Originally posted by ChapaevII
Compelling research with links
This is some of the most compelling reading I found on this, with TONS of links and references.
Thanks man. From the link:
Declassified August 1958: "Mere fact that the U. S. has developed atomic munitions suitable for use in demolition work." Declassified January
1967, "The fact that we are interested in and are continuing studies on a weapon for minimizing the emerging flux of neutrons and internal induced
activity." Declassified March 1976, "The fact of weapon laboratory interest in Minimum Residual Radiation (MRR) devices. The fact of successful
development of MRR devices."
There is a link embedded within that paragraph, and afterwards, is tons of good info, just as you suggest. I'll read through it more thoroughly a bit
later and post anything else that strikes me as worth it.
Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Dear Insolubrious:
Fantastic pictures! Not to be outdone! And they're new, at least I’ve never seen them. I did not realize that much base material was left
standing at the WTC site.
For clarity, and maybe you already knew this, he was comparing to Building 6 in that photo.
WTC1 and 2 were the Twin Towers, and hardly anything remained in
their footprints. A stack of debris barely reaching the lobby height at its
tallest in WTC1's footprint, and the bulk of that seems to be material from the collapsing "spire" and actually the lowermost section of
above-ground core structure that was still standing. WTC2 seems to have had much less in its footprint. Everything was scattered radially, though
primarily in four directions, with the vast majority of the mass being outside of the footprints.
WTC3 was crushed by falling debris.
WTC4 suffered TOTAL collapse across most of the building, but the part that remained standing, remaining standing in relatively great condition as if
someone had made a clean slice through it.
WTC5 suffered isolated and internal collapses, as well as monstrous fires.
WTC6 is the building in the picture; it suffered weaker fires than WTC4 and 5 apparently but also has that enormous hole in the middle. There were
reports of a series of explosions going off in its lobby about the time of WTC2's collapse.
WTC7, of course, had some fire, and then fell straight down at free-fall speed like a conventional demo.
Not totally relevant, but I thought I'd just sum that up for anyone interested in looking further into the other buildings besides 1 and 2 and 7.
Originally posted by dperry4930
Discount all you like. Last I heard KE = 1/2 mv^2 still held true.
Hey, how's your reading comprehension man?
Originally posted by bsbray11
You can juggle numbers all day; just because you can plug numbers into a formula does not mean that formula reflects reality in any way, in the way
you apply it.
Just curious.
Oh I am quite sure explosive 'experts' will come out of the ATS woodwork and attempt to explain how 'real' explosives don't operate under
the simple laws of physics.
You just admitted that your own formula does not account for various other variables by saying you could make it up by adding more explosives. So then
why are you pre-emptively discrediting anyone that has actually WORKED with explosives that's going to say the same thing?
I also don't understand the need for the string of immature remarks and suggestions that were not at all necessary to post, and contributed nothing
of value to the discussion.
Originally posted by deltaboy
Look at this video and look at where the top section is bending as it collapses. Thats not a hydrogen bomb.
Right; it's probably thermite/thermate. That's also why there was molten iron being spewed from the corner of WTC2.
Personally, I think if nuclear demolition munitions were used, it would have been from the basements, upwards-directed, destroying the core. I still
think thermite and HEs were also placed, as evidenced by the above initial failures (thermite), and clean diagonal slices on certain removed
columns.
The pic Insolubrious just posted gives a rough idea as to what *may* have happened (I'm not going to venture to be that exact!), just without the
initiating thermite.
[edit on 4-10-2006 by bsbray11]
