• 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:
Tell me, what's abnormal about it, compared to other skyscraper fires? Presuming it was begun with a plane crash and jet fuel, of course, which did not happen, but go ahead.
Click to expand...

Two passenger jets filled with fuel crashing into the skyscrapers is pretty abnormal in my book. In your world (shudders) who knows?
 
WTC Dust said:
Why did the construction guys water down the dump trucks? Is this type of watering rig normal at all deconstruction sites? What was producing all the dust?
Click to expand...

LoL they do it all the time Dusters. Especially when working with hot material. Then you add the fact that there was dust there from the piles of drywall, etc. It's fairly common.
 
WTC Dust said:
I'm not a genius when it comes to energy weapons. But I'm darn good in chemistry! Especially the chemistry of smell. I can almost guarantee I know more about that than anyone else posting on JREF. Anyone want to throw down?

I started this thread because in other threads, the existence of energy weapons was denied. And, by the way, ballistic energy weapons are yesterday's technology. Bullets, bombs, cannons, and even hijacked airplanes flown into targets are all ballistic in nature in that they are physical objects sent on a trajectory to a target.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. What is a rail gun? Delivering energy to target via a mass moving at high velocity is an efficient way of doing it and many advanced weapons programs are still doing just that.


WTC Dust said:
These newer weapons don't send out physical objects. Rather, they use wavelengths of electromagnetic energy to do the damage. You don't have to be an energy weapons specialist to grasp this much or to do a simple google search to find out what different types of energy weapons are out there and commonly understood already.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that makes for basic realities. The first being; you don't get more out of it than you put in. Just putting "energy beam" in front of the name doesn't mean you suddenly get more juice out of your power supply. You still have to generate, store, put that energy into the beam, and get it to the target. Which in atmosphere is not always trivial!

As a general rule, converting to electric energy from any other energy source is a lossy proposition. So if you had, say, a chemical-pumped laser weapon, then what comes out the business end will be only a percent of what you'd be able to deliver if you put those same chemicals into a grenade and threw it.
 
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...

beachnut said:
dust

Wow, that is hard
Click to expand...

Well, you've got all that sciencey stuff in your background Beachnut, so it might've been less difficult for you than someone with an ooooh, lah di dah, PhD in a totally unrelated field.

But, I'd think that someone who calls herself WTC "Dust" should be able to identify that mystery substance. Dr. B, have you actually managed to live in NYC for over a decade and have never seen building rubble being placed in a dumpster? It's a very common sight. And if the wind isn't moving, the dust particles from said rubble (sheetrock, plasterboard, whatever you want to call it) will rise slowly for a minute or two before re-settling and/or being carried by what little breeze there is. There's actually an ordinance requiring construction workers to wet it down if the wind is above X mph, but I can't specifically cite it. I do know, howeever, that in my years in Alphabet City, I'd see dozens of such scenes every day, so the pic is as common as dirt to me.

Try it little empirical experiment, why dontcha. Take a walk around your neighborhood on a sunny day. Observe. There's always some building being rennovated or taken down. You, too, will see those remarkable clouds of plain white construction DUST.
 
WTC Dust said:
We have videos that depict the object at a time point AFTER it is said to have impacted the WTC, but before it disappears inside the building.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to grasp what you are saying here, but it really makes very little sense. Are you saying that you can freeze the video to show the intact rear portion of the plane after the front portion has already been destroyed as it enters the building?

If that is what you mean, why do you find that surprising?
If that is not what you mean, then what do you mean?
 
WTC Dust said:
There is some wind. Fairly brisk? OK, I'll give you that, even though I don't think the air was moving all that briskly at that moment. The fumes rise up quite a distance before they start moving to the right.

And you're point? That these fumes are drywall? Anyway, I smelled the fumes 100+ days later, as strong as on Day 2. Get this through your head. The fumes didn't go away! I'm a personal witness to this. I guess I could be one of those class action lawsuit type of gals, but I don't know who to sue.
Click to expand...

Whoa! Are these your very own pics, WTC Dust? So this second one, clearly showing the bucket of the front-end loader that's just dumped the DUSTY debris into the dumpster (@DGM - in NYC we call roll-off refuse boxes "dumpsters" - they use that term in other areas for those wheelie thingies you find behind the Piggly Wiggly, but in NYC we also call the big fella a "dumpster"). You know exactly what the "fumes" are if you were there and this whole string of exchanges is just another in your ongoing theater of the absurd chain of presentations.

ETA 1: Who to sue? Your highschool physics teacher would be a good place to start.
ETA 2: Could you provide copies of your passport, with chops? I seem to recall that you were in the UK around the end of 2001, beginning of 2002. Just how long were you there? Didn't this take away valuable time from your Sniffi-gation? Well, with the prevailing winds, actually you may have had as good a chance to get a good whiff from Oxford Street as you would've from BPC - as I mentioned in another thread, the winds are against your sniffi-mony 99% of the time, blowing inland from the Hudson and over the southern part of Manhattan Island. The smells from "the pile" would not have been wafting eastwards - you were probably smelling the stink of us folk over in Jersey City (many of us don't half pong, ya know).
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
Why did the construction guys water down the dump trucks? Is this type of watering rig normal at all deconstruction sites? What was producing all the dust?
Click to expand...

Why did they water the trucks? To make them GROW of course!

How else would construction workers go from a small pickup to a big damn dump truck?
 
WTC Dust said:
It was cast with a curled up base, exploded outward and curled up top section, and many holes that had blown-out curled up bits in it?

By the way, I love the word embiggen.
Click to expand...

Yeah you moved the goal posts a wee bit sport. Desperation will do that.

Curled up base: YES.

Exploded outward: Not sure what that means but the base is exactly as it was cast, so: YES.

Many holes: Consistent with getting hit on top? YES, Made up of dozens of sections. YES.

You are getting boring: Yes.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Correct.

So give us one plausible location. If there are no plausible locations, then the weapon can't have done it.
Click to expand...

You "missed" this Dusty.


Come on, at least make a half-arsed attempt to answer it. You acknowledged that the beam would have to have some form of LoS and I applaud you for doing so, but I would like you to answer this question as a follow-up please.
 
Huh, funny, I was pretty sure the crane was spraying mist to illuminate the holographic dump truck used to conceal the fact that there was no debris to haul away - it had been foamified (tm).

...could be wrong I suppose...reality is so confusing.
 
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