It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SteveR
1.Pulverization of 99% of concrete into ultra fine dust as recorded by official studies. Concrete dust was created instantly throughout the towers when the fusion device million degree heat rapidly expanded water vapor in the concrete floors.
2. Superheated steels ablating (vaporizing continuously as they fall) as seen in video clips of the towers collapsing. This requires uniform temperatures roughly twice that of thermate.
3. 22 ton outer wall steel sections ejected 200 meters into the winter garden. Cutting charges cannot provide the energy required.
4. 330 ton section of outer wall columns ripping off side of tower. Cutting charges cannot provide energy required.
5. Molten ponds of steel at the bottom of elevator shafts (WTC1, WTC2, WTC7) Thermate is impractical for lower level demolition due to the thickness of the 47 steel columns.
6. The spire behavior (stands for 20-30 seconds, evaporates, goes down, steel dust remains)
7. Sharp spikes in seismograph readings (Richter 2.1 and 2.3) occurred at the beginning of collapse for both towers. Short duration and high power indicate explosive event.
8. A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris.
9. Wide area electrical outage, repairs took over 3 months. Fusion devices cause EM pulse with Compton Effect.
10. Fires took 100 days to extinguish despite continuous spraying of water. Thermate would cool down much faster.
11. Brown shades of color in the air due nuclear radiation forming sulfuric acid. TV and documentary footage changed the color balance to blue to disguise this fact indicating complicity in the coverup.
12. Elevated Tritium values measured in the WTC area but not elsewhere in New York. Official studies stated that 8 EXIT signs from two commercial Boeing jets were responsible. This is why the "no commercial planes" line of inquiry is very important and should not be ignored or attacked. It can provide conclusive proof of fusion devices and therefore US/Israeli military involvement.
13. Pyroclastic flow observed in the concrete-based clouds. Only found with volcanic eruptions and nuclear detonations. Jim Hoffman unfortunately missed this obvious observation in his papers.
14. Huge expanding dust clouds 5 times the volume of the building indicating extreme levels of heat generated far in excess of traditional demolition explosives.
15. Rubble height was some 10% of the original instead of 33% expected in a traditional demolition. Fusion device removal of underground central steel framework allowed upper framework to fall into this empty space and reduce the rubble height.
16. No survivors found, except some firefighters in one corner pocket in the rubble who looked up to see blue sky above them instead of being crushed by collapsing debris. Upward fusion flashlight beam of destruction missed this pocket but removed debris above firemen.
17. 14 rescue dogs and some rescue workers died far too soon afterward to be attributed to asbestos or dust toxins (respiratory problems due to alpha particles created by fusion that are far more toxic)
18. Record concentrations of near-atomic size metal particles found in dust studies due to ablated steel. Only possible with fusion.
19. Decontamination procedure used at Ground Zero (hi-pressure water spraying) for all steel removed from site. Water spraying contains fusion radiactivity.
20. Intact sheets of paper covered the streets with fine dust. Items with significant mass absorbed fusion energy and were vaporized while paper did not. Paper and Powder theory. (ed)
21. 200 000 gallon sprinkler watertanks on the roofs of WTC1 and WTC2, but no water in the ruins. Heat of fusion devices vaporized large reservoirs of water.
22. Reports of cars exploding around the WTC and many burned out wrecks could be seen that had not been hit by debris. Fusion energy blast and EM pulse caused electrical components in cars to explode and burn vehicles far from WTC site.
23. EM pulse was recorded by broadcast cameras with high quality electronic circuitry. This occurred at the same time as the seismic peaks recorded by Lamont Doherty during the beginning of the collapse. This is due to the Compton Effect and resulted in a large area power outage at the WTC.
Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
Tripe. "fusion device million degree heat", meet my little friend, the ideal gas law. Which says, other changes aside, that the pressure in the building is directly proportional to the temperature. Going from "nice 75F temperature" to "fusion device million degree heat" "instantly throughout the towers" = massive explosion leveling half of NYC.
If it was superheated to the point that the surface material was "ablating", they would be glowing. No glow. Sorry.
Try MGH. It's a big building, it fell a long way. Lots of potential energy.
Live people in the building. Radiological problems aside, enough heat energy to produce molten steel (yet not blow out the building - unlikely) would fry up the survivors.
They know it "evaporates" - how?
7. Sharp spikes in seismograph readings (Richter 2.1 and 2.3) occurred at the beginning of collapse for both towers. Short duration and high power indicate explosive event.
Let's see - a plane hit a building in both cases. Think that might help explain it?
8. A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris.
Yet, you have debris. If your magical "fusion" bomb could obliterate this press, how can the other debris exist?
Yet there wasn't. The outage was confined to the areas that had to be cut to kill power to the towers. Duh. Also, what of the firefighter's radios, the camcorders
And, oh by the way, I know neither you nor David Shaw have thought of this, but the Compton effect is caused by - what? X-rays? Gamma rays? That's right - hard radiation, and lots of it, enough to totally ionize the air in the entire area, the electrons of which then interact with the magnetic field of the Earth to produce the EM pulse. Now, where are the snow drifts of dead New Yorkers?
11. Brown shades of color in the air due nuclear radiation forming sulfuric acid. TV and documentary footage changed the color balance to blue.
Nuclear radiation sufficient to produce nitrous oxides would also have produced snowdrifts of dead New Yorkers, try again. I don't guess the dust and smoke from fires were sufficient to color the air?
Fusion weapons don't carry loose tritium other than in the boost and initiation systems. They make all they need by fissioning Lithium-6 in situ. If it was a fusion weapon, it would also have released an equal amount of deuterium, which was not found as far as I can tell. Try again.
It was a big dust cloud. It hardly qualifies as a "pyroclastic flow". Note the unburned trees, live people, etc. The association of a "pyroclastic flow" with a nuclear weapon is one I have only seen in truther sites.
What about "giant pulse of x-rays, gamma rays, and neutrons would have fried everyone in sight, yet mysteriously did not"?
18. Record concentrations of near-atomic size metal particles found in dust studies due to ablated steel. Only possible with fusion.
Well, no, it isn't "only possible with fusion". Please point out the conditions which only fusion can supply which are the gating factor here. I'll wait.
Water spraying contains fusion radiactivity.
No, it doesn't. Where do people come up with this crap?
20. Intact sheets of paper covered the streets with fine dust. Items with significant mass absorbed fusion energy and were vaporized while paper did not. Paper and Powder theory. (ed)
Also crap. Paper doesn't need to heat very much to combust, less to brown. Yet it did not. The amount of heat produced is tied to the scattering cross-section of the material, not the mass.
And yet, with these 200,000 gallon tanks turned instantly into very high-quality steam, there was no explosion.
did not level or start fires in nearby buildings
6. The spire behavior (stands for 20-30 seconds, evaporates, goes down, steel dust remains)
Originally posted by SteveR
I don't find anything to support your last statement of a "massive explosion leveling half of NYC". What you are alluding to is a rapid and extensive expansion of "gas".
We had that.
Dr. Robert Schuller visited the ruins and said that there "was not a single block of concrete in that rubble," suggesting that the nearly 425,000 cubic yards of concrete had disintegrated into dust.
As witnesses stated there are a couple of temperature references, 15000 and 11000. These are solar temperatures. While unverified it is at face value indicative of fusion.
There are 1157 victims completely unaccounted for. New York City chief medical examiner Dr. Charles Hirsch reported that the bodies were "vaporized". We know cremations require 3200 degree heat for 30 minutes to perform the same.
15000 or 3000, we are still above and beyond the range of hydrocarbon fires.
This is not the work of "lime" and "bacteria" Tom, nor is it the work of kerosene.
All nuclear reactions you have witnessed prior to 9/11 were detonated above ground. At the WTC there was little "glow" to observe, the reaction itself was literally shrouded with dense concrete.
Actually, the debris ejections Shaw is refering to happened at the beginning of the collapse. See this frame for reference.
Over a thousand occupants were vaporized without a trace - the survivors numbered under ten Tom. While I understand what you are getting at, the nuclear demolition theory is based on directional and localized energy release. The small pocket of survivors in a rear elevator shaft were well away from the center of the building. Interestingly, according to their story the next floor above them had vanished.
Metal "condensing" onto windows provides evidence for evaporation.
No. The spikes Shaw refers to happened a split second before each tower collapsed.
Apart from superficial minor debris, it didn't. Look at the pictures, watch the video of the collapse. Believe your eyes. The twin 110 story centers were wiped out.
The radiation was released deep within the basement of the center. EMP warfare involves detonating nuclear weapons at high altitudes. There is a reason for that - the radiation is absorbed by mass to an extent.
And, oh by the way, I know neither you nor David Shaw have thought of this, but the Compton effect is caused by - what? X-rays? Gamma rays? That's right - hard radiation, and lots of it, enough to totally ionize the air in the entire area, the electrons of which then interact with the magnetic field of the Earth to produce the EM pulse. Now, where are the snow drifts of dead New Yorkers?
It is a logical fallacy to argue what a weapon can or cannot do to which we know not the specifications nor the exact effects...(bla bla bla)...Now, unless you have access to classified information you have no way of knowing if such weapons fit the bill, other than your own cursory opinion.
My point being talking about ancient nuclear weapons - and they are ancient - does not debunk the use of a version that has gone through decades of development and secrecy. Nuclear secrets are the best kept in the world - we are very fortunate to have the DOE's report mentioning the "successful" development of minature minimal-residual-radiation nuclear devices.
The report has been covered in depth in a previous nuke thread, you may want to take a look.
(uncommented photo of debris)
And you'd be right. What we are talking about is PURE fusion weapons. There is NO polluting fission involved in the process. Read what has been posted. The U.S. for one injected many millions of dollars into the pure fusion program only to have it abruptly end in 1992.
Semantics, but I beleive you are right about Shaw's use of the term.
You chose not to answer 14 and 15.
In the case of a fission reaction/primary, yes. However, neutron radiation manifests death after many months. Now we have over 300 rescue workers diagnosed with unusual cancers. Types that match previous known radiation exposure.. such as thyroid cancer. Asbestos? You would have to be pretty desperate to cite asbestos.
You don't have to wait. The micronization profile is as follows...
Sample L18-2 was taken 0.25km from the center of ground zero.
An excellent quote from WITW. "Chemical explosives cause short localized bursts of energy. And most of that blast energy gets wasted, i.e. it does not enter the target. The radiation energy (Neutrons) from a hydrogen bomb doesn’t bounce off objects (like a chemical blast wave might) it penetrates and superheats them."
You are simply unaware. For a source with some solid scientific backing, read this.
www.freepatentsonline.com...
(you)
20. Intact sheets of paper covered the streets with fine dust. Items with significant mass absorbed fusion energy and were vaporized while paper did not.
(me, originally)
Also crap. Paper doesn't need to heat very much to combust, less to brown. Yet it did not. The amount of heat produced is tied to the scattering cross-section of the material, not the mass.
(you)
We are not talking about heat production but rather dispersion.
If this is not an explosion - you misunderstand the meaning of the word.
No fires? Are you kidding? The area around the WTC site was covered in charred vehicles and buildings on fire. WTC 7 anyone?
The levels of many of the elements are consistent with their presence in building materials, including chromium, magnesium, manganese, aluminum, and barium. The very high levels of titanium (> 0.1%) were due to their presence in paint, especially white paint. The lead levels are elevated due to the use of lead-based paint on metallic surfaces during construction of the building.
Link to earlier cited site
Other than that turbine piece they showed, I don't recall any chunky airplane bits being brought up.
I agree they're pretty thick from the few glances at the assy line I've had, do they always survive catastrophic airplane fires? I would expect the engine assemblies to survive any normal building fire at the least.
Off the top of my head, and I'd have to go pull up my demolition books to recall, I think reinforced concrete buildings shatter at an internal overpressure of about 30 PSI. That's to say, the building will fly apart and be scattered over the nearby surroundings. Not go boom, fall down. Fly apart. Totally.
At 500 PSI, you'd be sweeping up WTC bits far and wide. And that's at 10,000 C, not millions of degrees C.
Ken Holden, who is involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at Ground Zero, later will tell the 9/11 Commission, “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6.” [9/11 Commission, 4/1/2003]
William Langewiesche, the only journalist to have unrestricted access to Ground Zero during the cleanup operation, describes, “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” [Langewiesche, 2002, pp. 32]
Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, describes fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks. [SEAU News, 10/2001]
Alison Geyh, who heads a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reports, “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.” [Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine, 2001]
Ron Burger, a public health advisor who arrives at Ground Zero on September 12, says that “feeling the heat” and “seeing the molten steel” there reminds him of a volcano. [National Environmental Health Association, 9/2003, pp. 40 ]
According to a member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing, who is at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers’ remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.” [National Guard Magazine, 12/2001]
New York firefighters recall “heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel.” [New York Post, 3/3/2004]
As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O’Toole sees a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, “was dripping from the molten steel.” [Knight Ridder, 5/29/2002]
As well as the reports of molten metal, data collected by NASA in the days after 9/11 finds dozens of “hot spots” (some over 1300 degrees) at Ground Zero
June 11, 2006 — Since 9/11, 283 World Trade Center rescue and recovery workers have been diagnosed with cancer, and 33 of them have died of cancer, says a lawyer for the ailing responders. link
Analysis of Air Samples Taken from Residential Buildings in Lower Manhattan Indicates
No Elevation of Asbestos in Air. Low Levels of Asbestos and Some Fiberglass Found in Dust Samples.
link
This is not the story of rescue and recovery workers at ground zero getting sick with respiratory illnesses from their exposure; you have read those stories, and you have heard those cases.This is the story of 9-11 and cancer.
To date, 75 recovery workers on or around what is now known as "the Pile"—the rubble that remained after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on the morning of September 11, 2001—have been diagnosed with blood cell cancers.
link
No, no no. You have a lot of things wrong here. Neutrons will kill you right then and there.
Originally posted by SteveR
Heard of Theodore B. Taylor? Probably not. Senior nuclear physicist and bomb designer at Los Alamos. Died in 2004. His pre-9/11 science books talked alot about nuclear demolition and potential terrorism, in one book he speculated on the possibility of nuclear devices being used to demolish the World Trade Center.
Read "The Curve of Binding Energy". Oh no doubt you will call his work "tripe", eh?
Shortly after the war he began working at Los Alamos, where he designed many of the smallest and lightest nuclear bombs. Subsequently, Taylor became an advocate of putting the genie back into the bottle. One of his nightmare scenarios was a group of terrorists knocking down the World Trade Center with a homemade nuclear bomb
The frightening truth, as The Mini-Nuke Conspiracy reveals, is that the world has been hoodwinked. Piecing together the evidence with the help of scores of witnesses, the authors discover that South Africa not only made A-bombs but went on to produce an array of advanced tactical nuclear weapons. It did so with the help of allies in America, Britain and Israel.
Hounam and McQuillan show how a mysterious chemical called red mercury was responsible for a string of gruesome murders. They discovered that red mercury was a key component of a new type of battlefield mini-nuke. These so-called 'clean bombs' have the capacity to kill while leaving behind minimal radioactive fallout.
Originally posted by SteveR
You state that you beleive a nuclear weapon, used inside a building, would at least have resulted in intact pieces of the building flying distances, much like the explosion of a fragmentation grenade. And at most, air pressure 'polishing NYC to bedrock' (your words. Have you heard of the "The Hiroshima Prefectural Industrial Promotion Hall" intact only 150 m from the hypocenter of the atomic bomb explosion over Hiroshima.)
You claim this with calculations of overpressure based on Shaw's comment of instantaneous million degree heat through the building. This along with lack of significant radiation are your main reasons to debunk use of a nuclear device.
The problem with this is as I stated earlier. There are many signs that only a nuclear weapon demolished the trade centers. Our inability to accurately gauge how the weapon/s were used, and the behavior/specifications of them leads to (possibly) debunkable theories. No-one can state with certainty how they were applied - but we know they were. To dismiss the premise out of hand without factoring this truth is shortsighted.
I posted Shaw's research summary because there are good points in his work. What I beleive is not necessarily the same. Extremely high temperatures must of been present - at least in the hypocenter. This limitation alone massively affects your calculation of overpressure as there is no minimum yield. In 2 x 110 story buildings with concrete and steel floors, I would expect three things from a mini-nuclear demolition. One, mass-micronization of the concrete with portions of concrete away from the detonation intact, Two, hypothesized 'china syndrome' in the underlying debris, and Three consistantly attributable cancer.
Mass-micronization of concrete is unexpected in any kinetic only collapse, as you are kind enough to admit. You also note no 110 story demolition has been witnessed before, consequently there is no data on how improbable this micronization is and therefore should be untouched. That is a definite cop-out, Tom.
In Shaw's case it would indeed produce 100% or near 100% micronization. There is evidence that this did not happen, which is not such a bad thing considering many nuke theories are indeed based on localized detonations.
Onto the China Syndrome. How does one explain constant heat generation under the pile for weeks and months after 9/11? Drywall, lime, paint smouldering? Not under constant spraying of water night and day. Question to all: Why was this pulled out 8 weeks after 9/11?
I do not want to hear about "thermite" or any derivative. It is known that molten thermite cools off rather quickly, it no longer glows after a few hours.
An oxygen starved fire of "lime and other building material" (is that including the fireproofing?) does not generate yellow-hot FE (1800-2000) temperatures, let alone under constant spraying of water.
“Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall"
“in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.”
Alison Geyh, who heads a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reports, “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.” [Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine, 2001]
What is the massive indefinite heat a product of? Answer: Thermonuclear chain reaction.
There has been no answer whatsoever besides bacteria (it survives these temperatures?) for the bodies, and the assertation that office walls help to decompose 1000 bodies and skeletons is absurd.
...do you think if concrete plates are dropped to asphalt from heights such as 400m and lower they disintegrate to molecular dust? 35% of random sample sub 75 microns? Do they cover Manhattan in two inches of talcum-consistency dust?
It is easier to dismiss all this information. Afterall, ordinary explanations are far more likely by default. Aren't they?
I want answers to these statements. I also want answers to statements made in the previous posts you and readers have comfortably chosen not to address.
I said I was going to talk about the third telltale sign - consistantly attributable cancer. The internet and printed media is full of stories about 9/11 worker sickness.
I beleive that neutron radiation played a large role in the desired effects of the weapon. The majority of neutron radiation was directed upwards and absorbed by the mass of the towers.
You claim that a release of neutron radiation would of "instantly" killed many people around ground zero. Absolute fecal matter. As you should know, not all neutron radiation is equal. I will repeat that for your edification. Not all neutron radiation is the same. We know neutron lethality depends on the MeV.
not that I would think there'd be a high level after the collapse.
You call my mention of water "crap", perhaps I should of elaborated, you are aware that water, light water, is an effective neutron moderator? These are all important factors. Are you even aware that neutrons are used in certain medical operations?