• 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'm a research scientist. It says so on my resume.
Click to expand...

What's important is what your methodology says. And so far, it doesn't say anything resembling "scientist".

And I actually have good experience with fires. Fires are used in the laboratory. Fires accidentally happen in the laboratory. I've put out more than one fire, myself.
Click to expand...

I hope for your sake that does not appear on your resume.

Aside from which, it appears that you have absolutely no experience with aircraft incidents, major structural fires, firefighting, fire investigation or anything with even the slightest similarity or applicability to what happened on 9/11 and/or the days and weeks afterward.

My original statement stands, you observed substances you have never seen burned before in a kind of fire that you have never observed before.

And smell is a 100% legitimate research tool,
Click to expand...

Not the way you're using it, it isn't. If something smelled like chocolate to me, I would consider having it tested for the presence of sugar, milk solids, cocoa extract, hydrogenated vegetable or palm oil and natural or artificial flavors. That would be a proper scientific investigation and conclusion.

In your case, you have done absolutely nothing of the kind. You you did not take atmospheric samples of the strange smell. You did not visit major structural fires taking samples there, nor did you take samples at air crash sites and you certainly did not compare these samples to each other eliminating everything that was common between them.

That would have been scientific, but that is clearly not where your interest lies. You smelled something strange, and there you came to a dead stop.

WTC Dust said:
I'm not the only one who wondered what the smell was.
Click to expand...

You are also not the only one who didn't a damn bloody thing to find out what it was.
 
Last edited:
Where is the weapon?
Where was it tested - where was it deployed? What has become of it now? Why use a weapon that powerful on your own people, when you're currently at war? Why not use it again? Instead of sending soldiers to die, we can just dustify any seat of power in on the planet. Why haven't we? WHY ARE YOUR IDEAS SO STUPID?????
 
WTC Dust said:
Note well that the Empire State Building did NOT turn into dust after the plane crash and also note well that the building was made of the same materials as was the WTC.
Click to expand...

I'll type this slow because I know you can't read fast. Try and follow me. The plane that crashed in 1945 was much smaller,carried less fuel and therefore did not wreak enough damage to cause the building to collapse. The Empire State Building is not made of the same materials as the WTC. You claim to be a scientist but have not done any basic research. Frankly,a brain dead chimpanzee would make a better scientist than you. I don't believe that you have a Phd. Sorry for using some big words.
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
The thing that proves you wrong is that skyscrapers aren't manufactured out of strange materials. Steel. Concrete. Glass. Aluminum. Normal stuff. The size of the building doesn't determine the smell if it's on fire. It's the material that the building is made of that determines the smell, if it's on fire.

And there was nothing normal at all about the "fire" at Ground Zero.
Click to expand...

Nope, but stuff that burns and produces strange smells certainly existed in the towers.

Well, you're semi-right about the fire not being "normal". I mean, normally office fires don't burn for 99 days. They usually aren't burried underneath tons of rubble. And the corpses of the victims certainly doesn't help.

What is your baseline to determine this is an abnormal smell?
 
16.5 said:
Gee Dusty is too *********** lazy to google FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC, dusty, who would of thought!) Cleveland Center Flight 93.

Lazy, willfully ignorant or a troll?

Probably all three, huh folks.

Worthless thread is worthless.
Click to expand...

Dusty comes in with 14 posts in 20 minutes, but ignored this one, as she has ignored it for the last week.

lazy troll is lazy.
 
16.5 said:
Dusty comes in with 14 posts in 20 minutes, but ignored this one, as she has ignored it for the last week.

lazy troll is lazy.
Click to expand...

To answer questions she would have to think,and thinking would burst the bubble of her fantasy. She dare not answer questions. A kind of a troll.yes,but too early for ignore. More laughs to come,methinks.
 
WTC Dust said:
How did I know it was WTC dust at first sight of it? Because I was searching for it since Day 3, when I got to the WTC site and noticed to my dismay that the streets were fully cleaned of the stuff. I looked up and saw it on the second floor overhangs but couldn't think of a way to reach it.

The dust deposits had a certain look to them that I recognized and documented.
Click to expand...
THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE! Cleaned up after 3 days? Tracy I'm beginning to wonder if you were on the same planet after 9/11, let alone in the city!
 
WTC Dust said:
I can't claim to be an expert on events that happened in 1945.
People have survived plane crashes. I misread an article about it.

Don't forget that my 9/11 research isn't based on what other people write.

It's based on my direct observations and collection of the remains of the WTC itself.
Click to expand...
No, it's based on delusions.
 
Are you guys still arguing with the loon? The useful content of this thread, now nearing five thousand posts, could have been handled in two:

Post 1: The WTC structures were turned to dust, plus additional inane drivel.
Post 2: Incorrect. The vast majority of the structural steel was recovered and processed.

The rest is just an incompetent crank's exercise in ego gratification, presumably obtained by arguing with sane people (i.e., the rest of you), and appealing to another incompetent crank's silly fantasies. I know arguing is fun - I do my share - but 123 pages of this?
 
WTC Dust said:
Note well that the Empire State Building did NOT turn into dust after the plane crash and also note well that the building was made of the same materials as was the WTC.
Click to expand...
The B-25 bomber that hit the ESB was a hell of a lot smaller than a wide-body 767, and traveling less than half the speed. That makes a big difference Dusty. The ESB was also constructed differently. It has a conventional steel web frame and is thickly clad in masonry, and the fire was quickly reached and dealt with. You fail, again.
 
Last edited:
WTC Dust said:
Make a jpeg and circle the bounce-back so we all know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
It's on my priority list right between cleaning my wifes office and reenacting all Charton Hestons Planet of the Apes scenes wearing nothing but glow in the dark boxers while humming Michael Jacksons "Thriller" under by breath.

In the mean time, here's Alienentities post with video that shows exacty what you claim never happened,

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7394080#post7394080

And perhaps you could address my previous point that low resolution and low frame rates affect our ability to utilize youtube vids for this type of analysis.

BTW, I find it funny that you'd ask for a still to show something that's obvious in the video, kinda summarizes why 911 truth has been such an utter failure.
 
WTC Dust said:
Ironic then, that most of you believe the 19 Arab conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...
Your post does nothing to address anything I said and you seem to have forgotten this,

"Which absolutely flies in the face of you doing nothing to determine what your "samples" consist of and have then verified by independant labs.

You'll have to point out where coming to JREF to be debunked is common place with researchers trying to make the world a better place."

As a serious researcher looking for truth you've decided to forego the obvious step in having your samples analyzed in favour of arguing with members of a sceptics website.

Curious move for a serious researcher.
 
WTC Dust said:
Note well that the Empire State Building did NOT turn into dust after the plane crash and also note well that the building was made of the same materials as was the WTC.
Click to expand...
Note that the WTC towers didn't turn to dust either.
 
Porkpie Hat said:
It's on my priority list right between cleaning my wifes office and reenacting all Charton Hestons Planet of the Apes scenes wearing nothing but glow in the dark boxers while humming Michael Jacksons "Thriller" under by breath.
Click to expand...


Holy crap! I thought I was the only one.....





(truth be told, I'd rather hum "Hello my Baby")
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom