Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 6 votes

America Nuked 9/11


  • Please log in to reply
2239 replies to this topic

#541    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,531 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 01 September 2013 - 01:57 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 01 September 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

Don't you just love the way conspiracy logic works.  Some argue that it is demolition because debris falls outside the building footprint, others argue it's a demolition because the debris falls within the building footprint.  Wherever it falls, it proves its a demolition.

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification Swanny.

The events of the day were highly irregular to say the least.  Not just where the debris fell, but all the other evidence, photographic, witness statements, location of debris, and virtually everything else, so it was an explosion, a demolition, of some sort.

Obviously, exactly what kind of demolition--conventional or nuclear--remains to be seen, but with the epidemiology piling up steadily and surely 12 years later, the most likely culprit is nuclear.


#542    flyingswan

flyingswan

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,888 posts
  • Joined:13 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 01 September 2013 - 03:35 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 01 September 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification Swanny.

The events of the day were highly irregular to say the least.
True, not much of a precedent for airliners being deliberately flown into buildings.

Quote

Not just where the debris fell, but all the other evidence, photographic, witness statements, location of debris, and virtually everything else, so it was an explosion, a demolition, of some sort.
If you consider that all evidence points to a demolition, whatever that evidence happens to be, then you naturally say that.  I don't have that mindset, so when I look at the evidence, I find that it rules out a demolition for several reasons.

Quote

Obviously, exactly what kind of demolition--conventional or nuclear--remains to be seen, but with the epidemiology piling up steadily and surely 12 years later, the most likely culprit is nuclear.
There you go again.  To you, the evidence favours nuclear, but other conspiracy theorists, eg Steven Jones, look at the same evidence and rule out nuclear.  It's this cavalier attitude to evidence and logic that makes conspiracy theorists so entertaining.
http://911review.com.../wtc/nukes.html

"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true" - Francis Bacon (1561-1626)
In which case it is fortunate that:
"Science is the best defense against believing what we want to" - Ian Stewart (1945- )

#543    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,146 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 02 September 2013 - 05:03 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 01 September 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

The events of the day were highly irregular to say the least.  Not just where the debris fell, but all the other evidence, photographic, witness statements, location of debris, and virtually everything else,...

All of which debunks 911 truther claims that explosives were used.

Quote

...so it was an explosion, a demolition, of some sort.

According to demolition experts in the area, they heard no demolition explosions as the WTC buildings collapsed and the sounds the witnesses described were later found to be attributed to things other than explosives.

Quote

Obviously, exactly what kind of demolition--conventional or nuclear--remains to be seen,

False! There was no evidence of any kind that an explosive demolition occurred at ground zero.

Quote

Obviously, exactly what kind of demolition--conventional or nuclear--remains to be seen, but with the epidemiology piling up steadily and surely 12 years later, the most likely culprit is nuclear.

I already know that you know, no nuclear detonation occurred at ground zero, which simply means that you are just here to have fun and cannot be taken seriously because you stumbled when you back-stepped and added conventional explosives.

Apparently, you were caught in the act trying to deceive us and I hope you didn't think your misstep went unnoticed.


Edited by skyeagle409, 02 September 2013 - 05:49 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#544    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,531 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 02 September 2013 - 01:17 PM

View Postflyingswan, on 01 September 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

True, not much of a precedent for airliners being deliberately flown into buildings.


If you consider that all evidence points to a demolition, whatever that evidence happens to be, then you naturally say that.  I don't have that mindset, so when I look at the evidence, I find that it rules out a demolition for several reasons.

There you go again.  To you, the evidence favours nuclear, but other conspiracy theorists, eg Steven Jones, look at the same evidence and rule out nuclear.  It's this cavalier attitude to evidence and logic that makes conspiracy theorists so entertaining.
http://911review.com.../wtc/nukes.html

The developing epidemiology makes Jones' theory appear to be incorrect.

What besides radiation effects cause multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and leukemia at the rates we see in those who worked on the pile?

How do you rationalize the fact that those (over 1000 dead as of March 2011) who worked on the pile have the same diseases, at the same levels of incidence, as those who survived Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl?  And probably soon to be Fukishima?


#545    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,077 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:11 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 02 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

The developing epidemiology makes Jones' theory appear to be incorrect.

What besides radiation effects cause multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and leukemia at the rates we see in those who worked on the pile?

How do you rationalize the fact that those (over 1000 dead as of March 2011) who worked on the pile have the same diseases, at the same levels of incidence, as those who survived Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl?  And probably soon to be Fukishima?

Can you cite references to your data please.

Edited by RaptorBites, 02 September 2013 - 04:12 PM.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#546    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,146 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:19 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 02 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

The developing epidemiology makes Jones' theory appear to be incorrect.

Well, let's take a look.

*   No radiation associated with a nuclear detonation

*   No blast or shock wave associated with a nuclear detonation

*   No detonation flash associated with a nuclear detonation

*   No EMP associated with a nuclear detonation

Just a few facts and simply putting it in simple words, no nuclear detonation because the story was a hoax.

Quote

What besides radiation effects cause multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and leukemia at the rates we see in those who worked on the pile?

The evidence has been presented to you that the cancers had nothing to do with radiation.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#547    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,146 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:48 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 02 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

And probably soon to be Fukishima?

Speaking of Fukushima, let's take a look.

Quote

Japan vows quick action on Fukushima as tainted water crisis deepens

TOKYO - Japan vowed quick, decisive action, including the use of public funds, to tackle the worsening problem of contaminated water pouring from the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant, as the authorities step in to help the facility's embattled operator.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said the government "will step forward and implement all necessary policies" to deal with the flood of radioactive water from the plant, a legacy of the world's worst atomic disaster in a quarter century.

http://worldnews.nbc...is-deepens?lite

No such radioactive contamination was ever found at ground zero.

Edited by skyeagle409, 02 September 2013 - 04:49 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#548    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,804 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 02 September 2013 - 05:10 PM

It really dosnt matter Skyeagle in about twenty years were all going to be radioactive. DONT EAT THE FISH. so LONG.

This is a Work in Progress!

#549    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,531 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:29 PM

View PostRaptorBites, on 02 September 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

Can you cite references to your data please.

The ebook I'm still reading.  If it had been published on old-fashioned paper, I would have already finished it. :tu: I hate reading on the computer.  Too much bothers my eyes.

He cites CDC and other data.  I remember some years back when it was a political issue.  But being up in New York, I did not pay close attention.  I do remember something about a Zadroga Bill.

Edited by Babe Ruth, 02 September 2013 - 07:30 PM.


#550    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,077 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 02 September 2013 - 08:37 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 02 September 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:



The ebook I'm still reading.  If it had been published on old-fashioned paper, I would have already finished it. :tu: I hate reading on the computer.  Too much bothers my eyes.

He cites CDC and other data.  I remember some years back when it was a political issue.  But being up in New York, I did not pay close attention.  I do remember something about a Zadroga Bill.

Copy and paste the data here.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#551    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Mainly Spherical in Shape

  • Member
  • 25,059 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:there

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:28 AM

View PostRaptorBites, on 02 September 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

Copy and paste the data here.
Can you copy & paste data from an E Book? I've never used one of things, so I wouldn't know.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#552    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 4,925 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I might have been born yesterday but, I've been up all night.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:54 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 02 September 2013 - 05:03 AM, said:


...False! There was no evidence of any kind that an explosive demolition occurred at ground zero.

Nota bene: Except, of course, for the two jetliners.


#553    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,077 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:57 AM

View PostColonel Rhuairidh, on 03 September 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

Can you copy & paste data from an E Book? I've never used one of things, so I wouldn't know.
Depends on the e-reader software.  The problem here is BR is quoting information on a book not scientifically published journals.  I have yet to see any qualifications Jeff Prager has in regards to Nuclear Physics, Epidemiology, or a Medical Degree to make such asinine assertions.

It was much the same as listening to DRG try to explain physics of collapsing buildings, or Harriett et AL talk about forensic analysis of dust.  It usually ends up a hilarious failure.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#554    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 4,925 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I might have been born yesterday but, I've been up all night.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 06:59 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 02 September 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:


What besides radiation effects cause multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and leukemia at the rates we see in those who worked on the pile?


The tons of toxic material (a veritable chemical soup) that were in the pile?


#555    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,531 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 03 September 2013 - 01:40 PM

View PostRaptorBites, on 02 September 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

Copy and paste the data here.

If not successful with the copy and paste, I will at least provide the footnotes from CDC and other sources.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users