4th Generation MicroNukes Used on WTC1,2 and 7

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

This was originally a quote from that Begich material at haarp.net, which unfortunately is pretty much pure garbage, although it looks real.

Anyways, the "nuclear sized explosions without radiation" was about pumping a structure full of liquid methane and liquid oxygen, then touching it off with an ignition source.

Thanks for the info Tom.

So is the non radiation nuke you described theoretically possible? And if so what would the tell tale signs of it be and were any detected around the towers?

Originally posted by etshrtslr

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

This was originally a quote from that Begich material at haarp.net, which unfortunately is pretty much pure garbage, although it looks real.

Anyways, the "nuclear sized explosions without radiation" was about pumping a structure full of liquid methane and liquid oxygen, then touching it off with an ignition source.

Thanks for the info Tom.

So is the non radiation nuke you described theoretically possible? And if so what would the tell tale signs of it be and were any detected around the towers?

Are you talking about the APTI patent? Or something else in the thread? There were some low emission weapons discussed some pages back.

For the APTI device, it's a type of FAE. It's a patent of Frank Lowther's - you have some sort of contained structure that you fill up with a mix of oxygen and a flammable gas - usually methane is mentioned. You want to get it as cold as possible so you get maximum density, one or the other should be at or near the point of condensing out, whichever comes first.

Then you disperse aluminum powder into your cloud of cold gas and toggle it off with an exploding wire fuse, or you can use a really high powered RF source that's tuned to the size of the aluminum particles if they're big, or to some filaments you've got scattered around if not.

The structure you put it into has to be gas tight to use this method, so either you'd have to have a floor sealed off (not likely) or you use a balloon.

It wasn't a bad idea per se but there are better ways of doing it that were already available.

What I was proposing (sent it U2U to BSBray) was a type of thermobaric that's not talked about a lot yet. So it's sort of related to this in a weird way.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam


Are you talking about the APTI patent? Or something else in the thread? There were some low emission weapons discussed some pages back.

I was asking in general if it was theoretically possible and I gather from your answer it is.

A Fuel Air Explosive has similar effects to a nuke, without the radiation. But if you set one off in the WTC, it would do just like a nuke and vaporize large chunks of the building, and probably would have caused a fairly immediate collapse. The planes themselves gave similar effects to a nuke though. At the time of impact they hit with the equivalent force of a 1 kiloton bomb.

Originally posted by etshrtslr

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam


Are you talking about the APTI patent? Or something else in the thread? There were some low emission weapons discussed some pages back.

I was asking in general if it was theoretically possible and I gather from your answer it is.

Sure - a lot of FAE's work something like this although they don't use methane and oxygen for working fluids.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
At the time of impact they hit with the equivalent force of a 1 kiloton bomb.

So this pretty much debunks your statement that an FAE would have caused an immediate collapse.

High explosives have to be right on any amount of steel to cut through it, "vaporize" it. To explode something farther off, and expect it to destroy large steel columns, is very unrealistic. If you tried using that as a demo mechanism, the building would never move.

And the impacts themselves didn't create FAEs. The explosions were too slow. They were deflagrations, and this is even in the FEMA report, in the very beginning of it somewhere, intro or first chapter maybe.

No they weren't FAEs, but I stand by what I said that if an FAE was set off inside the WTC it would have collapsed almost immediately. It would have caused much more damage than the planes did. The damage from the FAE would have wiped out much more of the internal structure. The planes damaged columns around the impact, where an FAE would have traveled to many more floors and caused significantly more damage than the 767s did.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
No they weren't FAEs, but I stand by what I said that if an FAE was set off inside the WTC it would have collapsed almost immediately.

Here's a video of an FAE going off:




Watch the slow motion and you'll see that it didn't even take out whatever those little metal legs were that were holding it up. It blew them around, but it didn't "vaporize" them.

The hollow plastic man didn't even take that much of a beating.


You're not going to cause serious damage to this that way:




And that's one of the smaller ones.

Tom of Bedlam, I patiently waited for 15 pages, for you to disclose at last your thoughts on another possible explosive used in the WTC towers.

I knew what was coming, so here it is :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I asked, but got no response, as with so many questions from my side.

Moreover many eyewitnesses reported not one, but two explosions, and this is a certifiable fact. Investigations at the Oklahoma Geological Survey at the University of Oklahoma revealed seismographic records indicating two explosions, ten seconds apart. The first occurred at 9: 02 and 13 seconds with another following at 9:02 and 23 seconds. According to General Partin and many explosive experts that investigator Ted Gunderson has spoken to, this rules out the explanation of a truck bomb.

