VIDEO: What Turned the Twin Towers to DUST on 9/11?

Hey Everyone,

Another topic which is very relevant to this thread is the issue of 'no airliners'. I created a thread to discuss what seems to be obvious media fakery involved in the 9/11 deception. Since these topics are closely related, I wanted to provide a link to the 'no airliner' thread, just in case any of you were interested in looking more into it. Here it is:

1. VIDEO: Large Airliners Did NOT Hit the Twin Towers on 9/11!: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Thanks for looking more into these topics if you do!

Take care,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

facebook.com...
youtube.com...

reply to post by PookztA

....for it is rather obvious that the buildings were turned to dust.

No, no they weren't. You can stop now. The towers were not "dustified".

Originally posted by PookztA
Hey Everyone,

Another topic which is very relevant to this thread is the issue of 'no airliners'. I created a thread to discuss what seems to be obvious media fakery involved in the 9/11 deception. Since these topics are closely related, I wanted to provide a link to the 'no airliner' thread, just in case any of you were interested in looking more into it. Here it is:

1. VIDEO: Large Airliners Did NOT Hit the Twin Towers on 9/11!: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Thanks for looking more into these topics if you do!

Take care,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

facebook.com...
youtube.com...

edit on 19-9-2010 by PookztA because: Long Live TRUTH, JUSTICE, PEACE, LOVE, UNITY, & RESPECT

I see you have the regular ATS 9/11 disinfo 'debunkers' trying to discredit you Abe!

Strangely, your "Large Airliners Did NOT Hit the Twin Towers on 9/11" link above, which is also linked in another thread of yours just links back to this thread, as does the other one you linked it in.

I'm working my way through your threads, some interesting well thought out info. I'm sure people are intelligent enough to know who the real 9/11 disinformants are at ATS. They are the ones that work together in numbers, to try and smother the truth with agressive disinfo. It's just so obvious!

If there are numerous members in succession trying to shoot someone down and are acting rude, then you know you're getting very warm! You'd think after all the years they have been defending the OS, and all the years of trying to smother the real truth with disinfo that they would have better and more subtle tactics! I guess if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys eh!

People are still listening to Judy Wood? I thought she had slid back under a rock with the "micronuke" and "sublimation" brigades.

BTW, Hutchinson is either a fraud, or delusional. Go find me some video of him "dustifying", "jellifying" or whatnot any material at all where the analysis is done by a neutral third party. And by neutral analysis I don't mean Bedini or Sterling with an iPhone.

He never ever does it. When it's been tried, he waffles, tapdances and says "it's an art not a science and a lot of times it doesn't work", and that's because it doesn't work ever.

There is no "dustify" phase of matter. You can make a gas out of it with enough heat, and that gas can recondense into fine particulates - dust if you like. However, the amount of heat energy required would be rather dramatic. You would not get a simple powdering. Years ago I did a rather nice back-of-the-envelope on one of the 911 threads covering this. I know your degree is supposed to be in biology, which likely means you had college algebra, possibly "Calculus I lite" to cover why natural logs work the way they do for your stats course and to explain population growth equations. But you don't get much in the way of advanced math or physics. Nonetheless, even 'general science overview without calculus' for biology majors generally covers basic heat equations.

Try sitting down and getting an idea of the mass of the various materials involved. It's not that hard. You know the basic size of the building, the number of floors and whatnot. You can at least make an order of magnitude guess at the volumes of concrete and steel. Then look up the heat of vaporization of it all. Now, how much energy is that delivered over the time that the entire event ran? Yep. It's unreal, right? Not only that, with your numbers in hand, run through a quick set of numbers (did you cover gas law?) on the volume of gas that results from vaporizing those materials from the solid state. WOW! Now, and this is past your math, try to get an idea of the overpressure that results from conversion to gas of that much material in that time. Yep, Manhattan would be stripped bald. It gets worse, of course, if you start analyzing the more real-world effects of it. For one, you couldn't heat the entire building to vapor in a blink uniformly with a directed energy beam - the vaporized material at the near side of the building would be intercepting most of the energy because it doesn't just go away, it's still there in the beam. So it's being heated to the point that it's emitting x-rays or something as it explodes outward with several thousand pounds of overpressure.

But none of that occurred. The building didn't glow a blinding UV-white as it heated to vaporization in a few seconds. There wasn't an explosion that leveled the island. There were no radiation deaths. People weren't barbecued by the heat energy radiated by the vaporized materials. (Do you have a clue of how hot silicon vapor is?)

Hell, it didn't even bore a dustified hole in the ground where it overshot, nor was there a suspiciously even stump of non-dustified building at the bottom. Real life isn't like Star Trek where a phaser conveniently only disintegrates the target leaving the ground undisturbed around the red-shirt's feet.

Oh, and the cars? Go back and look. The ones that were running burned. The ones not running did not. They sucked in the dust and the engines tore themselves up. Except for the ones near the gas pipeline.

Of all the bogus, sham conjectures about 9/11, Judy Wood and the thermonuke crew are the worst.

Besides, everyone knows it was the 2001 graduating class of Echo Group that did it as a demo exercise. Sort of like some of the graduating Rangers class doing a helocast into Victory Pond for their parents.

Originally posted by Bedlam
the amount of heat energy required would be rather dramatic

Try sitting down and getting an idea of the mass of the various materials involved. It's not that hard. You know the basic size of the building, the number of floors and whatnot. You can at least make an order of magnitude guess at the volumes of concrete and steel. Then look up the heat of vaporization of it all. Now, how much energy is that delivered over the time that the entire event ran? Yep. It's unreal, right?

So you agree that the magnitude of the building, and the amount of heat required to bring it down would be dramatic. Seeing as the fires were contained to a few floors, and going off what you have said, it appears you would agree that the fires could not have caused such destruction to something of that mass and construction?

What are your theories on the collapses?

Also, seeing as you discredit all the thorough research from Dr. Judy Wood, can you link to your own body of thorough research?

Originally posted by kidtwist

Also, seeing as you discredit all the thorough research from Dr. Judy Wood, can you link to your own body of thorough research?

The only 911 researcher that has a body of thorough research equal to that of Judy Wood is the brilliant* Sophia Sasquatch.




*When measured on the Truther Intelligence Quotient equivalent scale

Originally posted by kidtwistSo you agree that the magnitude of the building, and the amount of heat required to bring it down would be dramatic.

What I agree is that the amount of heat energy required to vaporize the mass of the building in a few seconds would be dramatic.That's a bit different from "the amount of heat required to bring it down".

Sort of like - the amount of heat required to vaporize your car to a glowing mass of iron vapor in one blink like a big photoflash, or the amount required to ignite the gas in the tank. They don't really compare. One requires the power output of the US for half a minute, the other is a match.

What are your theories on the collapses?

It was a bad design, and prone to pancaking.

Or, of course, the truth - Echo Group drilled the hollow vertical box girders by renting appropriate offices, and pumped nanoexplosive slurry in. Bang. No more vertical support, and down she goes. You only have to do a few floors. Interestingly enough, the gubmint funded research some years earlier on just that.

Also, seeing as you discredit all the thorough research from Dr. Judy Wood, can you link to your own body of thorough research?

It's hard to call hogwash "thorough research". If I told you I'd compiled hundreds of pages of research proving that Kennedy was actually killed by evil zombie OompaLoompas, you wouldn't need to refute it with another hundred pages of proof that I was wrong.

It's basic thermodynamics. Pick up a book on it. There are hundreds of the damn things. Look for the "dustify" phase of matter, but don't expect you'll find it.

reply to post by waypastvne


lol

yeah but in case you missed it, 911 mysteries was plagiarized from 911eyewitness and the soundtrack was altered.

you guys are consistent gatekeepers I'll give you that much, but the truth will always be the truth.

Sure, you can attack the messengers all day long, ridicule posted info because it came off a mirror site and use the mirror site as the reason to dismiss the info rather than check the info but we know you are forbidden to check links view videos etc. It would turn you if you educated yourself so rather than be jeopardized they prefer you remain in the dark.

Sometimes I think you are all one person with multiple persona's to reinforce your debunking but no matter, the truth is always the truth.


You took issue with a word, dustify. Well, Dr. Wood isn't in the energy field (nor is anyone else when it is so new that it isn't even understood nor taught ) and as far as the courts that they own, appoint their own judges, and write the laws it wasn't a surprise it is always rejected.. .at least to some of us.

So lets use a different word to describe the same process if that will make you squirm some more ... the Hutchison effect is a field. John Hutchison bought a bunch of used radar/sonar equipment and started to experiment. Let me explain it to you

A sonar "ping" was used historically to pinpoint objects - as the echo returned the delay time told you how far away that object was. Rather than bounce the signal off an object once to find distance, Hutchison pinged the object repeatedly and "tuned" that harmonic resonance to the right frequency which created the effect.

If an opera singer hit the right note, that vibrational frequency shatters crystal. The resonant harmony excited molecules just like a microwave does with water generating heat.

With the Hutchison effect, John found that objects can be excited on a molecular level too by "pinging" at a harmonic resonance that when harmonized would cause the molecules to become detached from each other.

Remember the Philadelphia experiment and the attempt at radar invisibility where seamen were imbedded in the deck?

That is the dustification process that turned concrete to dust. Now I am not 100% sure this was the modality employed, nor the only modality employed on that day, nor am I sure I totally understand the process involved with the resonant frequency, but I do know that things in harmony will create effect.

That goes for a loving world too btw as well as a world in negative harmony. It is a natural order of things that get polarized.

So why hasn't anyone come forward that knows this you want to ask I'm sure... simple enough, advanced weaponry is secured under an umbrella of secrecy and to expose it would be a national security threat which is how I'm sure they hush everyone up and those who won't stay quiet are kept quiet by other means sometimes lethal.

They have beaten the laws of man because they own the courts... the best money can buy, including the judges they appoint and the laws they write.

Always about money but in the end, God knows all hearts and minds and bearing false witness is guilt by collusion.

Personally I'd rather keep my soul than their (or your) respect.
You will find a lot of company where you liars are destined for bearing false witness and I can prove you are all liars simply enough as I have been doing for years and not a single one of you has yet to be able to figure out a lie to dispute this fact.

Why lie if there was nothing to hide?

Google Video Link

.

In case the embed doesn't work here is the direct link...

Popular Mechanics

As the OP stated you guys travel in packs, like a disease you infect the truth with ridicule and condescending remarks about any or all who dare question the OS. You resort to tactics that are getting old and you all really do need a new playbook because we have been on to you for years and you are useful in that everytime you post a bs thread to cast doubts, we always look for the thread you are trying to bury via forum sliding.

And mods, if this post pushes that envelope, go ahead and delete it dock me points, even ban me w/e as it isn't anything I hadn't said numerous times over the years already. Mass murder never sits well with me and innocent souls are crying for justice. I won't back down. And to the guilty, you can take out everyone that knows the truth, you are still destined for the ultimate judgment and that is where my heart is consoled. You are too vile to be saved.

Originally posted by anoncoholicA sonar "ping" was used historically to pinpoint objects - as the echo returned the delay time told you how far away that object was. Rather than bounce the signal off an object once to find distance, Hutchison pinged the object repeatedly and "tuned" that harmonic resonance to the right frequency which created the effect.

"Harmonic resonance" is one of those nonsense terms. Harmonic of what? What is resonating?

If an opera singer hit the right note, that vibrational frequency shatters crystal. The resonant harmony excited molecules just like a microwave does with water generating heat.

