Merged The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

[WTC Dust]

Consider that WTC 1 and WTC 2 were almost identical buildings. They were both constructed with an inner cage made of steel that formed the elevator shafts surrounded by a perimeter floor made of concrete, steel, and other office furnishings and finally an exterior set of steel columns covered in aluminum cladding and floor to ceiling glass windows in between the columns.

The core columns (made of steel) and the exterior columns (made of steel) and the cross beams and trusses on every floor (made of steel) were broken up almost entirely into tiny, tiny pieces. Consider the material that made up the WTC: steel columns and framework, concrete, glass, ceramics, wood and fibers, aluminum, plastics and everything else located inside an office building. All of this material was turned into tiny fragments, but the steel being broken up like this is the strangest thing, because steel is so much stronger than those other materials. Some large beams were left over, but I'm talking about the steel that became tiny fragments. Tiny fragments of iron that behaved as a colloidal suspension of particles in the air. Some of the fragments were so small that they became an aerosol and floated up into the atmosphere. Some of them were a little larger in size, and formed a foam that fell to the ground and continued to grow in volume after they hit the ground.


What follows is a newly created 7 image depiction of what happened to the World Trade Center. I'd like your critiques, if you have anything to say besides personal attacks. I expect you to be polite and obey the rules of JREF if you choose to respond.

http://imgur.com/a/Fw0Wi

 

[Newtons Bit]

What the . No it wasn't.

 

[Justin39640]

Glad to see you're still around Dusty

 

[Spanx]

Well I guess it would have been alot easier to clean up if it was just a case of sending a team of road cleaners in to sweep up the dust.

Do you have any evidence of the pile of dust ?

 

[Bell]

You collected the "dust" samples in 2008 (iirc), how did you determine they were from the WTC at all and how did you determine which parts of the WTC they came from?

 

[dafydd]

You collected the "dust" samples in 2008 (iirc), how did you determine they were from the WTC at all and how did you determine which parts of the WTC they came from?

Not again!

 

[dafydd]

Consider that WTC 1 and WTC 2 were almost identical buildings. They were both constructed with an inner cage made of steel that formed the elevator shafts surrounded by a perimeter floor made of concrete, steel, and other office furnishings and finally an exterior set of steel columns covered in aluminum cladding and floor to ceiling glass windows in between the columns.

The core columns (made of steel) and the exterior columns (made of steel) and the cross beams and trusses on every floor (made of steel) were broken up almost entirely into tiny, tiny pieces. Consider the material that made up the WTC: steel columns and framework, concrete, glass, ceramics, wood and fibers, aluminum, plastics and everything else located inside an office building. All of this material was turned into tiny fragments, but the steel being broken up like this is the strangest thing, because steel is so much stronger than those other materials. Some large beams were left over, but I'm talking about the steel that became tiny fragments. Tiny fragments of iron that behaved as a colloidal suspension of particles in the air. Some of the fragments were so small that they became an aerosol and floated up into the atmosphere. Some of them were a little larger in size, and formed a foam that fell to the ground and continued to grow in volume after they hit the ground.


What follows is a newly created 7 image depiction of what happened to the World Trade Center. I'd like your critiques, if you have anything to say besides personal attacks. I expect you to be polite and obey the rules of JREF if you choose to respond.

http://imgur.com/a/Fw0Wi

Were those images created by a ten year old?

 

[LSSBB]

Did someone leave the attic unlocked again?

Dusty, please give us a detailed summary of where your dust samples are from. A spreadsheet would be nice, showing exact location found, date found, amount of material, characterization of the material including lab results of the color analysis and material analysis. Then formulate a model of their origin and distribution that matches your observations, and come back to us.

Should be doable for a PhD.

 

[beachnut]

... (made of steel) were broken up almost entirely into tiny, tiny pieces. ...
http://imgur.com/a/Fw0Wi

Lie number one.
The steel was not broken up into tiny pieces, that is a fantasy. The post is nonsense.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtclookingforThermitenotfound.jpg

You are calling smoke, dust. The smoke coming from the top of the WTC is not dust, it is smoke. Dark due to shaded sun and what is burning, dark and white. This can't get better. Your web page makes no conclusion.

The dust at the bottom for the WTC collapse is mostly wallboard and insulation which was smash by energy stored in the towers, E=mgh. More than 130 tons of TNT kinetic energy released.

Your web page does not say what happen to the WTC, your conclusion is safe where? The WTC did not turn to dust, some of the WTC was smashed into dust, and there was smoke. Wallboard, smashed to dust, insulation smashed to dust, some concrete smashed to dust. But steel was not dustified.

What was your conclusion?

The truth is.
All the steel was found, in large pieces and it was scraped or stored for study.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/steelstuffWTC.jpg
3 or 4 floors with steel smashed together.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/11crushedfloors.jpg
Steel from the WTC, not tiny. U B debunked again.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/111notmeltedsteelab.jpg
The nuts in 911 truth call this melted steel. Oops, not tiny.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/111notmeltedsteela.jpg
None of the steel was broken up to tiny pieces.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/Joneslie-1.jpg
Not tiny.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/NotMelted.jpg


1430 views, everyone also views the crazy guy at the corner with the "sky is falling" sign. Your point?

 

[Stamuel]

The core columns (made of steel) and the exterior columns (made of steel) and the cross beams and trusses on every floor (made of steel) were broken up almost entirely into tiny, tiny pieces. Consider the material that made up the WTC: steel columns and framework, concrete, glass, ceramics, wood and fibers, aluminum, plastics and everything else located inside an office building. All of this material was turned into tiny fragments, but the steel being broken up like this is the strangest thing, because steel is so much stronger than those other materials. Some large beams were left over, but I'm talking about the steel that became tiny fragments. Tiny fragments of iron that behaved as a colloidal suspension of particles in the air. Some of the fragments were so small that they became an aerosol and floated up into the atmosphere. Some of them were a little larger in size, and formed a foam that fell to the ground and continued to grow in volume after they hit the ground.


What follows is a newly created 7 image depiction of what happened to the World Trade Center. I'd like your critiques, if you have anything to say besides personal attacks. I expect you to be polite and obey the rules of JREF if you choose to respond.

In the images of the WTC Towers, there is clearly smoke and dust. I agree with you up to that point. However, there is no evidence that any of the dust is from steel, structural or otherwise. I have read one analysis of dust samples collected after 9/11, and by far the majority components were gypsum (26% to 64% depending on sample) and concrete (14% to 31%). At most 1% of the dust was iron rich. Note: even iron rich dust did not necessarily come from the steel in the buildings.

I am sorry, but pictures of dust coming from collapsing buildings, a porous rock, and dust is not enough to convince me that this analysis is wrong. (Not to mention the fact that there are photos of massive piles of steel columns after the collapses, and all the other evidence that most of the steel survived.)

 

[WTC Dust]

In the images of the WTC Towers, there is clearly smoke and dust. I agree with you up to that point. However, there is no evidence that any of the dust is from steel, structural or otherwise. I have read one analysis of dust samples collected after 9/11, and by far the majority components were gypsum (26% to 64% depending on sample) and concrete (14% to 31%). At most 1% of the dust was iron rich. Note: even iron rich dust did not necessarily come from the steel in the buildings.

I am sorry, but pictures of dust coming from collapsing buildings, a porous rock, and dust is not enough to convince me that this analysis is wrong. (Not to mention the fact that there are photos of massive piles of steel columns after the collapses, and all the other evidence that most of the steel survived.)

Aha! I see the point of your confusion. This is not a proof. This is a 7 image explanation of what happened to the WTC, intended for the naive audience. How does it do in terms of explaining my theory? Not whether or not my theory is correct, because almost none of you would support it. I already know that much. But does my point come across, if you're thinking in terms of an absolute newbie being introduced to my theory for the first time?

