Mushroom Cloud and Pyroclastic Flow

[R.Mackey]

Those articles simply echo the official line. There is no proof of the quantity of steel or concrete. None.

... if you throw out all the proof, there is no proof, correct.

Hasn't it occurred to you how circular your reasoning is?

• You know 9/11 was a Government hoax because the science doesn't add up
• The science doesn't add up because the steel is missing
• The steel is missing because all written records describing where it was are lies
• All written records are lies because the Government hoaxed 9/11

Round and round and round you go, for months now.

How much steel do those photos show? Laid end to end, the core columns would be more than 20 miles. THere would be about 4800 of the 3X3 wheatchex. Do we see anything approaching that? I don't. If you do, where is it?

It covered over 100 acres at Fresh Kills, and it filled the holds of several freighters. Didn't you even bother to click my links?

I never said fluid and phase are synonymous, and you know it. Stop it.

Phase: (physical chemistry) a distinct state of matter in a system; matter that is identical in chemical composition and physical state and separated from other material by the phase boundary;

So... this means you're suggesting the WTC dust was all "identical in chemical composition?" That's even stupider.

The falling dust-fluid on 9/11 was a distinct state of matter, as evidenced by the distinct boundries that it maintained against the air, that I keep harping on. It behaved as a fluid, and was a separate phase.

Hot and cold water in a bathtub will maintain distinct boundaries against each other, until you mix them up. Just hop in and feel for yourself if you don't believe me. Are they in "separate phases?"

This is where one fluid pushes or pulls another one. Which other fluid was pushing or pulling the WTC dust-fluid?

The fluid "pulling the WTC dust-fluid" is the fluid at the stagnation points of the large falling objects. By definition, this fluid travels at the same speed as those objects.

I'm not volunteering my piano. I am volunteering a piece of steel, or some piece of junk. I'd really like your input on how to recreate the effect we see over and over. You have to admit, it sure looks like the dust is coming directly out of the steel. How could we design an experiment where we could throw a heavy object off a cliff, with attached concrete/drywall/fireproofing/etc with the absolute most favorable possibility that it would recreate the phenomenon observed repeatedly on 9/11: Dust that flows continuously off of the steel, and falls rapidly.

Here's an easy one. Pile dust on top of your car, and then have a confederate drive it away. Simple.

NSA guy Greg Jenkins has written a paper on that. You guys are both wrong. You are ignoring the energy present in the material itself. A relatively small energy input, perhaps in the form of constructive interference patterns from two or more intersecting beams, could excite steel molecules in such a way that either the chemical bonding energy and /or nuclear energy is released. You know, E=Mc^2. Before Einstein, if I would have told you that a small bomb could level a city, you would have offered the same "insufficient energy" argument, and you would have been wrong.

You've got to be kidding me.

I might point out, at this time, that iron is among the most stable of nuclei.

In any case, you and Jenkins are proceeding scientifically backwards. You must start with understanding what happened (dustification), then try to explain figure out where the energy came from. You can say it's impossible all you want, the pictures are real. The spire disintegrated.

No, it didn't. In order to reach that conclusion, you have to throw out every single record of what happened to the debris. Heck, even Steven Jones says you're nuts.

Any time you want to come out from behind your veil of anonymity, and go on record, Mr. NASA man, anytime, any day, any night . . . Come on over to my studio. We'll sit and have this conversation on video, you can make your energy requirement argument, and show the debris piles, and cite any studies, and whatever you want. I think the vast majority of people have never seen the real evidence, and when they do, I think the vast majority of people will believe me.

What veil of anonymity? My login is my real name.

You, on the other hand, are an admitted hoaxer, and so nuts that other Troothers think you're a "disinfo agent." You've falsely accused me of being a liar, and haven't apologized.

What makes you think your "offer" is worth anything other than laughter?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Do you expect to be able to see EVERY SINGLE piece of steel from the buildings after they collapsed just from looking at pictures? btw, what pictures are you looking at to find the steel? I would love to see them all since you love pictorial evidence so much, I would LOVE to see the pictures you think prove that beam weapons (or whatever weapons you believe were used) destroyed the North Tower's north wall.

Thanks

I expect to see a pile of perimeter sections north of the north face of the north tower. There would be about 600 of the 3x3 sections. We see about 10 of them. That's quite a discreapancy. We have photos from 9/11, after the twin tower events, but before the WTC7 event. There is no huge pile in Vesey street.

Here is a great resource for studying the situation. Enjoy.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

 

[babazaroni]

Enjoy.

You mean like laugh at Judy?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

RMackey has suggested an experiment to duplicate the effects observed on 9/11.

He says

Here's an easy one. Pile dust on top of your car, and then have a confederate drive it away. Simple.

That is easy. But this would be horizontal, not vertical. I'd like to try to duplicate the effect seen on 9/11. I like the idea of throwing a heavy object over a cliff. How should I attach (or not attach) the dust, and what sort of combinations of dust should I use, in order to have the greatest chance of duplicating the effect observed multiple times on 9/11?

Thank You.

 

[R.Mackey]

What difference does it being horizontal make? You'd have dust adjacent to a solid object, in a freestream of air. What's the problem?

 

[babazaroni]

That is easy. But this would be horizontal, not vertical. I'd like to try to duplicate the effect seen on 9/11. I like the idea of throwing a heavy object over a cliff. How should I attach (or not attach) the dust, and what sort of combinations of dust should I use, in order to have the greatest chance of duplicating the effect observed multiple times on 9/11?

Thank You.

You are going to have to find out exactly what was on those girder sections.

Spray on insulation? Drywall? Plaster?

You have to prove your extraordinary claim to the public.

Get to it.

 

[gumboot]

You should seek damages from the school system!

This is probably the best JREF come-back I have ever seen on these boards.

Had me laughing for a long time.

-Gumboot

 

[Unfit4Command]

I expect to see a pile of perimeter sections north of the north face of the north tower. There would be about 600 of the 3x3 sections. We see about 10 of them. That's quite a discreapancy. We have photos from 9/11, after the twin tower events, but before the WTC7 event. There is no huge pile in Vesey street.

Here is a great resource for studying the situation. Enjoy.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

How many CLEAR photo's are available of Vesey Street prior to the collapse of WTC 7? I've seen none, please show me your clear pictures. Perhaps some of the perimeter columns were covered by other falling debris, it's not like they were the last pieces of debris to strike the ground.

I have a question. Apparently some "Star Wars Beam Weapon" that NASA and every other country in the world doesn't know exists, managed to destroy, and partially "dustify" both WTC Towers in roughly 15-20 seconds each. But it fails to destroy these small pieces of steel before they reach the ground?

It also fails to fire through and around these pieces of steel. It seems like WTC 3 would be disintegrating in this photo if that steel is really "dustifying" because of a star wars beam weapon, but of course, it's not.

There are a lot more explanations for the dust flying off the steel. Perhaps fire proofing or insulation breaking off while the steel is flying towards the ground at amazing speeds?

Just look at what makes up the largest amounts of the dust samples at Ground Zero:
45.1% Fiberglass, rock wool (insulation, fireproofing)
31.8% Plaster (gypsum), concrete products (calcium sulfate, selenite, muscodite)
7.1% Charred wood and debris
2.1% Paper fibers
2.1% Mica flakes
2.0% Ceiling tiles (fiberglass component)
2.0% Synthetic fibers
1.4% Glass fragments
1.3% Human remains
1.4% Natural fibers
trace asbestos (it became illegal to use during the construction of the WTC)
Other trace elements: aluminum, paint pigments, blood, hair, glass wool with resin, and prescription drugs were found.
http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/004194.html

Sorry for using a scientific test to prove my point, I know that you're not a fan of science.

Fireproofing could definitely produce a large amount of dust. Notice how the dust flying off the steel has a similar color as the fireproofing used in the WTC's.

If a different kind of fireproofing was used on the perimeter columns, please correct me.

Now look at the color of the falling steel. The piece towards the bottom is a red, why do I see no red in the dust clouds coming off of the red piece of steel? Seems like a beam weapon that's powerful enough to turn steel into dust wouldn't miss the redness of the steel. If a majority of the WTC's was "dustified" by a Star Wars Beam Weapon, the dust would be more than just the color of fireproofing, concrete, etc...things that you would expect to create dust during a collapse.


So this is what the star wars beam weapon does:
-It's capable of destroying two 110 storey buildings in about 15-20 seconds each, but not capable of destroying little pieces of falling steel before they strike the ground?
-It causes redish colored steel to disintegrate and form white dust. Only some of the steel though, ALL of the steel should be visible from ariel photo's of ground zero, it's not like some of it could possibly be covered up by other debris.
-It somehow missed some of the people who survived inside of the Towers when they collapsed.
-It can cause steel to disintegrate into dust, but the dust isn't present in dust samples from Ground Zero...Unless! Everyone who has ever done dust samples from Ground Zero is lying!

 

[babazaroni]

Those girder sections also show panels on them. Those panels, or something on those panels, could be the source of the air-blasted material streaming away.

BTW, thanks Unfit4Command for those great pictures on this page.

 

[MRC_Hans]

1.3% Human remains

Good data. I'd like to comment on the rather gruelling-looking figure above. It must be noted that much of this is probably not from the victims of that day. People had been working in those buildings for decades and a considerable portion of the dust in any well-used building will be idintifiable as "human remains", mainly dead skin cells, hair, nails, various things that you cough out.

Remember the old CRT monitors from before they introduced protection against electical fields? They always collected lots of dust on the screen (due to attraction from electrical fields generated by the high voltage driving the CRT). According to one investigation, 60% of that dust consisted of dead skin cells.

Hans

 

[Horatius]

NSA guy Greg Jenkins has written a paper on that. You guys are both wrong. You are ignoring the energy present in the material itself. A relatively small energy input, perhaps in the form of constructive interference patterns from two or more intersecting beams, could excite steel molecules in such a way that either the chemical bonding energy and /or nuclear energy is released. You know, E=Mc^2. Before Einstein, if I would have told you that a small bomb could level a city, you would have offered the same "insufficient energy" argument, and you would have been wrong.

So, R.Mackey has another example for the Inflationary Theory of CT. Now we have TS1234 proposing some new, undiscovered by anyone but the conspirators, method of inducing nuclear reactions in steel, and from a distance, no less.

Oh, except, iron (the main component of steel, you'll recall) has one of the highest nuclear binding energies:

At the peak of binding energy, nickel-62 is the most tightly-bound nucleus, followed by iron-58 and iron-56.[1] (This is the basic reason why iron and nickel are very common metals in planetary cores, since they are produced profusely as end products in supernovae).

...meaning any nuclear reaction, fission or fusion, will result in a loss of energy, not a gain. Hell, even supernovae create iron, they don't destroy it! So you've got some new physics that is potentially more energetic than a supernovae! Better put a safety on that sucker!

 

[Horatius]

Like these for example:
[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/rhearhy/6-3_wtc1-column-truss.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/rhearhy/wtcsteel_homepage.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/rhearhy/WTC-014_hires.jpg[/qimg]



[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/rhearhy/possiblytrussmaterial.jpg[/qimg]

And while we're at it: if the Dustification Beam can dustify 80% of the steel in the building, why is it none of the pieces we do see show any signs of being partially dustified? Are we to believe that this process is an all-or-nothing deal? The individual steel components are either intact, or dustified?

Does that seem at all reasonable?

So, Truthy, can you show us any pictures of half-dustified steel?

 

[Unfit4Command]

And while we're at it: if the Dustification Beam can dustify 80% of the steel in the building, why is it none of the pieces we do see show any signs of being partially dustified? Are we to believe that this process is an all-or-nothing deal? The individual steel components are either intact, or dustified?

Does that seem at all reasonable?

So, Truthy, can you show us any pictures of half-dustified steel?

I already looked all over the place for some partially dustified steel, can't seem to find any. I can't seem to find any dust samples with large amounts of steel present either, and I can't seem to find any evidence of a high powered beam weapon in outer space that destroyed two 110 storey buildings in only 15-20 seconds each, while some people still inside survived.

-edit-

Oh yeah, I have one more question. What kind of energy does this beam weapon release? Heat? If it is heat, then why would the steel "dustify" instead of melt? If it's not heat, then please tell me what kind of weapon we're dealing with here.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Excuse me, but why are we using time at all "debating" with the source of this drivel:

A relatively small energy input, perhaps in the form of constructive interference patterns from two or more intersecting beams, could excite steel molecules in such a way that either the chemical bonding energy and /or nuclear energy is released. You know, E=Mc^2.

I mean, throw in a few spelling errors, and Kumar could have written it.

Dude, your credibility just went homeopathic..... Or rather, it went from 100C to 1M .

Hans

 

[Pipirr]

What kind of energy does this beam weapon release? Heat? If it is heat, then why would the steel "dustify" instead of melt? If it's not heat, then please tell me what kind of weapon we're dealing with here.

May I propose the 'Dakara Superweapon' as a possibility here?

As I'm sure anyone familiar with even basic beam weapon technology is aware, once calibrated, the Dakara Superweapon is designed to reduce all matter within range to its basic atomic structure. It does this by propagating a disruptor wave that separates the atoms.

It was used with great effect against the replicators, in fact eliminating them completely and preserving life in the galaxy. Clearly if such as weapon were to have fallen into the wrong hands, the threat to a large office complex in Manhattan would be immense.

No other explanation for the missing wall, the lack of any steel dust, and the extra energy input as evidenced by the cauliflowers, has the simple elegance of this proposal.

Occam's razor, my friend. A phaser cannon would have been too messy.

 

[Unfit4Command]

May I propose the 'Dakara Superweapon' as a possibility here?

As I'm sure anyone familiar with even basic beam weapon technology is aware, once calibrated, the Dakara Superweapon is designed to reduce all matter within range to its basic atomic structure. It does this by propagating a disruptor wave that separates the atoms.

It was used with great effect against the replicators, in fact eliminating them completely and preserving life in the galaxy. Clearly if such as weapon were to have fallen into the wrong hands, the threat to a large office complex in Manhattan would be immense.

No other explanation for the missing wall, the lack of any steel dust, and the extra energy input as evidenced by the cauliflowers, has the simple elegance of this proposal.

Occam's razor, my friend. A phaser cannon would have been too messy.

But there's a problem with the "Dakara Superweapon." Do you notice the great amounts of light being released when the "Dakara Superweapon" is activated and fired? No such thing can be seen anywhere near the Twin Towers on 9/11. So this beam weapon must have released no light what-so-ever.

Also, from wikipedia:
"While it is incapable of destroying an entire planet, the wave will wash over everything on a planet's surface and in the surrounding space."

Nothing would exist on the planet if this was used on 9/11. Nice find though, Judy Wood will probably use this as evidence for the existance of such a weapon.

 

[Horatius]

May I propose the 'Dakara Superweapon' as a possibility here?

No, I'm sorry my friend, but the leading experts have clearly stated that it was a "Star Wars Beam Weapon", not a "StarGate Beam Weapon".

Please study the literature before embarassing yourself like this!

 

[Dave Rogers]

May I propose the 'Dakara Superweapon' as a possibility here?

No need. A Slaver disintegrator beam, which suppresses the charge on the electron and hence reduces the binding energy between atoms to zero, would do the job silently and efficiently, hence explaining the absence of any audible explosions. Read your Larry Niven.

Dave

 

[Pipirr]

But there's a problem with the "Dakara Superweapon." Do you notice the great amounts of light being released when the "Dakara Superweapon" is activated and fired? No such thing can be seen anywhere near the Twin Towers on 9/11. So this beam weapon must have released no light what-so-ever.

Also, from wikipedia:
"While it is incapable of destroying an entire planet, the wave will wash over everything on a planet's surface and in the surrounding space."

Nothing would exist on the planet if this was used on 9/11. Nice find though, Judy Wood will probably use this as evidence for the existance of such a weapon.

Ha. It could have been mounted on an Asgard ship and fired from orbit. It was a sunny day so nobody noticed the bright light. And it was calibrated for WTC steel, not anything else on the planet. And only some of the steel.

No, I'm sorry my friend, but the leading experts have clearly stated that it was a "Star Wars Beam Weapon", not a "StarGate Beam Weapon".

Please study the literature before embarassing yourself like this!

Star Wars? DISINFO.

I know who George Lucas works for.

No need. A Slaver disintegrator beam, which suppresses the charge on the electron and hence reduces the binding energy between atoms to zero, would do the job silently and efficiently, hence explaining the absence of any audible explosions. Read your Larry Niven.

Dave

Sounds a little far-fetched to me...

 

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

No need. A Slaver disintegrator beam, which suppresses the charge on the electron and hence reduces the binding energy between atoms to zero, would do the job silently and efficiently, hence explaining the absence of any audible explosions. Read your Larry Niven.

Dave

Sounds a little far-fetched to me...

After posting this, I googled "Larry Niven" and "Star Wars", and found the following at http://www.farsector.com/quadrant/interview-larryniven.htm:

SF: What are you most proud of in your non-writing life?

LN: The Soviet Union was driven bankrupt by a story evolved at my house in Tarzana. There were about fifty of us involved, led by Jerry Pournelle, during the Reagan era. It came to be called Space Defense Initiative, or Star Wars if you didn’t like it. The crucial point was that the Soviets couldn’t afford to keep up.

The science fiction writers were crucial: we could translate for the other guys, astronauts and engineers and military and businessmen and a lawyer.

So there you are - Larry Niven and some friends dreamed up Star Wars for the Reagan administration, Bush senior was Reagan's VP and successor, his son wanted to start a war to avenge the assassination plot against his father, so to fire up public opinion the WTC towers were demolished by a weapon clearly described in Larry Niven's books. Looks like a smoking disintegrator to me.

Dave