The "right note" part comes in when the wavelength of the frequency she's singing corresponds to a mechanical resonance in the wine goblet. Note that you have to have 1) a structure made of a high-q material 2) a shape that has a well-defined mechanical resonance at a frequency she can hit with some amplitude and 3) the material has to be brittle, but elastic.

That's why they have to use lead crystal to do this trick instead of say, tempered glass. Lead crystal is brittle and easily shattered, but like most glass is elastic (in a material science definition way) and has relatively low loss for vibrational flex. The shape of a wine glass gives it a decent mechanical resonance, and it's thin and doesn't have a lot of structural strength. So, altogether, it's a lot better target for shattering with low energy input compression waves like sound, rather than, say, a water balloon.

A microwave heats water in a very very different manner. Not only is it radio instead of sound (they are not related in any way), the heating of water with microwaves is done by dielectric heating. Basically, the water molecule's dipole is spun by the microwave's e-field component.

With the Hutchison effect, John found that objects can be excited on a molecular level too by "pinging" at a harmonic resonance that when harmonized would cause the molecules to become detached from each other.

The term "harmonics" in physics means something very different than the way you are using it.

Also, the "detachment" part is where the energy input comes in. Causing them to become no longer attached generally ends up as a lot of heat.

Remember the Philadelphia experiment and the attempt at radar invisibility where seamen were imbedded in the deck?

That was something completely different.

That is the dustification process that turned concrete to dust. Now I am not 100% sure this was the modality employed, nor the only modality employed on that day, nor am I sure I totally understand the process involved with the resonant frequency, but I do know that things in harmony will create effect.

Resonant frequency of what, exactly? Harmonics of what, exactly? EM and sound - so very different.

That goes for a loving world too btw as well as a world in negative harmony. It is a natural order of things that get polarized.

Syncretism between new age philosophy and physics. A thing that never works.

So why hasn't anyone come forward that knows this you want to ask I'm sure... simple enough, advanced weaponry is secured under an umbrella of secrecy and to expose it would be a national security threat which is how I'm sure they hush everyone up and those who won't stay quiet are kept quiet by other means sometimes lethal.

Or, alternatively, she's full of poo and so is Hutchison.

reply to post by Bedlam


you argue semantics?

Still can't address the lie I noticed.

don't bother to post a reply... I know you still don't have one.

Originally posted by anoncoholic
Well, Dr. Wood isn't in the energy field

Thank God for that. I wouldn't want to see her get Dustified.

Okay, I'm open minded to a lot of stuff, but first lets agree that 4 actual planes were involved on 9/11. Two of which struck WTC1 and WTC2. I'm assuming the hypothesis is that some form of electro-magnetic pulse energy turned the WTC complex into dust. So, what is the evidence that such a weapon was in play? Beyond "dustification" of course.

Originally posted by anoncoholic
reply to post by Bedlam

 

you argue semantics?

Still can't address the lie I noticed.

don't bother to post a reply... I know you still don't have one.

Which lie would that be? Come now, don't retreat into vague accusation.

edit to add: Terms mean things, especially in science. If you say something on the lines of "Oh, it's the harmonic phase resonance of the encabulator" I'm going to call you on it. I'm not nitpicking. "harmonic resonance" is a new age nonsense term. About the only place you can use it with any meaning (sloppily though, I might add) is when you're trying to tune a circuit to a harmonic of another signal - you might do so in a crystal oscillator where you're tuning an output tank to an overtone. But if you say "the glass is shattered by harmonic resonances" it's sort of like the technobabble from ST:TNG.

oh look, the three stooges. Where's dave?

still unable to answer that one simple question I see

Why the need to lie if there is nothing to hide?

Go ahead, keep patting yourselves on your lying backs and star each other since you are probably all the same person anyway

One simple question and yet it stumps you so badly that you still seek to pussy-foot around it.

God got your number, talk to Him not me

Originally posted by anoncoholic
still unable to answer that one simple question I see

Why the need to lie if there is nothing to hide?

Still can't be specific, eh?

I've never understood that one, although it seems to be a common ATS meme. "You told a lie/left something out/didn't answer some vague insinuation so you're hiding!" "Ok, what?" "You know, the question!" "What?"
"THAT question, you know, the one I'm thinking about!"

It probably looks more mysterious than the one where you cut and paste a list of 50 questions from someone else's website and then say something like "Until you answer all these, you can't have an opinion!"

reply to post by Bedlam


still refuse to read the posts you reply to I see. I could never understand that considering you guys claim to know everything how come you don't read what is posted but instead just jump all over the poster?

Since you are so knowledgeable about things perhaps you can explain how a heatsink works and why an aluminium head and cast iron block don't shear off head bolts considering they both have different expansion rates?

Don't forget to answer my first question, why the need to lie?

You might have to actually read what was posted to do that though...

Originally posted by Bedlam

What I agree is that the amount of heat energy required to vaporize the mass of the building in a few seconds would be dramatic.That's a bit different from "the amount of heat required to bring it down".

No it's not, because they both would bring the building down, and the building literally turned to dust, so if we are to believe NIST and the 'debunkers' here, then there just was not enough heat to bring them down full stop.

It was a bad design, and prone to pancaking.

Or, of course, the truth - Echo Group drilled the hollow vertical box girders by renting appropriate offices, and pumped nanoexplosive slurry in. Bang. No more vertical support, and down she goes. You only have to do a few floors. Interestingly enough, the gubmint funded research some years earlier on just that.

Where have you got this info from? Be interesting to see the source for clarification.

The buildings were a modern design, so therefore much more reliable and stronger than buildings like the empire State, it was designed with strength in mind, it should still be standing if it we are to believe it was hit on a few floors by a plane, and had isolated fires.

It's hard to call hogwash "thorough research". If I told you I'd compiled hundreds of pages of research proving that Kennedy was actually killed by evil zombie OompaLoompas, you wouldn't need to refute it with another hundred pages of proof that I was wrong.

It's basic thermodynamics. Pick up a book on it. There are hundreds of the damn things. Look for the "dustify" phase of matter, but don't expect you'll find it.

You are entitled to your opinion, you lost credibility when you mentioned "evil zombie OompaLoompas" you were doing ok until then! As for her terminology, someone has to create new terms for new occurrences that are a side-effect of new technologies. Just because a word does not exist until someone creates it does not mean it's invalid. We know what she means by that term, that is all we need to know!

Originally posted by 911files
Okay, I'm open minded to a lot of stuff, but first lets agree that 4 actual planes were involved on 9/11. Two of which struck WTC1 and WTC2. I'm assuming the hypothesis is that some form of electro-magnetic pulse energy turned the WTC complex into dust. So, what is the evidence that such a weapon was in play? Beyond "dustification" of course.

go to her website, spend some time there, and also pay close attention to the photographs.

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by 911files
Okay, I'm open minded to a lot of stuff, but first lets agree that 4 actual planes were involved on 9/11. Two of which struck WTC1 and WTC2. I'm assuming the hypothesis is that some form of electro-magnetic pulse energy turned the WTC complex into dust. So, what is the evidence that such a weapon was in play? Beyond "dustification" of course.

go to her website, spend some time there, and also pay close attention to the photographs.

I did that, but that did not answer my question.

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by 911files
Okay, I'm open minded to a lot of stuff, but first lets agree that 4 actual planes were involved on 9/11. Two of which struck WTC1 and WTC2. I'm assuming the hypothesis is that some form of electro-magnetic pulse energy turned the WTC complex into dust. So, what is the evidence that such a weapon was in play? Beyond "dustification" of course.

go to her website, spend some time there, and also pay close attention to the photographs.

I did that, but that did not answer my question.

As you say in your last comment, you are 'assuming' and making assumptions is not a good way to base your research. She obviously cannot be 100% sure what tech was used, hence why governments have secret programs! However, from her research of the debris, and damage, it is clear that whatever caused them to collapse is not what the OS is telling us!