Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Hydrogen Bombs Brought Down The WTC's Hypothesis

page: 43
12
<< 40  41  42    44  45 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon
How exactly did this switch stay active when a fusion bomb affecting the rest of the building went off? It couldn't have.


I like how you answer your own questions about this; are you a nuclear scientist?

All I want to know is how this fusion device would work and whether or not it's actually in military possession, in your expert and authoritative opinion. Can you honestly answer either question for me? Because I know there are a number of theories even in public domain as to how to initiate a fusion reaction without fission, using extremely powerful X-ray lasers or other mechanisms instead. And the only people with the resources and privacy to actually test these things would be.... the military. Who, coincidentally, have been spending trillions of dollars on nuke research since the 1940's, all through the Cold War to the present day. Can you really tell me what all they have by now with any authority at all?

Btw, if this thing was used, the blast obviously could/would not have left the core structure. It would destroy the core structure, send a bunch of debris flying, but nothing else or it would compromise itself by being plainly visible. If it can stay within such a cross-section of building, I don't see why it should descend so far vertically, either. Wouldn't the blast be spherical?

[edit on 27-9-2009 by bsbray11]




posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
No, I am not a nuclear physicist, so I can't answer those questions... but...


Wouldn't the blast be spherical?


That is my belief, and since the equipment in the basement was not destroyed, the blast that originated from the basement could not have been of this type.



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
You know nothing about fire department operations......I am familar with
how to decontamine clothing and such As you are not......your idiotic statement....You have no idea what EMP is - you simply parrot what some other clowns have wrote because it sounds cool... EMP (electromagnetic pulse) is burst of electromagnetic energy. It does
not vaporize people or cars or cause spontaneous combustion...Read it (though doubt you will or understand it....)

You know absolutely nothing about me, or what I know or what I don't know. You choose to incessantly attack others personally rather than the information presented, it's a tired old right wing nutjob tactic that just doesn't hold water here on the internet. Fox news might get away with it, but you particularly, you're just alot of text on a screen, angry sounding text ranting about someone you have never met or know anything about. When are you guys going to finally realize how patheticly ineffective that is on a discussion board? You don't know me or any of the other people you constantly attack and insult from adam, how that qualifies you to assume people are idiots says alot about you, doesn't it?
Your assumptions about me however are just rude enough to warrant one last response to you and while you must obviously think of yourself as being clever, I can assure you the transparency of your tactics serve only to further discredit your own angry ramblings.
You have completely ignored 90% of my post, as per your usual, and in that, failed to explain a single aspect of the various anamolies as reported by numerous witnesses. You've resorted to childishly insulting me, then have the gall to misquote me as having said that an EMP vaporizes people? It's either a very subtle disingenuous tatic or a stunning display of willfull ignorance employed by you on post after nauseating post, but if you think you can debunk something with that kind of crap, and retain any credibility for yourself, you're wrong.
I'd suggest perhaps actually reading my post a little better before misquoting me or making your insinuations about my, or anyone else's idiocy, lest you profess and display little more than idiocy of your own. I usually add people that resort to misquotes and insulting people to my ignore list, but you're a special breed of belligerent johnny come lately here that needs to be dealt with and exposed for what you are. Fortunately, post after angry ranting post, you're doing a fine job of exposing yourself.
There's help for people like you though, Get Some...



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
heat steel to sufficient temperatures to cause it to remain molten for months


Awesome post twitchy. You pretty much covered everything there. It seems more likely to me however that the steel remained molten not because of the high temps but because it was irradiated by the bomb. You can't cool down irradiation.



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
EMP (electromagnetic pulse) is burst of electromagnetic energy. It does
not vaporize people or cars or cause spontaneous combustion


What do you think electromagnetic energy IS?

Gamma, light, etc all fall in the EM spectrum.



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon
How exactly did this switch stay active when a fusion bomb affecting the rest of the building went off? It couldn't have.


Possible that it was shielded.



posted on Sep, 27 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Also the "brown cloud. you claim - large nuclear weapons cause nitrogen-oxygen molecules to create nitric oxides from the intense thermal pulse. None of this was present at WTC


Here is photographic evidence of 'brown clouds' at the site.

www.photolibrary.fema.gov...

EDIT: Adding second picture.

files.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by thedman
Anti matter triggers?


Antimatter is not "fantasy". In a 1997 press release CERN revealed capturing antimatter was under intense development at their labs. This is PUBLIC information...

public.web.cern.ch...

[edit on 28/9/09 by YourForever]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by YourForever
 


Apparently you did not read any of the links to Nuclear weapons archive

nuclearweaponarchive.org...

Still pushing your insane garbage ?

Ok - Antimatter has not been produced in amounts greater than a few
dozen particles. It takes a huge accelerator to create these few particles
Then there is problem of storing the antimatter and transporting

Of course it doesnt matter

All that matters is your lunatic conspiracy fantasy

As for brown smoke - what about 2 buildings on fire. Ever consider that as the source ?

No that would conflict with your insane little fantasy -

Cant have that - so need to invent some new bizarre excuse



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by YourForever
 


Reviewed your "brown cloud" pictures

Guess what - they are pictures of the cleanup process!

Nice try [SNIP]! Claim that "brown cloud" was created by nuclear
burst then show pictures taken weeks after

In one case an ironworker is using a THERMAL LANCE to slice up
steel debris

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Thermal Lance

en.wikipedia.org...

Clear have no ideaa what you are talking about....

Mod Edit: Removed insult

[edit on 28-9-2009 by Gemwolf]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
something Nuclear must have been used, I have no evidence of it - other than in the middle 70's, the towers were always pictured with Mushroom Cloud, and looking at the implosion of the towers - I see Mushroom clouds. and the math suggest not much of the building actually hit the ground. -- having said that, I do not recall any nuclear flashes, reports of nuclear fall out. etc. etc. poof if it was then they must have been really advanced reactions,

So, where is the Proof... ?

if you haven't seen Dr. Judy Woods research -- google
"the new hiroshima" movie - most of these points are still mysterous.
however, Dr. Hutchinsons research into levitation and molecular level
descendergration is a more closer to the evidence than say a hydrogen bomb would be. since a grand jury has not conviened on the subject, who
can say -- I say someone is gonna pay. and those are the criminals involved in what ever country they reside.



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Guess what - they are pictures of the cleanup process!


Yeah, they are. Nitric oxide is formed when air reaches temperatures above 2900°F. Structural steel melts at 2750ºF. The maximum temperature of a hydrocarbon fire in the atmosphere is 1517ºF. It is true that small amounts of nitric oxide may be formed in the presence of a thermal lance, but it is also true that there are pictures of large brown clouds at ground zero with no workers in sight.

The simple truth is the intense heat (nuclear irradiation) under the rubble formed nitric oxide brown clouds as photographed above. Deal with it...


Originally posted by Anti-Evil
I do not recall any nuclear flashes, reports of nuclear fall out.


You'd see no flash if the device was in the basement, just as you see no flash when a bomb is detonated underground. There are no highly radioactive byproducts in a pure fusion bomb.

[edit on 28/9/09 by YourForever]



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by YourForever
 


Most likely explanation for brown dust is rust (iron oxide) which is red/brown or paint flaking off from the torch

So why do you clowns always go for bizarre conspiracy theories

Every hear of Occam's Razor aka if two theories of equal weight are
examined, the simplest is the best



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Most likely explanation for brown dust is rust (iron oxide) which is red/brown or paint flaking off from the torch


www.photolibrary.fema.gov...

Um, so where's the torch in this picture?



posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Now you're denying your own eyes. It is not dust. You can see it is gas.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon
The AT&T central telephone switch for NYC was located in the basement of the building (where the explosion took place) and was operating for over a week after the building collapsed on battery backup.

How exactly did this switch stay active when a fusion bomb affecting the rest of the building went off? It couldn't have.


Well TLomon, that's a reasonable doubt so I looked into it...

Actually I think most of these hubs are designed with at least some form of a Faraday cage RF shielding, Qorvus for example builds a 'wireless networking and router system' with standard 'Faraday-cage RF shielding with conductive and weather-resistant gaskets' *. I would imagine AT&T would require similar standards, especially given the location and obvious importance of this switch.
Would be interesting to find out for surethough...

Edit:
Wasn't able to find anything out about the WTC AT&T switch yet, but I did find a reasonable comparison from the AT&T NorthEast Switching Station for Telecom / Internet, which was apparenlty ridiculously overbuilt to literally withstand a nuclear blast.




Source
I lived right down the street from this, its the AT&T NorthEast Switching Station for Telecom / Internet. About 67% of all phone calls go through this building. Some say it should of been the target for 9/11, as it would of disrupted countless businesses and government installations. If you notice, the building is very secure. What you don't know is that the building walls are very very thick, when it was built they were considered bomb proof, up to a unspecified nuclear yield. The building also has its own power supply, water supply and includes from what I can only assume, its own air cleaning system ...



You would be correct. I used to do a lot of work in this building. It was built during the cold war, and housed most of the long distance switches in the country. The outer walls are something like 12 feet thick, and the entire building in wrapped internally with a Faraday cage to prevent EMP from a nuclear weapon from damaging the equipment inside. The building still houses telco equipment, but much of it is rented as ultrasecure datacenter space. Call ATT if you need ultrasecure colo space.

The front doors of the building have glass in them, but they are about a foot thick and impregnated with lead. They are hydraulically actuated when you pull on them to open them. There are still enough bunks, food, and water stored there to house over 1000 people for a couple of months, and the generators are in working order and have enough fuel to keep things going for 3 months. Some of those shafts you see on the outside of the building have elevators in them, but most are empty elevator shafts used for ventilation. The are wide open, with a fence in front of each opening on each floor. There is an air filtration system connected to them which removes radioactive particles from the air.


Of course I'm speculating here because it's 6:00 in the morning, but
I have no doubt the AT&T central telephone switch for NYC in the WTC would have been at least Faraday Sheilded then, there's a possibility as well that some cold war era laws require it for central communication hubs.
With a low yeild SADM type nuclear device, the surge in voltage wouldn't nessecarily be devastating either, I've seen some calculations that had it within a few volts for a low KT yeild device, but I've not studied on it well enough to know the numbers.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by twitchy]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


Unless you are blind can see mass of rusted steel in picture

Also several large cranes picking it up

Now a sane person would say the brown cloud is rust shaken off the
steel by the cranes.....



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


SADM's are fission weapons. You and most of Manhattan would have noticed if one had gone off in the basements of WTC. The top down collapse wouldn't have happened. Blast and overpressure would have been noticeable. Radiation would have been noticeable. Melted stuff would have been noticeable. Radiation poisoning would have been noticeable.
Any conspirators who wanted to keep anything conspiratorial would be hard pressed to find a more obvious way to destroy the WTC than a nuke.

This is on a par with the no-plane theory and slightly less believeable than Judy Wood's death ray from space.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



Any conspirators who wanted to keep anything conspiratorial would be hard pressed to find a more obvious way to destroy the WTC than a nuke.

This is on a par with the no-plane theory and slightly less believeable than Judy Wood's death ray from space.


I don’t believe any nuke was used but, there is enough evidences that bombs were going off in the basements of the WTC. If it wasn’t for the New York Times to sue the government of NY under the FOIA to release the information that the FBI cover-up because, it doesn’t fit the OS. Don’t tell all of us that 503 eyewitness are lairs and the only eyewitness that the 911 commission and the government hand selected are the only one’s telling us the truth. Life lessons teaches me different.

[EX]9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st respondereyewitnesses Watch this video on youtube.com[/EX]

www.google.com...:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=

[edit on 13-10-2009 by impressme]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Whoever said fission SADM? SADM is the term for any nuclear device that fits the purpose of demolition, hence the name, no?

At least try to read the thread. You know how to read, don't you?






top topics



 
12
<< 40  41  42    44  45 >>

log in

join