Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 10
poppet

America Nuked 9/11

2,270 posts in this topic

Well Sky, it turns out there are some people who disagree with you.

What do you offer in the way of proof or facts that is so compelling?

This fellow has offered much more in the way of research than you have, and all things considered, what he says makes a bit o' sense.

What you offer--not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like he wants to cash in with a ridiculously stupid book...

Ummmm...did you see the part where the book is free.

But I'm sure you think we know everything that happened on 9-11 and that everything we know is the truth. Right?

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The definition of a nuclear weapon:

an explosive device whose destructive potential derives from the release of energy that accompanies the splitting or combining of atomic nuclei.

Splitting different elements yields differnt levels of energy released. In black project research there is no reason not to believe that very low yield explosive devices have been developed. I'm not saying the WTC was the victim of a pair of these so called suitcase nukes, to post pictures from nuclear tests done 50 and more years ago and say "see this is what would have happened in New York if they had used a nuke" is being just as stupid as the 9-11 believers accuse the truthers of being.

Personally I don't believe the more exotic theories, such as this one, but to think nothing fishy happened on 9-11???? You would have to be a complete idiot.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lastly, there was no evidence of a bomb blast of any kind at ground zero. BTW, were you aware that the claim of a nuke at ground zero was made up? Seems you were one of a number of people who took that bait.

Skyeagle409

thats not correct either.

vitrifiedrockjpg3_zps4cfee8b3.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg9_zps7020bda4.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg6_zps5480a765.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg7_zps3af7f866.jpg

What we have here is nick-named the pit a massive amount of concrete went into the pit and the bedrock has been vitrified, in layman’s terms it means there was so much heat generated in this one spot the rock actually melted.

Dr. Christopher Busby is one of the preeminent experts on nuclear fallout and radiation.

Dr. Chris Busby is director of the independent environmental consultancy, Green Audit. He has a first-class Honours degree in Chemistry from London University and a PhD in chemical physics from the University of Kent. He is Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk and a member of the UK Department of Health Committee Examining Radiation Risk for Internal Emitters (CERRIE).

Chris also sits on the UK Ministry of Defence Depleted Uranium Oversight Board and is National Speaker on Science and Technology for the Green Party of England and Wales. Chris is a fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine. He is also scientific advisor of the Low Level Radiation Campaign which he helped to set up in 1995.

Here is a snip from a translated radio interview with host Jim Fetzer and Leuren Moret who is an independent geoscientist and Dr Busby, the whole interview can be read at the link below the interview is titled, New Bombs and War Crimes in Fallujah and what is being discussed is a new weapon.

Dr. Busby: Well, that is an interesting question there and it has to do with this story of tritium in the water in the basement of the Twin Towers. Now if you look at tritium in the Twin Towers, there is a proper, peer reviewed scientific paper by a number of quite eminent chemical analysts who measured the concentration of the element tritium, which is a form of radioactive hydrogen [used in nuclear weapons and produced in some nuclear reactions] in the basement waters of the Twin Towers, and they concluded that the amount of tritium there was absolutely impossible – it could not have got there except as a consequence of some “unusual happening”.

http://www.veteranst...es-in-fallujah/

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Skyeagle409

thats not correct either.

vitrifiedrockjpg3_zps4cfee8b3.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg9_zps7020bda4.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg6_zps5480a765.jpg

vitrifiedrockjpg7_zps3af7f866.jpg

Did you really think those people are walking around in a radioactive pit?

This is how it is done in real life.

watertanks-9559364a629ef2bbc09d66319e0caa10c231599a-s3.jpg

Fukushima-Daiichi-workers-008.jpg

fukushima-workers.jpg

Fukushima%20workers.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Dr. Christopher Busby is one of the preeminent experts on nuclear fallout and radiation.

Dr. Chris Busby is director of the independent environmental consultancy, Green Audit. He has a first-class Honours degree in Chemistry from London University and a PhD in chemical physics from the University of Kent. He is Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk and a member of the UK Department of Health Committee Examining Radiation Risk for Internal Emitters (CERRIE).

Chris also sits on the UK Ministry of Defence Depleted Uranium Oversight Board and is National Speaker on Science and Technology for the Green Party of England and Wales. Chris is a fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine. He is also scientific advisor of the Low Level Radiation Campaign which he helped to set up in 1995.

Here is a snip from a translated radio interview with host Jim Fetzer and Leuren Moret who is an independent geoscientist and Dr Busby, the whole interview can be read at the link below the interview is titled, New Bombs and War Crimes in Fallujah and what is being discussed is a new weapon.

American soldiers ride around in the M-1 Abrams tank. During an airshow, an Abrams tank was placed on display for the public to view and touch and what is the armor of that tank constructed of? Depleted uranium.

As I have said, radiation is not considered a hazard in regards to depleted uranium. In fact, when control surfaces are balanced, the depleted uranium counter-balance weights are left in the open.

Dr. Busby: Well, that is an interesting question there and it has to do with this story of tritium in the water in the basement of the Twin Towers. Now if you look at tritium in the Twin Towers, there is a proper, peer reviewed scientific paper by a number of quite eminent chemical analysts who measured the concentration of the element tritium, which is a form of radioactive hydrogen [used in nuclear weapons and produced in some nuclear reactions] in the basement waters of the Twin Towers, and they concluded that the amount of tritium there was absolutely impossible – it could not have got there except as a consequence of some “unusual happening”.

Tritium had nothing to do with a nuclear device at ground zero. Here is something that you were unaware of.

Radioactive tritium leaks found at 48 US nuke sites

'You got pipes that have been buried underground for 30 or 40 years, and they've never been inspected,' whistleblower says

Tritium has leaked from 48 of 65 nuclear sites in the US. In one case it was detected in groundwater at levels exceeding the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water

standards by up to 375 times

At three sites — two in Illinois and one in Minnesota — leaks have contaminated drinking wells of nearby homes, the records show, but not at levels violating the drinking water standard. At a fourth site, in New Jersey, tritium has leaked into an aquifer and a discharge canal feeding picturesque Barnegat Bay off the Atlantic Ocean.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky

Are you claiming that WTC was the site of a former nuclear site, or are you just doing your usual thing and making nonsensical suggestions?

Your link references 48 of 65 former nuclear sites. Anymore I seldom read your posts, but took a look at this one. Are you saying WTC was a former nuclear site, or just talking trash? On the surface your post is absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you claiming that WTC was the site of a former nuclear site, or are you just doing your usual thing and making nonsensical suggestions?

Nope, but I think you overlooked something else, which said:

At three sites — two in Illinois and one in Minnesota — leaks have contaminated drinking wells of nearby homes, the records show, but not at levels violating the drinking water standard. At a fourth site, in New Jersey, tritium has leaked into an aquifer and a discharge canal feeding picturesque Barnegat Bay off the Atlantic Ocean.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, then are you claiming WTC was located on that aquifer or that discharge canal?

If you're not, then I don't know what relevance you are attempting to assign? Garbage in, garbage out, it what it looks like. Typical denial of evidence for an OCT apologist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahahahhaaaa... New York was nuked on 9/11. What a total bunch of stupid crap.

Wow !!!!!! Is there no end to bizzare CT propaganda?

I guess not.

What's next: "Extraterrestrial aliens took down the towers"

Blah, blah, blah... jesus people, GET A LIFE ALREADY, and leave the rest of us sane people alone.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hahahahhaaaa... New York was nuked on 9/11. What a total bunch of stupid crap.

Wow !!!!!! Is there no end to bizzare CT propaganda?

I guess not.

What's next: "Extraterrestrial aliens took down the towers"

Blah, blah, blah... jesus people, GET A LIFE ALREADY, and leave the rest of us sane people alone.

i've heard just about every completely ridiculous made up story about 9/11 there is from laser based sky weapons (lmao) to nukes (ugh) they are all crap built off the imagination of idiots. nothing more nothing less.

Edited by Iron_Lotus
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe aliens planted the nukes. ;)

I don't agree with most 9/11 theories but this is just really out there. Sounds like someone is just trying to cash in on the Truther movement and is putting out a wild theory to stand out.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, then are you claiming WTC was located on that aquifer or that discharge canal?

As noted in the report, Tritium reached the Atlantic Ocean. Can you sail from New York City to the Atlantic Ocean?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OP presents evidence for some sort of nuclear event. Whether his evidence is true and accurate I don't know, but if it is, THERE is the evidence

OMFG!!!! That is the quote of the year!

"OK, what they say may not be accurate, may not be true, may not even be possible, but it is EVIDENCE people!"

That's a Stundie if ever I saw one....

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviousman

What you cannot understand, it seems, is the ability that some of us have to remain NEUTRAL on any given question. That is, not commit to either side.

I do not know and cannot say with certainty that a nuclear device was used there, but it is obvious that SOMETHING special happened, and the simple factual evidence for that is that structural steel was in a molten state for more than a month. Jetfuel and gravity, and phone books and office furniture CANNOT do that.

It seems a likely candidate for such an energy requirement would be a nuclear device or two.

Open-minded critical analysis OBVIOUSMAN, that's all. The consideration of all possibilities. You should try it sometime. :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for those who have downloaded the FREE book the author makes a compelling case that for the last forty years the military have produced a small enough nuclear/neutron device that would do just the job of taking a 110 story skyscraper down, one man could place a device the size of a apple on every 10th floor in each building and it could be done in a afternoon.

The Seismic data tells us that the plane impact caused a reading of 2.3 on the Richter scale but only 2.1 when a half a million ton building hit the ground , how can this be ?

3DCad20copy_zps5263b9dd.jpg

B2level CAD and Oct 18 2001 3D - Below ground view of Ground Zero showing crater depths at the Twin Towers and Building 7 at more than 60 feet deep but not even a dent where the towers stood.

debrispileevening911.jpg

Stairwell B in the back ground were I believe 14 survivors were rescued ,how could any survive 500,000 tons of construction material coming down on top of them ,they couldn’t unless the mass of the building had already disappeared , take a look at the ground does anyone honestly see a pancaked 110 story skyscraper laying there because I sure cant.

The 1000 plus cases of rare cancer is now being investigated, The “New York Post” reports the WTC Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program has started contacting 911 responders who have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer.

Doctors are already looking into the high incidence of certain blood cancers in patients who worked at the former World Trade Center site, but it’s believed this is the first such probe to focus on a tumour cancer. Court papers filed in February 2009 as part of a case brought against New York City by ten thousand rescue and recovery workers cited 51 cases of thyroid cancer, making it the seventh most common type of cancer claimed by 911 responders.

This needs to be investigated.

Again for those who have downloaded Jeff’s book will quite plainly see that no large plane penetrated the Pentagon ,there are images of the Pentagon that were taken before the collapse and every front column is still intact , go and see for yourself page 16 the image will fill your screen and is quite revealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know and cannot say with certainty that a nuclear device was used there, but it is obvious that SOMETHING special happened,...

But, nothing to do with nukes.

...and the simple factual evidence for that is that structural steel was in a molten state for more than a month.

No it wasn't. No one saw molten steel at ground zero.

...Jetfuel and gravity, and phone books and office furniture CANNOT do that.

On the contrary, the fuel got the ball rolling and phone books and officer furniture took over and they can produce temperatures high enough to weaken steel. For you to claim otherwise would require the rewriting of the laws of physics.

It seems a likely candidate for such an energy requirement would be a nuclear device or two.

It is very clear that you have no understanding of nukes at all. There was no nuke involved and it shows that conspiracist are in the habit of dreaming up fantasies thinking they can rewrite the laws of physics and expect them to stick.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

for those who have downloaded the FREE book the author makes a compelling case that for the last forty years the military have produced a small enough nuclear/neutron device that would do just the job of taking a 110 story skyscraper down, one man could place a device the size of a apple on every 10th floor in each building and it could be done in a afternoon.

There is no evidence whatsoever that a nuclear device was used. It is very clear that you are unaware that you have been duped.

Edited by skyeagle409
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no evidence whatsoever that a nuclear device was used. It is very clear that you are unaware that you have been duped.

tell that to the first responders who now have cancer .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tell that to the first responders who now have cancer .

?? and that has what to do with nukes? the dust from the pulverized buildings that covered the first responders had nothing to do with it eh? had to be nukes... you do realize that asbestos is cancer causing as is crystalline silica, lead, cadmium, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon which was all released in the massive cloud of dust... but nope had to be nukes. oh the truthers are an "interesting" bunch.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Just Responders: 9/11 Health Crisis Broadens to Wall Street and Beyond

9.11.10 by Claire Calladine, 9/11 Health Now- Brian Cosmello was the quintessential All-American--former U of PA fullback with an economics degree and a hot job on Wall St. Then 9/11 struck: A bystander caught in the dust cloud during the building collapse, Cosmello survived only to return to his job two blocks from Ground Zero for the next seven months. Eight years later at the age of 31, Cosmello was diagnosed with a rare form of leukemia his doctors attribute directly to 9/11 toxins...

Snip from article

Mind swirling from the diagnosis, Cosmello began fielding questions from the doctors: What is your profession? “Finance and investments.” Has this always been your profession? “Yes.” Where did you practice? “For the past seven years in Charlotte NC; before that, two years in the New York-New Jersey area.” Have you ever been exposed to radiation of any sort? “Excuse me?” Did your profession have you handling certain types of equipment or machinery that may have inadvertently exposed you to radiation or chemicals of any sort? “No. What? No!”

http://www.911healthnow.org/911healthnow/Not_Just_Responders.html

lots more articles here

http://www.911healthnow.org/911healthnow/Home.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is essentially the difference between a home made nuke and an official nuke ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

tell that to the first responders who now have cancer .

Just because people contracted cancer doesn't mean that nukes were involved especially with tons of hazardous materials that were present in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

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

So here is yet another case where you tried to whip up another unfounded conspiracy scheme because you were unaware of the source of the hazardous materials that was present at ground zero, which had nothing to do with nukes. That is typical of the way 911 conspiracist spew disinformation and misinformation to push their unfounded conspiracies.

Edited by skyeagle409
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Double post

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is essentially the difference between a home made nuke and an official nuke ?

Unless one happens to work at Los Alamos or somewhere like that, nobody knows the answer to your question, depending on how you define the terms. :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 10

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.