Independant Investigation on WTC Dust

Showing people what a dishonest poster you are is enough....

 

Yeah, you failed at that as well. You've proven your posts are based on serious delusions though! Keep up the good work!

 

I pointed out the fact they don't know the origin of the red/gray chips which makes any conclusion meaningless.

I also noticed they had an agenda that was not based on facts but simply to prove someone else wrong.

 

Unless, of course, the origin of the red gray chips is immaterial as is the case here. THEN you only fall flat on your face.

That doesn't even make any sense. Jones et al. published a paper some hold up as proof of explosives. They did a paper to examine the facts of the matter and try to replicate the claims of Jones et al. They were either going to prove / disprove the presence of thermitic material and see if they could figure out the purpose of the chips. They succeeded on both accounts. The fact you're butthurt over the whole affair is hilarious, but ultimately meaningless. Your whining about an aspect of the paper that doesn't exist. The fact you can't figure that out and end up ineffectively flinging (*)(*)(*)(*) everywhere hoping something sticks somewhere is both pathetic and humorous at the same time. Reminds me of monkeys at the zoo....

 

Since I've pointed out several times I don't care about the Jones paper, how could I be PatHurt by this meaningless study? To say it doesn't matter where the chips came from only further proves your agenda driven drivel.

Did the Jones chips get tested to verify Jones' findings? Where did Jones get the chips? The whole thing is just an agenda driven joke whether you like this study or Jones'. To me, anyone that likes either study is an agenda driven fool.

 

Awww. Look at that! SS is trying to be clever! Unfortunately he once again fails. Constantly regurgitating the same crap time and time again must leave an awful taste in your mouth, but it does nothing to further the conversation. Your questions have been answered in detail time and time again, yet you appear to be mentally incapable of understanding the very simple concepts involved. A shame really. Is this what our education system is turning out these days?

 

How can you not be embarrassed?

 

I'm not you.

 

Good point. I'm the kind that would get embarrassed from blatant dishonesty but it doesn't bother people like you at all......

 

So you admit you are embarassed due to your massive dishonesty, and I'm not bothered at all because I'm not the one playing childish games, ignoring evidence, pretending people accused me of saying something different, and pretending my opinions are facts / evidence. That would be you. I realize you wish you could be me, but you can't. You will have to live with that let down.

 

How could you come to a conclusion about the paper's agenda without reading the paper? Sounds like your conclusion is the result of a little projection on your part.

Maybe if you had read the paper presented in the OP of this thread you would know the answer to this question.

Read the Jones paper. He tells you.

What facts did the linked paper disregard? The linked paper is not about demolition of the WTC. The linked paper is not about steel in the building, or the location of the red / gray chips analyzed in the study. The study is about the composition of the red / gray chips only. What agenda do you think drove them to study the composition of the chips, and how does this agenda prove that the study is meaningless?

 

I read enough to know:

they don't know the origin of the chips which makes the results useless.

the whole purpose of the test was to prove no explosives were used.

they clearly had an agenda and if you can't see that......

 

Well, if you would stop lying and tell the truth then you wouldn't have anything to (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about. The purpose of the test was to identify what the red and gray chips were. Nothing more. Nothing less. This has been explained to you before, yet you insist on lying. If you had read the paper you would see that that is what the purpose was, but instead you want to be dishonest about it and pretend the purpose of the paper is completely different from what the paper is about.

 

You clearly didn't read enough. You obviously didn't even get past the first sentence of the introduction.

The study had nothing to do with testing to prove that no explosives were used. The study had everything to do with the chemical composition of red / gray chips referenced in the Niels Harrit report. MVA found the same red gray chips described in the Harrit report in their own independently collected samples. MVA found that the composition of the chips in their samples was consistent with the composition of paint. Your inability to find meaning in such a study is rather comical, since you can't even manage to read the report. It's only 59 pages. Is it really that hard for you to seek truth?

 

And you don't?.....you truthers are something....you whine for 'independent investigation' and whine when you get it

 

Nothing to do with explosives? The very first response to this thread was a child-giddy celebration the test found no trace of explosives and nobody said anything about the results being for a different purpose. Now you want to claim it wasn't about explosives?

The study also pointed out the red layer was not consistent with any of the 177 coatings used. Why don't YOU read the study??

The red gray chips were never compared to the Harrit study. Why? You have to have access to those samples Einstein.


Let me show just how pathetically dishonest you are as these next few lines come from the person responsible for the Study:

"In the summer of 2011, after finishing my 22 respectful YouTube rebuttals of Richard Gage’s Blueprint for Truth (keywords chrismohr911), I decided to see if I could organize an independent study of the World Trade Center dust to find out if thermitic materials could be found."

Read it again then come back and lie to us again and say the study had nothing to do with finding explosives.........

 

No I don't. I look at the facts and evidence and if you cannot understand how then it is your own shadow blinding.

 

I LOVE IT! The truther who is always whining about taking things out of context DOES IT ON A REGULAR BASIS! Does this test have anything to do with explosives being used? No. It has everything to do with whether or not the red and gray chips contained a thermitic material. No matter how many times this gets explained to you, you wish to lie your ass off and pretend it is about explosives.

And? Was thermitic material found?

BULL(*)(*)(*)(*)! Now you are out and out lying. The entire first part of the study describes how the dust was collected and how they went through the exact same methodology used by Jones to identify and isolate the red and gray chips. Using every description made by Jones, the new study was able to positively identify these red and gray chips as the same kind observed by Jones.

See? Even your own quotes say nothing about explosives and everything about thermitic material found in Jones' study.

We did read it. Apparently you didn't. Thermitic material isn't explosive. It gives off heat. Maybe you should learn about the definitions of words before making a fool of yourself like that.

 

Can anyone else make sense of this post?

 

If you look at the facts and evidence, why do you continue to run from the evidence in the 9/11 investigation? You claimed it didn't have every last piece of evidence which somehow invalidates everything, but we all know that is just the cheap copout of someone who knows the evidence is there, knows the evidence blows his retarded theories out of the water, and knows that he cannot accept the evidence without looking like a complete fool.

We also understand that your self aggrandizing bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claims like the one above are nothing but the desperate attempt to seem credible, when the truth is your claims speak for themselves; they are hollow, they have no evidence to back them up, and they ignore the vast quantities of evidence that is out there that you cannot refute.

 

Truthers, in their rabid attempts to try and insult us, often times display fits of ignorance that can be hard to fathom. They try to insult anyone who doesn't buy into the numerous conflicting truthtard theories, but often times their attempts at insults come across as the attempts a three year old would try to make since they lack a complete grasp of the English language. All you really need to understand is he is trying his hardest to insult you. Just laugh like everyone else.

What he is saying is a complete lie as demonstrated repeatedly by his denial of any and all evidence from the 9/11 commission simply because the 9/11 commission report doesn't contain the totality of evidence collected on 9/11. This isn't logical or even sane, but it does show the desperate lengths truthers will go to in order to mask their dishonesty.

 

I'll just put it in my 'things that make me go 'huh?' file

 

Let me help you understand. You accused me of having an agenda and I responded by pointing out I don't because I look at all available info and if you cannot understand that it is because you are too agenda driven to understand. Did that help?

 

The dishonesty here is pathetic because we all know "thermitic material" is referencing explosives, or more bluntly, an artificial means used to collapse the buildings other than the planes.

Like I said, you are an awesome friend to Truthers because you have to be so dishonest to try and defend the OCT.

Did you ever find the proof all hijackers were in al qaeda? Of course not!!! Keep dodging....

 

That file is about to explode with being over filled.