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.


* * * - - 2 votes

WTC7


  • Please log in to reply
1999 replies to this topic

#1996    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 17 July 2012 - 07:45 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 17 July 2012 - 07:32 PM, said:

Sky

I got out of the Army in 1971.  Even in those old days there was such a thing as a 'tactical' (as opposed to strategic) nuclear weapon.  Small, perhaps "suitcase" sized low-yield nuclear weapons.

My guess is that we have done serious weapons development since 1971.

If you were familiar with tactical nukes, then why did you suggest that a nuke could have been responsible?  Anyone who is familiar with nukes would have known there was no way a nuke was detonated inside the WTC building.   Not only have you shown a lack of knowledge on aviation issues, but a lack of  knowledge of military weaponry as well.

Once again, what is the temperature created by a nuclear weapon at detonation?

Edited by skyeagle409, 17 July 2012 - 07:48 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1997    Mr.United_Nations

Mr.United_Nations

    hi

  • Member
  • 9,304 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 17 July 2012 - 08:44 PM

You still need to contain nuclear radiation no matter who big it is, it still would of covered a large area. If small area then you looking at radiation that is harmless. Same with any chemical or solid compound.


#1998    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 18 July 2012 - 12:19 PM

In 1945 nuclear weapons were quite large and primitive, airplanes could not go through the sound barrier, and Low Earth Orbit was only a theory.

My, my, what advances in technology we have seen in our lifetimes.


#1999    Mr.United_Nations

Mr.United_Nations

    hi

  • Member
  • 9,304 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 18 July 2012 - 12:44 PM

You do not need to be in the military to know about Nuclear power


#2000    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 18 July 2012 - 02:46 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 18 July 2012 - 12:19 PM, said:

In 1945 nuclear weapons were quite large and primitive,....

And yet, thousands of people died of radiation poisoning.

Quote


Environmental Consequences of Nuclear Weapons:

• Radioactive materials released from the testing or detonation of nuclear weapons remain
in the ecosystem for thousands of years;

• Drinking radioactive contaminated water over a long period of time is closely linked to
high cancer rates;

• Nuclear radiation, which results from the neutrons and gamma rays associated with
fission, is lethal in high doses, and has many lingering effects, including increased cancer
rates and organ damage. In addition to the 200,000 estimated deaths from the Hiroshima
and Nagasaki bombs, thousands of other civilians developed cancer and other diseases
form the high levels of radiation.

Quote

My, my, what advances in technology we have seen in our lifetimes.

In other words, you haven't a clue about how a nuclear bomb works.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users