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


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2269 replies to this topic

#511    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:12 PM

View Postpoppet, on 27 August 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

Really !!!

Yes it does!

Quote

...i would have thought he would be doing more than pushing papers ...........

He was out there assisting others after American 77 hit the Pentagon.

Quote

.....as their appeared to be a couple of lousy pilots

What lousy pilots? Do you mean, the terrorist hijacker pilot, Hani, who held a B-737 type rating and a commercial pilot license and accumulated over 250 flying hours? Remember, it doesn't take 250 flying hours to learn how to  performed a maneuver that I had done with less than 30 flying hours as a student pilot.

Or, perhaps, you are speaking of a highly experienced Air Force C-130 pilot who saw American 77 hit the Pentagon. Which of the two experienced pilots are you referring to?

Edited by skyeagle409, 27 August 2013 - 11:15 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#512    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:18 PM

View PostRaptorBites, on 27 August 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

Donald Rumsfeld is human, just like you and me.  In a tragic situation, you can't blame people for acting upon human instinct to help a fellow man in times of chaos.

Just like all other CT's, you like to focus on the irrelevant details.

DITTO!! :tu: They accept the reality that they are wrong.

Edited by skyeagle409, 27 August 2013 - 11:18 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#513    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:25 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 27 August 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

I'm 110 pages through Prager's piece, and it is pretty persuasive.  You won't hear Brian Williams or Diane Sawyer talking about this material on the evening news.  Ist verboten! :td:

Ask Jeff Prager where's the evidence! Apparently, his book has already been debunked by science, common sense and the laws of physics.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#514    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008

Posted 27 August 2013 - 11:31 PM

Right ! Wheres your Proof BabeRuth !

This is a Work in Progress!

#515    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 28 August 2013 - 01:09 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 27 August 2013 - 07:53 PM, said:

I'm 110 pages through Prager's piece, and it is pretty persuasive.  You won't hear Brian Williams or Diane Sawyer talking about this material on the evening news.  Ist verboten! :td:

Interesting indeed.  Considering it is a book and not a scientific paper.  Judy Woods wrote a book about DEWs and 9/11 and we all know the sort of crackpot she is.

Wonder how that group of firefighters survived in the stairwell of one of the towers being in such close proximity to a nuclear blast that burned paint off cars, destroyed windows and melted tiresin the vicinity of the towers.  How mysterious indeed.

The point is, there is no supporting evidence of a underground nuclear explosion.  ZERO.  Especially since the collapse initiation was in the upper floors.  How does an underground nuke explain that?  Magic?

Edited by RaptorBites, 28 August 2013 - 01:12 AM.

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

#516    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 28 August 2013 - 03:05 PM

RB

It appears that depending upon the type of nuclear reaction, different substances are (obviously) effected differently, because of the type of radiation released and other intricate dynamics of various nuclear reactions.  The different types of radiation released depends upon which type of nuclear explosion is tested.  At least as I understand it.  So too, the type and levels of heat released.

I'm sure as heck no authority on it, but Prager's book is most informative about the considerable variety of reactions and explosions, and of course devices, that might be employed.

Coupled with the observations made by the DELTA Group and USGS, it seems likely some sort of nuclear event took place.  10 years later, the epidemiology of the various cancers supports that theory.

It turns out that our Geiger counters can read only certain types of radiation, and not other types.


#517    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 28 August 2013 - 06:41 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 August 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

It appears that depending upon the type of nuclear reaction, different substances are (obviously) effected differently, because of the type of radiation released and other intricate dynamics of various nuclear reactions.  The different types of radiation released depends upon which type of nuclear explosion is tested.  At least as I understand it.  So too, the type and levels of heat released.

A nuke is a nuke is a nuke. Nukes release temperatures in the millions of degrees, severe shock waves, blinding flashes, EMP, radiological effects and create huge craters, none of which were present at ground zero.

Quote

Coupled with the observations made by the DELTA Group and USGS, it seems likely some sort of nuclear event took place.  10 years later, the epidemiology of the various cancers supports that theory.

The evidence has been presented to you that the cancers were caused by toxic materials, which were present in large amounts at ground zero and nothing to do with radiation. Check it out.

Quote

9/11 Ground Zero Workers Reach Claims Settlement

Asbestos and other harmful construction materials were used in the building’s construction during the 1970s, and when the towers collapsed all those materials were pulverized into airborne microbes; which were breathed in by every individual there for weeks and months.  This is not to suggest that every single person there will develop cancers and deadly diseases, but the chances of such a disease have become more possible because of the exposure.

When airborne asbestos fibers are breathed into the lungs there is a risk of developing mesothelioma, a cancer affecting the lining of the lungs.  Mesothelioma and other asbestos related illnesses are at risk in construction/demolition areas when proper safety practices are not taken seriously or ignored.

Cited From: Asbestos Exposure Claim from 9/11 | Asbestos.net http://www.asbestos....t#ixzz2OOhuAN9e

Quote

It turns out that our Geiger counters can read only certain types of radiation, and not other types.

Let's take a look here.

Quote

Radium

In research, radium is used as a source of neutrons in laboratories, and it is also researched by scientists who are interested in learning more about it and its isotopes. Radium is also sometimes used in treatment for cancers and in medical imaging. Some antiques like watches with luminescent dials contain radium, a testimony to the element's once widespread commercial use.

------------------------------------------------------------

Tritiated water: Traces only, provides further strong evidence AGAINST mini-nuke hypothesis

“Traces of tritiated water (HTO) were detected at the World Trade Center (WTC) ground zero after the 9/11/01 terrorist attack. A water sample from the WTC sewer, collected on 9/13/01, contained (0.164±0.074) nCi/L of HTO. A split water sample, collected on 9/21/01 from the basement of WTC Building 6, contained 3.53±0.17 and 2.83±0.15 nCi/L, respectively. These results are well below the levels of concern to human exposure…

http://www.llnl.gov/.../pdf/241096.pdf


Tritium at Ground Zero

*   Tritium radioluminescent (RL) devices were investigated as possible sources of the traces of tritium at ground zero. It was determined that the two Boeing 767 aircraft that hit the Twin Towers contained a combined 34 Ci of tritium at the time of impact in their emergency exit signs.

There is also evidence that many weapons from law enforcement were present and destroyed at WTC. Such weaponry contains by design tritium sights. The fate and removal of tritium from ground zero were investigated, taking into consideration tritium chemistry and water flow originating from the fire fighting, rain, as well as leaks from the Hudson River and broken mains.

A box model was developed to describe the above scenario. The model is consistent with instantaneous oxidation of the airplane tritium in the jet-fuel explosion, deposition of a small fraction of HTO at ground zero, and water-flow controlled removal of HTO from the debris. The model also suggests that tritium from the weapons would be released and oxidized to HTO at a much slower rate in the lingering fires at ground zero.

http://covertoperati...tium-study.html


Hazardous Materials at Ground Zero

Ground Zero Workers File Billion-Dollar Health Lawsuit

MONDAY, Sept. 13 (HealthDayNews) -- Nearly three years to the day of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, lawyers for more than 800 "Ground Zero" rescue and clean-up workers announced Monday a billion-dollar class-action lawsuit against owners of the World Trade Center for exposing the workers to allegedly toxic conditions.

Contained in this "toxic waste pile," according to Sawyer and Worby, were:
  • 200,000 pounds of lead from the estimated 50,000 personal computers in thousands of World Trade Center offices
  • mercury contained in the towers' more than half a million fluorescent lights
  • dioxin from oil and fuel
  • 2,000 tons of asbestos
  • benzene from more than 91,000 liters of burned jet fuel
  • cadmium, PCBs, and up to 2 million pounds of toxins known as polycystic aromatic hydrocarbons.
All of these contaminants have strong links to pulmonary, skin or immune system ailments, as well as cancer, Sawyer said. He predicted that long-term cancer rates among clean-up workers could rise to five to seven times the norm during the coming decades.

http://news.healingw...news1&id=521197




Leukemia Risk Associated With Low-Level Benzene Exposure

Conclusions: We found an excess risk of leukemia associated with cumulative benzene exposures and benzene exposure intensities that were considerably lower than reported in previous studies. No evidence was found of a threshold cumulative exposure below which there was no risk.

http://journals.lww....Benzene.11.aspx

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Benzene and Leukemia  

A substantial number of epidemiologic studies have provided estimates of the relation between exposure to benzene at work and the risk of leukemia, but the results have been heterogeneous. To bridge this gap in knowledge, we synthesized the existing epidemiologic evidence on the relation between occupational exposure to benzene and the risk of leukemia, including all types combined and the four main subgroups acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).

Conclusion: Our study provides consistent evidence that exposure to benzene at work increases the risk of leukemia with a dose-response pattern. There was some evidence of an increased risk of AML and CLL. The meta-analysis indicated a lack of association between benzene exposure and the risk of CML.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20584305

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Benzene Exposure: Warning Signs of Leukemia

Benzene is a recognized carcinogen that poses severe health warnings to workers and others who are exposed to it. There is a scientifically-proven link between benzene and leukemia; in fact benzene is a recognized cause of leukemia and other blood cancers, including multiple myeloma, Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and aplastic anemia.

Benzene has also been associated with Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML), which can be potentially deadly and Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS), which truncates one’s stem cells and kills healthy white blood cells.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dioxin

Many toxic chemicals are linked with a specific illness, such as lead and brain damage or asbestos and mesotholioma. Others are linked with several illnesses. Dioxin is tied to such a very large number of diseases because it is acancer-enhancer. Dioxins intensify cancers which other toxics begin.

As Barry Commoner explains, "...dioxin greatly enhances the activity of the enzyme system that converts most environmental carcinogens into active agents. Apparently, dioxin can so powerfully stimulate the enzyme as to sharply increase the activity of the small amounts of carcinogens present in...food, water, and air and thereby intensify their effect on tumor incidence. In effect, dioxin influences tumor production by enhancing the activity of carcinogens..."


This is why dioxin has totally different effects on different people. If a group of workers has already been exposed to chemicals which cause Hodgkins disease, dioxin will speed up the process and research will show that they have an increased rate of Hodgkin's disease. If a community has been exposed to chemicals which cause leukemia, dioxin will increase the rate of leukemia.

http://www.greens.or.../078/07-06.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cadmium

Our genetic blueprint is contained in the DNA of our cells.  If the DNA is damaged during cellular replication, or by free radical stressors (such as Mercury, Lead, or Cadmium), then the cell becomes dysfunctional; it may degenerate into a cancer cell.  DNA damage is not an infrequent event during normal life (i.e. sunburn), thus Mother Nature provides us with enzyme systems to carry out DNA repair.  Cadmium inactivates this DNA repair mechanism.

In a study of DNA replication and repair in yeast cells, Cadmium exposure increased the cellular mutation rate 2,000-fold. Cadmium exposure is thus a cancer double-whammy; Cadmium damages not just our DNA, but also our capacity to repair damaged DNA.

http://www.heartfixe...ics/Cadmium.htm




PCBs, and up to 2 million pounds of toxins known as polycystic aromatic hydrocarbons at ground zero.
Quote

Governments Link PCBs and Cancer

Most government health agencies, including those listed below, consider PCBs a "probable carcinogen" for humans and a "known carcinogen" for animals, based on extensive cancer research studies included on these pages.   All PCB mixtures cause cancer in animals.



*   World Health Organization
*   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
*   U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
*   U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
*   The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
*   The National Toxicology Program
*   The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)


http://www.foxriverw...pcb_pcbs_1.html


Examples of cancer-causing agents at ground zero that had nothing do to with nukes.
Edited by skyeagle409, 02 April 2013 - 01:04 AM.

