What happened at the wtc was not conventional explosives they were very exotic how else would you explain the distruction of the indestructable core.
I remember reading a story from one of the caplins from ground zero in january you didn't need a jacket working on the site from all the heat coming from ground zero thats over four months and still there getting major heat from the site .also take into account the molten pools of iron and you can see this device could of been some sort of top secret fusion device targeted at the core.
Your right we might not ever be able to prove it but we can very well use our minds to think that it could very well be possible or do you think that the government could not possibly have come up with a way to create a more sophisticated type of nuclear reaction without fallout .They have had over 50 years to perfect there weapon dont be nieve.

A nuclear weapon is a weapon which derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions of fission or fusion. As a result, even a nuclear weapon with a small yield is significantly more powerful than the largest conventional explosives, and a single weapon is capable of destroying an entire city. A fussion nuclear weapon produces a large amount of its energy through nuclear fusion reactions, and can be over a thousand times more powerful than fission bombs. These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs.

Maybe you mean a "boosted fission weapon".

There is no such thing in engineering as a so-called "indestructible core".

I meant if you go along with the official pan cake collapse idea one floor crashing into the next how do you explain the total distruction of the 47 column core i know nothing is indestructible.

"like you were in a foundry Like lava" ?????????I wasen't there but they were ....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3...metal&hl=en

Look ,it could never have been a fussion device. WAY too powerful. You need a fission reaction just to start the fussion reaction.

So, perhaps it could have been a low yield fission device, say 1 kt.

But then you still have radiation. It can be measured. If Bush did it, he never would have stood above the irradiated remains.

now this was in the 50's-- do you honestly believe we could not develop a "clean" version? click the link below for likely evidence of a recent "test"
***************************************************************************

link

Nice link and posted well. Yes, it' all fission. Physics remain the same as in the 1950's.

Bottom line. It could never be a fussion weapon, or even a fission weapon due to the extreme outburst of gamma radiation. Can't hide the cobalt etc, so I suggest you go to ground zero and dig up some evidence.

This is the most important factor of 9/11 that it WAS NOT conventional explosives.

It was definately explosives of some sort, whether a small nuclear bomb or something more sophisticated and undetectable.

From Sunofones link it highlights some interesting points the most important would be that the micro nuke exploded leaving NO signs of radiation, therefore some sort of micro nuke or something along those lines would have possibly been used, otherwise the pancake theory the Government has led us to believe just doesn't cut it. Also the fact that thousands of tons of concrete were pulverized into dust and not to mention the core simply vanished.

Also another interesting point is that steel was found BLOCKS away, pinned side ways into another building. So where led to believe a pancake collapse had enough energy and force to throw tons of steel straight into a building blocks away.... ? It was like a hot knife carving through butter. The only way for that would be by means of explosives.

The only point these debunkers are right on is that we may never know what sort of explosives was used inside the buildings.

Cheers

BZRK

That's called a compression wave. When the top floors collapse, the energy is naturally transferred with gravity to the floors below...and so on ...etc. Untill the the compresson blows out the bottom.

I guess other engineers don't frequent this site.

Think about it. A plane hitting the upper floors within 1/10 of a second of some sort of bomb being detonated floors below. The timing is...of course..another reason your theory would never work.

Here comes the plane.....ok ...ready.......now...press the bomb switch....yeah..........great timing.

The bombs didnt have to be wired on the floors where the plane hit. Did that ever make sense to you?

Also what were the explosions that ripped people apart in the basement? Compression? Oh please your comments are not justified nor do you have a open mind.

Cheers

BZRK

Do you know what fusion is?


Basically in a nuclear bomb, an atom with impact with another atom(Hydrogen I believe) and that will cause it to bombard other atoms and it creates an event that is mostly uncontrollable.

To even THINK that the US government(US mind you) could create something like this is absurd.

If anything, the Japanese would create such a thing before we do.

Your obviously not an engineer, nor do you understand basic engineering principles. So, I can never explain compression to you. You have no idea about Fussion v. Fission reaction and therefore I am wasting my time with you.

I never said the bombs were "wired", but elluded to the possibility of someone pushing a button. There is no evidence of any type of nuclear bomb being detontated in the basement.

Like everyone else on this forum BZRK, my comments are justified, even if you don't understand them.

