• 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.
Dr. Blevins, This message probably comes too late and certainly comes from a source you have no reason to listen to, but I feel like I have to say it anyway.

The further you go down this crazypants path, the more time and energy you devote to tilting at windmills, the more likely it becomes that this will define you for the rest of your days. To become a big name in the "Truth Movement" is to become a laughingstock everywhere else. Then again, if you really are aspiring to be a clown, maybe that's not such a bad thing.
 
WTC Dust said:
None of my doctors has ever suggested a mental illness. My excellent grades throughout all of my educational endeavors also suggests that I have a functioning brain. I have two graduate degrees. I've had to pass all sorts of tests of academic rigor and fooled dozens of professors who gave me all those good grades in order to be a fraud.

I'm a clown, not a crazy.
Hope to see you on the first of December!
Click to expand...

*sigh*

It's such a disappointment to see someone fall so far down the rabbit hole. Especially from a scientific standpoint.

Do you even realize there are hundreds of family members that were at the airport on the morning of September 11th that saw their family members get onto planes, take off, and never return home?

There's a continuous record of these planes from the moment they left the airport until the slammed into the buildings on 9/11. Not to mention the thousands of people that saw the planes approach, including survivors from the towers, and witnessed the planes slam into the buildings.

So much physical evidence of what really happened, and nothing to support the fantasy of some directed energy weapon.

argh....it's so stupid. Why hasn't this imaginary weapon been used in the 9 years since 9/11? argh...

argh...so...brain meltingly stupid....argh
 
WTC Dust said:
Judy Wood discovered the mechanism. If I fail to properly describe it, that is my fault.

My work involves the study of the WTC dust. It's different from Dr. Wood's work, but it does not contradict her work in any way.

My results contradict a plane crash mechanism and explosive devices. My work MAY or MAY NOT support energy weapons as a mechanism.
Click to expand...

Dr. Blevins,

The reason everyone on this board thinks you are insane is because you are suggesting that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers. The collisions of flights 11 and 175 with the towers were witnessed by many people, flight 11's collision was caught on 3 independently made videos, and flight 175's collision was caught on 43+ independently made videos. These events occurred in Manhattan of all places, one of the most densely populated areas on Earth.

In order to even consider your theory, you are essentially asking us to include everyone who made a video of the collisions and everyone who claimed to see the collisions into the conspiracy. You are also asking us to accept that the conspirators somehow prevented anyone who had a video camera from videotaping what really happened.

Alternatively, you are asking us to accept something just as bizarre to explain your "no planes", such as "holograms" or "psy ops". All of the possible explanations for "no planes" are even more bizarre than the directed energy weapon theory itself.

Can you not see the insanity of what you are alleging?
 
HatRack said:
Dr. Blevins,

The reason everyone on this board thinks you are insane is because you are suggesting that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers. The collisions of flights 11 and 175 with the towers were witnessed by many people, flight 11's collision was caught on 3 independently made videos, and flight 175's collision was caught on 43+ independently made videos. These events occurred in Manhattan of all places, one of the most densely populated areas on Earth.

In order to even consider your theory, you are essentially asking us to include everyone who made a video of the collisions and everyone who claimed to see the collisions into the conspiracy. You are also asking us to accept that the conspirators somehow prevented anyone who had a video camera from videotaping what really happened.

Alternatively, you are asking us to accept something just as bizarre to explain your "no planes", such as "holograms" or "psy ops". All of the possible explanations for "no planes" are even more bizarre than the directed energy weapon theory itself.

Can you not see the insanity of what you are alleging?
Click to expand...

I don't think she can. None of them seem to be able to see how crazy they look.
 
HatRack said:
Dr. Blevins,



Can you not see the insanity of what you are alleging?
Click to expand...

Clearly not, as she is as sure there was not any video fakery as she is sure there were not any planes. I don't know if the impossibility of projecting a hologram into a bright sky has been explained to her the way it was to Jammonius, but what difference would it make? She may as well say it was done with mirrors. That's no more foolish than saying the building turned to dust before it fell.
 
3bodyproblem said:
hehe, I doubt if it's of any consequence now, but my buddy "faked" his way into Teacher's College in the US. He approached me while we were in University to write some entrance exams for him. We used a fitness centers photo ID polaroid camera and laminator to superimpose my picture on his license. I wrote the exams and today he's the principal of a high school. I doubt if he could pass grade 10 math.
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of Dexter Manley, who made it through high school and four years of college without ever learning to read.
 
HatRack said:
Dr. Blevins,

The reason everyone on this board thinks you are insane is because you are suggesting that no planes hit the World Trade Center towers. The collisions of flights 11 and 175 with the towers were witnessed by many people, flight 11's collision was caught on 3 independently made videos, and flight 175's collision was caught on 43+ independently made videos. These events occurred in Manhattan of all places, one of the most densely populated areas on Earth.

In order to even consider your theory, you are essentially asking us to include everyone who made a video of the collisions and everyone who claimed to see the collisions into the conspiracy. You are also asking us to accept that the conspirators somehow prevented anyone who had a video camera from videotaping what really happened.

Alternatively, you are asking us to accept something just as bizarre to explain your "no planes", such as "holograms" or "psy ops". All of the possible explanations for "no planes" are even more bizarre than the directed energy weapon theory itself.

Can you not see the insanity of what you are alleging?
Click to expand...

Not only that, but she's asking us to accept that the hundreds (or thousands) of first responders and investigators who spent months crawling over the site of the collapses and examining the debris over at the Fishkill dump were willing to cover up the use of some superweapon, of which there WOULD be evidence on the debris. And to believe that the people who boarded those flights are willing to remain in hiding for the rest of their lives. And that the two airlines, comprised of numerous people who would have worked on or known about those flights, are willing to cover up that they didn't actually LOSE two planes each that day.

I once estimated the number of people who would have to be aware of some part of the conspiracy in order for it to be pulled off at over 100,000 people. The idea that THAT many people would be willing to keep their mouths shut for so long is utterly ludicrous. Like the old saying goes, "Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead." But no hard-core truther has ever acknowledged the lunacy of their stance, and I don't expect Dusty to ever do that either. At this point, I merely watch for the next Stundie she's sure to utter.
 
A thought occurs to me: If all of the steel was turned into its constituent iron, why was there no epidemic of iron poisoning amongst first responders and residents of Lower Manhattan?
 
I asked TAM that, and he explained to me that it would have taken years to show any kind of effect.

Here is his PM to me, with some good links included.

TAM via PM said:
From an inhalation pov, the inclination would be that some degree of pulmonary inflammation (pneumonitis) would result from inhaling iron (or any metal) filled dust or aerosol. However, it does not seem to cause much trouble at all. Here are links to two studies, where the scientists hypothesized that some inflammation or damage would occur, but in fact, it did not. One is a short term study, the other looked for fibrosis (lung tissue scarring from long term exposure) in workers over an average of 10 years exposure, and found none.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11696874
http://www.springerlink.com/content/y2p5154128218104/

However, exposure to iron rich (how rich I am uncertain) does seem to carry some increase risk of Cancer (carcinogenic effect). How much of a risk is still the stuff of studies.

http://md1.csa.com/partners/viewreco...&setcookie=yes

Interestingly, a study was done of 14 metal dressers who had daily exposure to iron oxide fumes for up to 16 years, and the conclusion of the investigators was that iron oxide fume alone does not seem to cause pulmonary fibrotic changes...

http://oem.bmj.com/content/29/2/169.abstract

SO from an inhalation pov, I would summarize (I am not a respirologist, so my expertise is limited);

1. Studies seem to indicated that exposure to inhaled iron aerosol or dust does not seem to cause significant short term illness, or chronic fibrotic change, but there is some evidence that LONG TERM exposure may increase the risk of cancer.

2. The WTC dust was full of other compounds, some of which were certainly much more likely to cause short term pneumonitis, and possible long term fibrosis, but the big question for the fibrosis part, is was the exposure over a long enough period.

