A Brief Summary: WTC Destruction & High Temperature Aftermath:
author: The Anonymous Physicist
ONLY Nuclear Bombs and the China Syndrome Fit All the Evidence
NOTE: PLEASE DISSEMINATE THIS DEFINITIVE SUMMARY ON THE NUKING OF THE WTC AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE!
|
 http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/
In attempting to ascertain what caused the destruction of the WTC on 9/11/01, and the great heat and molten metal observed for up to six months afterward, one must account for ALL the phenomena involved in WTC destruction, and the aftermath-- and not just one or two factors. Only nuclear bombs and the resulting China Syndrome can account for ALL phenomena observed. The overview and numerous supporting articles on the nuclear destruction of the WTC are here: wtcdemolition.blogspot.com But, at the outset, we should realize that there is an abundance of evidence that the O.C.T. (Official Conspiracy Theory) is quite bogus. For example, sworn testimony from firemen/responders contains their witnessing of loud explosions from the onset of tower destruction. This alone destroys the OCT of gravity-driven, progressive collapse.
A brief summary of the nuclear aspects now follows.
1. First, low yield nukes (mini-nukes or micro-nukes) are a proven fact that the U.S Govt has admitted to since the 1950's with their Davey Crocket rifle, and more recently with a physicist's testimony to Congress. It is also documented fact that since the 1960's, and Project Plowshare, low radiation nukes-- and later neutron bombs-- have been available, and were planned for excavation projects and such. My "many small nukes" WTC hypothesis indicates that numerous low yield nukes went off INSIDE (near the center of) the towers. They vaporized anything near them (via million degree temperatures and/or high neutron flux), but the yield of these micro-nukes was deliberately small enough not to vaporize the outer structure. This also ensured that any radiation was contained during detonation. And Plowshare, and neutron bombs, prove low radiation nukes have been available for decades.
2. MASSIVE EVIDENCE of ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSES (EMP) FROM NUKES. This includes the eyewitness, sworn testimony of EMT responder, Patricia Ondrovic (and others). She reported that as WTC1 was beginning to be destroyed, she saw flickering lights in WTC6 lobby where she tried to enter, but was stopped. And just outside at that time, cars caught fire without any visible reason, and one then had its car door explode off of it; and the door hit and injured her as she began to flee the area. Exactly how EMP from nukes did all this is explained here, along with other evidence of EMP during tower destruction from nuclear bombs.
3. DUST PARTICLE SIZE WAS LESS THAN 2.5 MICRONS-- & LIED ABOUT by the Gov't's main OCT (Official "Collapse" Theory) engineer/author. You can think of a mortar and pestle, and grinding something large into smaller and smaller pieces. It takes more and more energy input to yield smaller and smaller pieces. A nuclear bomb is known to yield particle sizes down to 10 nanometers. (1 nanometer is 1 billionth of a meter). And Govt scientists had equipment to analyze the WTC dust down to 10-nanometer size, if they wanted to, and should have. Unless they did, and have refused to release this. What they (the U.S. Geological Survey scientists) did was lump together all dust sizes less than 2.5 microns and released this data. (A micron is 1 millionth of a meter, and a thousand times larger than 1 nanometer). Nonetheless, the Govt's main engineer/author, Z.P. Bazant, numerous times wrote papers that claimed that 10 microns was the smallest sized particles created during WTC destruction, and later collected by USGS scientists. For years he did not cite the work that showed, this. Last year he did cite a reference, and it led back to the 2.5 micron study, NOT to the 10 microns he claimed as the smallest dust particle size! So he flat out committed fraud here. He had to do this as his bogus papers claim that the gravitational potential energy (height times weight) of the towers accounted for the energy needed to create the smallest dust particle size. And there isn't enough energy from his theory to account for 2.5 micron size dust, let alone the much smaller dust sizes that the USGS did not ascertain or release! The bogus physics and math from Bazant and others is here.
4. MELTED, HANGING SKIN WITHOUT FIRE was reported by at least 4 known WTC survivors. This includes WTC worker Felipe David, whose own words state this occurred without fire, but his story when told by another, has "fire" added. There are also two women who reported (on the "Larry King Show") that a similar thing happened to them, and they don't know why, because they too were not in any fire. And there is also a security guard with a similar report. The security guard and Felipe David had this happen to them in the lobby and the sub-basement area of WTC1 respectively. Outside the towers, firemen/responders also felt great heat on their skin without being near any fire DURING TOWER DESTRUCTION. Only the thermal rays of a nuclear bomb can account for this. They go out the farthest when a nuke goes off. And hanging skin was a common occurrence in Hiroshima survivors. Note that the outside firemen feeling heat on their skin (without fire near them) also disproves "DEW", as they are NOT in the towers nor right under them either, and thus if "directed energy beams did it", and these must be coherent, they would not diverge and cause heat far from their target! So no "DEW" was involved.
5. SUB-BASEMENT LEVEL, 50-TON STEEL PRESS & HEAVY DOOR VAPORIZED. At the same time as Felipe David's nightmare was unfolding, and also in the sub-basement, WTC engineer Mike Pecoraro reports going up a level and seeing that a sub-basement level was in shambles and was "just gone." Also he states a 50-ton press has also been apparently vaporized, and a 300 pound steel/concrete door has just been left shriveled up like foil. The only things that could do this are the multi-million degree temperatures, and neutron bombardment, from a nuclear bomb. Coupling this with the four survivors who had melted, hanging skin at this same time, we have evidence of blast, high temperatures, neutron bombardment and thermal rays-- all virtual proof of nuclear bomb use.
6. HEAT GENERATION AT THE WTC FOR UP TO 6 MONTHS AFTER 9/11- -THE CHINA SYNDROME AFTERMATH (CSA) (see http://wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com) No heat "lingers" for weeks and months, not alleged jet fuel, not alleged thermite (which would have been used up either in minutes or hours--or during its use as an explosive). We have the documented, witnessed, and well photographed and videotaped great heat and molten metal for weeks, and indeed for up to six months underground at the WTC-- until all radioactive fission fragments were carted away. No heat lingers for that long; this could only have been heat GENERATION. The evidence of great heat throughout much of the rubble pile and even higher temperatures underneath the two towers and WTC7 is massive. It included melted firemen's boots, even dogs had to wear special boots, a mass of congealed bullets in WTC6 going off weeks later from heat, and many photos of steam emanation from the continual water hosing of the "hotspots" all around the WTC. The China Syndrome HAD TO ARISE because each of the numerous small nukes used up only 1-6% of its fissile material-- which is standard for nukes. The remainder was then available as radioactive fragments, releasing great heat for a long time (until removed), as the half-life of Uranium 235 is 700 million years. And it is likely that there were numerous, redundant nukes employed, and the phenomena of "fratricided" and fizzled nukes may also have occurred as these are common with nuclear detonations. These effects likely further exacerbated the China Syndrome. The radioactive fragments were somewhat dispersed throughout the rubble pile, and in greatest concentration underneath the towers and WTC7-- where water and sand treatments could not readily be employed. Note that the alleged Tritium finding that the Govt released, may be a red herring to fool people to look for top-secret unknown types of nukes, which couldn't have led to the CSA, which is what clearly occurred. The ludicrous lying ("there never was any heat during or after WTC destruction") or the poor attempts to create new laws of chemistry and physics by alleged 9/11truthers ("super nanocomposite thermite burns forever") only shows how desperate the Govt is to hide the China Syndrome Aftermath.
7. THE MISSING PEOPLE, FURNITURE, steel & other contents of the towers. Destruction of the towers vaporized many of the nearly 3,000 people who died, as well as much furniture, steel and other building contents. The medical examiner was unable to find or utilize any strands of DNA for over 1100 people. The rubble pile from the two towers was only a couple of stories high when it should have been several times higher from a "collapse," or even a conventional demolition. There is much missing mass from the "extraordinarily high temperatures" as fire engineering Professor Barnett declared after examining vaporized steel, that occurred during tower/WTC7 destruction. Nukes vaporize matter near their hypocenter. Thermite, thermobarics, etc. DO NOT. Contrary to what some claim, neither thermite nor thermobarics could vaporize the missing people, furniture, steel and other contents, as detailed here.
8. CLASSICAL GOV'T DISINFO METHODS ENSUED whereby their agents put out supposedly "alternative theories" involving alleged "secret, new technologies" that are either evidence-free and/or impossible. Space Beams/DEW (Directed Energy Weapons), or ludicrous "super nanocomposite thermite burns forever" theories were created by the intel agencies to cover up the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath. (Thermite cools off in minutes or hours.) These "theories" desperately try to claim new phenomena or new laws of physics and chemistry--as does the 9/11 Commission's ludicrous "findings."
9. More now on the issue of Radiation: The #1 item above showed that the Govt has had mini-nukes, and micro-nukes for decades, and that low-radiation yielding nukes have also been around for decades as well. On the other hand, the great heat and molten metal at, and under, the WTC for up to six months after 9/11, indicates the existence of the China Syndrome Aftermath at the WTC; whereby many responders and Metro New York residents may have been exposed to some radiation from radioactive fission fragments that resulted from the use of the many micro-nukes. We have much indirect evidence of the effects of radiation poisoning among the 40,000 responders who were at "Ground Zero" in the weeks and months afterwards. There have been hundreds of reported cases of blood, lymph and thyroid cancers among responders. These types of cancers frequently arise from radiation exposure, and are much less likely (unlike lung diseases) to arise from inhalation of toxins. Also, the teeth and hair falling out reported by several responders are also standard illnesses from radiation poisoning. These responders' doctors and lawyers are not telling these people that radiation may have caused their illnesses, because the China Syndrome Aftermath remains one of the Govt's most closely guarded secrets. However, we can see that the Govt itself was well aware of what it had caused! Standard radiation-lowering methods were employed beginning the very next morning-- 9/12/01! These included water dilution/hosing down and sand/earth covering (and subsequent removal of this sand/earth) of the rubble pile. These procedures continued for weeks and months precisely because the rubble pile, and undergound areas, were replete with radioactive fission fragments.
There is some general information on radiation sources that needs elucidation. Due to absorption and other factors, radiation levels can go down quickly-- unless radioactive fragments (radionuclides) are released to the environment. Unless one is close (like Felipe David, who appears to have received thermal radiation, and not ionizing radiation)-- or the radiation is very intense-- enough distance/air or most materials, will stop most forms of radiation. This assumes one does not inhale or ingest radioactive particles or radionuclides. The underground WTC areas-- which likely had the highest radiation yields (and also heat)-- were off limits to all but a few responders. Also, as Hiroshima studies indicated, it took decades for many cancers and other illnesses to manifest. Note that a Gov't agency, FEMA, was/is in charge of any radiation data for Ground Zero, and could easily have blocked release of any data that found radiation. The U.S. Gov't has a long, sordid record of lying about radiation exposure to soldiers and citizens, as noted here when they nuked their own soldiers during "atomic tests".
Honest people, not in DENIAL, must see the analogy to the Reichstag fire set by the German Nazis, in 1933, in Berlin. This was their seat of almost their entire federal gov't. And this fire/destruction was used as an excuse to destroy their Constitution, and as an excuse for War on "terrorists," and then all of Europe. There was one difference with the Nazis, however. They waited till the middle of the night, when there were no inhabitants in the Reichstag building! Of course, that German Gov't did not admit they did it themselves, but that came out after they lost WWII. If U.S. Govt agencies have certain types of proof that they nuked the WTC, and thus its largest city; does any honest person think these Govt agencies would ever release this data--unless a new Gov't came about? There is reason to believe that other crucial data such as WTC rubble pile temperature (AVIRIS, 2nd set), and WTC destruction seismic recordings were altered. This physicist hypothesizes that WTC responders AND nearby Metro New York residents and workers, that were exposed either the longest or to certain areas with the "hottest"spots face the risk of getting cancer and other immune disorders from radiation exposure in the years and decades to come. Sadly this will prove the China Syndrome Aftermath in the worst possible way. Private persons and institutions are urged to get and keep statistics on this, as the Gov't will likely cover this up.
posted by spooked @ 9:30 AM
Eyewitness Testimony of Firefighters Believing They Were Nuked on 9/11
... as well as early WTC7 Destruction, EMP, non-impact plane flyby, and people being pushed out of a WTC tower.
By The Anonymous Physicist
Reading just a handful out of the 503 9/11 WTC initial responders' testimonies has proven to be a real eye-opener. These firefighters' and EMS officers' depositions provide good corroboration for many of the things I have hypothesized at this blog, including the following: The WTC was demolished via small nuclear bombs, that pre-"collapse" basement nukes were set off in the towers, synchronous with the "plane hit" explosions above, that there likely were EMP's (Electromagnetic Pulses from nukes), and that WTC7 underwent early explosions, and attempted early demolition.
Firefighter Edward Kennedy here states that he thought a "nuclear bomb" had demolished a tower. "We were on Liberty Street and we came out into there and it just look like something that -- it looked like a bomb, of course, had gone off, almost like a nuclear bomb... "
Here we learn that NYFD Lt. George DeSimone similarly thought the heat--without fire--impinging on him was Hiroshima-like:
"I thought it was some kind of thermal explosion where I'm either going to get burnt -- and I had kind of ideas that it was going to be something like Hiroshima where all this heat was coming at me and we were going to get burnt... "
Several hours after both tower "collapses", and despite official regime claims of total military and civilian flight termination, he said:
"...We saw jets overhead, commercial airliner, military jets, Air Force jets, and we didn't know what the hell was going on..."
Recall I have detailed how a nuke's thermal rays go farthest out, well beyond its destructive blast radius. Here NYFD Chief Jerry Gumbo's testimony is one of several I have cited, to say he felt heat far away from any actual fire. He stated:
"...At the time of the impact, we were able to feel heat that was generated from the explosion at the command post, which was across West Street, and West is fairly large street with that island in there, and debris was showering all over West Street."
I believe this is again indication of the early basement nuke concomitant with the "plane hit" explosion above.
Another firefighter who thought the WTC destruction was nuclear is NYFD Lt Richard Smiouskas, whose statement is here. He was an official NYFD photographer, and has some startling testimony, regarding other matters, as well. It appears that with his telefoto lens, he witnessed people being pushed out of tower one. He said:
"...I was photographing the fire from the roof. I had a long lens on the camera, and I had people in the windows. It looked like they were being -- they weren't actually jumping. One or two people I saw, they seemed like they were being forced out by the people behind them. There was half a dozen faces. In between the smoke you could see people..." (snip) "I guess they were all trying to get air, and this guy was actually standing in the window, standing in the frame with each hand on each frame and he kind of like got nudged out."
In the second sentence, it looks like he just stopped himself from saying "pushed". The last incident may even indicate the NON-jumper was trying to keep himself from being pushed out!
Lt. Smiouskas believed that a nuclear bomb went off, due to the magnitude of Earth shaking that he felt. As a tower is being destroyed he recalls:
"It looked like an earthquake. The ground was shaking. I fell to the floor. My camera bag opened up. The cameras went skidding across the floor... I'm thinking maybe a bomb blew up. I'm thinking it could have been a nuclear... ."
Then he writes of seeing "glitter" through the black smoke, during tower destruction.
"Everybody started running north, and this huge volume like ten stories high billowing, pushing black smoke and like a glitter. I guess it was glass that was glitter that was in the cloud of smoke."
I do not believe this "glitter" was glass in the black smoke. Perhaps it is more likely that gamma rays from nuclear explosions which could readily traverse the black smoke, impinged on his retina. This is like the atronauts in earth orbit seeing (retinal) flashes from cosmic rays when they tried to go to a higher earth orbit, and like medical x-rays that go through you and onto a photographic plate.
But note how Lt. Smiouskas found the ground shaking was intense enough that he surmised (correctly, IMO) that a nuclear bomb went off. Now, I have been in 5.1 (Richter scale) Earthquakes, and in 2.3's. The latter I didn't feel at all, and the 5.1 sounds more like what Lt. Smiouskas (and I) experienced—at least a likely 4.0. I also was at the WTC six weeks after 9/11, and saw many cracked, concrete sidewalks, blocks away from the WTC, (as well as experienced my eyes burning from the hot toxic gases still emitted.) I therefore make the following assertion. It is likely that the "official" 2.1 and 2.3 Richter scale recordings on 9/11 had their spikes cut off! I have even found that NIST asked for a "re-analysis" of seismic data from one observatory before publishing their "findings." So, just as I hypothesized about the long-delayed second AVIRIS (WTC temperature) data set, the seismic recordings were likely doctored by this regime. And this fire-fighter's belief that the intense ground shaking was due to a "nuclear bomb" supports this hypothesis.
The interview of Dr. Michael Guttenberg, of NYFD's Office of Medical Affairs, who may have witnessed EMP is here.
Just after the second "plane hit" explosion, and before any tower "collapse", he noted:
"... on the EMS radio, there was absolute silence for probably 10 or 15 seconds, you know, which to me, it seemed like 10 to 15 seconds, but it was absolute radio silence for a few seconds... "
Questioner:
"We were told that the air was so thick with debris that radio waves weren't able to travel."
M.G.:
"That was after the towers came down."
Note two things, the radios went dead—likely a sign of EMP, as I have previously described. And see how the questioner attempts to confuse the issue with a double lie. One, that this happened after a tower was destroyed, when instead, this is after the second WTC2 "plane hit" explosion, and before any tower "collapse" as Dr. Guttenberg corrects him. And two, that radio waves would have been blocked by a conventional explosion, when they wouldn't have been. And note also that this radio blackout occurred after the second "plane hit" explosion. My previous articles contained evidence, and my hypothesis, that the WTC1 "plane hit" explosion was used as cover for a nearly concomitant basement nuclear bomb explosion that vaporized a 50 ton steel press, and a garage level, and also caused phone outage. So we learn now that electronic communications also were affected after the second "plane hit", which may indicates that they also nuked the basement of WTC2 at that time. I hypothesized that this was done in case the planned, subsequent, intricate, top-down demolition failed.
Guttenberg also provides more eyewitness testimony for early WTC7 explosions, as he went to the loading area of WTC7.
"... We all stuffed ourselves into this hallway [near the loading dock of WTC7], pulled the door shut, and the noise just got very loud and the room filled with dust. The noise stopped, and we opened up the door, and everything was pitch black. The way we got into the loading dock was not the way we were getting out. It was obstructed."
This appears to be a watered down way of saying WTC underwent internal explosions. This jives with my earlier article citing Deputy Director of the NYC Emergency Services Dept., Barry Jennings, that the WTC7 underwent attempted complete internal destruction at the same time that the first tower (and WTC 3, 4, 5, 6) were demolished. My article, on top here hypothesized that fizzled nukes was the reason WTC7 was not successfully destroyed during this early coordinated attempt, which Jennings stated destroyed much of the lobby, now corroborated by Guttenberg. The last URL also has my earlier articles on nuclear demolition of the WTC.
NYFD Lt. Robert Larocco here also noted that tower destruction seemed "nuclear" to him. He said,
"Of course the cloud was kind of like a nuclear winter thing. You're walking through fallout."
Near the towers, but BEFORE either tower "collapse", he noted:
"As I started walking onto the side street - actually as I stepped onto the side street, the strangest thing I noticed was there was like three inches of snow on the ground. The snow was probably pulverized concrete, sheetrock, loose tiles, insulation, asbestos or what-have-you."
Now this fine ash or 3 inches of snow-like "pulverized concrete" as he called it would not occur from a "plane hit" or conventional explosives. Could this fine, 3 inches of "snow" be from the early basement nukes I have written about? Like the WTC1 basement blast that vaporized a steel press, and a parking garage level that eyewitnesses said was just "gone."
Now some DEW/OCT disinfo agents claim that the tower destruction was not loud because their hangout was not loud. During the commencement of WTC2 destruction, Lt. Larocco stated:
"The next second I heard that loudest noise in the world that I was describing before getting louder and louder." (snip) "It was the loudest noise I've ever heard in my life. It was in both ears. Kind of like those rockets that they launch the space shuttles with, it was like I had one going off in each ear. When I thought it was the loudest noise I ever heard, every second it was just increasing getting louder and louder and louder."
Lt Larocco also describes very personal feelings of fear of death, and fellow firefighters "crying like babies" during and just after collapse. These revelations prove that the redactions in the published responders' statements were not because of wanting to hide the most personal of feelings.
Lt. Larocco also stated that hours after both towers were destroyed:
"... I still really didn't believe that the second tower was hit by a second plane."
At this point, the interviewer, Monte Feiler, says, "Stopping the interview at 1306." Then, "Resuming the tape at 1308 hours. Same people present."
Now Lt. Larocco says: "
Like I said, the rumors were flying around, and they turned out to be quite factual, about the second tower getting hit. Although at the time I really didn't believe it until I saw it later on television. The thing about the Pentagon, the plane crashing out in Pennsylvania, it was all coming into the picture that this is something major going on."
So we see how something happened during this "time out." Something he was told and recalling what was "on TV" apparently made him change his mind and believe in the second "plane hit." This manipulation speaks for itself. And if there really were plane hits, would the PTB need to perform such blatent manipulations of eyewitness testimony?
Finally I note that when he was making his way out after "collapse," Lt. Larocco recalls:
"I thought to myself this is a locked exit. That's illegal."
We see, as some survivors have noted, many fire escape exits were locked. Someone--who may have had a master key--apparently locked numerous exits. If such a man is ascertained, and his actions proven to be deliberate, he should be charged with mass murder.
My interpretation of EMT Frank Puma's deposition here indicates that he may have witnessed a FLYBY, and not a "plane impact" regarding the alleged "second hit." He said:
"... I ran down to the corner of Church and Park Place, looked up and I saw the plane shooting out of the top of the towers. That's when I grabbed for my radio and yelled over the air, "1 Adam. A bomb just went off in the Trade Center."...
Note that after he witnessed an apparent flyby, HE CALLED IN A BOMB, and NOT a plane impact! In fact, when you couple his statement to the interviewer, with his action of exactly what he called in, it seems clear that he believed the plane he saw bombed the WTC! And this must be considered a possibility. However, all the evidence and the ludicrous "plane-shaped" hole itself indicate shape charges, at that facade, were set off in sync with a flyby (and basement nukes).
Finally, for those who grasp the deeper conspiracies I have elucidated here, I note that Firefighter Michael Wernick here stated the number of the Fire Engine that apparently responded first to the WTC, on 9/11. Wernick said, "Engine 33 went first." As I have written here before, "All things nuclear... "
posted by spooked @ 9:24 AM
The Crucial Differences in the Nuclear 9/11 Theories
A Call To Eliminate Nuclear 9/11 Mis- or Dis-Information & Attain Completeness and Fit all the Known Evidence
by The Anonymous Physicist
Several, differing WTC nuclear destruction scenarios have been put forth by their respective authors. While they all have nuclear explosions in common; they have key differences. These differences must be openly examined, and used to strive towards a final nuclear 911 WTC destruction scenario that fits all the evidence, and is not contraindicated by the Laws of Physics. Nuclear WTC scenarios that do not fit all the evidence, or contain false statements, or are contradicted by physical law need to be abandoned.
1. Within a year or two of 9/11/01 people began to post at physics forums that WTC destruction seemed to involve nuclear bombs.
2. By 2005, the first website appeared which contained a nuclear WTC destruction scenario by an Anonymous Finnish Military Expert. He hypothesized that one upwardly-focused, sub-basement shape-charge-like nuke was used to destroy each tower. Tower destruction, he stated, was likely done with the aid of conventional explosives as needed. The Finn also hypothesized that the single nuke was a fourth generation, fission-free thermonuclear (pure fusion) device. He cited the alleged Tritium finding by U.S. Gov't scientists. Therefore (fusion only), there could be no China Syndrome Aftermath with this theory.
3. In 2006, William Tahil wrote a book and offered it for sale online. (It is now downloadable for free.) Tahil also claimed that one deep underground nuclear explosion per tower occurred, but that they weren't bombs per se. Rather, he claims, there were two huge, underground, fission nuclear reactors already present, which were made to go supercritical, and explode in a nuclear fashion. Tahil wrote that a China Syndrome Aftermath resulted.
4. In 2007, this Anonymous [American] Physicist offered a detailed, nuclear WTC destruction scenario. Many small nukes were said to have been employed during tower destruction, but some conventional explosives may also have been used to allow the nukes to be small, and not vaporize the outer tower structure. After first incorporating all the "official" evidence, that included findings that supported both fission and fusion; he [I] first wrote that either fission-initiated fusion bombs or tritium-boosted fission bombs were used.
But after finding massive, irrefutable evidence of the China Syndrome Aftermath at the WTC for up to six months-- until the fissioning, radioactive fragments were carted away-- and noting that the China Syndrome can supposedly only occur from fissioning remnants, not fusion components, the Anonymous Physicist has stated the following. The alleged Tritium data release to the public may be a clever regime ploy (red herring) to get people to look for the mythical fourth generation nuke precisely because it is fission-free, and therefore you couldn't have WHAT WE DID HAVE-- THE CHINA SYNDROME AFTERMATH at the WTC. Since the evidence of the China Syndrome of a massive heat-generating source existed at the WTC for months afterwards, and only fission fragments could cause this heat GENERATION for so long, the bombs likely were fission bombs. The Govt then deliberately released bogus information (Tritium), as covering up the China Syndrome Aftermath was their most crucial Op-Plan after 9/11. The China Syndrome arose, and HAD TO ARISE perforce, because a fission nuke uses only 1-6% of its fissile material. The remainder is left over and will remain fissioning for a long time, as the half-life of Uranium 235 is 700 million years. Also the concepts of redundant nukes, "fratricided" nukes, and fizzled nukes were detailed in my papers, and all lead to a China Syndrome Aftermath.
Furthermore, the massive disinfo efforts by the American regime, and its agents, make clear how important it was/is to cover up the nuking, and the China Syndrome Aftermath in NEW YORK CITY. As usual, disinfo agents try too hard. Their M.O. is often clear to see. The hangouts known as the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT), and "DEW" blatantly lie that there was no heat during or after WTC destruction. And another hangout (thermite) has its proponent admit to the great heat for months, but must lie and claim that "thermite burns forever," when it actually cools off in minutes or hours. The final step, in the intel agencies' disinformation scheme--as more and more people see the truth of the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath-- is to plant individuals (mostly online personalities) who will pretend to be pro-nuclear 9/11. All the while everything they write is meant to confuse, confound, and actually belittle the nuclear 9/11 hypothesis with ludicrous or irrelevant claims. They will be easy to spot; they will likely never cite my research and articles on the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath. They will cite the other theories above-- but not mine-- precisely because of the unchanging flaws in the others, as detailed above. So please be aware of new, allegedly nuclear 9/11 proponents who may actually try to confound the issue; and present mis-, or dis-information, or irrelevancies, or pretend it is unknowable, or doesn't matter.
Let us now examine the first two detailed nuclear WTC destruction scenarios listed above. First, let us look at the Finnish military expert's claims of one sub-basement, pure fusion, shape-charged-like, upwardly focused nuke per tower. This appears to be erroneous in several ways. First the observed, top-down, destruction mechanism, and the earlier, highly likely nuclear sub-basement explosion (see more below) both belie the one nuke per tower hypothesis. The Finn has stated that he is an expert on shape charges, and that the top/down scenario could have been done via nuclear shape charges in the sub-basement. But the website that has his articles says that his translator refused to translate his details of how this could have occurred. But even if theoretically possible, the details of the early likely nuclear, sub-basement explosion (see below) demonstrate that his one nuke per tower scenario is untenable. Likewise, this Anonymous Physicist, has proposed that the hunt for the pure fusion, 4th generation nuke is likely a deliberate, planted red herring precisely because this would obviate what did take place-- the China Syndrome Aftermath. So I contend that the Finnish Military Expert's hypotheses of 1. Pure fusion nuke, 2. One nuke per tower in the basement are incorrect. The Finn also says that "red mercury" could be one way to attain fusion without prerequisite fission. This is the "red mercury" scam, that I have shown here is physically impossible to cause fusion; and is a British American Regime Psyops. The Finn was given my critique of his hypotheses, by the owner of the site that has his nuclear scenario. There has been no word back from him to my knowledge, but I would still welcome this now.
Next I have written what may be the only full review of Tahil's book here. And this should be read by all, after reading his book. Tahil deserves credit for analyzing the USGS dust/elements study, and concluding that fission likely occurred during the WTC destruction, and even afterwards with secondary fission on some of the samples. But then Tahil's scenario entails one nuke per tower in the sub-basement again-- but here each one was a fission explosion that arose from making a large, hidden fission reactor explode like a nuclear bomb with upward focusing (as with the Finn). My review makes clear that several aspects are untenable or improbable. First, a nuclear reactor "going super-critical," and exploding like a nuclear bomb is said to be physically impossible. Then the videoed, top-bottom tower destruction itself makes the one nuke per basement unlikely. Furthermore, my articles have also cited much eyewitness testimony such as from survivor sub-basement nuke survivor, Felipe David, and WTC Engineer Mike Pecoraro. Pecoraro was in a sub-basement level, and went UP a level to see that an earlier blast vaporized a 50 ton steel press and shriveled up a heavy concrete/steel door into foil-like matter. This implies a nuke went off above him, not below him, and so even if a fission reactor could be made to go off like a nuclear bomb (which is stated to be impossible), could the one reactor do this a second time after it would have had its first, chaotic nuclear explosion? So the actual destruction videos and eyewitness testimony further erode some of Tahil's (and the Finn's) hypotheses.
Finally, numerous crucial statements Tahil wrote are incorrect. His rationale for the massive hidden reactor hypothesis was two-fold. 1. He claims that a fission bomb uses up 100% of its fissile material, when the correct figure is only 1-6%! and 2. Massive amounts of Strontium and other elements found in the dust, he claims, could only mean that two massive fission reactors were already present. My review showed that Strontium occurs in concrete, sometimes not as a tiny component, but as a relatively large percentage, as is known for the concrete used in making the Empire State Building and the Pentagon. All this taken together make his two hidden, massive, reactors hypothesis either physically impossible (to go off as a bomb and/or to subsequently be re-used), unnecessary, or untenable. But again his work is most valuable for demonstrating the likelihood that fission occurred during WTC destruction, and that the China Syndrome resulted. I have had no communications from Tahil after my review and critique of his hypotheses. But I continue to welcome honest criticism of both my critiques of the other nuclear scenarios, and of my own hypotheses.
It is hoped that people will examine all the evidence (including survivors' testimonies, EMP, massive heat, sound, radiation lowering methods used, photos, etc.), and the Physics I have outlined, and that are archived at these two blogs, http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and http://wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com, and stop promoting misinformation or disinformation. I assert this includes the "red mercury" scam, the tritium red herring, and the latter's implied fission-free pure fusion hangout as well as seeing how massive hidden underground reactors going off as nuclear bombs are improbable if not impossible-- and don't fit the destruction evidence, and eyewitness testimony. They are not needed when you learn the aspects of my "many small nukes" hypothesis. If you are truly interested in what was perpetrated on 9/11, please read the ENTIRETY of the two blogs that contain my archived nuclear 9/11 articles, and make up your own mind. And if you want to see just how the Official Regime "explanation" for what occurred at the WTC on 9/11/01, (and some of the "alternative" non-nuclear theories) used bogus science and committed outright fraud, there are more articles on this at this site.
To sum up, all the evidence of the actual WTC destruction, and the great heat generated there for up to six months indicates that WTC destruction was most likely caused by numerous small nuclear fission bombs (micro-nukes), not by a single basement nuke, nor by massive hidden reactors that exploded like nuclear bombs. The China Syndrome Aftermath arose, and had to arise, because the fission fragments were contained in the buildings as they were nuked, and ended up all over the rubble pile, and beneath the towers and WTC7.
It's time to promote, or at least publicly discuss, the continual efforts made by this Anonymous [American] Physicist to examine all the evidence of the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome Aftermath in New York City. Please promote these works both on the net and to friends, family, and neighbors. It is ABSOLUTELY THE MOST CRUCIAL ASPECT OF 911 TRUTH, TO INFORM PEOPLE THAT THE AMERICAN REGIME NUKED ITS OWN MOST POPULOUS CITY, NYC, ON 9/11. If your favorite blog or website ignores-- or blocks-- this most crucial aspect, either post it yourself or tell all your friends, family, etc. And carefully examine the differences in the nuclear 911 hypotheses, and eliminate the impossible, the improbable, the untenable, or what the evidence indicated is incorrect; and promote what fits all the evidence, and is physically tenable-- many small fission nukes were used to destroy the WTC on 9/11/01, and the China Syndrome Aftermath resulted. And the radiation issue is also discussed here.
Please promote this, as there isn't much time left before they pull away the wool from everyone's eyes. It won't be pleasant, and must be prevented. Life will not be worth living then. Remember Hiroshima. The survivors there were said to be envious of the dead. This may be what they have planned for all of us, with the American Regime being, as Rev. Martin Luther King said, "the greatest purveyor of evil in the world today." Indeed, there is much evidence that the American regime nuked its own people at least once before 9/11/01, in the Port Chicago, California incident, as I detailed here. Thus the American regime remains the only regime that has nuked its own people, as well as others, and that fact would likely enrage the American people to act, as nothing else might.
posted by spooked @ 6:58 AM
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Micro-Nukes in the WTC--Creating The China Syndrome: Important Matters of Completeness & Plausibility
by The Anonymous Physicist
My "Many Nukes" Hypothesis for the destruction of the WTC on 9/11, perpetrated by the American regime, is detailed here wtcdemolition.blogspot.com. How this led to the China Syndrome is detailed here wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com.
To summarize these matters now, I have written how the towers' destruction entailed numerous micro-nukes detonating in each tower, and furthermore much redundancy was employed to insure that sufficient numbers of these low-yield devices successfully went off as planned. Some of the redundant micro-nukes were impacted by the exploding micro-nukes, which allowed for the redundant ones' fissile material to give rise to the China Syndrome. I also explained how some micro-nukes fizzled for various reasons--part of the reason for having so many redundant micro-nukes present. I listed several factors that could have caused this fizzling, even hypothesizing that the early explosions in the WTC7 were fizzled nukes, that were meant to destroy WTC7 but they did not properly go critical.
The reader can read how standard some of these concepts are in the nuclear world. The military and "policy" makers use the term "fratricide" for the occurrence of one nuclear warhead impacting/adversely affecting another one and preventing the latter from going nuclear. Read here, for example. Under the heading of "Nuclear targeting and fratricide," you will find this: "Historically, analysts have assumed that only 2 nuclear warheads could be used in a short time frame against any target because of a problem called "fratricide." Assigning multiple warheads to a target requires precise timing to prevent one incoming warhead from destroying others. Furthermore, a nuclear detonation near ground level (which is ideal for destroying hardened silos) would create a debris cloud that could destroy other warheads heading to the same target."
Furthermore, long term storage of nuclear bombs or warheads involves another form of fratricide. This article on the many problems of long-term nuclear warhead storage, describes how nuclear warheads have "vulnerability to fratricide neutrons," as well as being susceptible to many other problems that could make them fizzle. So you can see that I was correct in writing that impacted and/or fizzled nukes, are problems that could be expected to occur when you have a complicated scenario involving many small nukes going off in a relatively small place-- especially in an enclosed space. And these matters thus could easily explain where the available fissile material to cause the China Syndrome at the WTC came from.
Now knowing of these potentially, fratricidal effects on the nukes to be used in the WTC on 9/11, the American perps-- foul physicists, and monstrous military men, much like those involved in nuking their own at Port Chicago, and other innocent humans at Hiroshima and Nagasaki-- did the following. 1. Emplaced many redundant nukes, in each WTC building, and at each level to be nuked. The levels where the nukes were emplaced took fratricidal effects into account, as much as possible. 2. Used (somewhat hardened) sensors that would trigger (sequentially, as needed) redundant nukes at each level that they were to be set off at. 3. Used sensors that themselves would be vaporized, if the first, planned nuke went off properly, so that the redundant ones would not go nuclear. Of course, their fissile material would then be available for the China Syndrome Aftermath. Did all this go off exactly as planned? No. As I have written, the hidden, denied, early WTC7 explosions indicate that the perps failed to properly set off the nukes in WTC7, and took five or more hours to re-do it, later in the afternoon. One possible scenario for the failed, early nuking of WTC7 could be the following. The early nukes in the lobby and basement fizzled (due to fratricidal or other effects). That is, they exploded but either did not attain any criticality (only conventional explosions worked), or else the fissile material had been "weakened" and the resultant nuclear explosion was too small for demolition of WTC7 to occur. The sensor(s) were themselves damaged (from partial explosions), and did not then trigger redundant nukes to go off, or else all redundant nukes fizzled, as Jennings (in the last article) describes several WTC7 explosions.
However even a properly functioning nuclear device going off inside a building can lead to its own China Syndrome, as follows. Let us look at the efficiency of nuclear devices historically, as I do not have access to data on the efficiency of the most current nukes. But it would likely be in the same range. The efficiency of a nuclear bomb is the percentage of its total available fissile material (such as Uranium-235 or Plutonium-239) that actually undergoes fission during the criticality stage of implosion/explosion-- roughly one microsecond. The remainder is still highly radioactive and could give rise to a China Syndrome under certain conditions. Peter Vogel's book, "The Last Wave From Port Chicago" describes on page 13-13 how the Hiroshima "A-Bomb" used only 1.14% of its contained fissile material. The Port Chicago type A-Bomb had even less efficiency-- about 0.5%. More recently, 6% efficiency for updated nuclear bombs is cited here. Such a low efficiency is due to the immense difficulty of having an implosion, and then an explosion, whereby the fissile material has only one microsecond before the imploding, fissioning U-235 critical mass with its tremendous number of released neutrons and subsequent energy release (and great heat and pressure), forces the critical mass to explode outward thus terminating its criticality geometry.
What this means is that even a properly functioning, fission bomb will have 94-99% of its highly radioactive, fissile material released into the environment where it will more slowly continue to fission and decay-- and release great heat. Now if a nuclear bomb goes off several thousand feet in the air, a la Hiroshima, the unfissioned U-235 will be widely dispersed and will come down over a huge area. (The heat of the Bomb would even have vaporized the unfissioned U-235, but this will later condense and come down somewhere.) But the micro-nukes--even the properly fissioning ones used inside the WTC-- were, at least partially, contained during the destruction. But as the buildings were being destroyed, even vaporized, the remaining fissile material would be able to reach all around the WTC area, and some would likely reach significantly beyond as well. Some fissile material from the sub-basement nukes, would likely be trapped in the largest concentrations, to be found in the aftermath, in these basement areas. These radioactive fragments would also be inaccessible to the usual radiation-lowering mechanisms that were extensively employed beginning the very next day-- water hosing, and "coating" with sand/earth.
To sum up, my "Many Nukes" and resultant China Syndrome Hypothesis, is well supported by the known concepts of nuclear warhead fratricide, and the low (0.5-6.0%) efficiency of fission bombs. Indeed all the facts involving exploding numerous micro-nukes in an enclosed (or partially enclosed) space appears to make the China Syndrome aftermath not only plausible, but inevitable!
If the WTC Nuclear Destruction Had the China Syndrome Aftermath, Why Didn't Hiroshima?
by The Anonymous Physicist
The extensive evidence that the World Trade Center area "suffered" from great heat in the rubble pile and beneath the towers, from heat generated by the China Syndrome is here. But if my nuclear fission hypothesis for the destruction of the WTC is correct, why didn't the fission bomb that destroyed Hiroshima have a known China Syndrome there?
The reason is that there are numerous differences between the two events. My "many nukes" hypothesis for WTC destruction contains the concepts of redundant nukes, fratricided and fizzled nukes. Please read the above archived articles to understand just what attempting to explode many small nukes in the enclosed buildings entails, and even my hypothesis that the early explosions in WTC7 likely were fizzled micro-nukes. Now for some specific, relevant differences. Hiroshima was just one fission nuclear bomb, not many as with the WTC. Redundant, fratricided and fizzled nukes are not relevant to the events of Hiroshima, unlike the WTC. Finally, Hiroshima did not have a China Syndrome Aftermath because the A-bomb went off at an altitude of about 1800 feet, and IN OPEN AIR-- NOT IN THE CENTERS OF BUILDINGS NOR THEIR BASEMENTS.
The Hiroshima nuke was, of course, much larger than the sum of the numerous micro-nukes employed to destroy the WTC. As I have detailed, a fission nuke uses up only some 1-6% of its fissile material in its chain reactions before the remainder is blown apart from the heat and pressure resulting from the chain reactions. The 80 generations of fission chain reaction take but a total of one microsecond before the bomb's contents themselves are blown apart. In the open air, much of the micro-fragments of the remainder 94-99% of the fissile material (Uranium-235) were in the fireball, and much of this rose further with the fireball. But these heavy Uranium atoms fell back down. Some dispersed into the upper atmosphere, and would come down around the world. (Note that no Gov't has released atmospheric radiation data in the days after 9/11/01--this is perhaps both telling [of the worldwide collusion of regimes] and sad.) At Hiroshima, they came down in notorious fashion. Much of the remaining Uranium fissioning atoms came down 30 minutes later in the so-called "Black Rain." Many more people may have died because they suffered desperate thirst from their dehydrated condition in part from damaged, melted, hanging skin; and they drank the black rain, as there no longer was running water. They thus ingested radioactive particles. (The worst thing they could have done.)
There was no known China Syndrome Aftermath at Hiroshima because the Uranium atoms came down over a widely dispersed area; and thus were not concentrated enough to have heat generating effect in any known areas. Note that I have detailed that at Hiroshima, radiation levels on the ground were low enough so that American troops were there performing various tasks within a few days. At the WTC, the micro-nukes (emplaced in the centers) were chosen small enough so as to not vaporize the outer structure (and give the Op-Plan away). So as the micro-nukes were going off at each level and in the sub-basement area, the outer structure was still extant for the most part. Also there was no fireball under these conditions that rose to 15,000 feet or so. Just as there were no fireballs seen in all the underground nuclear tests. And there was no rain for several days. The heavy Uranium atoms and fragments, if in the dust, would have come down first, with all the many lighter elements coming down on top of them soon thereafter. This effect may even have provided some radiation shielding. Much of the rubble pile was indeed hot, and led to such phenomena as melted firemen's and dog's boots; and the need to hose down the rubble pile for many weeks and months, with countless photos showing the steam emanation that resulted. Fratricided or fizzled nukes and the more totally enclosed sub-basement effect would have left more concentrated fission fragments in some areas and in the former basements. These would later give rise to massive temperatures and molten metal weeks and months later, as detailed in the above-cited archived articles.
Indeed, I would assert that the floors that were chosen for the initial explosions, (the "official," but CGI "plane hit" floors), were chosen precisely because they still provided enough height and building material so that the first nukes going off at their top-most level would not vaporize through to the top! That could have allowed a visible rising fireball that had to be avoided. In other words, if the first nuke, in the top-down demolition, occurred at or near the top floor, it could have vaporized through to the outside air and a visible fireball could have then ensued. So the floors for the "plane hit" explosions were carefully chosen to coincide with the placement of the initial nukes to go off. This logic also dictates that if there were no planes, it is also highly unlikely that missiles hit the towers either. Anything hitting the towers could have jeopardized both the smaller shape charges to go off-- and create the so-called plane-shaped holes; and also if the wrong floor were hit, it could have interfered with the planned start of the top-down nuclear demolition, although some redundancy was probably built in.
But we should also never forget at least one similarity between Hiroshima and the WTC. Just as many people close to the Hiroshima hypocenter were vaporized, over 1100 human beings in the WTC towers were so vaporized that no intact strands of DNA could be used for identification. But fortunately there was one major difference in the aftermath, there was no widely dispersed, radioactive "black rain" to ingest or have fall upon people. The people of Japan have never forgotten their "black rain," nor their Hiroshima that was perpetrated by the same regime, primarily against innocent women, children and old men (despite the American propaganda efforts to imply otherwise). Likewise it must be the task for Americans to learn what this same regime did to the innocent human beings in the World Trade Center and the 40,000 responders, and the many nearby Metro New York residents and workers.
The terms Hiroshima and World Trade Center need to become synonymous. And the world needs to come together to counter this same monstrous regime before it kills all or most of humanity!
posted by spooked @ 4:37 AM
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Ground Zero Smoking Cannon: Where Are All the Core Columns and Beams???
(UPDATED 8/24/08)
The destruction of the WTC left basically four major types of large structural debris visible in photos like this:
(click to enlarge; this image was cropped from a larger picture taken September 23rd, 2001)
There was lots of aluminum cladding (the silvery stuff that spread the farthest and was seen on the rooftops of surrounding buildings), there were sections of the outer wall (these have the characteristic "wheat-chex" appearance, which were groups of columns linked by spandrel plates), there were many small beams of unclear origin (the right size for broken-off outer columns but could also be floor beams -- many floors of the WTC were supported by beams and not trusses-- or small core cross-beams), and last, there were the huge core columns and core cross-beams (the largest single separate columns that are strewn about like matchsticks in the photo above).
The core of the WTC was in fact huge-- in contrast to some conceptions of the core after 9/11, the core structure took up a major amount of the space inside the tower-- it was roughly 80 feet by 130 feet in cross-section, in the 207 by 207 foot cross-section of the tower, and it left about 60 feet of floor on two sides and about 30 feet of floor on the other two sides.
The core was composed of 46-47 vertical sets of long columns that went the length of the building, and the core was abundantly cross-braced by steel beams. Additional information on the core structures can be seen here and here and here.
In the picture above, you can see that some of the largest core column pieces were close to 100 feet long. In fact, the longest individual core columns were 36 feet long, so the longest columns shown in the photo must be two or three sections welded together that clearly stayed together during the destruction process.
Now that we have good information on the precise numbers and sizes of the WTC core columns, it turns out there were approximately 1974 total core column sections, and at least 50% of these were large rectangular box columns, 3 to 4 feet wide (note, this is an underestimation). Thus there were at least 980 of the very large column sections in just ONE tower. These columns would be the prominent ones in the photo.
The numbers of steel beams in the cross-bracings was much, much greater. At a minimum of 14 large cross-beams per floor, we're talking over 1500 more large steel beams. All told, we're talking about close to 3500 large steel columns and beams in the core, with 980 of these the massive 3 to 4 feet wide core columns.
So this begs the question: how many core columns and core cross-beams are seen in the remnants of a WTC tower, such as in the remains of WTC1 in the photo here:
I have marked with a black line anything that could be considered a large core column.
Erring on the side of calling everything remotely close to a large steel beam or column, I only count about 200 large core column sections (taking into account the idea that some of these columns are double 36 foot sections).
This leaves over 750 HUGE STEEL core columns unaccounted for!***
Further, there are still 1500 large core cross-beams and hundreds of remaining substantial core columns unaccounted for, that should be filling the debris pile but are not clearly there.
This picture was taken very shortly after 9/11, as the west wall WTC1 is still not cleaned up (lower left foreground), and shows that the large core columns were not moved between 9/11 and 9/23:
(click to view separately)
Thus, it wasn't that hundreds of the columns were carted away before 9/23 (when the top picture was taken). Further, given the massive size of the large core columns, they would not be able to be lifted out until the outer debris was cleaned up and the cranes could be moved in closer-- which was only just starting to happen on 9/23.
Now sure, some core columns and beams are going to be buried under the rubble and not visible. But almost 800 of these monster pieces of steel are buried in a rubble pile that wasn't more than 10 feet deep outside of the footprint of the towers, and no more than 60 feet deep within the footprint of the tower???
I don't think so.
Not to mention that the videos showed that much of the core clearly came down last (or at least large sections of it came down at the end), and therefore the core columns and beams should have been at the top of the pile.
And certainly, the core being the heaviest part of the building, core columns and beams were not going to fall very far from the foot-print of the tower.
So what happened to all the core columns?
My guess is the missing columns and beams were vaporized by small nuclear bombs-- mini-nukes emplaced in the center of the core structure. I am open to other suggestions besides nukes, but nukes seems to be the best explanation currently.
Further, seeing how the core gets progressively stronger towards the bottom, and the huge difference in strength of the columns from top to bottom, it is impossible for me to imagine that any gravity driven collapse would completely tear apart the lower core down to its base level. Thus, the lack of core columns helps to disprove the official story by itself.
***It's possible that I missed counting a few columns/beams in the picture, but I can't see missing more than 20-50. It's probably true I missed a few columns/beams that fell further and were off the bottom edge of the picture-- though looking at other shots of ground zero, I can't have missed more than 20-50 large columns/beams. Even so, we're still talking about over 750 large columns missing (and 2000 smaller columns and beams not readily apparent either)!!!
Seriously, where are they?
Because if these columns and beams can't be accounted for, it is yet another strong piece of evidence for nukes-- or some even more horrible means of destruction.
posted by spooked @ 9:04 AM
Saturday, July 19, 2008
WTC Destruction Theories: "DEW" versus Thermite/Thermate/Super Thermate versus Milli-Nukes/Micro-Nukes
In theory, all of these may have been used in combination with conventional explosives (e.g. C-4) -- and each of these may also have been used in come combination together. But let's discuss the PRIMARY mechanism used for the WTC tower demolition, since there still is apparent controversy over this.
DEW = directed energy weapons; typically described as a powerful beam weapon; type of energy has not been specified; originally proposed by Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds
Thermite/Thermate/Super Thermate = high temperature incendiary mixture (thermite) and hypothetical explosive variants (thermate and super-thermate); originally proposed by Steven Jones
Milli-Nukes/Micro-Nukes = explosive nuclear fusion or nuclear fission devices; proposed by several different people: Finnish Military expert (advanced fusion devices only), Ed Ward, Bill Deagle, Anonymous Physicist
The complete massive destruction of the WTC towers was characterized by several key features:
1) incredible pulverization/"dustification" of all building contents in a matter of seconds
2) pulverized debris violently bursting outward during the destruction
3) a consecutive series of "explosive" waves traveling down the towers during the demolition
4) disappearance/vaporization of large numbers of interior core columns
5) various odd phenomena-- likely EMP effects on vehicles and some electronic devices, odd holes in the ground and in surrounding buildings, early basement explosions, "hanging skin" in some surviving victims
6) extreme high heat in the ground zero rubble (widely-reported/well-substantiated)
7) large number of sicknesses/cancers in ground zero responders
8) suspicious treatment of remaining WTC steel-- washing, extreme security on trucks taking it away, rapid sale to China
I will now go over pros and cons of these hypotheses, focusing solely on the WTC evidence, without any discussion of the character or reliability of the proponents of the various theories. I am taking for granted that the towers were demolished by added energy devices -- not by fires and gravitational collapse. Further, I am assuming that there has been some sort of active cover-up of the demolition on the part of the official agencies and the media.
--------------------
PROS for DEW:
1) malleable nature of the "DEW" can explain everything associated with the tower destruction except the lingering heat at ground zero
2) towers did not need to be pre-loaded with devices
CONS for DEW:
1) type of DEW-emitting device and what type of directed energy was used on the WTC is completely unspecified
2) no DEW technology known that can explain the vaporization of steel and the extreme pulverization of concrete and the majority of inner building components-- all in seconds
3) huge amounts of energy required for DEW that can dustify the towers but no source of energy has been specified
4) needs to make the major assumption that the extreme heat at ground zero is a massive lie
5) does not explain the sicknesses/cancers in ground zero responders as easily as radiation from nuclear devices
6) does not explain the suspicious treatment of remaining WTC steel
Paper-- I do not think the presence of unburnt sheets of paper in the WTC dust can be construed as evidence for DEW, as the towers were undoubted filled with paper, and it's not at all clear what percentage of paper was destroyed. Paper is also light and some paper would thus would be expected to be blown out and away by explosive blasts, ahead of the highest energy wave.
Aluminum versus Steel-- I do not find the argument convincing that aluminum cladding intrinsically avoided destruction whereas the steel columns were vaporized.
Lack of bathtub damage and intact shops and tunnels beneath the WTC-- any sort of extreme pulverization of the towers from the top-down would lessen the overall impact on the ground of the towers' destruction; it's not clear where the intact shops and tunnels seen in pictures were in relation to the two main destroyed towers, thus this is inconclusive
Lack of large explosive sounds-- I do not think there is completely convincing case that can be made for lack of explosive sounds
DEW Pro/Con = Negative 4
--------------------------
PROS for Thermite/Thermate/Super Thermate
1) can explain some of the loss of steel as thermite can melt iron
2) might explain the lingering high heat and reports of molten steel
CONS for Thermite/Thermate/Super Thermate
1) difficult to imagine an incendiary chemical mixture being used to rapidly demolish a building
2) difficult to imagine how explosive thermite/thermate could be used to vaporize steel columns if the incendiary mixture is being dispersed by exploding at the same time
3) not clear that super thermate can account for the pulverization of the towers or that it even exists
4) not clear that residual thermite/thermate/super thermate can account for the extreme heat that lasted for at least six weeks at ground zero
5) requires massive pre-loading of the towers with large incendiary/explosive devices
6) does not explain the sicknesses/cancers in ground zero responders as easily as radiation from nuclear devices
7) does not explain the suspicious treatment of remaining WTC steel
Thermite/Thermate/Super Thermate Pro/Con= Negative 4
----------------------------
PROS for Milli-Nukes/Micro-Nukes
1) can easily explain all the features of the destruction of the towers
2) powerful, well-known, well-established destructive technology
3) small but extremely powerful and so do not require massive emplacement of devices in the towers
CONS for Milli-Nukes/Micro-Nukes
1) cover-up required for radiation at ground zero
One common argument I have seen made against nukes is that extremely bright flashes from nuclear explosions are not seen in videos. However this is not a definitive contrary argument as it is not clear what kind of flash would be seen from a very small nuke going off in the middle of steel tower-- especially once the first explosion has occurred and there are massive dust clouds that could shield the flashes of further explosions. Further, for tower 2, definitely, a few small bright flashes can be seen going off coincident with the tower going down.
Milli-Nukes/Micro-Nukes Pro/Con= Positive 2
-----------------------
Does anyone have a reasonable argument, based on the evidence, not on personalities, to add here?
Here is a satellite photo of abandoned fire trucks, cars, helicopters-- all apparently still (2008) too radioactive from Chernobyl radiation released after its 1986 explosion. Looks a bit like some of the photos of abandoned cars and fire trucks after 9/11, in lower Manhattan.
Molten metal in a French reactor. Can someone ask the 9/11 firemen/responders if this is like what they saw?
Can you see the hot spot still in this Chernobyl slag, years or decades later? The black line points to it.
Did China not want this stuff? Maybe USSR/Ukraine could not pay their price?
Chernobyl's "flowing lava" forever caught in the act. The same words the WTC firemen used.
Chernobyl's once flowing, molten, "Elephant's Foot". The caption reads, "Once molten fuel/debris mixture that dripped down through the floors of the exploded RBMK-1000 reactor at Chernobyl. It was so radioactive and solid, they had to use a rifle to chip a piece of it off."
Here is video of a tragic chopper crash: "helicopter with crew of military pilots spreading ANTI-RADIATION SOLUTION across the blown-up reactor of Chernobyl nuclear plant."
Finally, note the photo and text here.
This excellent Chernobyl site says here, "THEY TRIED IN VAIN TO PUT OUT THE FIRE with 2400 tonnes of lead and 1800 tonnes of sand." Does this sound familiar? I have written on the trucking in and out of dirt that the DEW proponent was kind enough to reveal to help prove the case for the nuclear destruction at the WTC. Mayor Giuliani ordered the trucking in and out of sand the very next morning.
But note the admission that many tons of sand and lead could not put out the radioactive Chernobyl fires! Sound familiar? As I have written the radioactive mini-nuke fragments strewn about in the rubble pile, and more concentrated under WTC1, 2, 7 also released great heat that went on for up to six months-- until all areas were reached, and they were carted away.
Now THESE are real "unextinguishable fires" to use the term the disinfo nuclear physicist, Steven Jones, desperately tries to claim for ("nano-composite") thermite--which actually stops burning in minutes. I have revealed Jones' anti-science claims in this regard here.
You might want to read more of the Chernobyl.info site for future reference. Note that it states that out of 800,000 Chernobyl responders (called "liquidators" here), one reference claims 25,000 have already died. How does this translate to the WTC? At the WTC, the number of responders is said to have been 40,000. No exact extrapolation can be done because of so many unknown variables in radiation exposure at the two different event aftermaths. If everything were equivalent, the ratio of numbers indicates 1250 WTC responders would die from their radiation exposure. Curiously as of 2006, there were some 400 rare cancers that are not uncommon results from radiation exposure.
More on the China Syndrome at the WTC here.
Again I state that WTC responder- survivors should reach out to their brother and sister survivors from Hiroshima and Chernobyl. They have much in common.
|
contribute to this article
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion
view discussion from this article
|
Ever notice how the leaders of the 9/11 truth movement drop the ball at the 99 yard line? Where are their congressional bills and efforts for a real investigation?
For the lowdown on Dr Jones, check out "Heavy Watergate" on Google video. Once a spoiler, always a spoiler.