• 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:
The fires weakened the steel? And then gravity took over. Yeah, yeah. I heard that already. Why do you bother telling me the official story over and over again. It should be obvious by now that I know at least what is officially said about 9/11. You don't need to keep telling me. I already know. Thanks.
Click to expand...

If you did actually know, you wouldn't have been asking what initiated the destruction of the WTC.
 
bill smith said:
You mentioned in a previous post that you were fascinated by the fact that the pile kept burning for so long. Did you see them pumping the millions of gallons of water into the pile to cool it down ?
Click to expand...

Yes, Bill, I saw the fire fighting efforts over the many months long period that the fumes were emanating from the sight.

I also experienced the multiple episodes of heavy rain, thinking each time that the "fire" must surely be out by now, but no. It fumed heavily, for months, and nothing seemed to work.

I saw the dump trucks going into the site with dirt and I saw them going out of the site with dusty beams.
 
WTC Dust said:
I haven't actually made my claim, yet...
Click to expand...

What a pity.

Without a claim, there is nothing to debate here.
A picture of dust? What more can you expect us to say but "yeah, that's dust in the picture"?
 
WTC Dust said:
You might be right because I never read science fiction, or fiction of any sort, except the classics. I never watch dramas or go to any movies that aren't documentaries. I don't like filling my head up with fakery, which is probably why I recognized that something was wrong with the 9/11 story the moment I heard it.

False things don't have a place in my brain, and I include fiction and especially science fiction in this category. I'm very unusual in this regard. For a very highly educated person to avoid fiction of every type is rare. I'd say it's unique. But it lead me to become an excellent researcher, so good for me.


Eventually, you will agree. I'm onto something here. If you pay attention to what I'm actually saying (as opposed to DEW and Dr. Wood and whether or not I need medication), then you will slowly start to see me as a great scientist. I have a world history changing story within my grasp, and I want to get it right.

You'll do me a favor if you weed out the errors, but me having mental illness isn't the truth, so it can't be weeded out. I need you all to weed out the stuff that isn't true. After you see my full presentation, of course.

You've only seen the first data slide, and you haven't even commented directly on it, so it might take a while.
Click to expand...

Grab that story hard, stroke it for facts and see if you can ejaculate a theory.
 
Dave Rogers said:
See, this is what I was getting at when I pointed out that beam weapon theories violate the Law of Conservation of Energy. There simply isn't a known source for enough power to dustify the WTC in 12 seconds, even if it were technologically feasible. WTC Dust here has a novel approach to this problem: simply pretend the Law doesn't exist. And, in that fantasy universe, suddenly there are no worries about finding new energy sources to replace oil, because we can just pretend there's an inexhaustible energy source to continue to power our society.

Those of us who have to actually deal with reality may not find all this terribly comforting.

Dave
Click to expand...


Dave,

You continue to confuse what you know and what exists. They aren't the same. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
 
Oystein said:
Here is a little research task for you, to keep you busy:

- How much energy (heat) do you need to vaporize a million gallons of water?
- How many tons of average combustibles as found in normall office would you need to create this much heat?
- How many tons of average combustibles as found in normall office were there in the WTC complex?
- Compare the results, and discuss!
Click to expand...

Exactly why I don't do calculations on demand. It's a waste of time.
Nobody likes busy-work.
 
WTC Dust said:
...
How the steel of the WTC lost its strength is of great importance. You say it was gravity, for the most part.
Click to expand...

No one says that. Again, you screw up on a premise.

WTC Dust said:
...The official story isn't my story. The official story says it was gravity, not me.
Click to expand...

And you repeat the wrong assertion.


This kind of posting something wrong in so many posts won't help you much.
 
djlunacee said:
How can there be beams if the steel turned to dust? You do realize the catastrophic admission you have just made do you not?
Click to expand...

Not really, because I emphasize that there were some steel beams that remained. These beams have dust on them in the picture mentioned.
 
djlunacee said:
This has got to be one of the stupidest things I have ever in my life read. You aren't very good at research are you? Why don't you try reading Bazant?
Then you might learn about crush up and crush down. Do you really expect the entire block to stay intact all the way to the ground and thn maintain its integrity after impact?
Click to expand...

Drop a steel cage a thousand feet. What happens? It deforms. It doesn't shatter.
 
NutCracker said:
You are all in denial. Obviously the dustification was done by a GRASER (Gamma Ray Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation).

Look, so called "scientists," think for once! What happens when a supernova goes off? Right, the stars' core, after all nuclear fusion fuel is spent basically a big ball of iron (if that isn't a hint, than I don't know what is), get's so hot that the iron gets fissioned into pure helium. Since this reaction is endothermic, the core implodes with a big boom. (Note that, though gravity isn't a force strong enough to make a building collapse, it is a force strong enough to squeeze an iron ball the size of the sun into a black hole the size of earth).

Now since all tricks mother nature knows have been implemented in technology, GRASERs are REAL. Period. There's no denying.

Now, you basiccaly bring a big rod of a suitable material into space (is ISS a coincendence.. I think not), pump it with HAARP, and you can dustify pretty much everything you want, everywhere. Instant steel to helium conversion. Doesn't leave a trace. Clean, simple, proven. Perfect.

Sheesh, you brag about what you know about what you know about little things like chemistry and building construction, you obviously know nothing about science that is actually BIG. Use your imaigination. Tsss..
Click to expand...

Uh, I meant imagination coupled with strict adherance to the scientific method.
 
Oystein said:
291 posts, and all WTC Dust has to show as supporting evidence is a photo of dust, with no offer of an analysis what's in it?

Worthless effort. Off to Ignore with him or her.








By the way: Am I the only one who wonders where jammy has been lately? :p
Click to expand...

Dust in the wind?
 
WTC Dust said:
Yes, Bill, I saw the fire fighting efforts over the many months long period that the fumes were emanating from the sight.

I also experienced the multiple episodes of heavy rain, thinking each time that the "fire" must surely be out by now, but no. It fumed heavily, for months, and nothing seemed to work.

I saw the dump trucks going into the site with dirt and I saw them going out of the site with dusty beams.
Click to expand...

Would you say that the videos we have all seen about 'it must be 1500 degrees in there' and 'the guy's boots melt in a couple of hours' are authentic ?
When you say that nothing seemed to work do you mean that they did not do much digging in the pile ?
Why do you think they brought dirt to the site ?

Sorry to bombard you with all these questions.
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
Ok. Your image is an image of dust. It's not really data at all.

Could you please present your data?
Click to expand...

I'm presenting my data exactly as I choose to present it.
Starting with the in situ picture. I don't plan to move forward
until this is commented upon. If all you get is that pic, ok.
 
alienentity said:
:whistling

[qimg]http://upload.stripgenerator.com/strip/32/73/24/00/00/full.png[/qimg]

ps can't remember who created this graphic - Horatius? Dave Rogers? Anyway, thx for it.
Click to expand...

This looks nothing like what happened on 9/11. Dust was coming out of the building horiztonally as soon as the destruction began. I didn't see anything of the bowed out shape that is in this image. Did you? If so, post a pic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom