WTC dust

[dafydd]

If you contact any professors, then get it right.

I'm saying that at least some parts of the plane would have bounced off the south face of WTC 2 if a plane crash took place at the south face of WTC 2.

I'm not saying THE ENTIRE PLANE would bounce off the south face of WTC 2, just parts of it.

Some of the plane would probably get stuck inside the building, as happened when an airplane flew into the Empire State Building. The passengers on that plane survived. They just crawled over the wreckage and took the elevators down to the ground.

You'd end up with damage similar to that seen in the photograph below.

Why do you insist on pontificating about subjects that you know nothing about? What about about some evidence about this Star Wars energy beam that can 'dustify' steel?

 

[dafydd]

If you contact any professors, then get it right.

I'm saying that at least some parts of the plane would have bounced off the south face of WTC 2 if a plane crash took place at the south face of WTC 2.

I'm not saying THE ENTIRE PLANE would bounce off the south face of WTC 2, just parts of it.

Some of the plane would probably get stuck inside the building, as happened when an airplane flew into the Empire State Building. The passengers on that plane survived. They just crawled over the wreckage and took the elevators down to the ground.

You'd end up with damage similar to that seen in the photograph below.

No passengers survived.It was a B25 bomber,not a commercial flight.Wrong again.

http://www.elevator-world.com/magazine/archive01/9603-002.htm

''Luckily, the accident occurred on a weekend, with only about 1,500 people in the building -- compared with the 10,000-15,000 on an average weekday. Still, 14 died in the accident -- 11 in the building, plus Colonel Smith and the other two occupants of the plane. Hardest hit was the Catholic War Relief Office on the 79th floor, directly in the path of the bomber. Eight relief office workers were killed. ''

 

[WTC Dust]

No passengers survived.It was a B25 bomber,not a commercial flight.Wrong again.

http://www.elevator-world.com/magazine/archive01/9603-002.htm

''Luckily, the accident occurred on a weekend, with only about 1,500 people in the building -- compared with the 10,000-15,000 on an average weekday. Still, 14 died in the accident -- 11 in the building, plus Colonel Smith and the other two occupants of the plane. Hardest hit was the Catholic War Relief Office on the 79th floor, directly in the path of the bomber. Eight relief office workers were killed. ''

Oops. Got that part wrong. Anyway, the plane parts did bounce off the building, which is my main point.

 

[R.A.F.]

I am not a historian. I'm a research scientist.

Since you brought up this "appeal to authority", you are compelled to list what schooling, degrees, and real world experience qualify you as a "research scientist".

 

[triforcharity]

It didn't smell like a hydrocarbon fire, and hydrocarbon fires are easily put out with water.

Except it wasn't JUST a hydrocarbon fire. It was a landfill fire, and a crematorium too.

You can't put a fire out, if you can't get to it.

Why, honestly, do you think this was invented?

http://firechief.com/mag/firefighting_waterjet_technology_cuts/

Don't forget the 27 days of rain during the first 100 days after the attacks, all the while the fumes kept going and going.

Do you mean 27 days of full rain for the entire day, or 27 days, where there was rain?

Did you see the above article?

Don't forget the fumes on the one year anniversary of the attacks.

Dust from the CONSTRUCTION site?

WHY do you insist on IGNORING everything that any of us post? Is it because it hurts your delusions?

Why are you so obtuse?

 

[triforcharity]

If you contact any professors, then get it right.

I'm saying that at least some parts of the plane would have bounced off the south face of WTC 2 if a plane crash took place at the south face of WTC 2.

I'm not saying THE ENTIRE PLANE would bounce off the south face of WTC 2, just parts of it.

Some of the plane would probably get stuck inside the building, as happened when an airplane flew into the Empire State Building. The passengers on that plane survived. They just crawled over the wreckage and took the elevators down to the ground.

You'd end up with damage similar to that seen in the photograph below.

Yeah, maybe if the plane was traveling slowly, and crashing into a concrete and brick building.........

Yeah, you might get that.

Do you know how fast the planes were traveling?

Do you understand momentium?

 

[dafydd]

Do you understand momentium?

Obviously not.

 

[triforcharity]

BTW, Dusty, the amount of rain between Sept. 11th, and Dec 19th, (The 99 days that the fire burned) the TOTAL amount of rain was 7.66 inches, with a high of 1.9" in one day.

Average of .08 inches of rain per day.

From here.

http://www.wunderground.com/history...001&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

What do you think that will do to a fire this size, and this complex?

 

[excaza]

It's absolutely mind boggling that someone can post a picture of a front-end loader dumping rubble into a dumpster and claim that the resulting dust cloud is 'fumes'

Christ, the same thing happens when you dump flour into a mixing bowl when you make cookies...you can't possibly be this dumb.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

WTC Dust ignored my question:

Are you just doing this because you want & crave attention for your seminar on Dec. 1st?

WTC Dust, admit it, you're doing this for attention for your seminar.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Oops. Got that part wrong. Anyway, the plane parts did bounce off the building, which is my main point.

I don't think making a building out of rubber is recommended.

 

[Furcifer]

Some of the plane would probably get stuck inside the building, as happened when an airplane flew into the Empire State Building.

OIC.

You mean like the fuel?

 

[Justin39640]

It didn't smell like a hydrocarbon fire, and hydrocarbon fires are easily put out with water.

Do you understand everything you think appears to be incorrect?

Last time I checked a grease fire is spread when you hit it with water, not put out. Just stop it already. You obviously have no clue as to what you're typing about.

 

[dafydd]

OIC.

You mean like the fuel?

http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm

''The plane's high-octane fuel exploded, hurtling flames down the side of the building and inside through hallways and stairwells all the way down to the 75th floor. ''

 

[dafydd]

Do you understand everything you think appears to be incorrect?

Last time I checked a grease fire is spread when you hit it with water, not put out. Just stop it already. You obviously have no clue as to what you're typing about.

She must be trolling.

 

[Justin39640]

It's absolutely mind boggling that someone can post a picture of a front-end loader dumping rubble into a dumpster and claim that the resulting dust cloud is 'fumes'

Christ, the same thing happens when you dump flour into a mixing bowl when you make cookies...you can't possibly be this dumb.

Apparently observational skills are not required to be a "research scientist".

 

[dafydd]

Apparently observational skills are not required to be a "research scientist".

I'm just going to dissect some fried chicken,does that make me a research scientist too?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

...you can't possibly be this dumb.

Your argument from personal incredulity flies in the face of all evidence.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I'm just going to dissect some fried chicken,does that make me a research scientist too?

Be sure to measure the pH and take some really blurry photos.

 

[DGM]

It didn't smell like a hydrocarbon fire, and hydrocarbon fires are easily put out with water.

Don't forget the 27 days of rain during the first 100 days after the attacks, all the while the fumes kept going and going.

Don't forget the fumes on the one year anniversary of the attacks.

Really WTC Dust, Dust out of a dumpster? Tell you what, If you seek professional help I'll pay for you to come to one of my job sites to see the exact same thing. Deal?