• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged No Planes At WTC (Split from: WTC Dust)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The DNA proves that the WTC dust was never hot, so it disproves thermite, regular bombs, nukes, and any mechanism that produces extreme heat..

What methods did you use to test for DNA and how did you determine it was human? How did you eliminate the possibility of DNA contamination (ie, a cat peed on your sample)

You've skipped this question several times. Why?
 
Last edited:
WTCDust, how did you manage to be in two places at the same time in the week following 911?
 
You're welcome.

For the sanity of all involved, I'm trimming this post:

Watch any of the videos of the final destruction of the WTC. What you will see is an explosion, not a collapse. The theory that best suits the evidence is that the magnetic field was altered near the WTC which caused the attractive force of the iron molecules to become repulsive. This involves the Casimir effect, which has not been included in physics textbooks, yet. Check out this reference or find out more on your own. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/457156a.html

I've watched far to many of the videos. Each time, I see a collapse, followed by material ejected by the force of pressure between the collapsing floors. I understand the Casimir effect, but fail to see the relevance. 1. There was no vacuum. Since the Casimir effect is measuring the influence of zero point or vacuum energy, it is a required condition. 2. The force measured is extremely weak, with gravity far outweighing the force measured in the Casimir effect and certainly far to weak to have any bearing on the steel support structure in the WTC. 3. This is an attractive force, not a repulsive force so how could this make the iron (I'm assuming you're actually referring to the steel alloy, by the use of the term molecule vs. atom) repulsive?

I'm sorry, but I didn't see your response to:

To clarify, this dust you're referring to, where was it collected? How can you be certain that the sample was not contaminated from an outside source?

If you want to talk to me, please remember what I said. I didn't take air samples. In 2009, it was the steel of the Deutsche Bank that was fuming. The particles of steel that were too big to float away, fell to the ground as dust.

Actually, you stated to me that you did. Regardless, if the particles were too big to float away, how did you smell them from your home?

Some of the samples are nearly 100% iron foam. You don't get that from some friction that might occur during a demolition.


This is true. However, how do you know that this iron foam wasn't being used by one of the tenants in the WTC? There are multiple applications for metal foam, such as filtration, soundproofing, energy absorption, optics, etc...

You are connecting two different tests where I have not. One is the pH. The literature is full of data that says the pH of the dust was extremely alkaline. My tests indicate that it is not very alkaline.

So, wouldn't this be proof that your sample was contaminated? Barring that, wouldn't it simply be possible that the pH would vary depending upon the location of the sample and the material within?

The DNA proves that the WTC dust was never hot, so it disproves thermite, regular bombs, nukes, and any mechanism that produces extreme heat.


Finding DNA in the sample proves that you have DNA in the sample. This could be due to a contaminated sample or could be dried blood or dried skin that was blown out due to compression from a floor well below the fire.
 
So WTC Dust:

What methods did you use to detect DNA and determine it was human. Seems like such an easy question you keep ducking.
 
Storage?

Really? All my qualification records are in a folder, in a drawer. Easy to access if I need them, sometimes I have to use them to back up what I put on my resume.

Who the hell puts stuff like that in storage?

People who figure that it is less convenient to keep them at hand than to put them in storage.

My diplomas are here in my house, but if I had a small house or moved regularly and rarely needed these documents (which is certainly the case -- I haven't needed a diploma since 2001), then why not store them?

Of all the signs that WTC Dust is a bit odd in her thinking, this is among the least convincing.

No offense intended.
 
On the day of 9/11, I knew that it was very unlikely that I would personally be the one who discovered what destroyed the WTC because, my background is in pharmacology, but to be truthful, I only studied pharmacology for five years. I studied chemistry for eleven years. My background is chemistry. Yeah, I specialized in the chemistry of biological processes, but whoopdeedoo. What I was doing every day was chemistry. Where I lacked a bit was physics, but I knew that my chemistry could play a role.

My knowledge of chemistry, especially, was a key aspect of my instant recognition that something was wrong about the plane crash story. What I see in the 9/11 videos as a chemist is a large amount of steel standing still...and then a large amount of various colors of gray material coming from the building. I've performed enough chemical reactions to know how things generally go, and things don't generally go like this in the laboratory.

In the laboratory, if you add any amount of jet fuel at atmospheric pressure to any amount of steel, and if you then light the jet fuel on fire, what you would get is a short lived fire and warmed, solid steel, with most of its strength. Yes, heating the steel up to the maximum combustion temperature would have resulted in some decrease in material strength of the steel, but not much.

But that is not the first thought I had. The first thought I had was, "Where did all this dust come from?" I was not on Manhattan on the day of 9/11. I was traveling back to Manhattan from a road trip. When I got to Delaware, I did not expect to see the black horizon coming from very near the place where I lived on Bleecker Street. When I got out of the truck after ditching it in a parking garage near midtown, I did not expect to smell this particular smell.

Smell is chemistry. As a biologist I know about smells. I know how smells happen and what makes a smell. This particular smell was more than a smell. It was a painful feeling, and the smell that was attached to this painful feeling was unlike anything I'd ever smelled before. It didn't fit any of my smell categories. I now know that I was inhaling particles of iron, which caused the weird smell and the pain, but I didn't know that then. All I knew was that it wasn't a biological smell and that I could also smell the decaying human bodies. That was harsh. I'll never forget the smell of those bodies. That means that bits and pieces of the people that died entered my body, as did the powdered remains of the WTC.

