WTC dust

[dafydd]

Why do you continually post your caricature ?

Why not?

 

[Fonebone]

And the planes were real too.

Real ... yes - Planes...NO
The flying objects that struck the two WTC towers were missiles.

Missile nose in....

Missile nose out....

 

[The Platypus]

Real ... yes - Planes...NO
The flying objects that struck the two WTC towers were missiles.

Talk about delusional, where do you see a missile? There's no missile in those photos.

The first photo shows a plane, and the 2nd is the beginning of the explosion and debris coming out the other side. How do you get "missile" out of that?

 

[dafydd]

Talk about delusional, where do you see a missile? There's no missile in those photos.

No missiles. Fonebone,your fellow truther here says that the planes were holograms and that the buildings were turned to dust by an energy beam weapon. No missiles. What do you say to that?

 

[WildCat]

Talk about delusional, where do you see a missile? There's no missile in those photos.

The first photo shows a plane, and the 2nd is the beginning of the explosion and debris coming out the other side. How do you get "missile" out of that?

A flying airplane is actually a missile.

 

[dafydd]

deleted

 

[dafydd]

A flying airplane is actually a missile.

True. Hey,fonebone got something right!

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

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

I'm not the only one to mention this, but you display a classic instance of Dunning-Kruger Effect.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge ..." - Charles Darwin

 

[beachnut]

Real ... yes - Planes...NO
The flying objects that struck the two WTC towers were missiles.

Missile nose in....
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814c9c36a3c2530.jpg

Missile nose out....
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814cf7347f0da62.gif

A 767, not a missile. I can prove it with RADAR data, you used your eyes and lack of knowledge to come up with the... wrong answer. Next time use evidence.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814c9c36a3c2530.jpg
Not a missile nose, it is Air and debris. Once again you used your eyes and lack of knowledge to post the wrong answer. Try physics next time.

You are just joking, right? The missile was debunked on 911 with evidence.

Do you have some evidence to support steel turning to dust on a WTC complex global scale?

 

[Dash80]

Real ... yes - Planes...NO
The flying objects that struck the two WTC towers were missiles.

Missile nose in....
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814c9c36a3c2530.jpg[/qimg]

Missile nose out....
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814cf7347f0da62.gif[/qimg]

Nope... Still an airliner being used as a missile. I saw and heard the thing myself *shudder*

 

[WTC Dust]

Who is "we". is there more than one person running around in your head?

No, it's the scientific "we". As in, now that I've made this discovery, "we all" know that foaming is the proper term for the process, as opposed to dustification, which was an invented word.

 

[WTC Dust]

Do I understand it correctly that in the days weeks following 9/11 there was not a single store open in all of New York or within easy driving distance that sold ladders?

This must be the case. After all, Dr. Blevins is such a dedicated, relentless and hardworking investigator who never gives up till she finds what she needs. She looked for duct for over 8 years without giving up, after all.

Amazing the lack of ladders in New York, isn't it? Proof of a government conspiracy if you ask me,

None that I knew of in 2001!

I'm from Texas. I wasn't necessarily "supposed" to be living in Lower Manhttan. I just ended up there.

Do you think it is reasonable, when cops were being such jerks about
people even walking near Ground Zero, that they would have allowed
me to lean a ladder up against a wall and scoop up some dust?

I say no. Anyway, I eventually got some dust, so better late than never!

 

[WTC Dust]

Actually Tracy your claims CAN hurt someone. The families of those who died on board the airplanes for example. I don't know if you read my post where I mentioned working for airlines, well so did my sister. She was a United Airlines flight attendant, she knew some of the flight attendants who lost their lives on UA175 and 93.

You have dodged all questions concerning the people who died on the four flights, they suffered too you know. So no Tracy you don't care about the victims at all, not one little bit.

Would you like to take this opportunity to tell us what you think happened to my sister's fellow flight attendants?

I would have a discussion with your sister. I can only really speak with expertise on what happened to the WTC. I cannot say with any confidence
what happened to individuals said to be on hijacked airplanes. I can say that
very little good evidence exists of hijackings.

One shady image of Mohammed Atta at a different airport. Anything else?

 

[WTC Dust]

Real ... yes - Planes...NO
The flying objects that struck the two WTC towers were missiles.

Missile nose in....
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814c9c36a3c2530.jpg[/qimg]

Missile nose out....
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/363814cf7347f0da62.gif[/qimg]

I've seen these images, and have concluded that a better explanation is
a "fake plane" rather than a missile. But I could be convinced otherwise.
A real plane? Nope.

 

[WTC Dust]

I'm not the only one to mention this, but you display a classic instance of Dunning-Kruger Effect.

This is where you fail to get it. I'm actually a very competent person.
You keep stretching, reaching for some way to debunk me as a person,
yet all the while my samples remain.

Can call a sample "incompetent" can you?

I've been to other forums and gotten the "stupid, crazy, liar" treatment.
I expected better from the so-called premier skeptics from JREF.

 

[WTC Dust]

I'm not the only one to mention this, but you display a classic instance of Dunning-Kruger Effect.

This is where you fail to get it. I'm actually a very competent person.
You keep stretching, reaching for some way to debunk me as a person,
yet all the while my samples remain.

Can't call a sample "incompetent" can you? If I'm incompetent, then
my samples will be revealed as ordinary material.

BUT, if I'm able to determine that a particular individual's DNA is located
in the dust, and that person was known to have died in the south tower,
that will be additional evidence that I don't see how anyone could deny.

What you can't deny about my samples is that they could possibly be
WTC dust. They were found close to Ground Zero in a spot that would
have admitted dust. There are pictures of my apartment building covered
in dust, so that part is easy. The dust deposits had the appearance of
other dust deposits. The multiple colors of dust were also seen in many
images.

What's new is my analysis. Nobody has understood before me that the two
different types of WTC dust exist and are relevant to the mechanism of
damage.

How does an airplane crash into a steel building produce any kind of
iron foam? It doesn't. Same for explosives. These things don't produce
metallic, iron foam.

I've been to other forums and gotten the "stupid, crazy, liar" treatment.
I expected better from the so-called premier skeptics from JREF.

 

[DC]

I've seen these images, and have concluded that a better explanation is
a "fake plane" rather than a missile. But I could be convinced otherwise.
A real plane? Nope.

there are still those no plane at WTC retards?

 

[DC]

This is where you fail to get it. I'm actually a very competent person.You keep stretching, reaching for some way to debunk me as a person,
yet all the while my samples remain.

Can't call a sample "incompetent" can you? If I'm incompetent, then
my samples will be revealed as ordinary material.

BUT, if I'm able to determine that a particular individual's DNA is located
in the dust, and that person was known to have died in the south tower,
that will be additional evidence that I don't see how anyone could deny.

What you can't deny about my samples is that they could possibly be
WTC dust. They were found close to Ground Zero in a spot that would
have admitted dust. There are pictures of my apartment building covered
in dust, so that part is easy. The dust deposits had the appearance of
other dust deposits. The multiple colors of dust were also seen in many
images.

What's new is my analysis. Nobody has understood before me that the two
different types of WTC dust exist and are relevant to the mechanism of
damage.

How does an airplane crash into a steel building produce any kind of
iron foam? It doesn't. Same for explosives. These things don't produce
metallic, iron foam.

I've been to other forums and gotten the "stupid, crazy, liar" treatment.
I expected better from the so-called premier skeptics from JREF.

LOL

 

[Dash80]

I would have a discussion with your sister. I can only really speak with expertise on what happened to the WTC. I cannot say with any confidence
what happened to individuals said to be on hijacked airplanes. I can say that
very little good evidence exists of hijackings.

One shady image of Mohammed Atta at a different airport. Anything else?

Could it be that he flew from Portland to Boston? Just sayin'

Yes there is a whole lot more evidence, which you would ignore even if I pointed it out... so should i bother or save the effort?

 

[Dash80]

This is where you fail to get it. I'm actually a very competent person.
You keep stretching, reaching for some way to debunk me as a person,
yet all the while my samples remain.

Can't call a sample "incompetent" can you? If I'm incompetent, then
my samples will be revealed as ordinary material.

BUT, if I'm able to determine that a particular individual's DNA is located
in the dust, and that person was known to have died in the south tower,
that will be additional evidence that I don't see how anyone could deny.

What you can't deny about my samples is that they could possibly be
WTC dust. They were found close to Ground Zero in a spot that would
have admitted dust. There are pictures of my apartment building covered
in dust, so that part is easy. The dust deposits had the appearance of
other dust deposits. The multiple colors of dust were also seen in many
images.

What's new is my analysis. Nobody has understood before me that the two
different types of WTC dust exist and are relevant to the mechanism of
damage.

How does an airplane crash into a steel building produce any kind of
iron foam? It doesn't. Same for explosives. These things don't produce
metallic, iron foam.

I've been to other forums and gotten the "stupid, crazy, liar" treatment.
I expected better from the so-called premier skeptics from JREF.

Just a thought... Have you ever wondered WHY the vast majority of people think you're crazy/stupid/lying? Apart from a few other loons, nobody supports your ridiculous steel to dust/foam/whatever theory.