• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

WTC dust

Status
Not open for further replies.
WTC Dust said:
I didn't smoke pot in college, except for like, one puff a year at a frat party or something. Grad school? Yes. By that time, I knew the health benefits.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I knew the "benefits" in the 70's. I remember............then I.......................what were we talking about again?



:cool:
 
WTC Dust said:
Yay! Back to the beginning. The dust was discovered in a building that was covered in WTC dust on 9/11. I can prove this with publicly available images.
Click to expand...

How do you know the dust didn't come from some other source before or after 9/11?

Something else I never mentioned was that there is still a lot of it left. I only took a fraction of the dust that I have found. I'll wager a big bet that there is still at least a few thousand pounds of dust that has not been recovered from the neighborhood nooks and crannies.

Lower Manhattan needs a re-cleaning, and I think that the dust still residing in buildings is a potential hazard and should be attended to.
Click to expand...

Good! That sounds like a much more profitable use of your time that what you're doing here.
 
WTC Dust said:
I don't want to read what you think of the truthers. I already know. "Chewy doesn't like truthers."

What I want to know is what they said about the dust heterogeneity. Can you remember? It's important.
Click to expand...

Damn right I don't! :D

You know, you could always use the search function of this forum to find out. If it's important enough, you'd look for yourself.
 
WTC Dust said:
I'm a research scientist, and you are not. Which means that I'm the one trained to explain previously undescribed phenomena, not you.
Click to expand...

If you're trained to do it, then for crying out loud, WHY DON'T YOU??!!??

I think we've waited long enough, don't you?

What evidence do you think can counter metallic foam?
Click to expand...

Why would anyone need to "counter" magnetic foam?

Can you "counter" ice cream? Can you "counter" Chicken McNuggets?

Also, the new phase is that I'm actually have original results to discuss, compared to analyzing the results of other researchers.
Click to expand...

Nope, nope, nope. Finish the first phase first. You have made your claims, now show your support for them.
 
Why is heterogeneity important? The source of the dust (assuming you are right about it being from the WTC) was a heterogeneous collection of building materials and contents. The resulting dust being heterogeneous is expected.
 
phunk said:
Why is heterogeneity important? The source of the dust (assuming you are right about it being from the WTC) was a heterogeneous collection of building materials and contents. The resulting dust being heterogeneous is expected.
Click to expand...

Depends on the exact nature of the heterogeneity, doesn't it?

I'm not talking about microscopic heterogeneity. I'm talking macroscopic.

Look at the data in this paper. It shows a high level of heterogeneity using the mass spectrometry technique mentioned so often earlier. But guess what he found? IRON! Yes, a materials science researcher found iron in the dust.
http://www.darksideofgravity.com/marseille_gb.pdf

Either way, at least some of my dust should look like the dust in this lady's hand, right? It does. But that isn't the metallic kind. The guy in Marseille, France got some of the metallic kind, but even he shows a lot of heterogeneity.
 

Attachments

  • A Lady with dust.jpg
    A Lady with dust.jpg
    109.4 KB · Views: 4
aggle-rithm said:
If you're trained to do it, then for crying out loud, WHY DON'T YOU??!!??

I think we've waited long enough, don't you?

An internet forum isn't a seminar. I can't do it all in a forum post. Just hold on until December 1. You can do it. You've waited this long to discover what destroyed the WTC. I'm telling you my results, so don't expect any surprises at the seminar, by the way.


Why would anyone need to "counter" magnetic foam?

If I find magnetic foam in the WTC dust, that needs to be explained somehow. Counter arguments are shortened to "counter" as a verb.




Nope, nope, nope. Finish the first phase first. You have made your claims, now show your support for them.

That's not my first phase. My first phase was all my research before I got any of the dust. Now I'm in the second phase of reporting on the dust.
Click to expand...

bold is mine
 
The testimony of a sanitation worker, who presumably has smelled a lot of smells:
"The dust was outstanding - I never smelled or tasted anything like this in my whole life - it was horrible. Orders were given to not hose down debris at the risk of destroying evidence. It got much worse, because now there was no water to hold down some of this dust. It was all over the place - It blew all over. The boats were totally filthy black, us guys were filthy. Our nose, our ears, our hair, everything about us was covered in this dust."

Former NYC Sanitation boat driver Jack Saltarella was exposed to barge loads of Ground Zero debris at Fresh Kills for 10 months and had to retire. Jack uses an inhaler to breathe at his home in New Paltz, NY, 6/27/2006.
 
WTC Dust said:
Depends on the exact nature of the heterogeneity, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
No.

I'm not talking about microscopic heterogeneity. I'm talking macroscopic.
Click to expand...
Still not surprising. Still irrelevant.

Look at the data in this paper. It shows a high level of heterogeneity using the mass spectrometry technique mentioned so often earlier. But guess what he found? IRON! Yes, a materials science researcher found iron in the dust.
Click to expand...
So? Why wouldn't they find iron?

Either way, at least some of my dust should look like the dust in this lady's hand, right? It does. But that isn't the metallic kind. The guy in Marseille, France got some of the metallic kind, but even he shows a lot of heterogeneity.
Click to expand...
You can't make an accurate conclusion based on looks. Engine oil and some darker grades of maple syrup look similar. That doesn't mean they're the same.
 
excaza said:
No.


Still not surprising. Still irrelevant.


So? Why wouldn't they find iron?


You can't make an accurate conclusion based on looks. Engine oil and some darker grades of maple syrup look similar. That doesn't mean they're the same.
Click to expand...

But you could call my research into question if none of my dust looked like the dust in the lady's hand. Some of it does.
 
The metallic dust looks like the stuff on top of "the meteor".

You can pick it up, but it's very crumbly.
 

Attachments

  • Meteoric metallic dust.jpg
    Meteoric metallic dust.jpg
    95.4 KB · Views: 5
On the left is the dust as I discovered it. On the right is dust as it was discovered in the days after 9/11. This is important to my story, because it was the overall shape of the dust in the nook that caused me to recognize it for what it was. I had been studying the dust for many years, and I knew the moment I saw it I had found some. Most of it is still right there where it was laid down 9 years ago. I only took a fraction of what I saw.
 

Attachments

  • comparison of dust fall pattern.jpg
    comparison of dust fall pattern.jpg
    42.5 KB · Views: 6
Last edited:
Here's some dust found right at Ground Zero. It looks really, really contaminated, doesn't it? There are all kinds of stuff in that dust.
 

Attachments

  • contaminated dust at ground zero.jpg
    contaminated dust at ground zero.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 4
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom