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

Merged 9/11 No Plane/Energy Weapon discussion thread

WTC Dust said:
Do you have any experience with basic science research? Have you ever answered a question that, before you came along, nobody else had ever answered before? Do you have any experience or training in forensics? Please elaborate if so.
Click to expand...
I have csome training in forensics, specificly related to arson investigations. I also have experience fighting fires very similar to the WTC fires, differing mostly by scale.

You have not offered any proof that the fires are at all unusual, aside from the astounding fact that some idiotic religious whackadoodles flew airplanes into the sides of the towers to make them collapse.

You will rarely smell a garbage dump fire these days. It is illegal in most places to burn garbage.

Hopefull, you will never again smell a fire in which human corpses are part of the fuel load.

What was most unique about the WTC fires is that they were burning a combination of trash and electronics compn ents which may notbe legally disposed of as trash, plus garbage from the food service operations within the buioldings and, as I mentioned, human corpses.

Of course it was not an ordinary fire, because you are not, ordinarily, going to find those things in the ruins and rubble.

The smell was not the result of any form of exotic energy weapon.
 
phiwum said:
It takes enormous ego to assume that all of the people pointing out the role of momentum in determining the effects of a collision are wrong.
Click to expand...


And for Ms. Blevins, an obvious experiment: Throw a bullet at a wall and record the damage to the wall. Now, fire a bullet from a gun at the wall and record the damage to the wall. What would you say accounts for the difference in damage (and yes, there will be a difference)?

WTC Dust said:
[...] if you think a fragile aluminum airboat can break through steel beams without destroying itself at the south face of WTC 2. It's a stupid story, and you're the one who got suckered by it.
Click to expand...


We can cut steel with water, you know...

Dave Rogers said:
But only if you neglect conservation of momentum.
Click to expand...


You don't have to neglect it; you can just set it to zero. :p
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
Nobody is talking about the Deutsche Bank, except me.
Nobody is talking about The Sphere, except me.
Nobody is mentioning the multiple types of metallic foam, except me.
Nobody is talking about the lack of a wake at 9:03AM, except me.
Nobody is talking about the smell of the WTC fumes and the duration of these fumes, except me.
Nobody is talking about the rain days in NYC, except me.

Dr. Wood is talking about some of the same things that I talk about, but she focuses on different things, like the magnetosphere.
Click to expand...

We'll if the whole world is against you, it's probably onto something.
 
Tracy, none of the weapons systems you offer up as evidence for your position deliver any kind of enegty which will do the job of steel demolition without creating a shower of sparks on the outside as well. There would be blinding light.
It isn't there.
 
WTC Dust said:
A complete understanding of the universe has not yet been declared by even the brightest of physicists.
Click to expand...

Nope, so what?

For example I've met a lot of human beings and I don't even have a clue as to what you're on about. Nope, not a clue.
 
WTC Dust said:
Check out this picture of a dump truck. I don't see anyone actively adding things to the dump truck. It looks like they put the stuff in there and left. Then the stuff is fuming. You can see the fumes. There isn't anyone adding things to the dump truck when the picture was taken, so I don't think it was being stirred up. I think the fumes are rising from the material placed in the dump truck.
Click to expand...

Here is my most plausible explanation for the photograph:

A front end loader is working on the side of the dump truck opposite the camera. A few seconds before the picture was taken, it dumped a load of rubble into the dump truck, then backed up and lowered its bucket, so that it can't be seen in the photo. The "fumes" are dust.

Alternative explanations:

The rubble contains lots of dust, which was stirred up by wind.

The rubble contains combustibles which were still smoldering, and the "fumes" are smoke.

Tracy is taking bong hits behind the dump truck.
 
I will ask again.......

WTC Dust:

Do you have any experience actually working with or on DEW systems?

Yes or no?
 
Time to abandon this insane thread and start a new one. It's like our own personal wack-a-mole.

Shame on those of you responding. :mad:

ETA; Suggestion for the mods: Could we have a merged thread called something like "No-plane crap, direct energy weapons, elves, wizards and other fantasy stuff"? I mean, there's no point to having this craziness pop up in a new incarnation every single day.
 
Last edited:
CORed said:
Here is my most plausible explanation for the photograph:

A front end loader is working on the side of the dump truck opposite the camera. A few seconds before the picture was taken, it dumped a load of rubble into the dump truck, then backed up and lowered its bucket, so that it can't be seen in the photo. The "fumes" are dust.

Alternative explanations:

The rubble contains lots of dust, which was stirred up by wind.

The rubble contains combustibles which were still smoldering, and the "fumes" are smoke.

Tracy is taking bong hits behind the dump truck.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously expect us to accept such a simple, logical explanation when there are billions of complicated and logically contorted (im)possibilities out there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

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