In terms of skin, iron exposure is not significant, if it was, we would see significant illness in people exposed to iron dust from many other sources, and we do not.

In essence, outside of possible carcinogen effects through long term exposure of inhaled iron rich dust or fumes, iron rich dust (not accounting for other dust components) would have little pathological effect, as the amount of iron, even in the rich dust, would be too small to cause iron toxicity.

In fact, I would suspect even if you ingested (ate) the dust, you would not take in enough iron to cause any harm, even if you ATE it every day for 3 months.

Most cases of iron toxicity comes from overdosing on ingested iron via medication for iron deficiency.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/815213-overview
http://www.drhoffman.com/page.cfm/120

Long term exposure to excessive iron can cause deposition in the liver, but once again, this would be chronic (as in years) of exposure to high INGESTED levels of iron, beyond the body's ability to excrete, use, or convert said iron.

SO in essence, a short term (1-3 months) of daily exposure, even to iron rich dust, considering ONLY the iron, would produce little disease, from what reading I have done.
Click to expand...
 
TheBigKahuna said:
Your observation skills are pathetic, and you ignore the fact that conservation of momentum requires the destroyed plane to CONTINUE MOVING THROUGH THE BUILDING.

You still haven't addressed the flaws in the science:
Wierzbicki, T. & Teng, X. (2003). "How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center." J. of Impact Engrg. Volume 28, Issue 6, pp. 601-625
You're wrong.
Click to expand...


Do you have a link to paper you cite as evidence ?
If not , could you forward me a complete copy so that I can examine it ?
Thanks -Fonebone
 
Captain_Swoop said:
HMS Sheffield was struck by an Argentinian Exocet Missile. They are made of aluminium and plastic composite.
In the picture you will see that the missile penetrated the Steel Hull of the ship fracturing the Fire Main. Its warhead didn't detonate but the rocket motor and unburned propellant started fires in the Engine Room that couldn't be controlled and the ship burned for 3 days before it sank.

http://www.navyphotos.co.uk/shfld4b.jpg

Why didn't it just bounce off?
Click to expand...

The Exocet missile that struck the Sheffield did not "bounce off" because
the Exocet am-39 that struck the Sheffield contained a shaped charge
armor piercing warhead and incindiaries .

http://docfoualier.free.fr/exocet.pdf

The flying object that struck the south tower didn't "bounce off "for the exact same reason.
The disguised missile that pierced the WTC2 steel exterior was equipped with an AUP-3m
DU penetrator warhead.The AUP3 penetrator created the bright white flash
and molten orange entrance hole micro-seconds before the missile hit.
363814cf3f37b80836.jpg

The armored chisel shaped nose of the missile traveled completely through
the tower and exited the NE bevel before the explosive payload detonated
.

The naked undisguised cruise missile that pierced the WTC1 tower also created
an intense white flash micro-seconds before it pierced
the steel column wall.
 
Fonebone said:
The Exocet missile that struck the Sheffield did not "bounce off" because
the Exocet am-39 that struck the Sheffield contained a shaped charge
armor piercing warhead and incindiaries .
http://docfoualier.free.fr/exocet.pdf

The flying object that struck the south tower didn't "bounce off "for the exact same reason.
The disguised missile that pierced the WTC2 steel exterior was equipped with an AUP-3m
DU penetrator warhead.The AUP3 penetrator created the bright white flash
and molten orange entrance hole micro-seconds before the missile hit.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814cf3f37b80836.jpg[/qimg]
The armored chisel shaped nose of the missile traveled completely through
the tower and exited the NE bevel before the explosive payload detonated
.

The naked undisguised cruise missile that pierced the WTC1 tower also created
an intense white flash micro-seconds before it pierced
the steel column wall.
Click to expand...
My bold

What part of the statement 'the warhead did not detonate' did you fail to understand?

As for the rest of your post, it's absolute dribble. There was no warhead detonation, you clearly know nothing about explosives. Not to mention that there are plenty of photographs of the aircraft and plenty of aircraft debris. Aircraft, not cruise missiles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom