Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

[332nd]

Nope, because the part she is referring to was cast that way.

In other words, the allegedly "curled" piece was made that way in the 1960's.

In other words, Dusty is full of ****.

Lol! I thought of that just before you posted.

 

[JohnG]

As I've told you many times, plane crashes can't do THAT to a steel framed building.

As simple as hijacking airplanes would have been, it wouldn't have resulted in the damage that was seen.

Isn't that a little like saying you can't be killed by being hit by a ball? After all, how many people do you know who have been hit by a ball?

but...

Doesn't it depend on where it hits you and how fast and/or if it's a baseball or a whiffle ball or a beach ball or a cannon ball and/or if you have any preexisting conditions that might make you more vulnerable to being struck compared to other people? In any case is the average person with their supposedly innate common sense always capable of understanding exactly what damage can and can't be done by one object striking another? What does "common sense" have to say about what a fragile piece of straw can do to a tree trunk when it is being propelled with the force of a tornado?

You're a doctor, what would you have to say to people who claim they could intuit everything you learned in all your years of training, even the stuff-especially the stuff that is nonintuitive?

 

[Bell]

Pop quiz for you, WTC Dust:

What is the layman's term for "iron oxide"?

R... r... r...... dust?

 

[Stamuel]

WTC Dust: I think this has been pointed out several times now, but even if only two people pushed buttons to directly control the events on 9/11, you still need an absurdly gigantic group of people with insider knowledge for your theory to work. You have claimed that the DEW and hologram projectors work using new physics. Presumably this is physics that has not been published in physics journals yet, so presumably all of the research into the new physics was carried out in secret. So you need a team of physicists big enough to work out all of the details of new physics to the point where that physics can be successfully applied in the real world. And they need to be at least 10 years ahead of the physics community of the entire rest of the world. So you need a group big enough and well funded enough to outpace physics research of hundreds or thousands of institutions worldwide. I suggest that this would have to be an enormous group, and the experiments would probably be enormous as well. And given a big group, you need administrators. You need funding from somewhere, you would probably need people to build experimental apparatus, etc. We are looking at a large group already.

Then after working out the brand new physics that allows for the holograms and dustamificationizing and/or foamationificalating, someone needs to use the physics to make devices that actually work reliably to the point of near perfection (there was no pixelation or obvious distortions of the planes in the videos, so those projectors had to be pretty good). Again, you need an R&D team that is at least 10 years ahead of every technology firm in the entire world, probably more like 10,000 years ahead. This would also be a large group of teams containing many people.

Then you need to build and deploy these things. They need energy (though apparently you deny this and think that molecules generate their own energy to destroy themselves when electromagnetic fields hit them). The hologram projector needed to be able to work absolutely perfectly over a very large section of sky. The DEW needed to break the bonds of hundreds of thousands of tons of material and scatter it, adding kinetic energy, in just a few seconds. The DEW needs to be in line of sight of WTC towers. (You apparently deny this. But if the weapon really is a beam, I don't see how you could make it respond to the twin towers without responding in similar ways to every building between the weapon and the towers. Buildings are made of similar materials, and presumably the beam interacts with the materials based on the material properties. Although... Dr. Judy Wood makes a big deal out of the fact that every building destroyed on 9/11 had a 'WTC' prefix. Maybe the beam responds to the name 'WTC'. It is new physics, after all.)

Finally, somehow in over 10 years no hint of the new physics is ever published. No lesser versions of the devices are ever patented, despite the fact that these technologies would presumably be worth enough money to buy the solar system a few times over. And no one watching 9/11 thought, "Wait, doesn't this work exactly like the device I made for my shady, evil, omnipotent, quadrillionaire boss?" and decided to blow the whistle. And then there is all the evidence of planes and terrorists that needs to be faked and promulgated.

I don't care if one guy hit a switch to turn these devices on to do 9/11. You still need a huge conspiracy to get up to that point. The fact that you think the players were sitting in an office and not on planes is by far the least interesting and least important aspect of your theory. Your theory presupposes the existence of some pretty fantastic stuff. You need to support the existence of this stuff, because without pretty strong evidence it is ridiculous to think it exists. And as far as I can tell, one porous rock that you found long after the event is not sufficient evidence.

 

[Bell]

WTC Dust: I think this has been pointed out several times now, but even if only two people pushed buttons to directly control the events on 9/11, you still need an absurdly gigantic group of people with insider knowledge for your theory to work. You have claimed that the DEW and hologram projectors work using new physics. Presumably this is physics that has not been published in physics journals yet, so presumably all of the research into the new physics was carried out in secret. So you need a team of physicists big enough to work out all of the details of new physics to the point where that physics can be successfully applied in the real world. And they need to be at least 10 years ahead of the physics community of the entire rest of the world. So you need a group big enough and well funded enough to outpace physics research of hundreds or thousands of institutions worldwide. I suggest that this would have to be an enormous group, and the experiments would probably be enormous as well. And given a big group, you need administrators. You need funding from somewhere, you would probably need people to build experimental apparatus, etc. We are looking at a large group already.

Then after working out the brand new physics that allows for the holograms and dustamificationizing and/or foamationificalating, someone needs to use the physics to make devices that actually work reliably to the point of near perfection (there was no pixelation or obvious distortions of the planes in the videos, so those projectors had to be pretty good). Again, you need an R&D team that is at least 10 years ahead of every technology firm in the entire world, probably more like 10,000 years ahead. This would also be a large group of teams containing many people.

Then you need to build and deploy these things. They need energy (though apparently you deny this and think that molecules generate their own energy to destroy themselves when electromagnetic fields hit them). The hologram projector needed to be able to work absolutely perfectly over a very large section of sky. The DEW needed to break the bonds of hundreds of thousands of tons of material and scatter it, adding kinetic energy, in just a few seconds. The DEW needs to be in line of sight of WTC towers. (You apparently deny this. But if the weapon really is a beam, I don't see how you could make it respond to the twin towers without responding in similar ways to every building between the weapon and the towers. Buildings are made of similar materials, and presumably the beam interacts with the materials based on the material properties. Although... Dr. Judy Wood makes a big deal out of the fact that every building destroyed on 9/11 had a 'WTC' prefix. Maybe the beam responds to the name 'WTC'. It is new physics, after all.)

Finally, somehow in over 10 years no hint of the new physics is ever published. No lesser versions of the devices are ever patented, despite the fact that these technologies would presumably be worth enough money to buy the solar system a few times over. And no one watching 9/11 thought, "Wait, doesn't this work exactly like the device I made for my shady, evil, omnipotent, quadrillionaire boss?" and decided to blow the whistle. And then there is all the evidence of planes and terrorists that needs to be faked and promulgated.

I don't care if one guy hit a switch to turn these devices on to do 9/11. You still need a huge conspiracy to get up to that point. The fact that you think the players were sitting in an office and not on planes is by far the least interesting and least important aspect of your theory. Your theory presupposes the existence of some pretty fantastic stuff. You need to support the existence of this stuff, because without pretty strong evidence it is ridiculous to think it exists. And as far as I can tell, one porous rock that you found long after the event is not sufficient evidence.

Welcome to the forums, Benjamin. Great first post!

 

[Jack by the hedge]

<polite applause> Welcome BenjaminTR.

 

[WTC Dust]

I see people dying horribly... You do know body parts were found? If this supa-dupa weapon can "foamify" steel why would ANY body part be found?

The weapon wasn't utilized perfectly. Not all of the WTC was turned into foam. A good amount of steel was left over, and a few but not many other items that weren't steel were also left over. The Deutsche Bank got an accidental zap.

 

[WTC Dust]

The difference between words and material objects is a great difference. Words are hearsay. Material objects are physical evidence. I have my standards, and those favor physical evidence over hearsay.

So your justification for the reports is that they all got it wrong??????

The whole FBI investigation? The tracks of the terrorists taking training as the flight academies reported? The records of phone calls from the planes as provided by the phone companies? The passenger manifests provided by the airline companies? The radar tracks registered and recorded provided by the FAA? All of that was "wrong"??????

