Merged The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

WTC Dust said:
You got this part wrong, Horatio. The dust cloud from WTC 2 had already settled when this image was taken. There was a burst of foaming from WTC 1 in the moments directly after WTC 2 was taken down. Most people aren't aware of this burst, but it happened. The white stuff you see coming out of the side of WTC 1 is coming from WTC 1, not WTC 2. It only poured out of WTC 1 for a few moments, and then it subsided, leaving the dark dust predominating again.
Click to expand...



See, now you're making a mistake. Having looked at your picture and accurately determined what it shows, as opposed to what you claim it shows, you should have written me off as a potential recruit, as I'm clearly neither stupid enough, nor insane enough, to be convinced by your claims. You're wasting recruiting resources on someone who obviously won't become one of your minions.

It's like playing Three Card Monty. You don't try to get someone to play after they say they've seen Three Card Monty before; you look for the rubes just in from Iowa, and take their money instead.
 
WTC Dust said:
When you ask for evidence of the pile of dust, I honestly don't know what you mean. Which pile of dust? There were many piles of dust. Do you mean the pile of dust that I personally discovered in a nook at 75 West Street? Or which piles?
Click to expand...

Do you mean the one you ''discovered'' seven years after the event? You cannot be serious, you're just bored again and seeking attention.
 
beachnut said:
WTC turned to foam. And the guys who bought the steel? Upset their steel was foam?

What caused the steel to turn to foam?

Oops...
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtclookingforThermitenotfound.jpg
Your study failed, most of the steel was recycled, sold as scrap. Only rust particles were liberated from the steel, not any of the steel turned to foam. Better luck with Santa, T. Fairy, or Peter Cotton Tail. It appears Bigfoot believers have better evidence than your evidence for foam.
Click to expand...

WTC Dust has never actually said what the foamification machine was , or how it works. Not surprising, seeing as such a thing does not exist.
 
dafydd said:
WTC Dust has never actually said what the foamification machine was , or how it works. Not surprising, seeing as such a thing does not exist.
Click to expand...

I'm quite surprised at this remark. We spoke at great length about this point. The foamification machine is very small. It can be operated by a single human or perhaps even a trained animal. It could even be carried around, like the phasers they used on Star Trek. That's why no one has even been able to show you one. If they are small, portable and super duper secret, is it any surprise that you have never seen one?

But this has all been addressed about before. Asking about it again is simply wasting everyone's time. We should be talking about more important things. I think the important question is to determine what kind of animals could have been trained to operate such a machine. Then we will know if we should be looking in the zoo or the aquarium.
 
I have discovered the most amazing thing. This fire happened in 1939
http://www.lafire.com/lastalarm_file/1939-1211_Hough_Kacl/Kacl-Hough.htm
It shows the same distinct pattern that the WTC Buildings displayed when they were foamified. Here is proof - and I mean iron-clad proof - that the foamification technology has been around for decades - and maybe even centuries.

1939-1106_GrayBuildingFire_600.jpg
 
Scott Sommers said:
I have discovered the most amazing thing. This fire happened in 1939
http://www.lafire.com/lastalarm_file/1939-1211_Hough_Kacl/Kacl-Hough.htm
It shows the same distinct pattern that the WTC Buildings displayed when they were foamified. Here is proof - and I mean iron-clad proof - that the foamification technology has been around for decades - and maybe even centuries.

[qimg]http://www.lafire.com/lastalarm_file/1939-1211_Hough_Kacl/1939-1106_GrayBuildingFire_600.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Cool I can see the fire fighters using the foam machines :)
 
Horatius said:
See, now you're making a mistake. Having looked at your picture and accurately determined what it shows, as opposed to what you claim it shows, you should have written me off as a potential recruit, as I'm clearly neither stupid enough, nor insane enough, to be convinced by your claims. You're wasting recruiting resources on someone who obviously won't become one of your minions.

It's like playing Three Card Monty. You don't try to get someone to play after they say they've seen Three Card Monty before; you look for the rubes just in from Iowa, and take their money instead.
Click to expand...

Notice that you aren't directly debunking or denying what I've said. Have you seen the videos of this foam pulse? Just look for yourself. Find videos that
cover the time period after WTC 2 went down but included WTC 1 in them.
You'll see the foam pulse.

It goes from all dark to a spurt of white at the bottom but still dark on top
to all dark again. This heterogeneity in the WTC dust is what will lead us to
the mechanism used to destroy the WTC and the eventual knowledge of the
real perpetrators, so it's pretty important.

Did you ever ask yourself the question, "Why are there two colors of WTC 'smoke'?" Because I did ask myself this question 11 years ago. I have the
answer, even though it took me a long time to find it.
 
WTC Dust said:
It goes from all dark to a spurt of white at the bottom but still dark on top
to all dark again. This heterogeneity in the WTC dust is what will lead us to
the mechanism used to destroy the WTC and the eventual knowledge of the
real perpetrators, so it's pretty important.
Click to expand...
We already know the mechanism and the perpetrators. Why must you attention-seekers use tragic events in such a pathetic fashion?

WTC Dust said:
I have the answer, even though it took me a long time to find it.
Click to expand...

No, you don't.
 
Resume said:
We already know the mechanism and the perpetrators. Why must you attention-seekers use tragic events in such a pathetic fashion?



No, you don't.
Click to expand...

Steel buildings don't do that if they catch fire. They do this. A severe, long lasting fire in a less strongly constructed building produced this. There was a partial collapse, but it wasn't global, and the Windsor building was still standing after the fire was extinguished.
 

Attachments

  • windsor hotel aftermath.jpg
    windsor hotel aftermath.jpg
    41.4 KB · Views: 9
Resume said:
We already know the mechanism and the perpetrators. Why must you attention-seekers use tragic events in such a pathetic fashion?



No, you don't.
Click to expand...

You got the wrong mechanism and the wrong perps.
 
WTC Dust said:
Steel buildings don't do that if they catch fire. They do this. A severe, long lasting fire in a less strongly constructed building produced this. There was a partial collapse, but it wasn't global, and the Windsor building was still standing after the fire was extinguished.
Click to expand...

What side of this building was impacted by a B-757?
 
WTC Dust said:
Steel buildings don't do that if they catch fire. They do this. A severe, long lasting fire in a less strongly constructed building produced this. There was a partial collapse, but it wasn't global, and the Windsor building was still standing after the fire was extinguished.
Click to expand...

You know nothing about structural engineering if you think all "steel buildings" have the same response to fire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom