• 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.
dtugg said:
We all know that you will not be providing any evidence whatsoever to support your insane ideas.



It's a picture. So what?

Next.
Click to expand...

I'm asking for a substantial comment that shows me you've actually considered the image.
 
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...

If the beams were dust how did you know they had been beams?
 
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...

WTC Dust said:
Back To The Future is a classic of fiction. You gotta admit that one.

Flux Capacitor? hahaha
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
WTC Dust said:
I'm asking for a substantial comment that shows me you've actually considered the image.
Click to expand...

Nobody gives a flying banana about your picture. It proves nothing, confirms nothing, shows nothing but dust. What response, exactly, are you looking for? "Gee Mr. Dust, that's a lovely dust pile!" Next slide.

What is the mass composition of your dust sample?
 
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...

Yeah, so it's your personal ignorance that thinks that a 10+ acre fire, that is buried under millions of pounds of rubble, should be able to be extinguished in a matter of a few hours. Good.

Now, pull your head out of your ass, and explain to me (BTW, I was there, for many many days) how you can put out a fire, that you can't access.

Thanks.
 
WTC Dust said:
Nobody seems to want to describe the forces. They just keep putting up examples and telling stories. I find that interesting.

Can anyone explicitly describe the forces that threw heavy steel beams horizontally during the WTC's destruction?
Click to expand...

Take a butter knife and hold it in your fingers at arms length with the point facing down. Drop it on a hard floor.

What happened?
 
WTC Dust said:
I'm asking for a substantial comment that shows me you've actually considered the image.
Click to expand...

How am I supposed to do that? I have no way of knowing the composition of the dust, which is all that really matters, simply by looking at a photo.

It is extremely clear that you will never produce any evidence whatsoever that supports your insane fantasies.
 
dtugg said:
:dl: X infinity
Click to expand...
You went to infinity too quickly.

If constant factors aren't enough, you could use polynomials. Then, if polynomials turn out to be too small, you could use exponentials. If exponentials are too small, you can go to tetration. If tetration falls short, there's always Ackermann's function:

Code: 
A(0, n) = n+1
A(m, 0) = A(m-1, 1)                            if m > 0
A(m, n) = A(m-1, A(m, n-1))                    if m > 0 and n > 0
I have a feeling we're going to need it.
 
WTC Dust said:
You still haven't talked about the tiny bit of data that I presented. You're talking about what has not been presented. It seems odd to me.
Click to expand...

It's a bag of dust.

Now, care to address the post, or are you going to show us some more moves in that Dodge you got?
 
WTC Dust said:
Actually, not in the slightest.

Up until now, I considered myself the second most knowledgeable person on the subject of what destroyed the World Trade Center, Dr. Judy Wood being the first.

Perhaps with my new research, I'll be #1 !! Not that I care, really. I'm just excited about my own findings. Dr. Wood is cool and will always be #1 in my book.

I'm presuming you haven't communicated with Dr. Wood, is all.
Click to expand...

Your psychic abilities suck.
 
WTC Dust said:
The fact that they came out with their results so early isn't in their favor. They didn't have time to thoroughly contemplate the evidence that was available, and much of the evidence has come out since that time.

Snap judgments? Not good. Slow, reasoned effort? Much better. You might have been convinced by the airplane crash story, but I wasn't. Not for a moment.
Click to expand...

So says the person who just declared that she 'knew', on the very day it happened, it wasn't the planes that brought the towers down.
:i:
 
W.D.Clinger said:
You went to infinity too quickly.

If constant factors aren't enough, you could use polynomials. Then, if polynomials turn out to be too small, you could use exponentials. If exponentials are too small, you can go to tetration. If tetration falls short, there's always Ackermann's function:

Code: 
A(0, n) = n+1
A(m, 0) = A(m-1, 1)                            if m > 0
A(m, n) = A(m-1, A(m, n-1))                    if m > 0 and n > 0
I have a feeling we're going to need it.
Click to expand...

I need a beer. Watching logic and reason being keelhauled makes my mind hurt.
 
WTC Dust said:
There was some steel left over after the attacks, yes. But it wasn't located within the footprint of WTC 1 and WTC 2, which I find strange.
Click to expand...

What I find strange is that you can't seem to grasp the simplest, well-documented reality that there were 6 levels of debris in the footprints.

You're now categorically denying there was steel in those footprint areas - that's a mighty big claim to make with zero evidence presented.
It's just another of your many bare assertions. You have a bad habit of doing that, y'know.
 
WTC Dust said:
I include the dust as part of the debris, but there were also some things thrown that weren't dust.
Click to expand...

So when the thousands of workers sifted through debris at Freshkills, and it wasn't dust btw, where did that debris come from?

You're slowly moving your goalposts, allowing that some steel was 'thrown clear', when at first you claimed 'almost all' the WTC was dustified.

By definition, any item that wasn't dust, is therefore NOT DUST. So your claim that this 1,462,000 tons of NON DUST doesn't exist is farcical. You're not going to be able to handwave away those facts.

I don't think you're onto something; I think you're on something. Seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom