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 thedman
reply to post by noahproductions
Notice you have ignored my evidence dismissing your claim of nuclear explosions in WTC
Originally posted by noahproductions
reply to post by GrisGris
Yeah,.. ok about the planes,.. but the claimed evidence, in fact, tellls us that the planes where actually the false flag..!!! Because the real devices where underground.....edit on 8-12-2010 by noahproductions because: (no reason given)
Yes that's right,.. we.. NoahProductions is my company and I (the owner) did not find former threads on ATS.
And you're right about the links to my website, because the pages were part of our Broadcasting and the advertisement is our one and only income like any other newspaper or whatever channel... even ATS !!
Originally posted by noahproductions
reply to post by Kailassa
Well the thought behind the operation would be: hiding what was happening inside and under the buildings.
All eyes of the world were on the burning and smoking spots...
The buildings were "smulched into a smouldering pit" where the temperature remained so
high that soil and glass were vaporised - boiled away - for over 6 weeks.
In the dust, they found high levels of chemical elements that had no business being there.
Extremely rare and toxic elements.
Some of them elements that only exist in Radioactive Form.
Elements such as Strontium, Barium, Thorium, Cerium, Lanthanum and
Yttrium.
But even more than that, the vast quantity of fallout produced and other factors show
that the explosions were not produced by ordinary atomic bombs
The explosions were produced by a clandestine Nuclear Reactor under each tower
undergoing a "power excursion" and then a core meltdown
Originally posted by fordrew
a) nuclear weapons create an EMP, or electromagnetic pulse, when detonated. Most if not all electronics in the area would be fried.
b) nuclear weapons of course emit nuclear radiation.
DEBUNKED.
Originally posted by Bedlam
In this case, the OP is apparently trying to dodge the non-kaboom problem by invoking the ghost of SL-1. However, SL-1 was a steam explosion/hydrogen flash, instead of a nuclear explosion as claimed.
Worse, the remains of SL-1 were horribly active, and it was quite difficult to clean up. And there was no "meltdown", per se, partly because the core was scattered around far enough that reactivity ceased. Even so, there was a lot of I-131 produced, which is a telltale of this sort of thing. And the explosion wasn't that large - certainly not large enough to "dustify" a WTC building by itself. Not to mention that if it HAD been large enough, you'd have gotten more of a blowing out instead of a falling down thing going on. The lack of overpressure effects is another issue, although essentially no radioactivity at all is the real biggie.
Originally posted by Cassius666
I did not see the videos, but I cant imagine why one would use a couple of mininukes to demolish the buildings, when explosives work just fine. Unless evidence of fallout and radiation has been found, nothing points to the use of nuclear devices.
Originally posted by noahproductions
Because the real devices where underground.....