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

Merged The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

OK, fine. I'll ask you. What evidence would convince you that my samples are from WTC 2? DNA fingerprinting good enough?

For starters, you could demonstrate that the airshaft where you found your samples could only have acquired them from a dust storm originating from the collapse of a large building complex and not from, say, ordinary exposure to NYC weather and air conditions - I can think of a simple way this can be disproved, which I don't think you've done. Then you can tell us what your methodology will be for extracting and analyzing any DNA fragments you find: since this is a mental exercise, feel free to specify as thorough a process as you can - money's no object!

The problem with dust - and small, light particulate matter in general - is that it gets in everywhere, and by its nature travels with the wind. Sometimes it can be traced back to a particular source, but not always. I currently consider myself a bit of a practical expert on dust right now, since I'm doing spring cleaning (including the garage, ahchoo). The stuff I swept up today is likely similar to your samples: concrete dust, bits of metal flake, pulverized plant matter, dead animal residue (insects rather than human, but there are probably skin flakes as well) and all the normal stuff you'd expect in this area. And it's on every surface and in every nook and cranny that isn't sealed.
 
For starters, you could demonstrate that the airshaft where you found your samples could only have acquired them from a dust storm originating from the collapse of a large building complex and not from, say, ordinary exposure to NYC weather and air conditions - I can think of a simple way this can be disproved, which I don't think you've done. Then you can tell us what your methodology will be for extracting and analyzing any DNA fragments you find: since this is a mental exercise, feel free to specify as thorough a process as you can - money's no object!

The problem with dust - and small, light particulate matter in general - is that it gets in everywhere, and by its nature travels with the wind. Sometimes it can be traced back to a particular source, but not always. I currently consider myself a bit of a practical expert on dust right now, since I'm doing spring cleaning (including the garage, ahchoo). The stuff I swept up today is likely similar to your samples: concrete dust, bits of metal flake, pulverized plant matter, dead animal residue (insects rather than human, but there are probably skin flakes as well) and all the normal stuff you'd expect in this area. And it's on every surface and in every nook and cranny that isn't sealed.

This is a great way to convince me.

My 5 year old nephew does just fine on his own by the way. He happens to read at a fourth grade level and excels in math and science as well, which is more than I can say for you. As far as being gullible, he is far from it. But you may want to take a look in the mirror. And in the future refrain from telling me how to interact with my family.
 
This is a great way to convince me.

My 5 year old nephew does just fine on his own by the way. He happens to read at a fourth grade level and excels in math and science as well, which is more than I can say for you. As far as being gullible, he is far from it. But you may want to take a look in the mirror. And in the future refrain from telling me how to interact with my family.

I think you might be responding to the wrong post
 
What precisely do you mean by DNA fingerprinting?

Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.
 
Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.

Why WTC 2 and not WTC 1?

I highly doubt you would ever be given access to victim DNA data, but if you were what if the DNA matched a plane victim?

Yes I know you run away from anything to do with the aircraft, but at least try not to respond with your usual "irreverent, there were no planes" mantra.
 
Last edited:
Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.
Why are you talking this far ahead? First you have to show the sample contains human DNA. You don't even know this because all you have ever done is look at it with a magnifying glass (and perhaps smelling it).

Why don't you start here? Show how you determined the sample contains human DNA. Surely this will be no problem for someone like you. :rolleyes:
 
Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.

We'll be here when you get back from doing the testing. Of course that would only establish that some of the dust came from the WTC (assuming there is any human DNA material in said dust). It would not establish the use of an energy weapon nor would it cast doubt upon the observed facts of the planes hitting the building.

DNA would do nothing to solve one of the numerous obvious problems with you idea which is that the dust certainly contains material that was not in the WTC (ie other random bits of stuff from around New York).

If you were somehow to isolate your sample so you only had material from the WTC (which frankly, I have no idea how you'd go about doing that) then you still left with two planes hitting the building and no energy weapon.

I know you've said the planes should have bounced off but that's nothing to be taken seriously. I suggest you watch "Nova Science Now", the special on going to Mars and you can see how less dense objects penetrate steel plates. The think you said makes planes penetrating the WTC is exactly the same thing that's a serious threat to spacecraft. Watching the bit about how NASA wants to protect the spacecraft will clear up your error on this point.
 
Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.
It is a crime to have dust you think has DNA from survivors on 911 - A crime to keep the evidence from the Police. You are full of BS - complete nonsense.
 
Matching the DNA detected in the WTC dust to databanks of family members who lost someone in WTC 2. It's a comparative study, called DNA fingerprinting. You take two samples of DNA, cut each into pieces with restriction endonucleases, and run them both on an agarose gel to see if the lengths of the DNA are the same.

A positive DNA match would, in my opinion, be pretty much the best proof that the dust came from WTC 2.


Even if you found a victim's DNA in the schmutz, how would you determine that it got there from the collapse of the building and not, say, an old cigarette butt?
 
You all know this "DNA in the sample" is all in her mind? She has not actually tested for this.

I wonder why you keep entertaining the fantasy that she has actually identified human DNA?
 
You all know this "DNA in the sample" is all in her mind? She has not actually tested for this.

