New 911 Evidence Solves Unanswered Questions

I'll make the argument fast, and then provide my video sources for further explanation.

There were two main unanswered questions that have perplexed the 911 Truthers. First was, where did the debris from the towers go? Second, why where 1400 automobiles burnt to a crisp, or showed signs of instant rust?

The answer - nuclear fallout. No, not a full scale atomic bomb, but rather some sort of new generation device planted under Towers 1, 2, and 7, which created a phenomenon called "dustification," or more specifically, molecular disintegration.

Here is my source. Remember, this guy is a nuclear physicist, and not a video editor! Try to appreciate the video for it's information!

In all honesty, this guy has better info than Simon Shacks "September Clues" movie!

It would be insane to think
The nuclear age was the Late 40s, surely new tech has advanced to a degree, that a standard nuke is old tech and new unknown weapons have advanced beyond what we are told
Quite plausible

a reply to: Raggedyman

Yeah, these videos are a follow up to his main presentation. In these new videos, he answers all the questions that arose from his first big presentation. I posted these clips because they better explain the argument.

a reply to: DebtSlave

Forgive my ignorance as I have no time to watch the videos you provided, but if we talking about a nuclear fallout shouldn't be a lot of people sick or dead by know from the fallout? I am aware many people got cancer but that was due to other things.

When the World Trade Centers collapsed on 9/11, a cloud of toxic dust and debris blanketed Manhattan. Largely unknown to the public, this dust contained an array of carcinogenic particles. Some of these toxins included: lead, mercury, dioxins, benzene and, of course, asbestos.

I lived in NYC in 2001 worked pretty close to Ground zero for years and now 17 years later no health issues, touch wood...

a reply to: szino9

Not only was thermite and thermate found in the ruble deposits, but so was uranium. This was AFTER two rainfalls (the first rainfall was on 9-12-01).

Yes, thermite and thermate can burn steel, but it CAN NOT "burn" from 9-11-01 to Christmas, 12-24-01. The "smoke" was nuclear fission. Do you know what nuclear fission is? Neither do I. Now find time, and watch the videos.

Also, as the videos show, when the fallout ebby flows hit all the cameras, they all showed "distortion signs" of nuclear fallout.

a reply to: szino9

Clean uranium is what it is called. Exposure is not toxic to biological life with a very short life span. Not sure anymore what its life span is but if I recall it is less than 5 - 10 years.

30 years ago USA had tech nuclear capabilities with artillery rounds designed to take out small cities....

a reply to: DeathSlayer
nm

Conjecture and PowerPoint slides turned into a YouTube video does not constitute evidence. How about big f'ing 757s loaded with Fuel crashing into big f'ing buildings.....how about that?

a reply to: DebtSlave

a reply to: DebtSlave

911 Forum is open to discussion....still.

The message you see is for creating new thread...click that message..it will disappear, and you can still make a thread there

a reply to: DebtSlave

Here is my source. Remember, this guy is a nuclear physicist, and not a video editor! Try to appreciate the video for it's information!

Its a video!


What new evidence is there?


Nukes have been speculated since it day 1 basically, we have 1 ATSers who bangs on about nukes at ground zero.


No logic of any rational thinking involved, only a view of the collapsing towers that makes a dust plum similar to a mushroom cloud.

And Nukes it is.

a reply to: DebtSlave

Do you know what nuclear fission is? Neither do I.

well then enough said.


You should have put this in the jokes forum then

This gotta be the worst theory I heard yet around 9/11
That would be the most caveman thing to do to carry out something like this
There are lots of better more discreet ways

Nukes.. hah

This theory, if one can grant it such a title, has been around since nearly Day one, in one form or another.

Nukes? Really?

There are so many things wrong with this "theory".

The heat pulse? Where?

The radiation? Where?

Big, fast, at a good percentage of the Speed of Sound, moving planes hit the buildings. The impact, and the fuel driven fires, resulted in the catastrophic failure of the buildings.

Probably just adding fuel to the fire but there is a "Conspiracy Theorist" John Lear, that says an Energy Weapon was used.

a reply to: DebtSlave

Wow, first off, I can't believe the 911 section of ATS has been shut down to open discussion.
When did that start? I don't have enough credits to post there, and this is important info, so I will post here in this section instead.

From one of the 'pinned' threads by SkepticOverlord regarding posting requirements for the 9/11 Conspiracies Forum.

(1) To Create New Threads:

Your WATS score (the blue W in your mini profile) must be 10 or better. And you must have been an ATS member for at least 30 days.

(2) To Reply To Existing Threads:

Your WATS score must be at least 1.0 and you must have been an ATS member for at least 48 hours.

Your 'WATS' score is currently 2, which will let you participate in existing 9/11 forum threads, however, you can not create a new thread until your WATS is 10.

TBH, I found your videos to be all over the place, like comparing the sound of a volcano to the sound of the towers collapsing, equaling evidence of a nuclear explosion.
As far as I can tell all the "evidence" presented in the videos has been covered ad nauseam in existing threads.

Could you please point out, in the almost 2 hours of video you posted, where "New 911 Evidence Solves Unanswered Questions"?

Thanks.

a reply to: seagull

But a building that wasn't hit by a plane....
What's the point

originally posted by: Raggedyman
It would be insane to think
The nuclear age was the Late 40s, surely new tech has advanced to a degree, that a standard nuke is old tech and new unknown weapons have advanced beyond what we are told
Quite plausible

They got as a far as dial-a-yield, where the operator could set the kilo-ton/mega-ton yield of a device. There were pictures that showed a third "pod" on one of the aircraft. But using modern explosives would be a lot easier.

Aircraft have used depleted uranium for ballast:

aviation.stackexchange.com...

I think there was a combination of methods used to take down the towers; a backup plan one might say. The other reason being that if one finds evidence of both thermite and tritium it clouds the field of reasons for how it was done. I do believe some type of energy or weapon not known by the public was at work that day, too many anomalous events that defy explanation by conventional methods.

Until one theory or another is proven I'm open to any theory no matter how outlandish it might seem. The truth is often stranger than fiction. Thanks for posting this, it's all new to me.

a reply to: DebtSlave

I heard about nuclear mini bombs in 9/11 years ago but this is the first time I've seen this explanation. To a non expert like myself, it sounds very convincing. I am sickened by this event all over again. Whoever had a hand in this deserves to be lynched. I just don't believe Saudis are sophisticated enough to be responsible.

originally posted by: szino9
a reply to: DebtSlave

Forgive my ignorance as I have no time to watch the videos you provided, but if we talking about a nuclear fallout shouldn't be a lot of people sick or dead by know from the fallout? I am aware many people got cancer but that was due to other things.

When the World Trade Centers collapsed on 9/11, a cloud of toxic dust and debris blanketed Manhattan. Largely unknown to the public, this dust contained an array of carcinogenic particles. Some of these toxins included: lead, mercury, dioxins, benzene and, of course, asbestos.

I lived in NYC in 2001 worked pretty close to Ground zero for years and now 17 years later no health issues, touch wood...

There have been thousands of deaths related to the after effects of 911

9/11 health crisis: death toll from illness nears number killed on day of attacksAt least 1,000 people have died from illnesses tied to exposure to debris
Number poised to exceed initial death toll ‘within five years’, expert says

www.theguardian.com...