• 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:
What's important is that nothing about a plane crash generates metallic foam.
Click to expand...

Keep beating that strawman. No one is claiming that dust came from the plane crash. The dust came from the building collapses.

Also, you still haven't shown the existence of any metallic foam.
 
WTC Dust said:
This isn't actually true, and even if it were true, the mass composition of these samples tells only part of the story. It's the structural arrangement of the material that tells the rest. Little flakes of metal dust? These can be explained by well understood processes.

Metal foam? Not really.

Remember what Carl Sagan said, "The beauty of a living thing is not that atoms that go into it, but the way those atoms are put together."

In this case, the metallic foam isn't a living thing, but the structure of the material still tells a world history changing story.

The tiniest bit of evidence can overthrow the grandest theory, and that's what I intend to do with it.
Click to expand...

And since you've shown neither the materials or their arrangement yet, why should anyone listen to you at all?
 
WTC Dust said:
Then don't ask me "how" something happened, because that is the work of Dr. Judy Wood.

I'm busy showing "that" it did, in fact, happen. Steel got turned into dust/foam.
Click to expand...

Let's see:

Buildings > something happened > dust/foam.

You might want to be a bit more specific in the middle.
 
tsig said:
Let's see:

Buildings > something happened > dust/foam.

You might want to be a bit more specific in the middle.
Click to expand...

Judy is fleshing out the details. She's the material scientist and mechanical engineer. I'm only a lowly bioengineer.
 
WTC Dust said:
Stop thinking that the laws of physics were violated! It didn't happen!
Click to expand...

Are you sure you have an education? You seem to have trouble with reading comprehension. Again, I don't think the laws of physics were violated. I think YOUR THEORIES violate them, and therefore didn't happen. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can say that.
 
phunk said:
And since you've shown neither the materials or their arrangement yet, why should anyone listen to you at all?
Click to expand...

Determined skeptics should not listen to me at all. They are about as useful as a religious zealot.

Only those who can be convinced should be tuning in.
 
phunk said:
Are you sure you have an education? You seem to have trouble with reading comprehension. Again, I don't think the laws of physics were violated. I think YOUR THEORIES violate them, and therefore didn't happen. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can say that.
Click to expand...

Well, you shouldn't even be allowing that thought to enter your head. The laws of physics are never, ever violated.
 
WTC Dust said:
Here's the deal: I've got the right answer. Because it is the right answer, more and more of you will start to understand it and see it for the right answer. Eventually, you'll be claiming it as something you "knew all along". That's the way revolutions happen in science.

A trained biologist and dedicated political activist, living in lower Manhattan when all hell breaks loose. I smelled the buildings as they burned, and I smelled something that isn't a part of a normal building fire, and it wasn't the smell of dead bodies I'm referring to. That smell went away after a few days. The other smell lasted for months.
Nobody could tell me the dust cloud was hot, because my personal acquaintances SURVIVED the dust cloud without a single burn. This is the reason you didn't see me coming around JREF in 2004 when Steven Jones came out with his thermite study, because it wasn't the truth. This is why you hear me talking about Judy Wood, because nothing she says on her website is assailable. The truth is the truth. Doesn't matter who says it.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're better than the trained dogs they had on site.
 
WTC Dust said:
Determined skeptics should not listen to me at all. They are about as useful as a religious zealot.

Only those who can be convinced should be tuning in.
Click to expand...

So only suckers should listen to you? I guess that's one way to get people on your side.
 
WTC Dust said:
Well, you shouldn't even be allowing that thought to enter your head. The laws of physics are never, ever violated.
Click to expand...

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

I know they aren't violated, that's the whole point. Your DEW and resonance theories would require violating them, therefore they are wrong.
 
WTC Dust said:
Here's the deal: I've got the right answer. Because it is the right answer, more and more of you will start to understand it and see it for the right answer.
Click to expand...

It's OK to have that opinion, but please stop pretending to be a scientist. What you're describing is the antithesis of the scientific method.


Eventually, you'll be claiming it as something you "knew all along". That's the way revolutions happen in science.
Click to expand...

No. It isn't. That's the way knowledge is stifled. When people think they already know the answer, they stop looking for the truth, or they look in the wrong place.
 
aggle-rithm said:
It's OK to have that opinion, but please stop pretending to be a scientist. What you're describing is the antithesis of the scientific method.




No. It isn't. That's the way knowledge is stifled. When people think they already know the answer, they stop looking for the truth, or they look in the wrong place.
Click to expand...

Scientists know when they've discovered something. It's called a "Eureka moment".
 
WTC Dust said:
Getting back to 9/11, I am telling you that the contents of the WTC buildings, including the steel, was largely turned into dust. I don't have the weapon specifications sitting in front of me, or I'd be telling you what they were. But I am actually describing the mechanism of destruction.
Click to expand...

And you would be able to show proof of this, when? December 1st?
 
Scientists can also quantitatively express their discoveries. Something you're, for some reason, completely unable to do.
 
excaza said:
Scientists can also quantitatively express their discoveries. Something you're, for some reason, completely unable to do.
Click to expand...

You keep acting like I don't know how to do calculations, when I'm merely unwilling to do unhelpful calculations at the request of meanies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom