Merged The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

[WTC Dust]

No, I'm not. I showed you an analysis of the dust; it contained many different substances.

Hans

It contained exactly as many different substances as the WTC buildings
contained before they were destroyed. Exactly my point to you. The WTC
became that dust.

 

[WTC Dust]

The difference is the Manila building fell over and was not on fire so it only has dust and not smoke and dust like the WTC. Dust clouds are always visible in building collapses just as smoke is common with buildings on fire. Here is the rub, the WTCs were on fire and then collapsed so had both smoke and dust! Pretty amazing, eh? Cripes.

Are you talking about two colors of dust?

 

[beachnut]

Are you talking about two colors of dust?

The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=244885

? Short term, or long term?

 

[brazenlilraisin]

I know I've found it. !! Heterogeneity. Wow. The dust has two colors. Wow. This is real, guys.

Prayz Jayzus. Or whoever. Because what you want isn't scientific scrutiny, but rather a pledge of faith in your little dogma. I think you've come to the wrong place for that...again. Third time is not the charm (contrary to common narrative ).

"Two! two! two dusts in one!" is not any more conclusive of...anything...than your previous ah-Ha statement "I smelled the World Trade Center as it burned".

 

[Stamuel]

[...] If your question was more along the lines of "Why are you studying two types of WTC dust?" a.k.a. "Why are you making such a big deal about two colors of WTC dust?" then I have the following reason:

I'm studying the two colors of WTC dust because I believe that this heterogeneity will lead to a more perfect understanding of the mechanism of destruction of the WTC. It's what I'm working on and it is what no one else on the planet is working on. Two colors of WTC dust. My first task, if you want to call it that, is to address attention to the existence of two colors of WTC dust. Most people, even within the WTC truth movement, do not consider or actively acknowledge the two colors of WTC dust.

And, since I've made my discoveries, I now know that the two colors of dust mean everything! I've solved the puzzle, and I'm very happy about it. Yes, I still have the arduous task of formalizing everything and eventually convincing everyone. But I know I've found it. !! Heterogeneity. Wow. The dust has two colors. Wow. This is real, guys.

I am concerned about the reasoning here. You appear to be treating the two-colored dust as a phenomenon that demands an explanation, and demands it to the degree that we must reject any theory if it does not provide a perspicuous explanation for the two colors of dust. From there, you propose as an explanation [something about foam], rather than dust, and back it up with a tiny dust sample that has not been analyzed (or have you analyzed it now?). So the dust was two colors because it wasn't dust but foam, which was created by [TBD] from different parts of the building which made different colors. I like the novel approach, but I doubt inference to the worst non-explanation is going to catch on.

Furthermore, even assuming for the sake of argument that there are two distinct colors of dust (rather than dark smoke + light dust), that by itself means nothing. If we found no explanation for the two colors, I do not even think that would qualify as a mystery, puzzle, or oddity. To me it is like trying to figure out why a particular bit of ground had 1% less dust than nearby ground. We do not need a full explanation for that. Imagine someone saying, "We fully explained the collapse, but we don't know why the dust was colored the way it was." Sounds fine to me. But we can explain the colors anyway, I think.

 

[MIKILLINI]

And, since I've made my discoveries, I now know that the two colors of dust mean everything! I've solved the puzzle, and I'm very happy about it. Yes, I still have the arduous task of formalizing everything and eventually convincing everyone. But I know I've found it. !! Heterogeneity. Wow. The dust has two colors. Wow. This is real, guys.

A composition from dissimilar parts? Heterogeneity? This is your discovery? Smoke and dust composition?

Who the hell are you and what did you do with PhD Tracy?

 

[WTC Dust]

I am concerned about the reasoning here. You appear to be treating the two-colored dust as a phenomenon that demands an explanation, and demands it to the degree that we must reject any theory if it does not provide a perspicuous explanation for the two colors of dust. From there, you propose as an explanation [something about foam], rather than dust, and back it up with a tiny dust sample that has not been analyzed (or have you analyzed it now?). So the dust was two colors because it wasn't dust but foam, which was created by [TBD] from different parts of the building which made different colors. I like the novel approach, but I doubt inference to the worst non-explanation is going to catch on.

Furthermore, even assuming for the sake of argument that there are two distinct colors of dust (rather than dark smoke + light dust), that by itself means nothing. If we found no explanation for the two colors, I do not even think that would qualify as a mystery, puzzle, or oddity. To me it is like trying to figure out why a particular bit of ground had 1% less dust than nearby ground. We do not need a full explanation for that. Imagine someone saying, "We fully explained the collapse, but we don't know why the dust was colored the way it was." Sounds fine to me. But we can explain the colors anyway, I think.

Explain away, if you must, but that's been my job. I have really and truly
wanted to know why there were two colors of WTC dust, and conventional
explanations didn't satisfy me.

If all you have to say is "fire" blah blah blah "jet fuel" blah blah blah "impact",
then just save your time. On the other hand, if you have an explanation of
the color and timing of WTC dust that is convincing, let's hear it.

Also, it can't generate a dust cloud that kills the passersby. The dust cloud was cool.
It wasn't like the stuff that came down onto Pompeii from Mount Vesuvius.

 

[NoahFence]

You can't be convinced. So what's the point??

 

[DGM]

The answer has several parts, depending on what you're talking about.
If what you mean is "Why are you studying 9/11?", the answer is:

If you actually read my post you would know that's not what I meant. I suspect you know this but, can't answer the actual question I asked.

Care to try again?

This is where you have to start. You need to show this to be true and show how it could be true. This is where you fail miserably.

Maybe you just forgot to start with a theory and work from there. You clearly started from a conclusion and are working backwards to make it true.

Why are you doing this?

 

[DGM]

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.

Can you show images where the dust had subsided and that this "foam" started up again?

I'm sure you just missed this. You know the picture you posted was part of a video. It does not show what you claim it does. The dust had not subsided from the first collapse.

 

[MRC_Hans]

And, since I've made my discoveries, I now know that the two colors of dust mean everything! I've solved the puzzle, and I'm very happy about it. Yes, I still have the arduous task of formalizing everything and eventually convincing everyone. But I know I've found it. !! Heterogeneity. Wow. The dust has two colors. Wow. This is real, guys.

Oookay. Pardon me, I seem to be slow, so can we start from scratch? While I can see that the color of the dust does vary somewhat, this appears to be due to different light and other mundane things. Otherwise, as far as I can see, it is a fairly homogenous light grey.

Could you humor me, and point out the two colors, in a picture?

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

It contained exactly as many different substances as the WTC buildings
contained before they were destroyed. Exactly my point to you. The WTC
became that dust.

But not in the same proportions as the buildings. For instance steel is very poorly represented in the dust.

(I don't think anybody denies that some of the WTC became dust.)

If the WTC, as you say, became dust, where did the huge heap of wreckage in GZ come from?

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

Also, it can't generate a dust cloud that kills the passersby. The dust cloud was cool.
It wasn't like the stuff that came down onto Pompeii from Mount Vesuvius.

Oh, I can explain that: You see, as the name hints, Mount Vesuvius, is not a building, it is a vulcano. Vulcanos tend to spew hot stuff when they erupt.

Buildings, OTOH are generally quite cool, in comparison. Even with a few storeys completely on fire, the overall temperature of a 110 storey bulding is quite cool.

Hans

 

[GlennB]

Foam? This supports my contention of way back that Dusty's "samples" contained smashed up remains of polystrene coffee cups. i.e. it was accumulated street litter The brown fibrous stuff would be cigarette butts.

 

[dafydd]

Yes, I still have the arduous task of formalizing everything and eventually convincing everyone.

The universe will end before you do that.

 

[dafydd]

Buildings, OTOH are generally quite cool,

Hans

I'm painting the outside of my house white and it looks really cool.

 

[Horatius]

Could you humor me, and point out the two colors, in a picture?

Hans

The problem here is, you're just not capable of being crazy enough to understand what WTCDust is saying*.


She's identifying the column of black smoke rising out of the tower, which normal people understand is a consequence of the ongoing fires, as "dust". This is why she'll never accept any reasonable explanation of where this "dust" originates from: She's fundamentally misunderstood what she's looking, at, and will never concede that error.





*Lucky for you, I am!

 

[WTC Dust]

I'm sure you just missed this. You know the picture you posted was part of a video. It does not show what you claim it does. The dust had not subsided from the first collapse.

Check the timing again, bro.

 

[WTC Dust]

Oookay. Pardon me, I seem to be slow, so can we start from scratch? While I can see that the color of the dust does vary somewhat, this appears to be due to different light and other mundane things. Otherwise, as far as I can see, it is a fairly homogenous light grey.

Could you humor me, and point out the two colors, in a picture?

Hans

http://imgur.com/a/G1tmG#0

Pretty hard to deny the two colors in the first two images.

 

[WTC Dust]

But not in the same proportions as the buildings. For instance steel is very poorly represented in the dust.

(I don't think anybody denies that some of the WTC became dust.)

If the WTC, as you say, became dust, where did the huge heap of wreckage in GZ come from?

Hans

Huge is a relative term, and the question is off topic as stated. But the
truth is that it is actually on topic, because more than wreckage and debris,
the two colors of WTC dust were also found in the basement of the WTC.

In this image, taken at least 5 years after the attacks, you can see the
dark and light colored material in the basement of the WTC.