The day I got home, I talked to two people who were caught up in the dust cloud. Neither one was burned.

Then 100 days later, I could still smell the unique WTC stench, so I had an additional data point. Whatever happened on 9/11/2001 didn't end on 9/11/2001. I could still smell it on 12/21/2001, 100 days later, as strong as in the first few days.

I swore I'd never stop searching for the correct answer to what happened on 9/11. I swore that nobody could ever change my mind that what I was smelling on day 100 was a normal office fire. But I didn't know that I'd eventually make real discoveries that ranked with the best in the world, which happened a few years ago when I discovered a large cache of WTC dust. That was somewhat lucky (if you consider 8 years of searching to be lucky).

On 9/11, I didn't think that I would make any important discoveries related to discovering the real weapon. But I knew I would recognize the correct answer if I ever encountered it. I had a rubric that would identify correct and even partially correct answers.

Whatever destroyed the WTC it:
1. was not an extremely hot process, and
2. produced fumes that were resistant to fire fighting efforts and occasionally heavy rain for at least 100 days.

Anyone who suggested a mechanism of WTC destruction had to fulfill these criteria, or they were wrong. Which is why I knew Steven Jones was wrong as soon as I read about his thermite theory, and why I'm not convinced that Judy Wood is wrong (because her mechanism doesn't require heat). She has not yet explained the long lasting nature of the WTC fumes, but I can't fault her for that, because neither have I. My work continues.

Did you take any air samples?
 
Yeah, but I was a near-constant observer of the smells coming from Ground Zero. The timing and the changing smells are relevant here, and certainly relevant to my background in biomedical science.

I, perhaps more than anyone living within a couple of miles of Ground Zero during important stretches of time, focused on the smell.

Right. None of the persons with forensics training who lived in Manhattan or worked around Ground Zero thought that the smell was unusual enough that perhaps the towers turned to foam or something.

Because they're not as insightful or well-trained as Tracy.

'Cause she knows smells, man. She knows smells. Forensics or fire investigators know nothing about smells around a disaster area, but Dr. Tracy? She knows.
 
Right. None of the persons with forensics training who lived in Manhattan or worked around Ground Zero thought that the smell was unusual enough that perhaps the towers turned to foam or something.

Because they're not as insightful or well-trained as Tracy.

'Cause she knows smells, man. She knows smells. Forensics or fire investigators know nothing about smells around a disaster area, but Dr. Tracy? She knows.

Her nose knows things her mind can't ken.
 
I thought the people who sweep the streets used to own them when they ruled the world. At least, that's what Coldplay says

I got to know a guy who was a street sweeper. When I told him I had collected some WTC dust, and did he know of anywhere to find any, he mentioned the curbside next to the Deutsche Bank. In 2009, the guy told me that he had to clean this particular curb as a part of his normal route, and some of it would be impossible to clean. He said then he'd have to call his supervisor.

Yep. The Deutsche Bank was still fuming and stinking all these years later.

Read this article about how they had to shut down the deconstruction efforts (again) now due to the accumulation of "smoke". I guess that people who don't study this stuff closely might read this and say, "No problem here. Everything seems exactly how it should be."

I see several problems with this news article. 1)Why was smoke accumulating in a dead building, so much smoke, in fact, that they had to install smoke removal equipment? Someone tell me they, personally, know of a dead building, almost entirely gutted, no activity going on in this building, but so much "smoke" that you had to put in smoke removal equipment? This isn't normal. Smoke, or fumes of any kind, are evidence of an ongoing chemical reaction.

2) Why did the smoke removal equipment break? Is it perhaps that it was attempting to remove something that wasn't smoke? If, as I say, the WTC dust was made of a large proportion of iron, which a piece of smoke removal equipment might not be equipped to remove from the air? Smoke is generally carbonaceous, made of carbon. It isn't generally made of iron.
 

Attachments

  • deutsche bank article.jpg
    deutsche bank article.jpg
    115.3 KB · Views: 9
Right. None of the persons with forensics training who lived in Manhattan or worked around Ground Zero thought that the smell was unusual enough that perhaps the towers turned to foam or something.

Because they're not as insightful or well-trained as Tracy.

'Cause she knows smells, man. She knows smells. Forensics or fire investigators know nothing about smells around a disaster area, but Dr. Tracy? She knows.

I use my sense of smell all the time in my profession! Don't be ridiculous.

The key thing about what I was smelling is that it was iron.
Iron particles gave the weird smell and the painful feeling.
 
I use my sense of smell all the time in my profession! Don't be ridiculous.

The key thing about what I was smelling is that it was iron.
Iron particles gave the weird smell and the painful feeling.

Or ground glass, asbestos and other things that were in those buildings. I didn't smell "iron" do you have some kind of super nose?

ETA: Before you said nobody (not even you) could identify the strange smell, yet now you're saying you were sniffing iron?

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Or ground glass, asbestos and other things that were in those buildings. I didn't smell "iron" do you have some kind of super nose?

ETA: Before you said nobody (not even you) could identify the strange smell, yet now you're saying you were sniffing iron?

:rolleyes:

I suspect "iron" is slang for something else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom