1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"chemtrails"???? LOL! LOL! LOL!

Oh, my....well, I had NO, ZERO, NADA respect for 'Jones' before...and, IF he is now going into the "chemtrail" realm....is there such a thing as 'negative' ZERO or NADA????

I mean....this, if true, is the final nail in his coffin of credibility......

So, as a pilot you don't believe in crop dusting? Which IS a chemtrail.

Not to mention there is a patent for chemtrails.

Chemtrails are real.

After a five-year investigation into chemtrails - including interviews with air traffic controllers (thanks to reporter ST Brendt), scientists actually involved in this project (thanks to reporter Bob Fitrakis), NASA and NOAA atmospheric studies, and corroboration from independent scientific lab tests on rain and snow samples falling through chemtrails (thanks to my Espanola correspondent, and Dave Dickie in Edmonton), I can state emphatically that chemtrails are not contrails. So what exactly are chemtrails? And what evidence is offered by the award-winning reporter who first broke this story?

Welsbach Seeding Patent for Global Warming PDF

www.willthomas.net...

But, I guess if a "truther" believes in them, they don't exist?

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Nutter]

reply to post by GBP/JPY


As far as I've been able to discover, the only concrete in the towers was in the floors (100mm thick) and the basements. The cores were simply covered in heavy 'sheetrock' gypsum plasterboard material. The massive column sections at the base (sub-basement) level must have been set in concrete but still not enough to hinder the firestairs and elevator shaft wells on the used levels.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
As far as I've been able to discover, the only concrete in the towers was in the floors (100mm thick) and the basements.

You need to look at the details of the columns in the "leaked" WTC 1 blueprints. Most of the columns have a cementitous fireproofing. Cementitous means cement which is concrete without the sand and aggregates.

reply to post by Nutter


Cloud seeding, and crop dusting have NOTHING to do with these alleged "chemtrails", as are proposed by the proponents of this fantasy. Occurring at high altitude, as suggested (and proven to be completely false, simply not understanding how contrails form, and WHY they form...basic science and meteorology).

Since this person we are discussing is of a conspiracy-mind, he is likely to latch on to ANY crazy whackjob "theory" out there....this is evidence of his continuing delusional state of mind.

It is also a trait seen in quite a few OTHER fringe 9/11 "conspiracy theorists".

reply to post by weedwhacker


I take it you didn't have time to check out the patent for global warming chemtrails? Pitty.

A method is described for reducing atmospheric or global
warming resulting from the presence of heat-trapping gases
in the atmosphere, i.e., from the greenhouse effect. Such
gases are relatively transparent to sunshine, but absorb
strongly the long-wavelength infrared radiation released by
the earth. The method incudes the step of seeding the layer
of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere with particles of
materials characterized by wavelength-dependent
emissivity. Such materials include Welsbach materials and
the oxides of metals which have high emissivity (and thus
low reflectivities) in the visible and 8-12 micron infrared
wavelength regions.

Whether you want to call seeding or crop dusting a chemtrail or not is irrelevant. They are both a chemtrail.



[edit on 24-2-2010 by Nutter]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
THERE ARE NO SUCH THING AS "CHEMTRAILS"!!! ***

No kidding. Please go back and re-read my previous post so that it becomes clear to you about what I was trying to say.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


I have to ask you the same questions then. Are you denying that seeding and crop dusting have occured? They are both chemtrails.

reply to post by Nutter


I HAVE SEEN these patents....you DO realize, I hope, that patents are filed, to protect the "Intellectual Property" idea --- does NOT mean that the idea is ever put into use, or built, or deployed.

It is an IDEA!!!!!

This should NOT be a thread about so-called "chemtrails', except as much that if "Dr." Steven Jones is a proponent of the traditional view of so-called "chemtrails" (that is, the belief in some organized, massive plot to "spray" the skies....all evidenced MERELY from people seeing contrails, and not understanding HOW they form, and WHAT they are) then it speaks to his incredible lack of scientific understanding, and invalidates anything he claims....because he certainly seems to be a nut casa, for that very reason.

Cropdusting is conducted at very low altitudes...about ten feet, or so, above the ground. Reason??? Accuracy of application.

Cloud seeding, to induce precipitation, is done at relatively low altitudes, within the troposphere, and well below the freezing level altitudes.

(Hint....depending on atmospheric variations, the "freezing level" will vary. BUT, consider the "Standard Adiabatic Lapse Rate", which describes the AVERAGE decrease in temperature with increasing altitude....it averages, roughly, two degrees celsius per 1,000 feet of altitude).

SO, when you seed a cloud, you do it from INSIDE, and if you wish to produce liguid precip, you do it where it will not freeze and become snow or sleet.

"Chemtrail" nut job believers think that it's being conducted at high altitudes, by some mysterious top-secret process --- sounds a LOT like Jones' claims about "nano-thermite/thermate"....which he thought he found, when in fact it was PAINT!

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"Chemtrail" nut job believers think that it's being conducted at high altitudes, by some mysterious top-secret process --- sounds a LOT like Jones' claims about "nano-thermite/thermate"....which he thought he found, when in fact it was PAINT!

So, a chemtrail to you is only something done in a sinister way, but when it is done to seed clouds or retard global warming it is not a chemtrail but a contrail with chemicals in it? Gottcha.

Also, could you please post any type of paint that has the exact same characteristics as the dust found?

Didn't think so or you guys would be posting it all day long.

You do realize that since you are the one who claims that what he found is paint that the burdon of proof rests on you to prove your thesis, correct?

[edit on 24-2-2010 by Nutter]

Originally posted by Nutter
You do realize that since you are the one who claims that what he found is paint that the burdon of proof rests on you to prove your thesis, correct?

Wrong, Jones claims he found thermate, so the burden of proof is on him to prove that - which he has not done!

reply to post by Nutter


No. Stop playing a game, and twisting my meaning.

So, a chemtrail to you is only something done in a sinister way, but when it is done to seed clouds or retard global warming it is not a chemtrail but a contrail with chemicals in it? Gottcha.

There ARE NO "chemtrails", not in the way that is promoted by those nut job websites!

The "retard global warming" patent is merely an IDEA....not been put into effect, it is merely one of MANY ideas postulated.

EVERY contrail made by a jet does have chemicals in it....from the product of the internal combustion engine! It is the normal exhaust gases emitted by the engines, just as your CAR emits hydrocarbons in its exhaust.

Frankly, the notion of "chemtrails" to combat climate change seems a fringe idea, to me...the enormity of area needed to cover is the most daunting reason.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by Nutter
You do realize that since you are the one who claims that what he found is paint that the burdon of proof rests on you to prove your thesis, correct?

Wrong, Jones claims he found thermate, so the burden of proof is on him to prove that - which he has not done!

See this is where you guys get things messed up.

Yes, it is Jone's burden to prove thermite.

But, it is your burden to prove it is only paint.

It's like if you say the moon is made of cheese and I say "No, it's made from steel".

There are two burdens to be had.

1. You need to show it is made of cheese.

2. I need to show that it is made of steel.

You DO NOT need to show proof that the moon isn't made of steel just because I said it is. Your burden is that you need to show it is cheese. My burden is showing it is steel.

Get it yet?

Originally posted by Nutter
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by Nutter

See this is where you guys get things messed up.

Yes, it is Jone's burden to prove thermite.

But, it is your burden to prove it is only paint.

It's like if you say the moon is made of cheese and I say "No, it's made from steel".

There are two burdens to be had.

1. You need to show it is made of cheese.

2. I need to show that it is made of steel.

You DO NOT need to show proof that the moon isn't made of steel just because I said it is. Your burden is that you need to show it is cheese. My burden is showing it is steel.

Get it yet?

Fine, sounds fair - when do I get access to Jones' samples so I can fulfill the other part of the burden?

See your analogy sounds fine because, in theory, all parties would have equal access to the observed material. But in this case, there is no access to what Jones supposedly sampled. So the only burden is on him.

And he has failed for a variety of reasons, first and foremost due to a complete departure from scientific method.

Originally posted by ImAPepperOh Bsbray... Jones is into Chem trails now AND said it is possible that the Haiti earthquake was the US governments plan. Nice to see that you stand by your man like that!

You will notice the first mention of chemtrails was by this poster, who includes various other off-topic debunking attacks. Is this person being paid?

Back on topic, it is good to see that 1000 qualified engineers are fighting for 9/11 to be investigated. Maybe we will see Bush in the Hague. Or maybe Nuremberg.

Why are you discussing Chemtrails in this thread. This is a typical tactic used by the "twusters" to side-track and distract from the article at hand.

Their logic is that some 'truthers' also believe in some other theories that are not quite so logical. If you are a truther then you must believe all other conspiracy theories.

That same logic applies as: Alma Cogan is dead, therefore all people that are dead are Alma Cogan. (Ref: Monty Python)

These fanciful thoughts, and the ever popular ad hominims, are all they have left after you scrape away the surface bravado. Their eyes are so tightly closed that they can't see anything. Truth or otherwise.

One against one, direct, blow by blow comparison of the OS against the "TM" data has never been attempted. Not for a lack of asking from the 'truthers.' Strangely, the OS guardians won't play nice in the sandbox. They cite "National Security.' Well, if the OS is true, hasn't the secret of the buildings' collapse been let out of the bag?

reply to post by Nutter


I have tried to explain to dereks that he also has the burden of proving his own claims before, but he seems incapable of grasping this and can only keep asking YOU to prove YOUR case.

For example if you ask him to prove what was causing all of the explosions that everyone kept hearing and experiencing first hand at the WTC that morning, he'll just ask you to prove what they were and refuse to answer himself. So you see how much he understands about burden of proof.

Originally posted by Badgered1
Why are you discussing Chemtrails in this thread. This is a typical tactic used by the "twusters" to side-track and distract from the article at hand.

Their logic is that some 'truthers' also believe in some other theories that are not quite so logical. If you are a truther then you must believe all other conspiracy theories.

That same logic applies as: Alma Cogan is dead, therefore all people that are dead are Alma Cogan. (Ref: Monty Python)

Also called "poisoning the well."

An interesting question is which of these posters are "twusters" (sic?) and which are paid?

Theoretically, it should be quite simple to identify which are merely mistaken individuals and which are the professionals with an agenda. The latter are probably overall not that bright. I might do that sometime.

That will get me on a list two.

[edit on 24-2-2010 by rizla]

reply to post by rizla


"Twusters" is just a stab at those who use epithets like "Twoofers".

Just posting here probably gets you on a list somewhere.

That's going to be a very long, dull list that will require some serious sorting. Raw data, I suppose.

Originally posted by Nutter
You need to look at the details of the columns in the "leaked" WTC 1 blueprints. Most of the columns have a cementitous fireproofing. Cementitous means cement which is concrete without the sand and aggregates.

That would be the 'SFRM' which was sprayed onto to steel as fireproofing but that's in no way at all structural IE does not add to the strength of the building, its purpose was to increase the endurance in a fire to allow more occupants time to escape.