Many people are still unaware of the hazardous materials that have been found at Ground Zero as a result of the damage done by the Twin Towers collapse.  Asbestosand other harmful construction materials were used in the building’s construction during the 1970s, and when the towers collapsed all those materials were pulverized into airborne microbes; which were breathed in by every individual there for weeks and months.  This is not to suggest that every single person there will develop cancers and deadly diseases, but the chances of such a disease have become more possible because of the exposure.

Cited From: Asbestos Exposure Claim from 9/11 | Asbestos.net http://www.asbestos....t#ixzz2PEK7spha



These workers are properly dressed to work within certain radiation-contaminated sites.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Which is definitely not the case here at ground zero.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by skyeagle409, 28 August 2013 - 06:49 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#518    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 28 August 2013 - 07:11 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 August 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Coupled with the observations made by the DELTA Group and USGS, it seems likely some sort of nuclear event took place.

False! Anyone who knows anything about nukes would dismiss that claim outright and yes, even Steven Jones debunked the nuclear claim. Let's take a look at the explosive power of 35 tons of explosives.

http://www.youtube.c...YKxwWZ-aRM#t=10

That was just 35 tons of explosives, but did we see such a detonation at ground zero? No! Yet, min-nukes can produce yields well in excess of 1000 to 5000 tons of TNT, many times the power of what you saw in that video and yet you want us to believe that a nuclear detonation occurred at ground zero.

Compare this collapse of WTC2 with the above video where 35 tons of explosives was detonated.



As you can plainly see, there was NO detonation of  35 tons of explosives as WTC2 collapsed much less up to the level of mini-nukes whose explosive potential is in the range of hundreds to thousands of tons of TNT.

Edited by skyeagle409, 28 August 2013 - 07:17 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#519    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 18,477 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008

Posted 29 August 2013 - 01:19 AM

Some people Live in a world all to themselfs  Skyeagle ,We both know a few in here ! There was nothing but Two Airliners crashing into the Towers that day ! Nothing ! Fact,Actual Proof ,End of the C.T. B.S. story ! :tu:

This is a Work in Progress!

#520    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 29 August 2013 - 03:23 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 28 August 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Coupled with the observations made by the DELTA Group and USGS, it seems likely some sort of nuclear event took place.  10 years later, the epidemiology of the various cancers supports that theory.

Oh the Delta Group survey?  

Quote

In that hot pile, some of the debris' constituent elements combined with organic matter and abundant chlorine from papers and plastics, and then escaped to the surface as metal-rich gases. These then either burned or chemically decomposed into very fine particles capable of penetrating deeply into human lungs.
In the trade-center air samples, Cahill identified four classes of particles that have been named by the EPA as likely to harm human health:
  • Fine and very fine transition metals, which interfere with lung chemistry.
  • Acids, in this case sulfuric acid, which attack cilia and lung cells directly.
  • Very fine, un-dissolvable (insoluble) particles, in this case glass, which travel through the lungs to the bloodstream and heart.
  • High-temperature organic matter, many components of which are known to be carcinogens.
"For each of these four classes of pollutant, we recorded the highest levels we have ever seen in over 7,000 measurements we have made of very fine air pollution throughout the world, including Kuwait and China," Cahill said.
After the debris fire was out, pollution levels dropped, Cahill said. DELTA Group measurements at the trade-center site made in May 2002, with the American Lung Association of New York, showed that levels of almost all of the very fine components had declined more than 90 percent.
http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm


Odd, nothing there relating to diseases stemming from radioactive fall out.

Oh the USGS Dust Survey?

Quote

Dust Components

The dust samples were largely made up of a mix of materials commonly used in building construction or found in office buildings: particles of glass fibers, gypsum wallboard, concrete, paper, window glass, etc.

http://www.usgs.gov/...enter-collapse/


Look at that! USGS stated the dust was made of particles from common items found in office buildings and building construction.  Nothing there stating nuclear fallout.


So, either you have taken to intentional misinformation from Jeff Prager and the Jim Fetzer school of clowns, or, you are a flat out liar.


Interesting indeed.


Edited by RaptorBites, 29 August 2013 - 03:31 AM.

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

#521    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 29 August 2013 - 05:43 PM

RB

It is at least a 2 part analysis.

1) The presence of certain elements, including Strontium and other elements related to nuclear reactions, and

2) The size of the particles.  Those microparticles can be released ONLY above certain temperatures.

Jetfuel and gravity are unable to reach those temperatures, and thermite cannot sustain high temps.

Further, the energy required to launch huges pieces of structural steel and exoskeleton hundreds of feet horizontally cannot be achieved with anything other than nukes.

Jetfuel and gravity cannot pulverize and calcine concrete, but nuclear explosions can.


#522    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 29 August 2013 - 07:54 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 29 August 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

RB

It is at least a 2 part analysis.

1) The presence of certain elements, including Strontium and other elements related to nuclear reactions, and

2) The size of the particles.  Those microparticles can be released ONLY above certain temperatures.

Jetfuel and gravity are unable to reach those temperatures, and thermite cannot sustain high temps.

Further, the energy required to launch huges pieces of structural steel and exoskeleton hundreds of feet horizontally cannot be achieved with anything other than nukes.

Jetfuel and gravity cannot pulverize and calcine concrete, but nuclear explosions can.

Horizontal displacement of debris can ONLY be achieved by nukes?  So you have come to a conclusion that only nukes can explain WTC collapse?

Edited by RaptorBites, 29 August 2013 - 07:55 PM.

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

#523    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,457 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 29 August 2013 - 09:19 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 29 August 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

It is at least a 2 part analysis.

1) The presence of certain elements, including Strontium and other elements related to nuclear reactions, and

2) The size of the particles.  Those microparticles can be released ONLY above certain temperatures.

That has nothing to do with nukes at ground zero. Nukes create temperatures in the millions of degrees and no such detonation occurred at ground zero.

Quote

Jetfuel and gravity are unable to reach those temperatures, and thermite cannot sustain high temps.

Since temperatures at ground zero did not reach temperatures in the millions of degrees or even come close, you have found yourself at a dead-end once again.

View PostDONTEATUS, on 29 August 2013 - 01:19 AM, said:

Some people Live in a world all to themselfs  Skyeagle ,We both know a few in here ! There was nothing but Two Airliners crashing into the Towers that day ! Nothing ! Fact,Actual Proof ,End of the C.T. B.S. story ! :tu:

Babe Ruth knows very well that no nuclear detonation occurred and he is just here to have fun and nothing else.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#524    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    El camion marveloso

  • Member
  • 26,391 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005

Posted 30 August 2013 - 06:23 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 29 August 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

RB

It is at least a 2 part analysis.

1) The presence of certain elements, including Strontium and other elements related to nuclear reactions, and

2) The size of the particles.  Those microparticles can be released ONLY above certain temperatures.

Jetfuel and gravity are unable to reach those temperatures, and thermite cannot sustain high temps.

Further, the energy required to launch huges pieces of structural steel and exoskeleton hundreds of feet horizontally cannot be achieved with anything other than nukes.

Jetfuel and gravity cannot pulverize and calcine concrete, but nuclear explosions can.
You don't think that if an enormous building collapses, debris is going to go in all directions?

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:


#525    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 30 August 2013 - 06:33 AM

View PostColonel Rhuairidh, on 30 August 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

You don't think that if an enormous building collapses, debris is going to go in all directions?

Of course he doesn't.  Few months ago, he proposed that controlled demolition was the culprit of laterally displaced debris, now he knows it can only be nukes.

One thing obvious to all 9/11 conspiracy theories is, if the evidence contradicts your belief, find something else, preferably wilder and imaginative, to be the culprit.

One thing the CT crowd can be consistent on, is the evolution of the conspiracy.

Edited by RaptorBites, 30 August 2013 - 06:34 AM.

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