I wonder why you keep entertaining the fantasy that she has actually identified human DNA?


Given that she found her crap with cigarette butts in it, it would not surprise me in the least if there were some DNA in the dust, especially considering that there would likely be DNA from a whole bunch of other NYC biota, which is rather the point.
 
Given that she found her crap with cigarette butts in it, it would not surprise me in the least if there were some DNA in the dust, especially considering that there would likely be DNA from a whole bunch of other NYC biota, which is rather the point.
Granted. The fact that anyone is letting her argue that she will connect this to the WTC is pure fantasy.

She took a couple close-up photos and put a magnet on the stuff (if she even did that or has any of the stuff). Now she's talking about how she needs to assemble a team and do all sorts of research. This is her fantasy. She has no idea what she has (if anything) and will never do any real work to change this. As long as people are responding, her "work is worthwhile. It's all about the attention. In all likelihood, she doesn't even have these samples she claims to have.
 
Last edited:
You all know this "DNA in the sample" is all in her mind? She has not actually tested for this.

If she had done any testing, it wouldn't be a problem to describe her method. She hasn't.
 
I doubt she made any effort to collect anything. I think she found random pictures on the internet and made up this whole story.

I believe she did scrape up this stuff, but knows full well that it's nothing but junk.
 
Hey, that's cool. It's at least a beginning.

Please tell me what type of evidence you'd need in order to change your mind. Physical evidence, circumstantial evidence, documentary evidence, eyewitness testimony?

What is the nature of the proof that you would require?

Let's have whatever evidence you have got.

... You know, the credible, verifiable kind of evidence.

Hans
 
We'll be here when you get back from doing the testing. Of course that would only establish that some of the dust came from the WTC (assuming there is any human DNA material in said dust). It would not establish the use of an energy weapon nor would it cast doubt upon the observed facts of the planes hitting the building.

DNA would do nothing to solve one of the numerous obvious problems with you idea which is that the dust certainly contains material that was not in the WTC (ie other random bits of stuff from around New York).

If you were somehow to isolate your sample so you only had material from the WTC (which frankly, I have no idea how you'd go about doing that) then you still left with two planes hitting the building and no energy weapon.

I know you've said the planes should have bounced off but that's nothing to be taken seriously. I suggest you watch "Nova Science Now", the special on going to Mars and you can see how less dense objects penetrate steel plates. The think you said makes planes penetrating the WTC is exactly the same thing that's a serious threat to spacecraft. Watching the bit about how NASA wants to protect the spacecraft will clear up your error on this point.

The energy weapon ain't my gig. Judy Wood says that stuff. I don't
"believe" it at all. It's just the best theory out there. Knock it down,
if you wish, and I will not care a bit.

My work does matter to me, and the issue of contamination has been
brought up many times, but there hasn't been a decent response to
my discussion about contamination. It's been a one-sided conversation.
Someone from JREF will say, "Your dust is contaminated." I respond with
a thoughtful discussion of the possible sources of contamination, and
then....crickets. Later on, someone else will mention that my dust is
contaminated, when they don't actually know that it is contaminated
(because they haven't tested for contamination) and don't really have
a good idea of what contamination is and how to conduct science
in the face of contamination. If a sample is contaminated, or suspected
to be contaminated, you don't just throw up your hands and say
that nothing can be done about it. Because something can be done about
contamination. It's not a strange concept, dealing with contamination.
It's not scary, nor does it invalidate things on a global scale.

The WTC dust might be contaminated with bacteria, but not more than
any other sample. If you think my WTC dust samples are contaminated
with cigarette butts, they aren't, but even if they were, big deal.
As long as I didn't come to a silly conclusion as a result, like that the
WTC was destroyed by a cigarette fire.

What's a cigarette going to do, anyway? Shatter steel into fragments?
I don't think so!

The reason I was able to isolate pure WTC dust is because there was
a lot of it in rather heavy chunks. The big chunks are still intact, never
having been investigated. So at least the stuff on the inside of the
chunks is pure WTC dust. If you think this stuff was sifting around like
sand, it wasn't. It had plopped down and stayed there for years,
protected from rain by a concrete overhang.

Some objects might penetrate steel plates. An airplane might even
penetrate a steel plate, if it wasn't too thick of a plate. But an
airplane couldn't have crashed into the south wall of WTC 2 without
at least SOME debris bouncing off the south wall of WTC 2 at the
moment of impact, and before the subsequent explosion, which was
real.
 
Last edited:
Even if you found a victim's DNA in the schmutz, how would you determine that it got there from the collapse of the building and not, say, an old cigarette butt?

There will never be zero doubt about it. If I get one DNA match from
a family member, maybe that's not good enough. OJ got away with
murder because of this kind of doubt. But if there are several DNA
matches from several different family members, the case gets stronger.
 
Given that she found her crap with cigarette butts in it, it would not surprise me in the least if there were some DNA in the dust, especially considering that there would likely be DNA from a whole bunch of other NYC biota, which is rather the point.

Maybe so, but the DNA wouldn't discriminate between the different
types of dust if it were random, cigarette-born DNA. The DNA is located
in the lighter dust and not in the darker dust. Can't get that from a
splash of rat pee or a cigarette butt.
 

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