WTC dust

[bill smith]

First of all, I am pursuing an academic venue for my studies. Secondly, you know the real reason why there is no one who is seriously, scientifically questioning the official story, and it's not because the official story is true.

It's because people are scared. Academic research into 9/11 is very heavily frowned upon. As soon as a professor would begin to question 9/11, he or she would be attacked, and tenure doesn't exist any more. Professors don't have real academic freedom these days, which is sad.

I agree. Science has been usurped by politics. Look at NIST. Check out the union of concerned scientists- who you almost never hear about despite them numbering in the tens of thousands.

 

[beachnut]

I agree. Science has been usurped by politics. Look at NIST. Check out the union of concerned scientists- who you almost never hear about despite them numbering in the tens of thousands.

They say your claims on 911 are moronic delusions. They debunk your failed ideas on 911, saying your claims are anti-intellectual claptrap.
Steel turning to dust is an insane claim based on delusions and ignorance.

 

[bill smith]

But would you expect to find metallic dust in the midst of WTC dust?

Dr. Bevins I have a nanothermite theory that I believe covers virtually every aspect of the collapses . Do you think it would be useful to compare aspects of our theories with a view to ruling out either Judy Wood or nanothermite ?

For me it's either Judy Wood or nanothermite and I really want to rule out one or the other.

 

[WTC Dust]

I take it that your field of expertise is not one of the physical sciences? It's simply that you've completely failed to explain the energy discrepancy between what's required to destroy the towers and what was (or even still is) available. It would require something even more powerful than the NIF, and that's hardly mobile.

Nor have you addressed the issue of what happened to all of the energy that didn't couple with the structures, through scattering, reflection, etc. Why didn't this energy affect any of the surrounding structures, people, etc?

ENERGY takes many forms, and it's important to keep this in mind before you start calculating.

My early training was in science. In graduate school, I specialized in biomedical science, did two postdoctoral fellowships and worked in industry.

That was then. This is now. What fuels my research curiosity is 9/11. One thing about research biology is that it is essentially biochemistry, so when it comes to things like "energy" and "heat" I'm quite in my millieu, having had to exquisitely control for such variables in my work.

Those who insist that the WTC was destroyed in a HOT process (one that works by generating excessive heat) also insist on thermodynamic calculations. They want to know the energy it takes to vaporize steel, etc., and expect me to answer all that stuff.

But the theory I'm working on has nothing to do with heat energy. Any calculations about vaporization energies are irrelevant to the theory.

 

[Dog Town]

For me it's either Judy Woods or nanothermite and I really want to rule out one or the other.

Glad I ain't you! What a headache you must have, deliberating over the musings of the insane! Good luck with that.

 

[WTC Dust]

Sure. How about left over from construction (we don't sweep floor pans well before the concretes poured) or elevator brakes. What steps did you take to isolate your dust from background contamination. In other words, how do you know your dust is only from the WTC site?

Good questions. I haven't attempted to prove to you all that the dust I have is actually WTC dust, so you have a point here.

Let's say that my dust had contaminants of normal dust. Contaminants would then need to be accounted for. Really, almost all the dust that has been studied by laboratories around the world has been picked up off of the ground near the WTC site, so each of these laboratories has also had to deal with the contamination issue.

That's not to say that contamination isn't important, only that it doesn't rule out any hope of getting any answers.

Let's say I prove that some of my samples are composed of >80% iron dust. Does normal city contamination change this result? A real question.

 

[WTC Dust]

We aren't dumb you know, Judy Wood does have alias's.

Atleast us guys don't go through periods, maybe except if we're in hockey. Sorry ladies, pun wasn't intended for all of you.

Yes, when men find out that you are a female, they often mention menstruation.

 

[WTC Dust]

Welding.

OK, good answer. What does welding dust look like?

 

[WTC Dust]

Cool story, sis'.


Cool story, sis'.


She has identified herself as a pharmacologist. I assume this thread began with some unfortunate experiment.

More precisely, I'm a former pharmacologist. I've been studying 9/11 full time for these 9 years.

 

[WTC Dust]

Grinding welds down etc. When you grind something (on purpose or by accident in metal to metal contact) a lot of it is very small particles or what you could loosely call "dust".

