Discussion: 9/11 WTC: AE911's "Pyroclastic Flow" collapse dust clouds

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
[Mick: thread split from: https://www.metabunk.org/showthread.php?p=50357#post50357 ]

Or another example of something demonstrably false, the notion of "pyroclastic flow", which is just the dust from the collapsed building being pushed away.

There you go. Reasonable people can make mistakes (note the last one: explosions before the planes hit?)
I don't understand your point Mick. Seems like you are grasping at straws here. How is it false. Anyone can see it is a pyroclastic flow. It doesn't have to come from a volcano. Are you suggesting that ae911 falsely claiming the government used a volcano to blow up the wtc?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyroclastic_flow


 
Last edited by a moderator:

SR1419

Senior Member.
I don't understand your point Mick. Seems like you are grasping at straws here. How is it false. Anyone can see it is a pyroclastic flow. It doesn't have to come from a volcano. Are you suggesting that ae911 falsely claiming the government used a volcano to blow up the wtc?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyroclastic_flow

Who is grasping at straws??

If it was a "pyroclastic" flow- why was no one burned or incinerated by the hot gas- like in Pompeii ?

It was a cloud of dust not a pyroclastic flow
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's a rather dramatic video of a guy getting engulfed in the "pyroclastic flow". Start at 2:58. At one point the video skips and shows something on the tape he was recording over, then it all goes black. But keep going, he lives. It was just a very large cloud of dust. Nothing pyroclastic about it.



Amazing video besides that. I remember seeing it on 9/12 (as I recall). He's a doctor, nearly dies, then goes and runs triage.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Who is grasping at straws??

If it was a "pyroclastic" flow- why was no one burned or incinerated by the hot gas- like in Pompeii ?

It was a cloud of dust not a pyroclastic flow
See https://www.metabunk.org/posts/50360
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
You think it's unreasonably pedantic to point out that it's not a pyroclastic flow, it simply resembles one from a distance?

AE911 have "Pyroclastic" as one of their main points of evidence, except now they have changed it to the meaningless "pyroclastic-like". But the people there still parrot "pyroclastic" as if it means something.

It was just a big cloud of dust. So why don't they list "unexpectedly large cloud of dust" as a point of evidence, along with "fell faster than I would have thought", and "not as much lateral spread of debris as one might imagine"
 
Last edited:

SR1419

Senior Member.
Nice misdirect Oxy....

just answer the question:

If it was a "pyroclastic" flow- why was no one burned or incinerated by the hot gas traveling hundreds of miles an hour?

or even better...

If it wasn't a pyroclastic flow...why call it that?
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
You think it's unreasonably pedantic to point out that it's not a pyroclastic flow, it simply resembles one from a distance?

AE911 have "Pyroclastic" as one of their main points of evidence, except now they have changed it to the meaningless "pyroclastic-like". But the people there still parrot "pyroclastic" as if it means something.

It was just a big cloud of dust. So why don't they list "unexpectedly large cloud of dust" as a point of evidence, along with "fell faster than I would have thought", and "not as much lateral spread of debris as one might imagine"
Do you know anyone who thinks ae911 are suggesting that the government used a volcano to blow up the wtc? Is that what you believe?
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Do you know anyone who thinks ae911 are suggesting that the government used a volcano to blow up the wtc? Is that what you believe?
No- but AE911- by using the term "pyroclastic flow" IS suggesting that the dust cloud was something other than what would be expected as the result of a collapsing building.

They are using the term- and its inherent catastrophic potential- to insinuate that the cloud of dust is somehow evidence of an inside job.

There was NOTHING even remotely close to pyroclastic "like" about the dust cloud.

So, why are they deliberately lying?

Seriously, Oxy- why use the term at all?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's an excellent example of a "pyroclastic flow"



Just a big clouds of dust. Compare with the video above. And this is just from a 6 story structure, add another 104 stories on top of that = bigger cloud of dust.

Similar, verinage demolition this time (no explosives)


and another with the dust cloud enveloping people:
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
And here's a couple more clouds of dust, both from small buildings, both without explosives:







Here's a smaller collapse, but still with dust clouds bigger than the bit that fell.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
No- but AE911- by using the term "pyroclastic flow" IS suggesting that the dust cloud was something other than what would be expected as the result of a collapsing building.

They are using the term- and its inherent catastrophic potential- to insinuate that the cloud of dust is somehow evidence of an inside job.

There was NOTHING even remotely close to pyroclastic "like" about the dust cloud.

So, why are they deliberately lying?

Seriously, Oxy- why use the term at all?
How can they be lying?

It looked like a pyroclastic flow.

See:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/concrete.html


 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Leaving aside the use of words, why do you think it is significant? Why is AE911 pointing out that there was a huge cloud of dust that looked like a pyroclastic flow without the temperature?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's what Richard Gage wrote (emphasis mine):

http://www.ae911truth.org/news/41-a...eel-at-wtc-site-challenge-official-story.html
His link goes to:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/dust.html
Which is utter nonsense, as a quick look any video of a building collapse will show you. Falling buildings create lots of dust, the displacement of air pushes that dust away. Air is a fluid, so the cloud of dust is the forced out air (carrying dust in suspension) violently mixing with the exterior ambient air. It's really simple fluid mechanics.

Really I can't stress this enough: physics fail! Gage's assertion is utter nonsense.
 

Spongebob

Active Member
Here's an excellent example of a "pyroclastic flow"


Just a big clouds of dust. Compare with the video above. And this is just from a 6 story structure, add another 104 stories on top of that = bigger cloud of dust.

Similar, verinage demolition this time (no explosives)

and another with the dust cloud enveloping people:

Perfectly depicted...
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mendel ventilator vs CPAP vs oxygen discussion (split from othr thread) Coronavirus COVID-19 6
DougW Bastille Day rampage discussion General Discussion 5
MikeG Debunked: Home Schooling Parents in Ohio Jailed General Discussion 6
MikeG James Tracy: Teaching 9/11 to Students General Discussion 4
Svartbjørn The Challenge with Peer Review General Discussion 4
MikeG Halliburton's $100 Load of Laundry General Discussion 5
MikeG Debunked: 1,433 Deaths Caused by New Zealand Police Since 1990 General Discussion 37
Joe Discussion of use of the "Advocating Violence" thread Contrails and Chemtrails 121
mrfintoil Discussion: False memories and "No persistent trails in the past" Contrails and Chemtrails 46
Christian Svensson Chemtrails Global Skywatch facebook discussion Contrails and Chemtrails 49
Soulfly Hello, a discussion about memes and their influence on bunk. General Discussion 46
George B Chemtrail discussion: ethics, psyops, and stuff Contrails and Chemtrails 140
econ41 AE911's Response to Mick West's Iron Microspheres Talk. 9/11 17
Mick West Sept 3, 2019 release of Hulsey's WTC7 draft report: Analysis 9/11 183
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Mick West WTC7: Is AE911's (and NIST's) Focus on A2001 Justified if it Was Not "Key" in NIST's Global Model? 9/11 181
Mick West Why Didn't the WTC Fires Ignite AE911's Supposed "Nanothermite"? 9/11 28
Mick West AE911 Truth Forced to Claim Plasco Collapse is an Inside Job 9/11 336
Mick West Debunked: 9/11 Truth New York Times Billboard Quote 9/11 53
Oystein AE911 Truth's WTC7 Evaluation Computer Modelling Project 9/11 1340
gerrycan AE911 Letter to Inspector General Claims NIST WTC7 Report is Provably False 9/11 161
qed Where are the AE911 models? 9/11 79
Mick West Paraody of AE911: Free-fall descent proves giant hole, not explosives used! 9/11 62
Mick West Debunked: 9/11 WTC: AE911's "Pyroclastic Flow" collapse dust clouds 9/11 9
Related Articles
























Related Articles

Top