What people were ripped apart in the basement? This is the first I've heard of such a claim.

There was at least one person who was burned (not ripped apart as explosives would have done) by a fireball coming through the elevator doors.

It is stunning to me that people cannot comprehend this somewhat basic principal, and that they suspect some sort of demolition, when it is utterly obvious that these buildings collapsed due to massive structural failure at the level where jetliners loaded with fuel slammed into them at about 500 miles per hour. There is absolutely no evidence that the towers collapsed due to anything but this.

It doesn't even look fishy in the least, as I view the films of those towers collapsing...

I'm not sure it requires an engineering degree to understand the basic principal involved here.

I think that the mass given for the WTC towers was in the range of 1 billion pounds... 500,000 tons each. That's a hell of alot of material. Perhaps it's a bit too big a number for some folks to comprehend. These structures were immense beyond a scale that is appreciated on the TV (something like 210 feet along each side, and 1000+ feet tall).

This means that this behemoth structure weighed about 9 million pounds per floor.

The S tower was struck centering on the 80th floor of a 110 floor building, if I'm not mistaken. If anyone cannot imagine that the major structural components of the building were not severely damaged by a 325,000 pound object (a missile, essentially--(NO, not a REAL MISSILE, a plane being used as a missile...for those of you who have a tendency to read things into statements that were never intended to be there)), traveling at about 600-700 FPS, and slamming straight though the heart of the structure, then there is something amiss in one's reasoning skills.

Failure of the remaining components, due to the excess stress produced on them, caused 30 floors, or about 270 million pounds of stuff, to fall...at least a floor, 10 feet, say, at the acceleration of gravity (32 FPS/S). The kinetic energy of such a mass falling 10 feet (which would give it an impact velocity of about 25 FPS into the next available floor) can be measured in gazillions of foot pounds ( ...billions really, but I'm just playing...let's just say more energy than is generally imaginable).

To expect the structure of the 79th floor to support such an impact is ridiculous, and it would collapse, adding another 9 million pounds to the acellerating mass, which would then impact the 78th floor with more energy, and so on, until halfway through, you had 500 million pounds of mass falling pretty fast into the structure below...

It is difficult to imagine that what people saw on that day was anything other than what might be expected, horrifying as it was to watch. Nor is it anything other than logical that due to the compression wave generated by this immensity, a great velocity could be imparted to significant pieces of debris, in all directions, and that tens of thousands of tons of concrete would be instantaneously pulverized into micro-fine dust.

From my viewpoint, I cannot imagine that it would've done anything different than it did.
I recall walking into a conference room on that day. A group of managers were watching wide eyed at the screen on the TV, and they told me what had happened....I made some comment, after looking at the TV coverage for a couple of minutes, that they'd better evacuate those buildings and about 10 blocks all around them. My colleagues asked me why, and I said, "Those buildings are gonna come down, straight down."

They looked at me like I was nuts. Less than an hour later, we were looking at smoke and dust filled places where those buildings used to be.


The calculation of the average energy involved in this collapse is progressive, in that it's constantly increasing as more mass and more velocity are being added to the equation every second....I'm not so sure the figures would mean much to the non-technically oriented person even if you did the math right here for them...

I think what people don't readily understand is that no one had ever seen such a collapse before...a building that occupies about 50 million cubic feet, and weighs about a billion pounds, collapsing essentially from the top down onto itself. One floor at a time into the one below it in rapid sucession. Indeed, no one ever anticipated such an occurrance.

I can imagine the conversation during the design meetings...

"Geez, what happens if the main support structure on the 80th floor is degraded beyond it's ability to hold the weight above it and the upper part falls into the lower part? Ya think it'll hold?"

...and the rest of the staff looking at the questioner as if he was nuts.

Of course it's not going to hold.

The idea that this was anything but what physics would produce, given the specific circumstances, is quite frankly silly.

But despite that, you'll still hear people talking about those video clips showing puffs of smoke and dust blasting out of the towers below the collapsing area, and insisting on the notion that they're explosions set up to make the building fall... ...when what they were were blasts of crushed building (and other much more horrid stuff) being ejected by the internal collapse and the compression wave caused by the floors crushing down from above.

No, I think you're right. Engineeers are not generally a part of these discussions.

You should do your research and google William Rodriguez.





The notion to believe that a raging fire ball managed to maintain its energy to go through the elevator shafts 90+ Floors down and blow out the basement is utterly preposterous.

The blast happened seconds before the impact. How could a jetliner hit 90 floors above and burn a man’s arms and face to a crisp in the basement below within seconds of impact?

Cheers

BZRK

Aztec to come to a conclusion that there was no type of nuclear bomb being detonated in the basement is some what close minded.

As stated previously, it was definately explosives of some sort, whether a small nuclear bomb or something more sophisticated and undetectable.

You really think the Government would use an explosive which is conventional and used in controlled demolitions?

It doesn't really matter what you debunkers keep posting here, what matters is that thousands and thousands of people including the victims families and numerous whistleblowers do NOT believe in the official story.

You guys keep on making the assertions that the Government could not be involced in such a crime and so on and so forth but reality, facts and evidence show us that the Government has known and has been documentated that they have the means of creating a false flag attack for a pre-text to war (Operation Northwoods) to trick the American Citizens. Pearl Harbor for instance, information now is being presented showing Roosevelt knew about the attacks yet he didnt do anything about it, because this was a way for him to enter the war. The list goes on.

This act of dispicable nature on the day of 9/11 could only be carried out by evil elements in the Governments, meaning Defence Chiefs, certain elements within the Bush Administration, CIA, FBI. You only need to have a look at whistle blowers who are coming forward each and everyday from CIA and FBI agents to Government officials, are there claims to be taken lightly? What reason would they have to risk there job, there lively hood and image to lie about the issue?

Cheers

BZRK

Who has made that assertion?



It couldn't possibly, no way, no how, never, ever don't-even-consider-it been done by, y'know, terrorist? They've been known to blow stuff up too.

So are claiming they could possibly be involved?

So what are you really claiming?

Aquatus your right, terrorists do blow up "stuff" too.

BUT....

If your talking about the bombings of the 1993 WTC and the Oklahama Bombing there are numerous inconsistencies with those issues in which can be discussed in another thread.

We are talking about 9/11 here, where 19 Arab Hijackers managed to hijack 4 planes with box cutters, on the same day as Norad were conducting terror drills, also managing to by pass Americas mutli billion dollar defence network being the CIA, FBI, NSA and the list goes on.....

Why has Bush consistantly banned an independent enquiry?

What we just suppose to sit here and take the governments word for it?

Cheers

BZRK

Yeah...but we're not. We are talking about a fusion device being used to demolish the WTC towers.

Bzrk, admit it...there is absolutely no one that could corroborate the NIST explanation that you would trust. Independant query? Made up of who? If they said the government had nothing to do with it, you would just turn around and accuse them of being influenced, and therefore not credible.

There is absolutely nothing that anyone could do to show you that the towers were not intentionally demolished, and you know it, so you can stop using the term "open-minded".

The text you pasted supports exactly what I said, that he was burned, not torn apart. Thanks.
Why is that preposterous? Gravity pulls down on jet fuel just like everything else, and the path of the planes through the buildings meant that the large wing fuel tanks on the port side would intersect with the elevator shafts.

We've covered this dozens of times, there was no way for him to know which of the explosions he felt or heard were the primary impact and which were secondary effects, as he COULDN'T SEE THE IMPACT.

Skin hanging off is not ripped apart? WOW.....

If you look at the plane hitting the tower you can see a large fireball outside the tower, its obvious that there is no scientific proof to suggest that the the "raging fireball" (if any) managed to retain its energy and maintain its force to descend down elevator shafts 90+ floors down to knock out marble panels, windows and burn people to a crisp. Some sort of explosives definetely.

Theres no way for him to know of the explosions he felt or heard? what the? Theres people that back him up with what he heard in the basement seconds before the attack. Rodriguez is a key eye witness of the devastation on 9/11 and proof that there were explosives in the basement at very least.

Cheers

BZRK

You still avoided my questions like always. What do you claim happened on 9/11? your opinion? Inside job? actual terrorist attack?

So your saying there is absolutely know one that could corroborate the NIST explanation, so we are meant to take there word for it right? Its a nice world you live in to believe the Government.

Where meant to believe the Governments employees (scientists & researchers) on what happend on 9/11 with out no need for an independent inquiry..... i find that very strange and hard to swallow.

Cheers

BZRK

Now there was a nuke in the basement? Where do you people get this sh**?

Even a small nuclear device would create a huge explosion., nobody would be coming out of the basement.

Amazing how they get those facts sooooooo wrong

1. Radiation does not form NO², NO³ or nitric acid
2. Alpha particles are harmless and any tritium would have escaped quickly as it is lighter than air
3. If there was a fusion reactor at the site the steel it self would have became radioactive and that wouldn't have been washed off
4. And like i said before any tritium that would have been there would have escaped quickly

and when people are talking about 300,000,000 degree temperatures in the context of nuclear fusion they are not referring to some hellish inferno they are referring to 300,000,000 degrees of acceleration potential (i believe that's the correct term)

Like you have ever answered any of my questions.

Terrorist attack. If the government was involved, it was at a tertiary level.



There are plenty of people who can corroborate the NIST report. Heck, to start off, there are the 140,000 professionals engineers, material scientists, and architects who subscribe to their journal the report was published in.

You aren't meant to believe anything. No one cares about your beliefs, or mine, for that matter.

Oh, and for those who missed the display of incredible chutzpah:



Heck, point to a single one of my questions that you answered

Deal with it, Bzrk. You're close-minded. There isn't a single group you could name that you would believe if they told you the report was valid.

Im Close Minded lets not get into insults please Aquatos you always tend to abuse your rights as a mod when i end up "OWNING" you anyway but lets not go there.




I quote from one of your posts: "Okay, I will admit it. Maybe there is something to the idea of an inside job."

Tertiary level or not it still a Government Inside job, oi boi......."rolls eyes"

Actually i believe the hundreds of Whistleblowers, eye witneses, and the numerous amounts of data other scientists counter argueing the Governments explanation, thats who i believe.

You also said once that the whistleblowers dont interest you, which i find absolutely amazing. Close Minded? lmao

Cheers

BZRK

Let's not. Calling you close-minded is not an insult, it is a fact, until shown to be otherwise.

From one of my posts? Are you sure?



Whatever. Life isn't quite so black and white with me.

So the only group you would trust to give you an unbiased account of what occured at the WTC is a group that is actively voices it's belief that the government was involved?

And no, that wasn't the question that I asked. The question that I asked was which group you would believe to tell you that the NIST report was valid.



Basketball doesn't interest me either. Neither does horticulture. I suppose I am close-minded about those two subjects too.

"OWNING"...lmao.

It is a fact? the only close minded individual is your self Aquatos, claiming Terrorists were the cause of 9/11 yet in another thread you claim an inside job and then you say something that is way below my IQ, that if the Government was involved it was at a tertiary level..... geeee which one is it?

Terrorists? Government? UFO's? whats next on your list?

You always refer back to your childish comments about not interested in basketball etc, but the point you dont get is how can one be focused on just the collapse of the building and come up with the conclusion that Government was not involved and not thoroughly go through other aspects of 9/11, it just amazes me with your lack of knowledge and research depth, to come up with such a conclusion.

"Whatever"..... smart counter argument......

Am i expecting a PM off you like always warning me? LOL

Cheers

BZRK

Any Audio of CD charges yet?

There is actually audio of an explosion just before the plane hits....its on the documentary Martial Law 9/11....

There is also a camera on a tripod moments before the plane hit the camera shaked as if some explosion had been set off and moments later the plane crashed..... this is also on the movie Martial Law 9/11, it can be seen on Google for free.

A near by firm was conducting a meeting, and it was recorded. There was a explosion and 6 seconds later the plane hit which is proof that William Rodriguez story is true...

People talk about CD Charges etc, in my opinion the Government would not have used conventional means of explosives, some other type of explosive which i am unsure of could possibly have been used. Just because we dont know about it or hear about it does that mean it doesnt exist?

For instance we hardly ever hear of Ghosts, we hardly ever see ghosts does that mean it doesnt exist.........

We need to keep an open mind about the Government and look at its history to see that they do in fact have the means to conduct such conspiracy acts as 9/11....

Some audio and video can be seen here - LINK

Cheers

BZRK

It is a fact. You want to prove it wrong. Okay then, please name a group thet you would trust to tell you that the NIST report was valid.

You are confused. My stance on 9/11 is the same that it has been for years. I believe that the project was made and carried out by terrorist. I do not "believe" the government was involved, however if they where, I believe they would be on a tertiary level, meaning that they provided funding or support for a terrorist group without any knowledge of what they planned to do. In other words, if the government was involved, they had no idea that their involvement would lead to an attack on our soil. I believe the terrorist planned on crashing the planes into the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and the Capitol. I do not believe the terrorist had the faintest idea that the towers would collapse.

You seem to be under the impression that I have said something contrary to this. Feel free to quote me if I have (and I mean quote me as in "provide a quote", not as in "write something you believe that I have said").



What I don't get? Bzrk, the problem here isn't me getting it. It's you. You are the one that doesn't understand this, not me. I'll try explaining it to you one more time, but seriously, if you haven't got it by now, it isn't because I haven't tried to explain, but rather you have no intention of listening.

Listen carefully. If a person is not interest in something, that means they are not interested in it. They are not interested in analysing it. They are not interested in learning the details of it. They are not interested in debating it at length. That is what not being interested in something means.

"You also said once that the whistleblowers dont interest you, which i find absolutely amazing."

Why? Why is it so amazing to you that someone does not find whistleblowers amazing? Is it amazing to you that someone doesn't find basketball amazing? Horticulture? History? Why should anyone have to be interested in whistleblowers? Just because they interest you does not make them interesting to everyone else.

So, what does that mean? Because I am not interested in the details of the conspiracy, it means that I do not draw any conclusion. It means that I do not create logical arguments. It means that everything that I say on the subject is, and this is made absolutely clear, nothing more than my belief. Nothing more. There is no support for it, there is no arguements for it, there is nothing more than the simple statement, "This is what I believe". In importance, it takes it's place right alongside "I believe planes fly," "I believe boats float", "I believe basketbal exists", and "I believe Horticulture works". I don't invest any intellectual energy in these things. I don't seek to understand how they work, why they work, what the physics behind it all is, or anything else about them. I have my own interests, and in the subjects that interest me, that is where my attention lies. It is in these subjects that I know the details, the arguments, the sources. It is in these interests of mine that I can (and do) make conclusions, logical arguments, supporting evidence, and everything else. One of my interest is in engineering. The collapse of the WTC towers is a great intellectual exercise for me, as are several other engineering achievements and disasters. Those are the topics that peak my interest. Those are the topics I will happily spent my time on. Why? Simply because they interest me.


I agree. Considering that your response would have been the same regardless of this remark or of a page long detailed explantion, I consider it not only smart, but efficient as well.

To you, this is some sort of contest. You see yourself as some kind of winner, and me as some kind of loser. To me, this is little more than an annoying conversation with a person who believes that, because they are right, everyone else must be wrong.

You want this topic to be as important to everyone else as it is to you. You want everyone to acknowledge your arguments and counter them, so you can fire back what you consider to be detailed and reasoned replies, and are flabergasted when you meet resistance, reason, or in my case, indifference. It simply does not occur to you that you could be interested in something, and someone else could not. You can't make that separation. To you, it is all or nothing, black or white, either a government wide conspiracy or a total government is innocent claim. You can't reconcile the notion that there might actually be a half-way point. If someone is not agreeing with you completly, they must be against you all the way, and since you believe the government is completly involved in this, anyone apposing you must, be default, be convinced that the government is utterly innocent. Because you take the entire conspiracy at one go, anyone who only is interested in one part of it must be close-minded, must be utterly lacking in knowledge, must have made absolutely no research in depth.

Christ, how many times have I explained this to you? How many times have I told you that I have no idea if the government is involved, that it might be, that it might not be? Yet, you still, every time I respond to anything you post, within a few posts you are immediately saying that I have claimed to completly trust the government. That's just one example, Bzrk. You just don't listen. You can't. Your world does not allow for that sort of flexibility. I am not Aquatus to you. I am a guy who disagrees, and therefore I trust the government implicitly, I have not done any research, I do not have knowledge of the subject, and am wrong in every respect.

Bzrk, you aren't going anywhere. You are living a sort of week-long Groundhog Day, where you argue something for a week, then the next week you start over again right were you where the week before. Anything you learned about anyone else is forgotten, and they are all returned into the default "sheeple" classification. Any progress in the arguments you made is forgotten, and you repost them in their original format, then are suprised when everyone groans at seeing them again.

You are stuck in a loop, man, and you don't even see it. A week from now, you are still going to be saying that I flip-flop between the government being guilty or not, and that I have made solid conclusions about the conspiracy, but have refused to back it up. And you will still be saying that someone bombed the basement, and you will still have no answers for the questions that this claim generated (heck, you can't even remember them now, can you?). And, of course, you will still be accusing everyone of avoiding your questions, completly oblivious to the fact that you are doing the exact same thing to theirs (you truly think you have answered the questions I asked you, don't you).

Forget it. Go ahead, do what you did last week, do what you will do next week, and declare this a victory for yourself. Next week, the whole thing will be repeated again. Christ, it's like arguing with the guy from Memento



Probably. You do have quite the persecution complex. But, since I only send PM's when people have violated forum rules, I see no reason to send you anything.

from the second page of this thread posted by chris-- the detonation prior to collapse is obvious
audible detonation prior to collape

and anyone that thinks the towers could not widthstand the impact from a commercial aircraft is just uneducated or misinformed-- both the construction manager anf the architect had testified to its ability to widthstand multiple impacts-- to think that a commercial aircraft has more force than a hurricane is plain tuntaduh-- each tower could widstand sustained hurricane force winds bearing down on every square foot of its surface much less a "pencil piercing a screen door"

Quick question.... When will this supposed Biography of BZRK be released? LOL......

I sense some frustration......well you talk nonsense all the time which amazes me..... First you claim terrorists then you claim government involvment at a tertiary level, then you say the following in which YOU CANT EVEN REMEMBER which astonishes me: "Okay, I will admit it. Maybe there is something to the idea of an inside job. - Aquatus1"2

Well there is only 1 thing you are right on, and that is the fact that this thread will end and another will open, another set of arguments will be placed on the table in which close minded people who cannot see the US Government being corrupt will TRY and disprove there claims.

I dont see this as a contest, in all earnest i really dont give 3 flying pigs what you write re debunking the 9/11 issure, like ive said more and more people are realising that the Governments explanation of 9/11 is just utter CRAP.

You expect us to just sit here and believe the Governments explanation, you asked me to name a group thet you would trust to tell you that the NIST report was valid and i would suggest anyone not working for the Government which is obvious, physics professors, engineers the people with the right qualifications that are not affiliated with the government would be a valid group. The Governments explanation is counter argued by numerous professors around the world..... when betting if the Government is right or the indepedendent professors i would bet on the independent professers....

Anyway its obvious we are going around circles and your getting frustrated at the highest level which i find extremely funny when you claim to be a "DEBATER" LOL

Is there anything else you would like to write about myself since you know "so much" old wise one.

Cheers

BZRK

Obvious but doesn't sound anything like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-WvQbFMIWU

See that is an ACTUAL CD.

As far as the impact, Have the construction manager and Architect said that it was brought down by CD?

Please, go read up on that incident as you asked me to do. The guy was BURNED, not blown up by a bomb. Bombs don't peel skin off preferentially, they do damage through overpressure and shrapnel. Fire does directly damage the skin, it does superficial damage, and severe burns will lead to skin peeling and sloughing. Seriously, go talk to a combat medic about the difference between fire and bomb injuries.
No, confined to the elevator shaft, and fueled by falling fuel, the fireball inside would travel much farther than the one outside. Just a few gallons dumped down an elevator shaft can cause a fireball all the way to the ground level, and there were thousands of gallons in the fuel tanks whos paths intersected the elevators.


There is no way to know the cause of what he felt or heard. How does he know which of the vibrations or noises was from the impact if he couldn't see the impact?

As I've explained before, vibrations travel much faster through steel than air. For someone 1000 feet away inside the building, they will feel the impact before they hear it. When you feel a vibration in a building, with no other outside information, you will almost always think it is below you, since you feel it through the floor (unless you're hanging from the ceiling for some reason). So what william rodriguez described, feeling an explosion below then hearing the impact above, EXACTLY FITS with what you would be expected to experience from a single impact way above.

Not preposterous but a fact of physics. Read up on fire in confined conditions and the speed in which it travels.


Plenty of scientific proof. Did you know during a controlled demolition of a building, it is done in SERIES not in one big bomb.


Very good, sir!


Not uneducated or misinformed. True, some of the designers felt the buildings could withstand an impact of an airplane. The impact is not what brought it down but the jet fuel (full tank) weakened the support structures. These concepts involve structrual engineering, and are obviously way to difficult for some to comprehend.

And you explained it very well sir. But probably to deaf ears.

whats obviously too difficult to understand is the absolute lunacy in a hydrocarbon fire having an effect on 47 solid steel box columns-- apparently "ANOTHER" motive surfaced today and the time schedule seems a bit damning if you ask me--
**********************************************************************

link

ok a well known republican insider comes forward with a plan that had been put to paper to disassemble and reassemble the wtc due to corrosion issues is stone walled with the reason given is that it doesnt matter as the building "will be blown up" and rebuilt in about 10-12 yrs in 1989 and none of the skeptics bat an eye--HAHA LOL

Why doesn't someone build a replica twin tower and fly a plane into it? It would solve everything!

Why fund an expensive test when the structural engineers who are the only ones with the expertise to conduct and analyse it have no problem with the official explanation?

The purpose of this tread involved a fusion nuclear bomb to bring down WTC.

There are various types of nuclear bombs as I previously stated. Fusion bombs are based on nuclear fusion where light nuclei such as deuterium and tritium (isotopes of hydrogen) combine together into heavier elements and release large amounts of energy. Weapons which have a fusion stage are also referred to as hydrogen bombs or H-bombs because of their primary fuel, or thermonuclear weapons because fusion reactions require extremely high temperatures to occur.
The distinction between these two types of weapon is blurred by the fact that they are combined in nearly all complex modern weapons: a smaller fission bomb is first used to reach the necessary conditions of high temperature and pressure which are required for fusion. Fusion elements may also be present in the core of fission devices as well as they generate additional neutrons which increases the efficiency (known as "boosting") of the fission reaction. Additionally, most fusion weapons derive a substantial portion of their energy (often around half of the total yield) from a final stage of fissioning which is enabled by the fusion reactions. Since the distinguishing feature of both fission and fusion weapons is that they release energy from transformations of the atomic nucleus, the best general term for all types of these explosive devices is nuclear weapon.

There are no nuclear weapon that don't release radiation. Keep the theory that a conventional bomb brought down the towers if you want, but a nuclear bomb is simple absurd.

it wouldnt have to be completely "clean" as it was detonated underground and would of had a substantial amount of debri to cap its crater-- the evidence is right in front of everyones eyes-- the "destruction" of evidence by gulianni and co is also a red flag no one wants to acknowledge-- why wont you accept the eye witness testimony or the facts of molten pools of steel taking 8 weeks to cool??!?
*************************************************************************

link

If it wasn't completely clean, it would be detectable. Look at the tiny amounts of an unusual isotope that have been detected all over London and points east in recent weeks. Could a conspirator guarantee that there would be no minute leak?

Because the exact same same evidence has been explained through far more likely and well-supported means than the ones you propose.

Hey aquatus1 you don't honestly believe everything the government tells you do you ? watch this and comment please. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=861...0653&q=mena

Absolutely not. I check into it and make sure the arguments are both credible and valid. I dislike politics a great deal, but I have a fondness for logic and methodology.



Sorry, but I have little patience for conspiracy videos. I don't like having other people making conclusions for me. If you would like to address a specific point, you can do that, but this thread is about a fusion device at the WTC, so unless it relates to that, please do not de-rail the thread.

And that last piece goes to everyone.

Just an interesting fact fusion reactors cannot explode, because if a fusion reaction were to become uncontrolled just shutting off power to the reactor would stop the reaction

Any breach in containment will stop a fusion reactor, don't even need human intervention, but what we're talking about here is bombs not reactors.

Unfortunately for the CT side, there are no fusion bombs that aren't triggered by a fission bomb, and there are none even within several orders of magnitude small enough for the explosion to be contained within the WTC buildings.

By the way, why do the CTs keep forgetting about the survivors in the stairwell on the 5th floor. How the hell did they survive being so close to this supposed fusion bomb?

You should know by now they don't actually think their theories through.

If a nuke was actually detonated there would be no room for doubt.