My experience as a mechanic destroys her experience with a PHD in regards to metal and how it can fall apart (cause I've observed the result thousands of times, complete with "dust").

I have a machine in my shop now. A powerful electric motor spun its woodruff key and ground itself down as well as the ID of its coupling to the gearbox. There was "dust" everywhere. Should I quote my customer that his armature shaft and coupling were destroyed by a DEW and that he should really check his ceiling for nefarious energy emitting devices?

I've been around machine shops. I've seen some of what I'd call metal shavings that come from grinding and forming metal objects. The dust I have is nothing like that dust, and there is actually more than one type of dust, one of which is not metallic. This dust is unique in my world experience.

The only place I've seen dust like this is in the reports on the dust found near Ground Zero.

What is really required here is a real mechanism that can turn steel into dust. You all say that no mechanism exists, despite the metallic dust. I say physical samples prove that such

 

[WTC Dust]

They say your claims on 911 are moronic delusions. They debunk your failed ideas on 911, saying your claims are anti-intellectual claptrap.
Steel turning to dust is an insane claim based on delusions and ignorance.

But what about my metallic dust samples? Saying something can't happen is fine, but when evidence exists that it did happen, then what?

Call the discoverer crazy? Or attempt to find a solution? I know I'm a happy, healthy person. I don't go out of my way to hurt people. I am not doing this to mess with anyone's brains or exonerate ObL. I'm doing it because no airplane crash could do what was done and nobody else is offering a decent solution.

 

[WTC Dust]

Dr. Bevins I have a nanothermite theory that I believe covers virtually every aspect of the collapses . Do you think it would be useful to compare aspects of our theories with a view to ruling out either Judy Wood or nanothermite ?

For me it's either Judy Wood or nanothermite and I really want to rule out one or the other.

Yes. Since you've been polite to me, I will consider your nanothermite theory. You know that I am heavily biased against it, but I will not insult you for telling me what you think. Normally I refuse to talk about thermite, because those people are really angry and mean when they talk about it.

 

[bill smith]

Yes. Since you've been polite to me, I will consider your nanothermite theory. You know that I am heavily biased against it, but I will not insult you for telling me what you think. Normally I refuse to talk about thermite, because those people are really angry and mean when they talk about it.

I mean what I say. I want to be debunked if I am wrong. There is no future in continuing with a failed theory however much one might be attached to it.

I suggest that you propose something that gives difficulty to the nanothermite theory and I'll see if I can cover it.

 

[TJM]

I suggest that you propose something that gives difficulty to the nanothermite theory and I'll see if I can cover it.

Reality.

 

[bill smith]

Reality.

AJ you know the picture Dr.Blevins posted of the dust or mist or whatever it was at the first anniversary of 9/11 at Ground Zero ? You are the photo wizard around here so can you crop it and enlarge it and put it onscreen for a closer look ?

 

[Drs_Res]

Did you miss my post here? I see you answering or reponding to a lot of others.
You see, the thing is, none of what you say about your dust means diddly squat at this point, since you don't even know the origin of your dust.

 

[WildCat]

My early training was in science.

Whoever trained you should be fired.

 

[DGM]

Let's say I prove that some of my samples are composed of >80% iron dust. Does normal city contamination change this result? A real question.

That would again depend on where the sample was collected.You don't seem willing to tell us this and I also suspect you will never show the sample was >80% iron. Unless you can show that the sample was unique to the area and in some way different from what could be expected, I'm afraid it's useless.

As far as city dust with high iron content, sweep a subway station sometime.

 

[WTC Dust]

Did you miss my post here? I see you answering or reponding to a lot of others.
You see, the thing is, none of what you say about your dust means diddly squat at this point, since you don't even know the origin of your dust.

I know the origin of my dust! I discovered it.

 

[triforcharity]

Our country tortured that confession out of KSM, so it doesn't count. Zach Moussaoui was forced to testify while wearing a stun belt. This isn't within the Constitution. Our Constitution allows you to defend yourself.

KSM also confessed BEFORE being tortured.

Every high-profile suspect wears a stun belt, since they cannot wear handcuffs in court in from of the jury. The stun belt works so they don't try to run.

Nice try though.

/OT