If it was not wrong, someone put it there. Your pet hypothesis neglects to consider the vast amount of people that would be necessary in order for it to be carried out. You pretend it's small because you neglect to consider the rest of the documented facts of the day. It isn't. If the documented facts are all faked or planted, then it's a huge conspiracy involving a lot of institutions and individuals. If they are wrong, it's by far the hugest collection of simultaneously wrong facts in the whole world.

I understand why you don't want to consider such things. If you considered them, your understanding on how many people would have been involved (drop the "wrong" argument, it's really silly) would totally invalidate your claim of a small number of people involved, therefore you must dismiss that thought in order to keep your delusion.

 

[WTC Dust]

I didn't watch the news reports and instantly believe everything I was hearing, no.

The problem is that you are operating from a false premise; that the 9/11 attacks didn't go down the way the government and media said they did. This, incidentally is a premise you claim to have arrived at (via some sort of intuition or common sense) whilst listening to the initial radio reports on the morning of the attacks. It's not enough to say the official story is false because the collapses "didn't look right", or the debris "didn't smell right" or that some of the low quality out of focus second generation video of some of the coverage of the attacks make the airplane look like an "orb", you must also explain why the perpetraors would conceive of such a absurdly complicated Rube GoldbergFinger-type scheme in the first place? Why didn't they decide to just "crash planes into the buildings"?

A theologian may try to grapple with what was going through God's mind when he let the 2004 tsunami happen, but said theologian must first demonstrate that God exists. Until he can do that, trying to explain the 200 thousand+ deaths as an act of God is nothing more than an interesting thought experiment. A much more useful activity would be to learn more about plate tectonics, so that increasingly better early warning systems can be developed to reduce the loss of life in future earthquakes and tsunamis. That, however requires science, not fanciful games of "what if?" played by credulous people obliviously out of their depth regarding the subject at hand.

In the same way, you decided on the morning of 9/11 that planes did not strike the towers, which forced you (and lots of other Truthers) to cobble together 31 flavors of alternate explanations that roughly squared with the observable facts while at the same time contradicting the official story as much as possible. This perverse reverse-engineering to make the facts fit your conclusions, where you were ideologically obliged to dismiss the official story on principle, has lead to some of the most ridiculous "theories" ever devised by the human mind.

 

[WTC Dust]

None of my official opinions on 9/11 have anything to do with intuition.

I knew that airplane crashes couldn't have done THAT to the WTC because I know what a plane crash is. It's a very fragile aluminum airboat variably full of hydrocarbon fuel that gets destroyed with any significant impact with any solid object, falls to pieces, and catches fire in a bright orange flame. The smoke from an airplane crash is dark gray. When airplanes crash into strong buildings (not necessarily even made of steel), they basically stop right at the site of impact and directly fall to the ground. Some pieces get stuck in the building, and a hydrocarbon fire ensues.

Fragile aluminum airboats do not survive an impact with steel beams and slice through the steel beams. It's like throwing an egg at a brick wall. The brick wall might get a tiny bit of damage, but the egg shatters. It's like a bug being squashed on the windshield of a car. Almost no damage to the windshield, but a complete splattering of the insect.

Hitting a steel building with a plane is like hitting a plane with a steel building. Remember Newton's 3rd Law? If you took the WTC and swung it like a baseball bat and smashed into a stationary plane, you wouldn't get much damage to the WTC, but the plane would be smashed into tiny pieces and catch fire.

If you agree with the official hijacking conspiracy, fine, but you're really not my true audience. I'll show you some of my stuff and see what you say about it, but I do not intend to waste my time proving anything to you. Take it or leave it.

Isn't that a little like saying you can't be killed by being hit by a ball? After all, how many people do you know who have been hit by a ball?

but...

Doesn't it depend on where it hits you and how fast and/or if it's a baseball or a whiffle ball or a beach ball or a cannon ball and/or if you have any preexisting conditions that might make you more vulnerable to being struck compared to other people? In any case is the average person with their supposedly innate common sense always capable of understanding exactly what damage can and can't be done by one object striking another? What does "common sense" have to say about what a fragile piece of straw can do to a tree trunk when it is being propelled with the force of a tornado?

You're a doctor, what would you have to say to people who claim they could intuit everything you learned in all your years of training, even the stuff-especially the stuff that is nonintuitive?

 

[achimspok]

It's like throwing an egg at a brick wall.

It's like throwing a 179000kg egg at 600mph at a brick wall.

...nothing left of the brick wall.

 

[WTC Dust]

WTC Dust: I think this has been pointed out several times now, but even if only two people pushed buttons to directly control the events on 9/11, you still need an absurdly gigantic group of people with insider knowledge for your theory to work. You have claimed that the DEW and hologram projectors work using new physics. Presumably this is physics that has not been published in physics journals yet, so presumably all of the research into the new physics was carried out in secret. So you need a team of physicists big enough to work out all of the details of new physics to the point where that physics can be successfully applied in the real world. And they need to be at least 10 years ahead of the physics community of the entire rest of the world. So you need a group big enough and well funded enough to outpace physics research of hundreds or thousands of institutions worldwide. I suggest that this would have to be an enormous group, and the experiments would probably be enormous as well. And given a big group, you need administrators. You need funding from somewhere, you would probably need people to build experimental apparatus, etc. We are looking at a large group already.


Check out the Casimir effect. It's been done. Weapons development proceeds faster than any other type of research, and we already know about many weapons that use energy waves. Ballistic weapons are the weapons of yesterday. Information about advanced weaponry is never disseminated quickly to the public, except in the case of Hiroshima. The damage seen at Hiroshima was new in many respects. How many people did it take to develop the weapon and load up the airplanes and drop the bombs? Kind of a lot, actually, but the secret was kept until the weapon was used, wasn't it?

9/11 was like Hiroshima in that new technology was used. Only nobody told us about it. Can you imagine how long it would have taken to figure out what happened at Hiroshima, if the government hadn't told us what took place? I'm guessing many years.


Then after working out the brand new physics that allows for the holograms and dustamificationizing and/or foamationificalating, someone needs to use the physics to make devices that actually work reliably to the point of near perfection (there was no pixelation or obvious distortions of the planes in the videos, so those projectors had to be pretty good). Again, you need an R&D team that is at least 10 years ahead of every technology firm in the entire world, probably more like 10,000 years ahead. This would also be a large group of teams containing many people.

You'd be surprised. Technological advances are made one person at a time. One person leading a small team can do a lot.

Then you need to build and deploy these things. They need energy (though apparently you deny this and think that molecules generate their own energy to destroy themselves when electromagnetic fields hit them).

So we're good on this issue?

The hologram projector needed to be able to work absolutely perfectly over a very large section of sky.

It didn't work "perfectly". Mistakes were made.


The DEW needed to break the bonds of hundreds of thousands of tons of material and scatter it, adding kinetic energy, in just a few seconds.

If you look at the videos, not much kinetic energy was added. I say this is consistent with the Casimir effect, that only acts strongly at micrometer distances. Once the energy beam altered the electromagnetic field around the WTC, reversing the Casimir effect, the molecules of steel pushed each other apart a bit. After they were pushed apart a micrometer or two, the effect was negligible. This resulted in a not very fast explosion, or what I term "foaming".

The DEW needs to be in line of sight of WTC towers. (You apparently deny this. But if the weapon really is a beam, I don't see how you could make it respond to the twin towers without responding in similar ways to every building between the weapon and the towers. Buildings are made of similar materials, and presumably the beam interacts with the materials based on the material properties. Although... Dr. Judy Wood makes a big deal out of the fact that every building destroyed on 9/11 had a 'WTC' prefix. Maybe the beam responds to the name 'WTC'. It is new physics, after all.)

There are SO DARN MANY wavelengths of electromagnetic energy that are completely invisible and unaffected by material objects, that I'm surprised you say this. I say that the Deutsche Bank was also destroyed beyond repair and also a Greek Orthodox church.

