It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fusion at WTC

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 05:04 PM
You have seriously got to be joking.

Bomb, genius... rapid release of energy - has nothing in similarity to colapsing building - which is a more gradual release of energy. The detonation of the bomb would have blown the building up - and caused a hell of a lot of damage elsewhere as a bomb detonated anywhere in the WTC would have caused an overpressure wave that would have, litterally, flattened the nearby buildings.

And the dust couldn't have been the fireproofing on the steel, either. So let's jump to the conclusion that it is a fusion bomb.

I hereby mark this post as evidence that people will beleive and argue anything.

posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 05:29 PM
Before the building came down, you could hear a definite explosive sound, and what was weird was the way the tower sounded as it came down floor by floor. The last bit at the end of the clip was truly eerie.

I have a hard time swallowing that a Boeing aircraft would have enough fuel or burn hot enough to create the explosion that you hear prior to the tower collapsing.

I had to listen to the clip three or more times to be sure that I heard it right. Strange thing was that prior to the sound of some kind of explosive, you don't hear anything, then two seconds before the building starts collapsing you do. Especially, as the plane had impacted sometime before the collapse.

posted on Dec, 13 2006 @ 10:09 PM
Maybe 9/11 was just used to test some new kind of weapons we don't know about, I saw the words "space beam" used.

posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 12:58 AM

Originally posted by ChrisJr03
Maybe 9/11 was just used to test some new kind of weapons we don't know about, I saw the words "space beam" used.

Yeah but they haven't been supported. All the points I've seen for space beams so far have been pretty ridiculous, like the Banker's Trust damage, when a perimeter column was hanging out of it.

The fusion devices considered here aren't new, imo, but aren't public knowledge, either. And anyone confusing pure fusion with conventional nukes doesn't quite understand the concept being considered. That's been a typical reaction thus far, though, to just assume we're talking about bombs like those dropped on Japan, when we most definitely are not.

posted on Dec, 16 2006 @ 11:24 AM
I simply don't understand the thought process behind you guys......

"Let's test a top secret weapon on our own people while hundreds of video cameras are watching!"

The risks DEFINATELY outweigh the benefits (WHAT benefits?) in that one. I mean - not only can you be found out for attacking your own freakin' country - you can also blow the cover of a secret weapon and open up all kinds of pandora's boxes.

You also don't seem to realize how much fuel a transcontinental aircraft carries. There's more fuel in one of those planes than is in most gas stations in town (unless it's some gigantic truck stop). It burned quite hot, and would set quite a few OTHER objects in the building on fire. Metal does something when it gets heated up - it becomes weaker. Add increased heat to structural damage and firefighters being unable to reach the blaze........ I think it's logical to beleive that the building could colapse.

There are videos that show four floors worth of material compressed into about a one and a half foot 'pancake'. Not only does that create some rather extreme temperatures, but you have the heat hot enough to melt steel in certain areas.

To see a blob of steel with other debris in it does not surprise me and does not lead me to suspect fusion. Why? Because it is able to be created under the known circumstances and that fusion would not create a blob of anything, but, rather, gasses containing various metals. All of the biproducts of fusion in that case would be in gasseous form because they are made at such extreme temperatures.

Also, the metals shown are far too heavy to fuse without some insane energy release that would probably have wiped out half of New York.

Like I said......... you all must REALLY think someone in our government wants us all dead...... even going as far as a 'space beam'........

posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 05:44 PM
thanks for posting BSBRay the insight into the a-neutronic bomb was particularly interesting and is the first time I have heard of such a device. I have been looking into this further and it seems it had been tested at least once in Nevada and it also ties in to suggested theories for the OKC bombings.

There is a video shot from Trinity church of the collapse which captured what appeared to be a large bolt of electricity penetrating the outer wall of the building accompanied by a what sounds very much like a large clap of thunder, it could of been some type of electrical failure but I am not so sure, it seemed rather strange.

Check out this page the trinity clip should be on here:

the most pronounced sound being that of 2 gigantic explosions. They are unmistakable and sound like 2 violent thunder claps.

If you can't hear the audio in the above AVI file you may need to grab this ac3 codec:

Some info on the a-neutronic bomb:

A bomb capable of blowing up buildings into dust. Some conspiracy theorists say that these devices have been used in the Oklahoma Bombing and the controlled demolision of the World Trade Center during 9/11. Alternate name: "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device".

Perhaps Its possible we have been looking at the fusion devices because they have a similar effect of the a-neutronic bomb than common CD explosives?

The inventor of the a-neutronic bomb Michael Riconosciuto has a rather interesting background too, including insider knowledge of terrorist cells (possibly even had contact with OBL) and predicted the 9/11 attacks(!) He has also been imprisoned on drug charges as of the early 2000s.

[edit on 18-12-2006 by Insolubrious]

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in