Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[Macgyver1968]

For the record, based on body of work I believe one of current supporters of Dr. Wood in this thread is quite serious and genuine, while the other might be having a joke or two at our expense (at least in part).

I am in complete agreement.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Stella: What do you think of weapons that use wavelengths of energy? Certainly we have tasers.

We also have slingshots. So?

 

[beachnut]

Does anyone know if or how excessive exposure to marijuana smoke affects one's sense of smell?

Recently, she’s been promoting the use of ibogaine, a hallucinogen with both psychedelic and dissociative properties that she says might fight addiction to opiates.

 

[WTC Dust]

More nonsense. Your dust samples don't prove no planes. Even if your dust is caused by something other than planes (like, the collapse more than an hour after the planes), that doesn't say anything about the planes.

For your dust sample to prove no planes, you would have to prove that planes would somehow completely prevent your dust from forming.

This is lopsided thinking, and it focuses too much on the planes. Focus on the dust itself. What can produce it under normal temperatures?

 

[WTC Dust]

That's the sample that you cannot even say what elements or compounds they contain? What did they do to you in Pharmacology that made you forget the scientific method?

I've told you there are iron oxide chips in it, and this isn't strange. Other people have also reported this.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Recently, she’s been promoting the use of ibogaine, a hallucinogen with both psychedelic and dissociative properties that she says might fight addiction to opiates.

Then all you need is something to help you kick that ibogaine habit.

 

[phunk]

This is lopsided thinking, and it focuses too much on the planes. Focus on the dust itself. What can produce it under normal temperatures?

Don't deflect, explain the logic behind your claim that the dust proves no planes.

 

[Mudcat]

Stella: What do you think of weapons that use wavelengths of energy? Certainly we have tasers. Do you think the only weapons we have of this nature are already 100% publicly known? Do you think there is 0% chance of the existence of a DEW?

I know this was directed at someone else but mind if I field this? DEWs, to a certain extent, already exist in the world. But DEWs are not effective weapons in comparison to conventional weaponry. The reason for this are the laws of thermodynamics and the blooming effect.

So what you get are large, unwieldy and suspicious looking devices that have to be very close to their targets and do not possess the kind of destructive power you would need to instantly destroy buildings of any size let alone the WTC.

 

[Stellafane]

Stella: What do you think of weapons that use wavelengths of energy? Certainly we have tasers.

First (and just to be pendantic) it's a bit inaccurate to speak of "wavelengths of energy," since energy comes in many forms, and only a subset -- primarily electromagnetic radiation -- are measurable in wavelengths.

That aside, tasers are a singularly poor choice to cite in support for a DEW. Indeed, the limitations of the taser points out the difficulties in developing such a weapon. Tasers deliver an electroshock to the target, and only work when they are in direct contact with the skin. Even a small gap between the electrodes and the target renders the taser useless, since (and this is a critical point) air is a very poor conductor. Yes, large scale discharges (such as lightning) can traverse the air, but that takes vasts amounts of energy to do any large-scale damage of the sort witnessed on 9/11. So taser technology, no matter how vastly scaled up, could not have possibly taken down the WTC.

Do you think the only weapons we have of this nature are already 100% publicly known?

No doubt there's various classified work underway around particle beam and other "ray gun" technologies, perhaps remnant projects of the heyday of SDI. But that's not really the point. If a DEW weapon of the sort Dr. Wood hypothesize does exist -- and remember, it's up to her to prove it does, not I to prove it doesn't -- then if it were used on 9/11, it would have left copious amounts of incontrovertable evidence behind, evidence that would have been readily witnessed by literally millions. That last statement isn't based on speculation or opinion; it's simply basic science. No such evidence was observed -- none at all.

Do you think there is 0% chance of the existence of a DEW?

Its existence, possibly in some prototypical scale-model form? No, I can't say 0% chance. But if you re-phrased the question as "Do you think there is 0% chance that a DEW was used on 9/11 to bring down the WTC?" then I'd say yep -- 0% is 100% right.

 

[NoahFence]

People died on 9/11, but people are suffering TODAY from the effects of 9/11.

...yes. and other people suffer effects of other things. Like acid, pot, crack, or any one of a number of illicit drugs that alter a person's sense of reality.

All one needs to do is accept it, and then seek help.

If someone doesn't want to get the help needed to return to reality, I would suggest perhaps penning a children's book. Look at the classics - Alice in Wonderland. Where the Wild Things Are.

Come on! Overactive imaginations removed from reality is just what the doctor ordered in that line of work.

 

[beachnut]

This is lopsided thinking, and it focuses too much on the planes. Focus on the dust itself. What can produce it under normal temperatures?

An active imagination. Fantasy. Produce by a mind which refuses to understand math, physics, and more.

Not funny any more.

 

[NoahFence]

...Stopped being funny when it wanted to take bets on the outcome of the missing Russian airliner.

I'm sure it's happy knowing that all hands were lost.

 

[calebprime]

Then all you need is something to help you kick that ibogaine habit.

Off-topic, but why not. I saw a documentary called I'm Dangerous With Love. The merits of the doc aside, it was very clear that ibogaine is pretty unpleasant, or extremely unpleasant, so it's not addictive. As a cure for opiates it might have some promise, but in the doc, one person who was addicted to benzos has a seizure during the ibogaine "cure" and nearly dies. Pretty gruesome scene, actually. It's interesting stuff, but not a party drug. It's more of an ordeal than a fun time. Never tried it, never will.

 

[X]

You seem like you hate women when you refuse to use Dr. in reference to them, even when they earned their degrees. Just saying.

Then you have some severe reading comprehension, perception and image problems.

I don't view it as disrespectful to refer to women as Mrs, Miss or Ms. Nor do I view it as disrespectful to refer to men as Mr or Messrs (plural).

Further, having a degree is no guarantee against nonsense, and I will not give someone authority on the basis of their degree. Especially when they are
a) talking nonsense
b) outside their area of expertise
c) violating logic in manners most obscene

I don't know how you see my posts as being women-hating. I really don't. But then, I don't see an alphabet after someone's name as adding any weight to absurd (oft times idiotic) arguments*, either.

*arguments like:
- a directed energy weapon did it, but refusal to tell anyone how the weapon works or where it was located and a tendency to ignore the very real physics showing the claim to be impossible.
- that planes never crashed into the towers, because the pictures were of holograms (but no explanation of how the projections worked, fooling thousands of eyewitnesses and hundreds of camera from all angles)
- that pictures of planes prove no planes because they are trustworthy sources, but radar tracks and passenger DNA don't count as evidence because you don't think the traceability isn't there
- that dust collected from a random windowsill years after the event is uncontaminated and has no traceability problems; apparently 9/11 is the ONLY source for dust in New York

 

[dropzone]

...Stopped being funny when it wanted to take bets on the outcome of the missing Russian airliner.

I'm sure it's happy knowing that all hands were lost.

You use "it" as if WTCDust lacked a gender. Someone up a piece mentioned nude poses on taxis that could clear this up but didn't give links.

 

[NoahFence]

You use "it" as if WTCDust lacked a gender. Someone up a piece mentioned nude poses on taxis that could clear this up but didn't give links.

No, more precicely, I'm using "it" as an indication that the "person" in question has no humanity.

 

[dropzone]

No, more precicely, I'm using "it" as an indication that the "person" in question has no humanity.

But there are naked pictures?

 

[George 152]

More nonsense. Your dust samples don't prove no planes. Even if your dust is caused by something other than planes (like, the collapse more than an hour after the planes), that doesn't say anything about the planes.

For your dust sample to prove no planes, you would have to prove that planes would somehow completely prevent your dust from forming.

Didn't she have to get rid of the cigarette butts in her 'dust' sample ?

 

[DGM]

Didn't she have to get rid of the cigarette butts in her 'dust' sample ?

Some people in the WTC towers were smokers. This is further proof her samples are from 9/11/01!

 

[phiwum]

This is lopsided thinking, and it focuses too much on the planes. Focus on the dust itself. What can produce it under normal temperatures?

You are the one who asked about the wake of the planes as if its absence in photos would prove something.

If the presence or absence of planes is irrelevant to your primary theory, why do we have this thread at all?