• 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:
You might have to do a little bit of learning that doesn't depend on me. Just figure it out.
Click to expand...

Nobody could learn anything by depending on you. Why? You don't appear to know anything. Why do you crave attention? Do you need it to bolster up your fantasy about being a scientist?
 
Last edited:
sylvan8798 said:
ETA: Wow, this is my 1111 post. Eleventy, eleven!!!11!!
Click to expand...
OMG you're one of "them"
The number 1111 looks a lot like the twin towers side by side. The attacks were on 9/11 and the first aircraft's flight number was 11. ZOMG INSIDE JOB!!11111111
 
Dash80 said:
I really wish I knew, it's hard for me to understand the mindset of such disrespectful kooks. An attention thing maybe, especially our neon-haired friend Dusty. Everything she's posted screams "HEY LOOK AT ME, GIVE ME ATTENTION!"

She's getting the attention she craves here, we really shouldn't feed her but it's hard to resist.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what it is, she's basically an attention whore and I wouldn't be surprised in the least if she had Histrionic Personality Disorder - everything from the pink hair to the "medical marijuana barbie" to the "rainbeaux barbie gangbang lottery" to 9/11 gullibility fits. Everything has some form of "shock value, look at me" about it.

The problem is if people continue to reply to her posts it only reinforces her delusion.
 
Sunstealer said:
That's exactly what it is, she's basically an attention whore and I wouldn't be surprised in the least if she had Histrionic Personality Disorder - everything from the pink hair to the "medical marijuana barbie" to the "rainbeaux barbie gangbang lottery" to 9/11 gullibility fits. Everything has some form of "shock value, look at me" about it.

The problem is if people continue to reply to her posts it only reinforces her delusion.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the kindest thing do would be to stop responding.
 
jiggeryqua said:
I was here at the start. Certain posters didn't even start with reason and rational argument, but get a clue: when it doesn't work, stop. Just stop. Because rubbing detergent into ducks so they sink just makes you look like a ****.
Click to expand...

So we just admit defeat and leave the forum for the insane to post what the please? Doesn't sound the action of a Skeptic to me....
 
Sunstealer said:
It would be, that's why I don't post in reply to her now - I tend to lurk and laugh and shake my head a lot.
Click to expand...

Yes,I think I will do that too. Replying just pushes her further into her fantasy world.Poor woman,I hope she recovers.
 
fess said:
Dusty, I don’t want to drag this wake thing back into the fray, but as I touched down today, a thought entered my mind. I’m sure you have seen aircraft touchdown during landing, or at least a video of it; so, if what you say is true (the aircraft drags a wake behind it), then why doesn’t the aircraft drag the smoke from the tires contacting the runway behind it?
Click to expand...

because they reverse the flux capacitor on landing so that the time vortex holds the smoke where it was when created and the plane moves on without it.
Simple really if you just makes things up ;)
 
chipmunk stew said:
I think it's rather an amazing serendipity that the smoking gun that will finally crack the mystery of 9/11 just happened to turn up in the residence of the top 9/11 investigator in the world. I mean, what are the chances???
Click to expand...


Truly the stuff of a good movie plot.....and we know from "Independence day" that its easy to dustify buildings!

independence-day.jpg




but wait....isn't that the twin towers in the background???? (note WTC7 isn't obvious at all) they dustified the ESB first then the WTC? but how did I see the burning WTC debris from the top of the Empire State????? Could it be that the dustifying is just a silly fiction?
 
Last edited:
sheeplesnshills said:
So we just admit defeat and leave the forum for the insane to post what the please? Doesn't sound the action of a Skeptic to me....
Click to expand...
Even twoofers stay away from the steel discombobulator space beam madness. Dusty's ramblings don't need refuting - they speak for themselves. No one of sane mind is going to read this thread and agree with her. So there really isn't any point.

All she has done is find some random material 8 years after the fact and take a photo of it. If you believe that a steel foamification machine was used on 9/11 based on that staggeringly detailed research ( :sdl: ) then no amount of rational, skeptic posting is going to make any difference to the believer (because they are clearly mad).
 
Sunstealer said:
Even twoofers stay away from the steel discombobulator space beam madness. Dusty's ramblings don't need refuting - they speak for themselves. No one of sane mind is going to read this thread and agree with her. So there really isn't any point.

All she has done is find some random material 8 years after the fact and take a photo of it. If you believe that a steel foamification machine was used on 9/11 based on that staggeringly detailed research ( :sdl: ) then no amount of rational, skeptic posting is going to make any difference to the believer (because they are clearly mad).
Click to expand...

Possibly but you discount the stupid and the naive. millions of folks think there is a god that hates people because they are gay and will send you to eternal fire for having sex unless you are married. Just because an idea is utterly insane does not mean its not accepted by enough people to affect the rest of us. The stupid and Naive get to vote just like smart educated ones............
 
Well said, sunstealer. Her manner is childish and irrational, there is no point in attempting an adult discussion.

Dr Blevins is not really unlike many of the other hardcore truthers that have visited these forums, IMO. She cannot accept simple, bonafide evidence where it contradicts her beliefs, makes umpteen bare assertions to back up frankly delusional observations.

The main thing which distinguishes her from garden-variety truthers is that she has a biomedical degree, and has an attention-seeking public persona. In that regard she is very much like Dr Steven Jones (although she is of course far less distinguished in her field of expertise), or Jim Fetzer or Judy Wood.
On the scale of career achievements, once again, she is far less distinguished than those others, even though Dr Judy Wood has not had an auspicious career, having been fired from her teaching post.

I'd prefer to discuss the topics rather than actually debate Dr Blevins, for the reasons noted above. It is not necessary to engage the person directly when you can address the claims independently.

I think Tracy has made her case, and apparently it has failed to impress anyone here. Perhaps she can submit some further info when she has it, rather than just repeating the same material and refusing to seriously discuss anything else.
 
alienentity said:
I think Tracy has made her case, and apparently it has failed to impress anyone here. Perhaps she can submit some further info when she has it, rather than just repeating the same material and refusing to seriously discuss anything else.
Click to expand...
A few pages ago she did claim to have something new, I recall her saying it something like "just wait for what I have for you next, it's controversial"

No doubt it will be the same bullcrap, just different packaging.
 
Dash80 said:
A few pages ago she did claim to have something new, I recall her saying it something like "just wait for what I have for you next, it's controversial"

No doubt it will be the same bullcrap, just different packaging.
Click to expand...

Thus far her presentation has consisted of utter hogwash. Embarrassingly bad and incompetent. And that's giving it a fair shake.
 
Dash80 said:
A few pages ago she did claim to have something new, I recall her saying it something like "just wait for what I have for you next, it's controversial"

No doubt it will be the same bullcrap, just different packaging.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that was a set-up for dropping the I'm Going To Sell It bomb.
 
dafydd said:
They managed to sell pet rocks,so if she can find enough marks good luck to her.
Click to expand...
My daughter has two pet rocks, she made them using permanent markers, those stick-on "bobble eyes" and jewels. I'd take some of Dusty's dust/foam but definitely not the cigarette butts, kids shouldn't be messing with those.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom