Federal Grand Jury To Hear Evidence - World Trade Center 9-11 Was Controlled Demolition.

a reply to: tadaman

And why would there be molten steel randomly out in the street?

a reply to: neutronflux
Aa
You know next to nothing about nukes. Which is normal. Yet you pretend like you do.

Instantly killed by radiation? That's not how it works champ.

The radiation buried underground which slowly leaked to first responders who mostly died of cancer?

That radiation?

a reply to: neutronflux

How does that negate anything I said?

You are just convinced and upset that I am not.

Truth will get out. Mark those words. It already is. Hence why I know.

a reply to: tadaman

Now you are contradicting yourself.

You

The radiation buried underground which slowly leaked to first responders who mostly died of cancer?

But also you

What you said makes no sense. There is absolutely no way for JET FUEL to burn through that much steel

Which is it?

Anyway, if “slowly leaked to first responders ” was true, there would have still been detectable radiation above background and detectable contamination. There was no detectable radiation above background. There was only normal background radiation.

More false arguments by you.

a reply to: neutronflux

Sir those comments are unrelated and by no means mutually exclusive

What is contradicted?

Radiation dissipates. Is this news to you?

Lol

Bye

Typical 9/11 BS. Not impressed. It was an inside job, you traitors.

Yeah. I don't care anymore. My people are just as dead. This might as well be declared.

So let me see if I've got this right

To comply with top secret building regulations all tall high rise buildings have to be fitted with nuclear bombs to safety demolish them in an emergency. These nuclear bombs are detonated in the base of the building and pulverise it all the way up and then it starts collapsing from top. The nuclear bomb also entombs itself and the radiation quickly disapates as well as giving emergency workers cancer and keeping objects in the open glowing hot.


Is that about right?

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Primarily, because the most of skyscrapers are new buildings and their time to be demolished has not come yet. The tallest building ever demolished by an implosion was only 47-strories high - it was the Singer Building in New York City that was built in 1908 and demolished in 1968 due to its being obsolete. This building was a much weaker structure compare to incredibly strong hollow-tube type steel-frame skyscrapers being built today.

 

So, despite common misconception, it is not possible to demolish a steel-frame building by a commonly known controlled demolition (implosion) scheme. In bygone days when buildings were brick-walled and concrete-paneled, their bearing structures used to be concrete supporting columns and concrete supporting girders.

 

Sometimes these concrete bearing structures were reinforced by insertions of metal bars, but sometimes they were plain concrete. In either case it was possible to calculate right amount of conventional explosives to be attached to these bearing structures at right spots (or to be placed into holes drilled in bearing structures) in order to break them all at once and to cause the building to collapse into its footprint.

 

However, it is no longer possible with modern steel-framed buildings - such as, for example former Twin Towers of the New Your World Trade Center, World Trade Center building # 7, or the Sears Tower in Chicago.

About the surviving sections not part of that ONE corner.

Note that these core (rectangular) and perimeter (square) columns did not belong to lower parts of the Twin Towers, but to their upper parts.

 

That is why they were spared by general pulverization the Towers were subjected to during their demolitions, while virtually nothing, except microscopic dust remained of similar columns belonging to the lower parts of the Twin Tower structure.

Anyhow, "Controlled Demolition Inc." began to study possibilities of demolishing modern skyscrapers by underground nuclear explosions at the end of 60s, at request of the then New York Sate Governor Nelson Rockefeller - when it became necessary to get a legal approval from the New York Department of Buildings for the WTC Twin Towers construction.

 

After some research, a final solution was found and approved by the Department of Buildings and "Controlled Demolition Inc." got its nuclear demolition know-how patented.

a reply to: tadaman

You haven’t cited any actual evidence.

I debunked your concerns. You posted a debunked photo. And you never answered a single concern listing why the nuke theory is total BS.

a reply to: mrthumpy

You forget the encased bomb melts steel anway in to liquid above ground?

a reply to: neutronflux

You have belligerently tried but just said opinion with no supporting facts.

I have done the opposite.

How do you think the audience takes it?

Lol

a reply to: neutronflux

They were picking apart the wreck for survivors.

Things got moved around. There are also plenty of pics of excavators pulling the molten metal for days after from the crater.

But by all means hang onto one point that doesn't actually negate anything offered.

Then scoff and declare it all debunked. Fail.

a reply to: tadaman

What is your most credible piece of evidence? The posting of your debunked photo. Or some how a 1kt bomb encased in the ground kept 1,000,000 tons of rubble above ground smoldering hot for weeks with no detectable radiation?

a reply to: neutronflux

I said it already. Provided sources. Explained my argument.

Do the same or shut up or leave me alone

You haven't done this in a while. No one doubts metal melted. That is part of the official story now. Genius.

"Oh, that is paper. No metal was melted...."
"Jet fuel burned the support beams.."

Contradicted yourself much?

a reply to: tadaman

Now you are babbling. You never presented actual evidence. Rants yes, evidence no.

Again, do you have actual proof the pile was hot enough to to support liquid steel?

Proof radiation was leaking up from the ground at levels above background?

a reply to: neutronflux

Video evidence of molten metal flowing out good enough?



I addressed the radiation already. It's ionizing radiation that makes you sick BTW. Not thermal.

But you know that right? Nuke expert that you are.

a reply to: tadaman

How does molten metal prove melted steel.

Copper, lead, aluminum have lower melting points than steel. They are metals. Whatever poured out is not going to be pure anything, and it’s going to be loaded with buring plastics and ash.

Is that a false statement

a reply to: tadaman
If you have decay of fission products creating heat, you have ionizing radiation by default. The same for the fission of uranium.

You cannot have heat from nuclear reactions without producing radiation.

You need to stop.

a reply to: neutronflux

That second picture was taken much later on. FROM the crater.

Is that melted lead or plastic you think?

a reply to: neutronflux

No you need to do more than state the obvious with no connection to your absent argument.

You talk about the thermal radiation and mention no melted steel, which contradicts the official story.

Then say ionizing radiation would instantly kill photographers. You need to stop. You sound drunk.

Ionizing radiation takes time and varies in effects due to level of exposure, personal health and other immanent factors.

Please explain how dust makes your thyroid gland fail and gives you cancer?

a reply to: tadaman

Again, lead, copper, and aluminum melt before steel. Then the towers were loaded with plastics from computers and furniture. Through in solder from electronics. There would be no pure anything.