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

#571    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,437 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 07 September 2013 - 02:01 PM

RB

Another bit of circumstantial evidence supporting the nuclear theory is a comparison of the photos of nuclear weapons tests over the years to the photos of the towers coming down.  Especially those photos taken from above.  Very similar patterns of explosions, with the vertical component that is visible.  The explosions at the towers with the instantly pulverized and calcined concrete is telling.  Certainly NOT the result of jetfuel and gravity, and not the result of thermite.  :no:


#572    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 07 September 2013 - 02:26 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 September 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

Another bit of circumstantial evidence supporting the nuclear theory is a comparison of the photos of nuclear weapons tests over the years to the photos of the towers coming down.

There was no nuclear detonation during the 911 attack which explains why there was no such evidence found at ground zero during cleanp operations.

Quote

The explosions at the towers with the instantly pulverized and calcined concrete is telling.

Considering that nukes generate temperatures of millions of degrees, the WTC buildings would have been vaporized, not pulverized if planted within those buildings. What happened to the steel tower when the United States detonated its first nuclear bomb?

Before the nuclear detonation

Posted Image


After the nuclear detonation

Posted Image

The nukes at 911 ground zero story is false and add to the fact there was no evidence which explains why that nuke story was found to be false. Simply putting it in simple words, you were duped again, and you knew it, but decided to have some fun anyway.

Edited by skyeagle409, 07 September 2013 - 03:20 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#573    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 07 September 2013 - 02:28 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 September 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

You missed alot in the DELTA report regarding aerosols and microparticles of iron and other elements.  Whether on purpose or by accident I don't know.

Basically speaking, you are proving that you do not understand what you are posting.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#574    Magiclass

Magiclass

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 31 posts
  • Joined:26 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 07 September 2013 - 02:57 PM

One only has to read the book "Where Did The Towers Go" by Dr Judy Wood on this and your mind will be changed forever!


#575    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 07 September 2013 - 03:03 PM

View PostMagiclass, on 07 September 2013 - 02:57 PM, said:

One only has to read the book "Where Did The Towers Go" by Dr Judy Wood on this and your mind will be changed forever!

Where did they go? Let's go here for starters because as you can see, there is no evidence on the steel that a directed-energy weapon was used and besides, that story was false.

Posted Image

Posted Image


http://911research.w.../WTC_apndxD.htm

Now, let's take a close look of WTC2 as it collapses.



As you can plainly see in that video, no directed-energy weapon was used to facilitate the collapse of that building, which simply means the directed-energy weapon story is false.

Edited by skyeagle409, 07 September 2013 - 03:16 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#576    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,437 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:36 PM

View PostMagiclass, on 07 September 2013 - 02:57 PM, said:

One only has to read the book "Where Did The Towers Go" by Dr Judy Wood on this and your mind will be changed forever!

Well it is certainly a valid question that Judy asks!

There are a zillion questions and anomalies regarding the events of 11 September, and the peculiar molecular behavior that happened that day is most strange.  If one believes the official story, one must accept that somehow or other the rules of physics were suspended that day.

I think Jeff Prager hits it right on the head--most likely candidate by far is tactical nukes.  That covers so many of the bigger anomalies.


#577    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:04 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 September 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:



Well it is certainly a valid question that Judy asks!

There are a zillion questions and anomalies regarding the events of 11 September, and the peculiar molecular behavior that happened that day is most strange.  If one believes the official story, one must accept that somehow or other the rules of physics were suspended that day.

I think Jeff Prager hits it right on the head--most likely candidate by far is tactical nukes.  That covers so many of the bigger anomalies.

Since I am on military duty today, I will have limited time to respond to your other post till later.

What laws of physics were suspended by the official narrative BR?  Please be specific.

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

#578    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:07 PM

View PostMagiclass, on 07 September 2013 - 02:57 PM, said:

One only has to read the book "Where Did The Towers Go" by Dr Judy Wood on this and your mind will be changed forever!

The towers littered the streets and in the basement levels of the WTC.

Judy Woods is a crock.  Her own theory is overwhelming evidence that she has no clue what the hell she is talking about.

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

#579    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 08 September 2013 - 03:18 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 September 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

There are a zillion questions and anomalies regarding the events of 11 September, and the peculiar molecular behavior that happened that day is most strange.  If one believes the official story, one must accept that somehow or other the rules of physics were suspended that day.

Suspending and rewriting the laws of physics from the comfort of your keyboard in regard to nuclear physics is exactly what you have been trying to do.

Quote

I think Jeff Prager hits it right on the head--most likely candidate by far is tactical nukes.  That covers so many of the bigger anomalies.

Looking at the laws of nuclear physics, there is more evidence that a meteor knocked over the WTC buildings than a nuclear detonation at ground  zero, which translates into zero evidence for a nuclear detonation. Basically speaking, you do not know a thing about nukes.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#580    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 08 September 2013 - 03:19 AM

View PostRaptorBites, on 07 September 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Judy Woods is a crock.  Her own theory is overwhelming evidence that she has no clue what the hell she is talking about.

DITTO!! :tu:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#581    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 08 September 2013 - 04:00 AM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 September 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

RB

Another bit of circumstantial evidence supporting the nuclear theory is a comparison of the photos of nuclear weapons tests over the years to the photos of the towers coming down.  Especially those photos taken from above.  Very similar patterns of explosions, with the vertical component that is visible.  The explosions at the towers with the instantly pulverized and calcined concrete is telling.  Certainly NOT the result of jetfuel and gravity, and not the result of thermite.  :no:

Visible vertical component of a collapse is not evidence of anything other than dust, which is carried by air, tends to get kicked around violently in chaotic situations.

This is clearly a silly point you want to concentrate on when in reality, its an expected event given the situation.

Nobody stated the concrete was instantly pulverized.  Why bother with a straw man there?  There are many other things that can be crushed easier, such as ceiling tiles.

Yet it has been proven time and time again that fires compromises steel's strength to an point of failure.  In the case of WTC, the failure happened at the joints.

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

#582    Liberallez

Liberallez

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Joined:08 Sep 2013

Posted 08 September 2013 - 04:54 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 20 March 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

There was no nuclear blast nor flash evident anywhere in New York City. The idea that a nuclear device was used was a made-up story.


So... on the basis of what you believe is the only possible indicator of nuclear fusion or fission you deny even the possibility of the existence of technology you know nothing about.
Good thinking!
You sound like those who persecuted Galileo because it was obvious that all the evidence proved the earth was flat.


#583    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,773 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:06 AM

View PostLiberallez, on 08 September 2013 - 04:54 AM, said:

So... on the basis of what you believe is the only possible indicator of nuclear fusion or fission you deny even the possibility of the existence of technology you know nothing about.
Good thinking!
You sound like those who persecuted Galileo because it was obvious that all the evidence proved the earth was flat.

A nuke is a nuke is a nuke.

There was no evidence of a nuclear detonation at ground zero. No blinding flash, no massive shock wave, no EMP, no radioactive fallout nor radioactive residue, and let's remember, nukes generate temperatures in the millions of degrees, the attributes of a nuclear detonation that was not present at ground zero.

To sum it up, no nukes at ground zero.

Quote

You sound like those who persecuted Galileo because it was obvious that all the evidence proved the earth was flat.

I am not on that side by any means. 911 conspiracist took a serious hit on the issue of nukes because the story was determined to be false, just as they took a serious hit when they claimed that United 93 landed at Cleveland airport. When the facts came rolling in, it was determined the conspiracist actually confused Delta 1989, a B-767, with United 93, a B-757. That is because they didn't bother to do their homework, which they also failed to do in regard to nuclear weaponry.

Let's do a recap. This is a detonation of just 35 tons of explosives.




That is nothing compared to a mini-nuke that is many times the explosive yield of 35 tons of explosives. Now, let's take a look at this video and explain to us why you do not see an explosion as WTC2 collapsed.



Compare the two videos and then, explain to us why no nuclear detonation occurred at ground zero.

Edited by skyeagle409, 08 September 2013 - 05:31 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#584    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,008 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 08 September 2013 - 05:24 AM

View PostLiberallez, on 08 September 2013 - 04:54 AM, said:

So... on the basis of what you believe is the only possible indicator of nuclear fusion or fission you deny even the possibility of the existence of technology you know nothing about.
Good thinking!
You sound like those who persecuted Galileo because it was obvious that all the evidence proved the earth was flat.

Doesn't matter.

Point is, claiming a nuke was used to bring down the towers is an extraordinary claim.  To prove it, you must provide extraordinary evidence.

To start, you can first provide where such nukes were located to show the collapse we saw.  Then explain how the perpetrators were 100% sure collapse initiation would happen the way it did.

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

#585    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,437 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:29 PM

View PostRaptorBites, on 07 September 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:

Since I am on military duty today, I will have limited time to respond to your other post till later.

What laws of physics were suspended by the official narrative BR?  Please be specific.

Many, if one embraces the Official Conspiracy Theory.

Perhaps the biggest is the horizontal displacement of large structural pieces of steel by way of jetfuel and gravity.  It's impossible, given the NIST report.

The cellphone calls were another, and a crucial part of the story.  As described by the OCT, they were impossible.

Just finished the halfway point of Prager's book RB.  With your open and analytical mind, you would be most impressed.

Biggest piece of trivia for me was the story of Taylor Wilson.  At age 14 he became the youngest person to design and build the equipment for, and to successfully accomplish, nuclear fusion.  He was the 32nd person on the planet to have done so.  Inside his little reactor plasma was heated to 580 million degrees, hotter than we estimate the core of the sun to be.

17 year old Thiago Olsen in Michigan fused 2 H to form He, star in a jar.

If those young men working in their garages could do that, what do you suppose the DoD could do with 60 years of constant research in weapons development?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users