Finally, somehow in over 10 years no hint of the new physics is ever published. No lesser versions of the devices are ever patented, despite the fact that these technologies would presumably be worth enough money to buy the solar system a few times over. And no one watching 9/11 thought, "Wait, doesn't this work exactly like the device I made for my shady, evil, omnipotent, quadrillionaire boss?" and decided to blow the whistle. And then there is all the evidence of planes and terrorists that needs to be faked and promulgated.

Oh, well.

I don't care if one guy hit a switch to turn these devices on to do 9/11. You still need a huge conspiracy to get up to that point.

Not at all. The people who develop a technology aren't the same people, necessarily, as the ones who use it.

The fact that you think the players were sitting in an office and not on planes is by far the least interesting and least important aspect of your theory. Your theory presupposes the existence of some pretty fantastic stuff. You need to support the existence of this stuff, because without pretty strong evidence it is ridiculous to think it exists. And as far as I can tell, one porous rock that you found long after the event is not sufficient evidence.

No. I have many such 'rocks'.

 

[WTC Dust]

It's like throwing a 179000kg egg at 600mph at a brick wall.

...nothing left of the brick wall.

No. No, it isn't at all like that. A 179000 kg egg (made of calcium carbonate like regular eggshells) couldn't maintain itself under its own weight.

 

[WTC Dust]

If it helps, I'm not trying to silence you. On the contrary, I'm hoping that your past/present/future posts in this forum are the very first things that turn up on a Google search of your name and remain so for the duration of your career.

Wow. Why do you care?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Because you have essentially two choices.

1. The weapon had LoS to GZ.

2. The weapon was either in space or mounted on some form of plane, or the beam was bounced from a satellite.

If the weapon was on Earth and was not reflected from something in space/the air then it would have destroyed absolutely everything in between it and GZ. Don't you get that? Even the theoretically possible laser/heat-ray weapons have to have LoS because they will hit whatever is in front of them first. If they were fired through an object, whether that be a building or a hill or a person, that object will be utterly destroyed. Further to this, the act of destroying that object will remove some of the energy from the weapon's beam, meaning that not only did it "dustify" the WTC, but that it did so on less than full power.

Do you really think you could (hypothetically) point a version of your DEW at a tree behind me, destroy the tree and leave me unharmed? If not, then you must KNOW it needs LoS, if so...

I'd rather you answered my question here. Do you understand why knowing where the weapon could have been is important yet?

 

[MIKILLINI]

You should tell your cartoon perps to sit properly with their chairs on all legs, they might injure themselves. Safety in the workplace!

They appear to be levitating. Hard to focus on the job sitting in a levitating chair and they do need a safety program.

 

[Dash80]

The weapon wasn't utilized perfectly. Not all of the WTC was turned into foam. A good amount of steel was left over, and a few but not many other items that weren't steel were also left over. The Deutsche Bank got an accidental zap.

I wasn't talking about steel, I was asking how the amount of energy needed to "foam" much steel could leave fragile body parts.

 

[Resume]

As I've told you many times, plane crashes can't do THAT to a steel framed building.

As simple as hijacking airplanes would have been, it wouldn't have resulted in the damage that was seen.

Yet in reality, that's what happened, so something must be amiss with your calculations.

Did you imagine those planes would bounce off the towers?

That makes you a Bouncer.

 

[Bell]

Yet in reality, that's what happened, so something must be amiss with your calculations.

Did you imagine those planes would bounce off the towers?

That makes you a Bouncer.

When I throw a chair at a wall, I expect it to bounce. Wait... what...?

 

[MIKILLINI]

If planes and gravity can't do it, then planes and gravity can't do it. It doesn't matter if the official hijack conspiracy is a simpler story. Plane crashes just don't do what was done. We have many examples of plane crashes and even a few plane-crashes-into-buildings examples to compare to 9/11. They don't match up.

Come on Tracy! You haven't answered the questions Oystein asked regarding fire and temperatures. Unless you learn more about fire temperatures and hydro-carbon fire temperatures, nothing will match up for you.
What you're doing is no different than being in a round room searching for a corner.