9:03AM.
 
bill smith said:
What do you think the smell resembled ? I know that some people say that it was hard to describe but even an idea would be helpful.
Click to expand...

You can do a google search on WTC smell or WTC stench and find out for yourself.

The smell is unique in my smell memory, and many people have claimed this.

How do you describe a smell you have never smelled before? By saying what it wasn't? We don't have good words to describe unknown smells.

It wasn't musty, moldy, wood burning, tires burning, petroleum burning, or anything that I have ever smelled before, and it lasted full strength for no less than 100 days. It hurt the nose to breath it in, even after all that time.
 
WTC Dust said:
You need to pay closer attention. The nook is protected by a concrete overhang, but is open to the air. The cigarette butts got there after they were thrown in the hole because they whip around and have some horizontal motion as they fall, and some of them landed on the ledge. But not where I got my dust, so they didn't contaminate my dust.
Click to expand...

If dust from the towers collapse could end up in the nook, so could dust from nearby construction.
 
phiwum said:
If dust from the towers collapse could end up in the nook, so could dust from nearby construction.
Click to expand...

Potentially true. Construction dust doesn't tend to fly upwards of eight stories, though, and in fact, my samples were rather pristine, except the cigarette butts. They looked just like dust samples that were laid down on 9/11.
 

Attachments

  • comparison of dust fall pattern.jpg
    comparison of dust fall pattern.jpg
    42.5 KB · Views: 8
excaza said:
No, we're saying it because you're a terrible scientist.
Click to expand...

You mean "terrible" as in "formidable", right? I'm Godzilla, stamping around Ground Zero, looking for dust samples. BWARRGH!!
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
I haven't told a single lie on this forum. Also, I'm not a truther. I'm a research scientist.
Click to expand...

No, you've told several.:p

I came here because I wanted to battle the debunkers directly, but most of what has been said has been irrelevant or insults. Not a debunking. So it's has been largely a waste of my time, too, but with some little tidbits of good.
Click to expand...

You have indeed been wasting your time, but not in the manner you think. Since you've arrived here you've been wasting our time as well, but you've also taught us that you're an incompetent scientist in this area of study.

That was a valuable piece of information, so thank you. You've demonstrated that an intelligent and well-educated person can fall prey to a serious delusion.:D
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
Mostly empty space? Are you kidding? Steel exterior beams (covered in aluminum cladding), steel spandrel plates, and windows, and you call that "mostly empty space"?

You're telling me that a plane crashed into the WTC, but missed hitting the steel on the exterior, and I call schenanigans on that. At least the parts of the plane that hit the steel should have bounced backwards and they don't, at least not in the videos of 9:03AM.
Click to expand...

Let us say that I were to reach into a leg and tear the femur right out of someone's thigh. Then, lets say I had a bar of lead of a similar size and shape of the wet femur. If I started pounding the two items together (the femur and the lead bar) the femur would crumble slightly at the point of impact, but the lead would rapidly deform.

Let us then say I were to take less than an ounce of lead and accelerate it to about 2000 feet per second and position the femur, this time still encased in the leg, in front of the trajectory of the bullet, then the femur would shatter and the lead ball, though deformed and broken, would probably continue out the other side of the leg.

You see, in order for something to bounce off of another thing, either the impactor or the impactee must absorb the impact energy and the release it in the opposite direction. Like a child jumping on a trampoline. However, if the the impact energy is greater than the absorption capacity of the impactor and impactee then the momentum will not be stopped regardless of the relative hardness of the objects impacting.


Scientist troll can't do science
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
You can do a google search on WTC smell or WTC stench and find out for yourself.

The smell is unique in my smell memory, and many people have claimed this.

How do you describe a smell you have never smelled before? By saying what it wasn't? We don't have good words to describe unknown smells.

It wasn't musty, moldy, wood burning, tires burning, petroleum burning, or anything that I have ever smelled before, and it lasted full strength for no less than 100 days. It hurt the nose to breath it in, even after all that time.
Click to expand...

Just to pursue it a bit further...do you think that you were breathing in particles of something when you got the smell ? To hurt (burn?) the nose you would imagine so.

If the smell remained at full strength for about 100 days did it then disappear at once or did it gradually fade away ? Can you identify an event (like a pouring of concrete on ground zero ) that might have covered it up for instance ? Or do you think that there was more to it ?
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
I didn't say "ignore". I said "disbelieve".

When they see a building turning into dust and then the pieces falling down, and they hear "collapse", most of them accept the word "collapse" despite the fact that what they saw was not a collapse.

This isn't ignoring what you see. This is disbelieving your own eyes.
Click to expand...
So you don't believe the fact that you saw the building collapse. I would call that denial. Maybe reality is too painful for you, we all cope different ways. You chose to not believe what is seen on so many videos.
 
DGM said:
So you don't believe the fact that you saw the building collapse. I would call that denial. Maybe reality is too painful for you, we all cope different ways. You chose to not believe what is seen on so many videos.
Click to expand...

I've heard it called a collapse a zillion and one time. I've looked at images of the buildings as they were being destroyed, both moving and still, and I see dust, not a collapse.
 
WTC Dust said:
And what was causing that stench?

To be truthful, lower Manhattan needs a recleaning. Before and since my discovery, I have noted many abandoned apartments in the area that have dusty windows. Dust from the inside, not the outside.
Click to expand...

I've already explained the stench to you.

The stench around here is your delusions.
 
DGM said:
You seem to make a lot of "what if" or "suppose that" posts. Why is that? Is most of your research faith based?
Click to expand...

Research scientists go about explaining previously unexplained phenomena. Thinking and a good imagination, grounded with good sense, is required.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom