WTC dust

[tsig]

Research scientists, such as myself, are engaged in discovering new things about the world. Not supporting Bill, just saying that it is my vocation.

None of you, as far as I can tell, understand what I'm saying to you, but I don't think you've given me a fair chance.

You've been willful. You've already taken a stance. You say anyone who talks about 9/11 truth is a blah blah blah, and so far, you've been mostly correct. All of the theories about what happened on 9/11 are wrong, except one, and that includes the official plane crash conspiracy theory.

But you haven't really heard and contemplated what I'm telling you, yet, so you don't see the difference between what I've been telling you and everyone else.

So far all we've seen are two fuzzy photos and lots of "Look at me!!!".

On the one hand you tell us you're a clown then you want to be taken seriously, sorry Dust but you don't get it both ways.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The Exocet missile that struck the Sheffield did not "bounce off" because
the Exocet am-39 that struck the Sheffield contained a shaped charge
armor piercing warhead and incindiaries .

What part of the the "warhead did not detonate" did you not understand?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The Exocet missile that struck the Sheffield did not "bounce off" because
the Exocet am-39 that struck the Sheffield contained a shaped charge
armor piercing warhead and incindiaries .

http://docfoualier.free.fr/exocet.pdf

The flying object that struck the south tower didn't "bounce off "for the exact same reason.
The disguised missile that pierced the WTC2 steel exterior was equipped with an AUP-3m
DU penetrator warhead.The AUP3 penetrator created the bright white flash
and molten orange entrance hole micro-seconds before the missile hit.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814cf3f37b80836.jpg[/qimg]
The armored chisel shaped nose of the missile traveled completely through
the tower and exited the NE bevel before the explosive payload detonated
.

The naked undisguised cruise missile that pierced the WTC1 tower also created
an intense white flash micro-seconds before it pierced
the steel column wall.

So how did the wings get through? more shaped charges but the flashless kind?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Presumes a plane.

so does assuming a plane would bounce off

 

[sheeplesnshills]

"We describe previously unknown phenomena."

Planes have never hit things before?????

"An engineer wouldn't typically have the intellectual tools and experience it takes to do this. They have other tools and do other things. They develop technology, they don't explain the universe."

LOL they do however design Planes and buildings and are trained to know what happens when one hits the other at high speed......thats 101 stuff for us engineers.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

No-planer/DEW threads are quite.... the work of art in stupidity.......

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Can you show me some video of debris bouncing off the south face of WTC 2 at 9:03AM?

First show us why any should. List all assumptions made and show working. (if you really have a Phd you should know how to do that.)

So far, none of the videos I've seen show this. They show debris shooting out of the building after the "thing" went all the way in.

As one would expect. large volume of fuel enters building, is "atomized" in the impact, ignites and rapidly expands in volume (just like it does in a jet engine)
large volume of gas exits building through any orifice available including the hole the plane made going in taking minor debris with it.

No surprise.

 

[The Almond]

You should believe me because I'm a research scientist [...]

You're no Linus Pauling.

 

[Newtons Bit]

I'm a fantastic scientist, actually, and I love my work.

No, I didn't presume no planes. I've been studying the dust for 9 years.

What dust have you been studying? The current extremely tainted and questionable sample you've been using was only given to you recently.

 

[Thunder]

Why do you ignore the stuff that is presented? Why should we listen to you, when you don't even address simple questions?

why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?

 

[triforcharity]

why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?

Touche.

And she's ran away again.

 

[Dragonrock]

Dusty,

First, I know you're a coward so you'll ignore this.

Looks like I was right.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The Exocet missile that struck the Sheffield did not "bounce off" because
the Exocet am-39 that struck the Sheffield contained a shaped charge
armor piercing warhead and incindiaries

No it didn't explode. Unfortunately the one that got the Glamorgan did explode. It was fired from a shore based improvised launcher. Glamorgan saw it coming on Radar and made a high speed turn away, the missile skidded on the deck and exploded. This made a hole in the hangar deck and into the galley where a fire started. The missile body penetrated the hangar door, causing the helicopter to explode and start a severe fire. Thirteen crew members were killed and more wounded.
It's an irony that 15 of the RN ships involved in the Falklands were armed with Exocets.

USS Stark forwas mistaken for an Iranian ship in the Iran - Iraq war andattacked with two Exocets. The first penetrated the port-side hull , the second entered at almost the same point, exploding in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and 21 were injured. Stark was heavily damaged, but saved by the crew.

 

[jaydeehess]

There is when you are using axy-acetelyne torches to cut the building apart. It's called an exhaust fan. They fail due to many reasons. Solenoids going out, fuses popping, circuit breakers tripping, someone unplugging it, belt snapping, motor seizing up, you name it.

You're grasping at straws.

I've not kept up with every post by WD. Did she happen to link to the article about smoke in Deutsche bank? After all her grasp of what articles do and do not say is probably tenuous at best.

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Research scientists Biologists, such as myself, are engaged in discovering new things about the world life. Not supporting Bill, just saying that it is my vocation.

None All of you, as far as I can tell, understand what I'm saying to you, but I don't think you've given me a fair chance.

You've been willful. You've already taken a stance. You say anyone who talks about 9/11 truth is a blah blah blah, and so far, you've been mostly correct. All of the theories truths about what happened on 9/11 are wrong right, except one, and that includes the official plane crash conspiracy theories.

But you haven't really heard and contemplated what I'm telling you, yet, so you don't see the difference between what I've been telling you and everyone else.

Fixed that for you WTC Dust!

 

[twinstead]

Seriously, WTC Dust, with all due respect perhaps you would be more suited in a forum that actually is intimidated by your constant mantra of "I'm a research scientist". Most here don't appear to be very impressed.

 

[Athyrio]

Touche.

And she's ran away again.

Probably needs a good night's sleep for that bombshell of a presentation tomorrow.

 

[HatRack]

You should believe me because I'm a research scientist, and because engineering isn't a research science. It's an applied science. Getting an engineering degree is very different from getting a research degree.

9/11 had nothing to do with the unexplained, and everything to do with that which is readily explained by careful use of applied science. The fact that you are a research scientist makes you less credible when it comes to 9/11 than an engineer for that very reason. Like many who become too involved in the possibilities of what could be, you have your head up in the clouds.

 

[Fonebone]

Warning-not intended for "jason lives in mommy's basement" crowd

My bold

What part of the statement 'the warhead did not detonate' did you fail to understand?

As for the rest of your post, it's absolute dribble. There was no warhead detonation, you clearly know nothing about explosives. Not to mention that there are plenty of photographs of the aircraft and plenty of aircraft debris. Aircraft, not cruise missiles.

What part of the the "warhead did not detonate" did you not understand?

Fonebone <
The shaped charge creates a breach in the ship armor allowing the explosive payload
of the Exocet to penetrate into the vessel before the time delayed fuse detonates the explosive.
Apparently the shaped charge worked as designed blowing an entrance into the vessel but both
the time delayed and proximity fuses failed to initiate the explosive payload.


http://docfoualier.free.fr/exocet.pdf
The missile is divided into four modular parts:
[excerpt]
-Section 2 contains the warhead which is common to all versions. It is a 165-kg shaped charge with
fragmentation and incendiary effects. The explosive employed is Hexolite. It is initiated by a delay
fuse which allow the missile to penetrate the outer hull of the ship before blowing up. A proximity
fused is fitted as a back-up fuse if the missile overfly its target, then causing extensive damage to
the bridge, antennas and potentially aircrafts on deck.[/excerpt]

 

[TheBigKahuna]

Wierzbicki, T. & Teng, X. (2003). "How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center." J. of Impact Engrg. 28, pp. 601-625

Do you have a link to paper you cite as evidence ?
If not , could you forward me a complete copy so that I can examine it ?
Thanks -Fonebone

Well, I've been unemployed for a while. Are you offering me a consulting job to look this paper up for you? It'd be cheaper for you to order it or go to your local library and see about interlibrary loaning a copy.