Constructive criticism is highly welcomed.

 

[dafydd]

Aha! I see the point of your confusion. This is not a proof. This is a 7 image explanation of what happened to the WTC, intended for the naive audience. How does it do in terms of explaining my theory? Not whether or not my theory is correct, because almost none of you would support it. I already know that much. But does my point come across, if you're thinking in terms of an absolute newbie being introduced to my theory for the first time?
Constructive criticism is highly welcomed.

The newbie should not be drinking coffee at the keyboard when he sees your ''theory'' for the first time. All newbies, take a line through Ann Elk.

 

[DGM]

Aha! I see the point of your confusion. This is not a proof. This is a 7 image explanation of what happened to the WTC, intended for the naive audience.

Isn't that the same approach a "snake oil" salesman would use? You have a PhD. Why don't you use it to convince other PhD's? Instead, you target morons (it's obvious).

 

[Stamuel]

Aha! I see the point of your confusion. This is not a proof. This is a 7 image explanation of what happened to the WTC, intended for the naive audience. How does it do in terms of explaining my theory? Not whether or not my theory is correct, because almost none of you would support it. I already know that much. But does my point come across, if you're thinking in terms of an absolute newbie being introduced to my theory for the first time?

Constructive criticism is highly welcomed.

My mistake. If you are looking purely for comments about how well the photos explain your theory: not too well, I'm afraid. There is a cartoon saying that dark foam came from the elevators, and light foam from elsewhere. A newbie would not in a million years guess that you are claiming that those parts of the building actually became foam. The other photos do not have any clear relation to your claims to anyone who has not read a substantial part of your previous threads. Plus, I and most non-experts would have no idea what the dust in those magnified images is made of, so that does not really help anyone either.

Also, to avoid being misleading, the beginner should be informed just how contrary to all existing evidence the theory is. You should include photos showing all the steel in piles after the buildings collapsed. And show that the dark "foam" you identify is rising in a very smoke-like fashion from fires. You should also include some pictures to document how you collected your sample, since that is also important as I recall.

Hope this helps.

 

[Spanx]

BenjaminTR

Is this what your talking about ?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234913

 

[Mark F]

Well I guess it would have been alot easier to clean up if it was just a case of sending a team of road cleaners in to sweep up the dust.

Do you have any evidence of the pile of dust ?

Perhaps instead of all that heavy lift machinery during the recovery/cleanup they could have saved time with a few dozen Dyson vacuum's?

 

[dafydd]

My mistake. If you are looking purely for comments about how well the photos explain your theory: not too well, I'm afraid. There is a cartoon saying that dark foam came from the elevators, and light foam from elsewhere. A newbie would not in a million years guess that you are claiming that those parts of the building actually became foam. The other photos do not have any clear relation to your claims to anyone who has not read a substantial part of your previous threads. Plus, I and most non-experts would have no idea what the dust in those magnified images is made of, so that does not really help anyone either.

Also, to avoid being misleading, the beginner should be informed just how contrary to all existing evidence the theory is. You should include photos showing all the steel in piles after the buildings collapsed. And show that the dark "foam" you identify is rising in a very smoke-like fashion from fires. You should also include some pictures to document how you collected your sample, since that is also important as I recall.

Hope this helps.

Years after the event, complete with cigarette butts. I can dig out her dust thread for you if you like.

 

[NoahFence]

September is turning out to be a bad month for logic in this forum.

 

[Horatius]

But does my point come across, if you're thinking in terms of an absolute newbie being introduced to my theory for the first time?

Constructive criticism is highly welcomed.

I think anyone not smart enough to realize that, in your picture #3, you're comparing the smoke from the fires in one building with the dust from the collapse of the other, will make a perfect addition to the Truth Movement. For anyone smarter than that, this presentation will perfectly encapsulate exactly how insane your theory is.

So, good job all around!

 

[cjnewson88]

No comment...