Merged The Origin of Two Different Colors of WTC Dust

[ozeco41]

She's got you chasing her strawman...

It is pointless giving reasoned responses to trolling.

 

[DGM]

It is pointless giving reasoned responses to trolling.

It is interesting though, that she keeps ignoring the energy of the collapse. You know, being a "PhD research scientist"* and all.



* : I have no doubt she is, along with her other personalities.

 

[ozeco41]

It is interesting though, that she keeps ignoring the energy of the collapse.

The psychology of trolling is complicated - hard to discuss without being seen as "off topic" OR in breach of the MA.

The psychology of "troll feeding" is even more intriguing to me.

My own rule of engagement is to first distinguish behaviour i.e separate the post content from the person - satisfies the MA. THEN separate trolling post content from reasoned argument. Some of our members do mix reasoned argument in among the nonsense. So I often give rational answers to reasonable questions. I usually get ignored but that is no loss - it gives a measure of the other persons seriousness.

You know, being a "PhD research scientist"* and all.



* : I have no doubt she is, along with her other personalities.

I was a slow learner in dealing with PhDs - I was a senior public official with two Bachelors degrees interfacing with my rank near peers in the local university. My "civilian" rank at that time was equal to deputy head of the University. Had to learn that there is no magic abut PhD - it is a rank status symbol in their trade of academia - my rank status symbols were different but at least equal. I learned to translate into their language by explaining that my Masters was from the URW (University of Real World) and my Doctorate from UHK (University of Hard Knocks) Some great people but academics live in a sealed encapsulated world and can be naive when out in the foreign territory of "Real World".

Then, after "retirement" I worked briefly as a mid level project facilitator inside the same University. Mmm....interesting. But too far OT here. A couple of hours over a few beers for those reminiscences.

 

[MIKILLINI]

WOW that's what she considers a SEMINAR?

I just watched the whole thing and can't stop laughing! Tracy waving that chunk of junk around a magnet on a hair ribbon had me in stitches.

I've seen 8 year olds give better organized, well thought out presentations.

Two things came to mind while I watched this Elementary school level of show and tell;
WWPWID (What Would People With Insomnia Do?)- Most of this presentation would cure their condition.

WWSCD(What Would Steve Colbert Do?)- He would suggest the last bit of the presentation for the comedy channel.

Seriously, a cereal box and ribbon? Seriously? There is nothing compelling to be taken seriously at all here, absolutely nothing, and then, to top it all off, there is the pink hair to push credibility even further out the door.

 

[Wolrab]

I might be inclined to believe Dust if she was hypothesizing that the entirety of NYC and environs were drugged by the water system and made susceptible to mental mass hallucinations if she had sample of water from that time with traces of some drug. She would be in her realm as a pharmacologist.

As it stands, she is so far away from her education that she is a joke. She willfully ignores physics, chemistry, the scientific method, fire science, crash science, metallurgy, underground fires, chain of custody, building design, architecture, structural engineering, and a whole host of related sciences.

 

[WTC Dust]

So you have dust with a level of iron higher than expected. Explain why the higher level of iron than you expect is inconsistent with something other than a plane impact and fire.

We need not concern ourselves with your assessment that debris should have bounced off the buildings. Your errors with regard to that assessment have been more than adequately explained to you.

You got something wrong. The level of iron is not higher than expected. It is what it is. Plane crashes do not produce iron fragment-rich dust.

 

[DGM]

You got something wrong. The level of iron is not higher than expected. It is what it is. Plane crashes do not produce iron fragment-rich dust.

No one ever said they did*. Why do you think the building collapse had nothing to do with the dust?

*: Actually it could depending on what the plane hit. but the plane impacts were not the source of the dust.

 

[Craig4]

You got something wrong. The level of iron is not higher than expected. It is what it is. Plane crashes do not produce iron fragment-rich dust.

If what you say is true (and there's no reason to think it is) then it supports the contention that your dust samples did not come from the WTC. Since there is a massive, overwhelming amount of evidence to indicate planes flew into the buildings, then the fact that your dust is inconsistent with a plane impact indicates it did not come from the WTC.

 

[WTC Dust]

If what you say is true (and there's no reason to think it is) then it supports the contention that your dust samples did not come from the WTC. Since there is a massive, overwhelming amount of evidence to indicate planes flew into the buildings, then the fact that your dust is inconsistent with a plane impact indicates it did not come from the WTC.

That's one of the reason the comparative DNA test would be an interesting
thing to do. If I was able to prove that my dust samples contain the remains
of, say, half dozen 9/11 victims, then it would be hard to make any sort of
argument that the samples didn't come from the WTC.

Now, since many lines of evidence have convinced me, the principal
researcher on this project, that the dust is, in fact, WTC dust, this
whole line of experimentation is rather uninteresting, because it's not
a scientific breakthrough. It's a control experiment, intended only to
satisfy the masses.

Remember, I've convinced myself pretty well that it is WTC dust, even
though I might be mistaken and proved mistaken in the future.
Proving that my samples are WTC dust to the masses would be very
expensive to do it the way I envision it, resulting in OJ Simpson trial
type of proof. I don't have that kind of cash to throw away on a
control experiment, even though it could and probably should be done.

If I "prove" that the dust is from the WTC, big whup. That's step one.
It's not unique. Other people have WTC dust. Nobody has done my
material analysis of the dust, and nobody has come to what I think are
amazing conclusions, that the WTC was turned into metallic foam at
low temperature.

Oh, yeah. The DNA comparative test would prove that the samples were
never hot, because DNA degrades quickly at high temperatures.
So there is that additional reason to do the DNA work, but I still don't
have the money for that.

 

[Dash80]

Remember, I've convinced myself pretty well that it is WTC dust...

LOL

Too bad you can't convince everyone else.

 

[beachnut]

WTC turned to metallic foam; a silly lie.

Nobody has done my material analysis of the dust, and nobody has come to what I think are amazing conclusions, that the WTC was turned into metallic foam at low temperature. ...

Your conclusions are not amazing, they are nonsense.

The WTC was not turned to metallic foam; that is a silly lie.

 

[Muc]

Plane crashes do not produce iron fragment-rich dust.

Neither do "beam weapons".

 

[thebicyclist]

Neither do "beam weapons".

I thank it is fair to say that beam weapon technology has not advanced since Cyrano De Bergerac

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Ok, for some reason my post was carted off by the mods with a string of others, so I'll try again.

Tracy, I believe you are a real scientist. What test or tests did you conduct to show DNA in your sample?

You have a sample of dust, you tested it by doing ___ and prevented contamination by _____.

Fill in the blanks.

 

[WTC Dust]

Ok, for some reason my post was carted off by the mods with a string of others, so I'll try again.

Tracy, I believe you are a real scientist. What test or tests did you conduct to show DNA in your sample?

You have a sample of dust, you tested it by doing ___ and prevented contamination by _____.

Fill in the blanks.

That sort of question would be asked by my employer, not by someone curious as to what my results were.

 

[Dash80]

That sort of question would be asked by my employer, not by someone curious as to what my results were.

Nice dodge.

 

[The Big Dog]

That sort of question would be asked by my employer, not by someone curious as to what my results were.

that IS RIDICULOUS.

Fifth graders call it "showing your work."

You know what? Forget it, it is a Science thing, you probably wouldn't understand.

 

[Resume]

Remember, I've convinced myself pretty well that it is WTC dust, even
though I might be mistaken ...

Remember what one famous scientist said about this sort of thing?

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.
Richard P. Feynman

 

[WTC Dust]

that IS RIDICULOUS.

Fifth graders call it "showing your work."

You know what? Forget it, it is a Science thing, you probably wouldn't understand.

The full technical specifications on what I've done is not for you to judge, nor am I offering it to you.

Not only is it a waste of my time to submit the full specs to this audience, but it's also not something I'm planning to submit to anyone except a peer reviewed audience. I've got some secrets.

 

[WTC Dust]

Remember what one famous scientist said about this sort of thing?

That's exactly why I put some ideas out on JREF in the first place. This isn't a proper peer group, but at least some people paid attention. Nothing they've said has attacked the basics of what I've done. My conclusions have withstood at least the meager testing that JREF has provided.