• 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.
jhunter1163 said:
I expressed my opinion on the idea o/f making jokes 9/11 upthread. It hasn't changed.

BTW, WTC Dust, if 9/11 was a "good" day for anyone, it was me; I met the woman who is now my wife that day in a chat room as I was looking for news. Even with that, it was anything but a "good" day.
Click to expand...

It seems to be perfectly legitimate to make jokes about the various nine-eleven personalities though. You guys have been doing it for years and years.
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
You cannot account for the first 8 years of it's existance. If you can, please show that work here.

It should look like this.

11 Sept. 01 - Sample came to rest where I found it.
Click to expand...

You grant too much. We don't know how much dust was present prior to 9/11. Any construction that occurred near the roof of the building *before or after* 9/11 would, apparently, have deposited dust in the same location.

She has provided no evidence that even the bulk of the dust found was deposited on 9/11.
 
Unsecured Coins said:
That's because when it comes to truthers, the jokes write themselves.
Click to expand...

There's a few on the Shill side too..

There was a young Shyam called Sunder
whose physics was woefully under
the level of skill
required of a Shill
the conspiracy soon fell asunder
 
WTC Dust said:
You haven't read my posts very carefully, if you're asking that question.

I've interviewed enough people who have said they saw (what they thought was) a plane in the sky with their own eyes and not on TV to deny this testimony.

It was a fake plane.
Click to expand...

HOW was it a fake plane? Explain that to me, please. Given the technology available at the time, holograms and the like are utterly impossible; not to mention the debris, plane parts, and oh yes, BODIES that fell from the towers as a result of your "nonexistent" plane striking them. Lest you forget, both towers were on fire for at least thirty minutes (102 in the case of the North Tower, which was the first one struck); the firefighters, whom, I might add, are a hell of a lot more experienced than you in determining causes of fires, all agree that both buildings were an inferno at the points of impact. How do you explain the smoke and flames billowing from both towers for more than thirty minutes before the towers collapsed? Your delusions get more and more absurd as you talk, Dusty. Face it; you were not there. The firefighters and other first responders, not to mention the eyewitnesses, were. The NYFD lost 343 of their brothers in the collapses, and if you ever went up to one of them who was there that day and started spouting your lunatic theories, I wouldn't blame them in the slightest if they hauled off and punched you right in your delusional mouth. Not that I'm advocating such; I would hope our NYFD members would have more sense than that. But the more you talk, the less sense you make, Dusty. So I'm giving you a chance here. Explain to me how the plane crashes were faked, using technology that actually EXISTED at the time of 9/11/2001, in such a way that everyone who was THERE would believe it was a plane crash when it wasn't. Unlike you, most New Yorkers probably don't smoke weed, so drug-induced hazes are pretty much out; plus there's all the physical evidence, including plane parts, body parts from people who were determined to be on the planes (not to mention all the people in the towers themselves), the FDR and CVR recovered (albeit badly damaged) on site from flights 175 and 11, the millions of pieces of wreckage that were picked over at Fresh Kills that were the structural elements of the WTC, and the word of thousands of eyewitnesses and first responders, plus construction workers and demolition crews who were crawling all over the site in the weeks and months following the collapse of the towers. I find it odd that not ONE of them supports your claims that the WTC buildings turned largely to dust and that there were no planes that actually struck the towers. And quite frankly, I'm more inclined to believe them, since they were actually THERE and you, by your own admission, were not on site at Ground Zero ever and have only discovered your so-called "dust" at a site a few blocks away. So why should I believe you over them? Explain that to me, in a way that doesn't violate every known physical law of the universe, and I might start believing you. Until then, you are just another sad, delusional, kook who can't support any of their assertions with actual, physical evidence. So go on; prove me wrong. I dare you.
 
phiwum said:
You grant too much. We don't know how much dust was present prior to 9/11. Any construction that occurred near the roof of the building *before or after* 9/11 would, apparently, have deposited dust in the same location.

She has provided no evidence that even the bulk of the dust found was deposited on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Frank Greening estimated about 120,000 tons of dust was deposited over Manhatten from the WTC.
 
WTC Dust said:
It's time for some of you to lighten up on the subject of 9/11. There was nothing funny about the attacks of 9/11, but human beings are funny, quirky creatures. Our human nature is to make fun.

I think there is a phenomena going on here that is having two completely different effects. Confusion is the phenomena.

For the dedicated skeptic, this confusion about 9/11 generates anger. They have to disbelieve their own eyes to believe the official government plane crash conspiracy theory. They have to, somehow, swallow their curiosity as to why no planes were actually ever found in the four places they were said to be. You also have to accept that our military forces are so completely incompetent that they were unable to intercept any of these four planes, when they had hours of notice that stuff was going wrong. All this confusion brings up anger from the determined skeptic when information is smartly supplied to them that pokes at their confusion.

For the comedian, this confusion has led to a lack of very good jokes about 9/11. You have to know something about something in order to make a joke, and most people really don't know what happened. The best jokes are clever, and to the exact point, and if you are confused about something, it's hard to get there.
Click to expand...

:jaw-dropp

Please tell me you are not saying that we should start making jokes about the tragedy of that day.

People lost their lives, jobs, family members! Our world was forever changed by the events of that day! There is absolutely NOTHING amusing about the tragic deaths of nearly three thousand people, not to mention the thousands of severe to moderate injuries sustained by others, or the complete and utter destruction of practically a quarter of a cityscape! If this is actually what you think, then quite frankly you sicken and disgust me. You're treating this like it's all a goddamn JOKE. You are no better than those 19 terrorists who caused this devastation. Just do yourself a favor and shut the hell up.
 
bill smith said:
It seems to be perfectly legitimate to make jokes about the various nine-eleven personalities though. You guys have been doing it for years and years.
Click to expand...

None of the leading Truthers are members here. If they were, I would be the first to throw the yellow flag on the jokes. I would love it if Richard Gage or Steven Jones or Judy Wood would come here and actually discuss their theories, and explain why it is that they are right and the community of experts here are wrong. I want to see that, Bill.

But none of them will come here. Why do you suppose that is?
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
There's a few on the Shill side too..

There was a young Shyam called Sunder
whose physics was woefully under
the level of skill
required of a Shill
the conspiracy soon fell asunder
Click to expand...

Whatever your current job is, retain it, for I do not forsee you making millions in the comedy business. However, you need to explain why clunkity clunk, jedi mind tricks, explosive ceiling tiles, tv fakery, deaths by luggage bludgeoning, 4 versions of the same movie, anything alex jones says, DRG, Steven Jones, Jesse"It's LOCKED!!" Ventura and anyone who mentions death rays from space doesn't automatically come with it's own laugh track.
 
WTC Dust said:
There was nothing funny about the attacks of 9/11
Click to expand...

Nor are we making jokes about 9/11. You see, truthers and other mindless conspiracy theorists tell lies to support their claims. This causes a bit of frustration among intelligent people as the lies are easily outted and the liar usually runs away or self-destructs and gets banned (not for their opinions but because they start swearing or threatening other users). Then, a few moments later another truther shows up with lies similar to those that were just exposed.

So we make fun of the truthers. Not the well explained and understood events of 9/11, but of the people who crap on the graves of those who died by spouting the same obvious nonsense over and over. We make fun of the truthers because the alternatives, such as hunting them down and nailing their scrotums to chairs with rusty rail road spikes, is likely to get us in trouble.
 
bill smith said:
Frank Greening estimated about 120,000 tons of dust was deposited over Manhatten from the WTC.
Click to expand...

So? How does that tell us whether the bulk of her particular pile is from the collapse? Or when that pile was deposited?

How much dust was deposited in the same location prior to 9/11? How much after? Does she know whether there was construction near this nook (say, on the roof) at any point during the life of the building? If she doesn't know, then why should we assume that the majority of this dust is from 9/11?
 
Unsecured Coins said:
Whatever your current job is, retain it, for I do not forsee you making millions in the comedy business. However, you need to explain why clunkity clunk, jedi mind tricks, explosive ceiling tiles, tv fakery, deaths by luggage bludgeoning, 4 versions of the same movie, anything alex jones says, DRG, Steven Jones, Jesse"It's LOCKED!!" Ventura and anyone who mentions death rays from space doesn't automatically come with it's own laugh track.
Click to expand...

I could never get all that into a simple limerick.
 
I'm sorry to interrupt, but why is there so much opposition to the truth movement if it is wrong?

Our one and only question at this point should be: are the grey-red chips paint or nano-thermite? ;)

Conversation is great.
 
Quiproquo said:
I'm sorry to interrupt, but why is there so much opposition to the truth movement if it is wrong?
Click to expand...
If something is wrong, why shouldn't it be opposed? Given the abject failure of the truth movement to produce anything, opposition isn't even necessary.

Thermite isn't relevant to this thread topic, so your one and only question should go to another thread where it's already been shown, numerous times, using your own revered scientists' data that it's not thermite because it doesn't react like thermite.
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
You're taking my post out of context. I was referrring specifically to the smells and fires that occured after the collapse.

The rest of your post is just ****.
Click to expand...

100 days after the destruction (not collapse) of the WTC, you could still smell that weird stench from more than a mile away, where I lived at the time.
 
WTC Dust said:
If you suggest that contamination occurred, you should be able to back up your claims. I told you about the cigarette butts nearby. They weren't actually touching my samples, but they were nearby. Other than that...don't know what would have contaminated my samples.

They were subjected to changing temperatures and humidity, but never to direct precipitation.
Click to expand...

If rain couldn't fall on them then how did the samples get to where they were?
 
DGM said:
Wrong!

Why do you have to ignore so much evidence for your view to work?
Click to expand...

I didn't say "ignore". I said "disbelieve".

When they see a building turning into dust and then the pieces falling down, and they hear "collapse", most of them accept the word "collapse" despite the fact that what they saw was not a collapse.

This isn't ignoring what you see. This is disbelieving your own eyes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom