WTC dust

[The Big Dog]

added it to my sig!

Way to go Dusty!

 

[sts60]

If she's a PhD but no scientist, then the award of a PhD is valueless - to everyone who has one, or is working for one, or ever attends an institute of tertiary education.

Non sequitir. Conferral of a PhD generally indicates intellectual capacity, and clearly is of value for several reasons - a very straightforward example being all the jobs which require a PhD.

It's what one does with one's education that confers value. The OP has done nothing of value in the context of understanding the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and is apparently promoting the same silly nonsense more than five thousand posts after it was pointed out that her initial premise (towers "turned to dust") was simply not true. Many other errors and invalid assumptions were made by the OP, and apparently - I put the poor crazy woman on ignore a long time ago - are still being made, but these are moot since the inital claim is completely wrong.

At least we can avoid appeal to authority by establishing that no measure of ability confers authority, the critical measure is whether they agree with me. At least it wasn't you banging on about narcissism....

Straw man. What matters is relevant authority, applied correctly. The OP has little relevant authority, and furthermore made claims implying nonexistent authority in materials science, civil and structural engineering, firefighting, forensics, optics, aerodynamics, and probably a few others. Poor crazy Ms. Wood, to whom she appealed for intellectual cover in the form of some magic dustifying death ray, had more relevant expertise. But all that came from it was spectacularly silly claims, just like the OP, rendering any appeal to authority in that direction by the OP useless.

Cha...I forgot where I was for a moment. We don't have to make sense, just so long as we're heaping abuse on the right target.

The OP made no sense, and is apparently still, lo these many pages later, repeating the same nonsense. I will agree, though, it's unseemly to continue to heap abuse on the mentally ill, so I have largely given this thread a pass. I just marvel that it's still going; it serves no purpose except to gratify the OP's ego.

 

[beachnut]

Oh, maybe I should point something out. Not only am I the best 9/11 researcher...

If I knew I was the best 9/11 researcher, and I didn't tell you, ...

.... In graduate school, I was the absolute best at some things, meaning the best in the world. ...

...
9/11 is what I do. I'm great at it. I know my stuff.

Yes you are the best 911 truth researcher, you exceed all other 911 truth researchers.

Bless you, beachnut, I've had you on ignore for simply ages.

Yes you proved you have me on ignore, I understand. Are you saying WTC dust is right, steel turned to dust? Or do you really have me on ignore?

90% of responses to Dusty would shame any forum, ...

She the best 911 truth investigator. I agree. Do you really support her claims of steel to dust? Do you know what she thinks cause the steel to go to dust?

Do I need to summarise that for you, or would it be wasted in the face of whatever mantra you've been chanting to yourself to justify your infantile aggression?

I missed it, what did you say turned the steel to dust?

... It doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong. It's only the internet. ...

How does this dove tail with turning steel to dust?
\

I was wondering what device she thinks cause all the steel to turn to dust, but then I realized ....

Not dust. She is the best 911 truth researcher!

 

[sylvan8798]

Dusty, I don’t want to drag this wake thing back into the fray, but as I touched down today, a thought entered my mind. I’m sure you have seen aircraft touchdown during landing, or at least a video of it; so, if what you say is true (the aircraft drags a wake behind it), then why doesn’t the aircraft drag the smoke from the tires contacting the runway behind it?

Such a bizarre claim. How can you PULL air?

 

[Dash80]

Don't be confused, Dash. I'm not talking about thrust. I'm talking about the wake that follows every single craft moving through every single fluid.

Spaceships don't have wakes, because they aren't moving through any material. Boats do. Airplanes do. No evidence of this wake was seen in any video or still image of the WTC on 9/11.

This should wake you up, but you can go ahead and grit your teeth and wave your hands around some more if you choose.

I'm not confused Dusty I was just using a funny example, in response to someone else. It's you who looks dumb here not me.
Wakes are LEFT BEHIND not dragged along like some kind of trailer, you have been told this by many members who know what they are talking about, and quite a few who use logic and look things up.

 

[Dash80]

The streets were clean when I got there, less than three days later.

Were you there three days later? If so, do you think you could have scooped some dust off the street, as I had planned?

The dust was there, only higher up. You couldn't reach it from ground level. There was not one spec of dust easily found when I showed up such a short time later.

I went there intending to take some dust samples, and was foiled. Years later, I succeeded.

Yes Dusty I was there, so was my brother-in-law. He was digging for survivors for days after the attacks. I remember 3 days after the attacks was the first day my sister was even able to get back in to her apartment. The dust was still everywhere, it was like walking through dry-powder snow getting to her building.
You were foiled how exactly? The dust covered the area.

 

[alienentity]

I have the material in my possession that has already proved the 19-Arab conspiracy to be wrong.

And you wonder why people consider you to be a few cards short of a full deck.

 

[alienentity]

Dr Blevins claims are basically nonsense. Her no-plane claims are illogical, scientifically illiterate and silly. Her 'no-hijacking' claims are essentially insane - they just do not square with basic reality. Her 'steel turned to dust and became a foam' is probably the pinnacle of this shark-jumping exercise - it's just plain crazy. She has not even tried to present an intelligent hypothesis as to how this 'foam' was created from steel, by some mysterious energy weapon!! Egads!

Dave Thomas is totally correct IMO, this is a Fail-athon of the highest order. 1443 posts from this person has failed to produce any real evidence to back the claims, and has instead exposed the level of self-delusion operating here.

Sad stuff, really.

 

[dafydd]

Yes you are the best 911 truth researcher, you exceed all other 911 truth researchers.

Yes you proved you have me on ignore, I understand. Are you saying WTC dust is right, steel turned to dust? Or do you really have me on ignore?

She the best 911 truth investigator. I agree. Do you really support her claims of steel to dust? Do you know what she thinks cause the steel to go to dust?

I missed it, what did you say turned the steel to dust?

How does this dove tail with turning steel to dust?
\

I was wondering what device she thinks cause all the steel to turn to dust, but then I realized ....

[qimg]http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/wtclookingforThermitenotfound.jpg[/qimg]
Not dust. She is the best 911 truth researcher!

Quote.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

That isn't a reply about what I was talking about (that no bounce-back is shown in any of the videos of 9:03AM on 9/11).

It wasn't intended to be.

This was my post addressing your bounce back post,

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7431058#post7431058

 

[Porkpie Hat]

There is something that you said that made me think I hadn't explained myself perfectly yet.

There are many reasons that I have not presented the sort material analysis that you keep mentioning. The main one is the following: I only have presented evidence that a non-science audience can understand. Instead of showing them a mass spectrograph with a peak labeled "Fe" and expect people to trust me that I haven't mislabeled the graph, I made a magnet dance with my samples. People understand that iron is magnetic.

It sounds more like a cop out than an explanation on why you refuse to act like a serious researcher with an understanding of the science behind determining the cause of the towers collapses.

David Blainn can make building disappear, you make a magnet dance.

wow...

Do you get me? Instead of pointing to a peak on a spectrograph that is labeled "Fe03" or some such, I show them the sample that has rust red spots on the sample. People know what color rust is. They can look at the spots and say, "Yep. If they aren't rust, they are rust-colored!" I don't have to be fancy with equipment to get my points across, and I choose not to primarily for this reason, that I want non-science people NOT to have to "trust" me.

Fe2O3.

And seriously, you act as if most laypeople are stupid.

Should we not expect to see rust nor rust like colours at ground zero?

Seems you're looking for ways to dupe the unexpecting rather than find the truth.

Oh, I forgot one. I showed images of the sample that can move a magnet, and those images show that the sample is a foam. I don't have to describe what a foam is or quantitate exactly how foamy it is. I can just show them the pics.

I've seen your website, there's nothing quantitative or qualititative on it.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

I don't really know what you mean here.

You responded to me asking what was covering the people at ground zero, I said that it was dust...then I asked if the presence of dust was an all or nothing proposition, meaning if there was dust it could be only explained by some nefarious means as implied by you.

This seems like a diversionary tactic and I assure you, as a parent to 3 small children I can see diversions from a mile away....maybe further.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

Please listen carefully: NOTHING impacted the WTC.

Yet when you were shown a video showing exactly that you stated,

It's something, just not plane debris.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7431785#post7431785

So now that something is nothing eh?

BTW, please qualify your claim that the (obvious plane) debris we see bouncing off the twoers was not from a plane and that the timing proves it incorrect.

If you can't do that then you fail in proving your point.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

Foaming is a better word. Less fancy.

I'm sure your hairdresser agrees.

 

[Porkpie Hat]

Oh, maybe I should point something out. Not only am I the best 9/11 researcher (apart from the previously mentioned Drs. W and H-C), but I'm also BY FAR the best biomedical scientist in this group. I'm also the best protester of the group. I'm used to being the best. It's no big deal, only, scratch that. It is a big deal.

If I knew I was the best 9/11 researcher, and I didn't tell you, then you wouldn't have the best opportunity to get what I'm saying. It's like if you met someone and months later it turns out he has a world record and gold medal in speed skating, you'd sorta wonder why he didn't tell you that before.

Being the best in the world at something is what it is. In graduate school, I was the absolute best at some things, meaning the best in the world. It ain't no big thang to be the best, for some people who are used to being the best and aim at that exact spot every time like me.

If you knew a gold medal winning speed skater for a long time, and he didn't tell you anything about his world record, then you'd wonder what else he was hiding. I'm the best (or among the tippy-top best) 9/11 researcher in the world. You don't have to "believe" me in any way just understand that that is how I'm representing myself to you and everyone else I encounter.

9/11 is what I do. I'm great at it. I know my stuff.

I'm better.

See how easy that was?

 

[WTC Dust]

A gold medal winner isn't a narcissist if they point out that they've won a gold medal.

Equally so, I'm not a narcissist. 9/11 humbled me, remember? I thought I pretty much knew the universe. What I saw on 9/11 did not comport with all the other things I knew about the universe, so I had to go back to square one.

Thing is, none of you did that. All of you turned to authority for explanations. I did not depend on someone else to tell me what I was seeing. For this reason, I wasn't fooled when they said that the WTC "collapsed" because it clearely didn't.

Such extreme narcissism is yet another indication that you are mentally ill...

 

[WTC Dust]

You haven't googled Tracy Blevins, yet.

Neither are you because you are not a Phd scientist.

 

[WTC Dust]

There actually is, you just aren't knowledgeable enough to know it.

For one, a steel-framed building is much different than a reinforced concrete building. Secondly, shape matters.

The shape of the materials in a fire doesn't determine the smell of the fire.

 

[WTC Dust]

Almost NOTHING of what has been said in this thread is on the scientific discovery that I'm talking about (two types of metallic foam that used to be the WTC). It's mostly been insults and claims that I'm a liar, fraud, crazy, and the like.

Read the thread. We tried and tried and tried,all to no avail. The mockery is born out of frustration and the fact that she is so arrogant and a self confessed genius. She needs taking down a peg or two. Legitimate target.

 

[WTC Dust]

The real reason you are all not agreeing with me is that you have already determined that you are correct when it comes to 9/11.

It's almost impossible to teach someone something when they have already been convinced of something else.

How do you teach a religious person that there is no god? Hard to do.

Etc.

Dusty, you really should worry about Confirmation Bias. You say you're the "best 9/11 researcher," but you aren't winning lots of converts with your posts, are you?

I consider myself a serious 9/11 researcher, having debated Richard Gage twice, recently published a major article on 9/11 truth in the Skeptical Inquirer, etc.

You are not convincing me, nor are you winning any other converts, because you are simply not making the case for your arguments. You SAY that planes will have wakes that follow them with considerable force, yet you haven't been able to confirm any such thing. You SAY that your dust is from the Towers, yet you haven't provided material analyses of your foam, submitted it to independent testing, or -- in general -- helped support any of your claims very well at all.

People here have pointed you to real physical evidence that directly contradicts your claims (such as ATC tapes that do prove the planes were hijacked, something you insist did not happen; there have also been several eyewitness reports from posters here, or their friends/family). You have not 'dealt' with that evidence in any substantive way whatsoever.

You may think you're 'hot stuff', Dusty, but your efforts are simply more and more servings of UTTER FAIL.

You are no more persuasive that 9/11 was an inside jobbity-job than Death Dart and his street theatre, or Clayton Moore with his non-sequiturs, or ergo with his Stundies.

Sorry, but this is the plain truth - if you were such a perfect exponent of your theories, if you're so 'great' at 9/11, why isn't anyone here agreeing with you?

It's because you are not the "best 9/11 researcher" that you think you are.