A more plausible explanation, they say, is a barometric bomb. This works via a process that involves not one but two explosions; the first uses an explosive known as PETN which releases a lethal cloud of chemicals, ammonium nitrate and aluminium silicate. This cloud is energized with what is described as a “high potential electrostatic field.” A few seconds later there follows another blast using an explosive called PDTN that ignites the cloud created with a much greater force than TNT.

This would account for the two blasts heard by witnesses and it would also explain the extensive damage caused by the explosion. However such a bomb would be beyond the scope of a supposed ‘lone nut’ like Timothy McVeigh. In fact knowledge of how to construct such a device is available to only a few with the highest level of security clearance because the barometric bomb is still highly classified. In other words only those with a high level of security clearance in the U.S. Government and security services would have access to the know how to construct such a device.

We once had a long thread going here about the explosion sounds which were audible only in that specific video from the guy filming at the Pier on the other side of the Hudson River.
In all other, Media "spectacles", these deep rumbling sounds were not to be heard. We discussed eventual clipping out, by the news agencies feeding the Media, of all explosive sounds in their videos send all over the world.
We knew of embedded agents working for the Propaganda Arm of the US Army Corps, in the editting rooms of CNN, FOX, BBC etc.

And these sounds of explosions were also about 10 seconds apart, several times over, so if we adapt the possible use of a Riconosciuto device, or more of them on 9/11, that interval would fit the picture and sound.

Originally posted by LaBTop
Tom of Bedlam, I patiently waited for 15 pages, for you to disclose at last your thoughts on another possible explosive used in the WTC towers.

I knew what was coming, so here it is :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I asked, but got no response, as with so many questions from my side.

I'm sorry, did you ask me something I didn't respond to in some way? I think the other thread we met on about the cars was the first 9/11 thread I ever looked in, and this is the second.

The only reason I was stalling was to find some decently detailed info that I can post. There's not much.

At any rate, BSBray and I have been tossing it back and forth on U2U. I didn't want to post something as full of lame holes as the nuke theory.

There's something way better for buildings than that device they're discussing in your link. They've gone several generations past that. There's a new class of stuff that Sandia developed a few years back as part of the "no maintenance nuke" project that ended up spawning off into a new series of thermobarics, the latest of which is a bunker-defeat munition that just guts reinforced concrete buildings, turns them into powder. I think BSB is justifiably skeptical about it cutting steel box girders like it does rebar.

However, just for fun, I found some research being done on drilling into box girders and flooding them with thermobarics a split second before you detonate them - guess what - it shatters steel box girders like glass. What a weird thing to research.

Anyone know if the box girders at WTC were continuous all the way up? Could you have flooded the entire box girder from ground to the top in the core? Or are they welded to plates at some point?

AHA.
I knew we would end up with the same ideas.

That is exactly what I have thought all the time.

Only, I thought about the mysterious out of order, for all 3 towers, emergency firefighter standpipes.

These are quite thick walled iron pipes, which have to be able to withstand quite a lot of pressure.
Ideal tubes for thermobaric bombs.
Parts of them, or the whole network of them.

Pumper trucks from the NYF department were not able to get even one standpipe working, which is, if you think about it a bit deeper, quite disturbing.
Why were the firefighters having so much trouble to get these life saving networks working, in fact not one of them in WTC 1, 2 and 7 ?

Were they pre-filled with these mysterious detonation explosives?
And closed off a few meters above the firefighter-couplings?

Originally posted by LaBTop
AHA.
I knew we would end up with the same ideas.

That is exactly what I have thought all the time.

Only, I thought about the mysterious out of order, for all 3 towers, emergency firefighter standpipes.

These are quite thick walled iron pipes, which have to be able to withstand quite a lot of pressure.
Ideal tubes for thermobaric bombs.
Parts of them, or the whole network of them.

Pumper trucks from the NYF department were not able to get even one standpipe working, which is, if you think about it a bit deeper, quite disturbing.
Why were the firefighters having so much trouble to get these life saving networks working, in fact not one of them in WTC 1, 2 and 7 ?

Were they pre-filled with these mysterious detonation explosives?
And closed off a few meters above the firefighter-couplings?

I was thinking more of the core box members - like the one BSBray posted a photo of a couple of posts up. If there was a failure of the core that let the floors detach and fall - and some percentage of the core girders were missing - what if they were just blown to crap from the ground floor with thermobarics? And then some HIT let loose on the floors below the plane strike to sort of punch the thing straight down?

Anyways, got to go. Back to the nuke topic, I hope to get some time to plug through the math of what happens when you "vaporize all the silica with neutrons" in terms of overpressure inside the building this weekend. I'm still waiting to hear if the dust that was supposedly all concrete converted back to Portland cement was seen to have solidified into big plaster chunks when wet down. Or if it's just plain old ground up concrete dust, which wouldn't have.

O, TB, for such things, just plug in Google, terms like "USGS 9/11" or Geological Survey reports, or click my name, and have a look in a few of the very small amount of threads started by me (it is not so much time consuming).
I have posted quite some details about the strange dust sampling activities from USGS in New York around 9/11.

Btw, I enjoy your reasoning, I agree there are a lot of grey areas, when trying to fit a nuclear device into the thorough list of Gottago (hope I spelled that name right).

We already wrestle many months with the amount of uncertainty involved with neutrons, EMP, X-rays etc eventually involved.

If we are not mistaken, all core columns were first fixed with those iron nails, when erected, and then later welded thoroughly together.
I do not know if there were plates welded inside them, anywhere.
If so, we still can consider quite long boxes of steel, to be filled with thermobaric solutions, eventually.

And we still must find a workable hypotheses for a top-down demolition, which can be sold to a shocked populace as a gravity-driven collapse.

I would propose pressure-related explosion-induction devices, placed from top to bottom.
No radio signals, no det-cords, too much room for failure in such a huge structure.
Simple mechanical devices, and 3 big ones at the 3 mechanical floors per tower.


My biggest question mark hangs on all these clear-cut external column packs of 3 columns by 3 floors high, when we seem to know that these were also welded together.
These identical packs can be seen laying around literally everywhere, after all collapses. Weird.

That's why I still keep an option open for some sort of intense ultra-sound wave, either aimed at the outer walls, or an ultra-sound device, directly connected to the core and outer wall columns.

And then the ConEd electrical station would fit well. A lot of energy would be needed for such a device.

PS: read this thread, for the explosion sounds from Rick Siegel's "911 Eyewitness" video from Hoboken :
www.abovetopsecret.com... to page 5.
Especially page 4 and 5.

And in there, is this link to Sonic Weapons :

www.answers.com...
Demonstrated infrasonic weapon.
The U.S. DOD has demonstrated phased arrays of infrasonic emitters. The weapon, about the size of a truck, usually consists of a device that generates sound at about 7 Hz. The output from the device is routed (by pipes) to an array of open emitters, which are usually one wavelength apart. At this frequency, armour and concrete walls and other common building materials vibrate, and therefore provide no defence. The frequency is chosen to be near the resonant frequency of internal organs, causing illness, deafness, and internal injuries. The resulting weapon is the size of a truck, fragile, and has a shorter range than missiles or artillery shells.

When you are interested in the seismic 9/11 anomalies mentioned in the 911 Eyewitness thread above, read this thread, and my external link mentioned in it :
www.abovetopsecret.com... and page 2.

I challenge everyone to proof me wrong on this :
www.studyof911.com...

Originally posted by LaBTop

A more plausible explanation, they say, is a barometric bomb. This works via a process that involves not one but two explosions; the first uses an explosive known as PETN which releases a lethal cloud of chemicals, ammonium nitrate and aluminium silicate. This cloud is energized with what is described as a “high potential electrostatic field.” A few seconds later there follows another blast using an explosive called PDTN that ignites the cloud created with a much greater force than TNT.

id be really interested to read the source for that quote. from what i know of the explosives listed in that quote...none of them are really good choices for a thermobaric device. this isnt the thread for it but theres a string of reasons for it.

but tbh, i really cant see a thermobaric of any type at work in the wtc's honestly...but thats just me.

See, this is the sort of thinking/analysis i hoped people would put forward when i joined this thread. Awesome post!

We can only really speculate as to the exact means of destruction, but there are many vital clues which i feel havent been taken into account;

-When the 2nd plane (supposedly) hit, the other tower seemed to undergo something odd at the top. Smoke looked like it was forced out by a wave of pressure, a man who was in a window drops his shirt that he was waving/got injured or killed by this mystery. I cant find the video right now, but its definatly out there.

-Squibs. Some of them seemed to pop out in the exact centre of the floor, on all 4 sides. This to me suggests one explosion in the core area, and the pressure wave (circle) meets the edges of the building (square), busting the windows, and allowing the dust to escape. What could cause individual windows to pop out and release dust, and not all of them...

-Molten metal, pulverization of so much of the buildings, melted cars, seismic wave of over 2... these are all halmarks (IMO) of some exotic weapon, and personally i am leaning towards a micronuke.

A plan like 9/11 would need to be pretty solid. The logisitics of setting up hundreds of charges, thermate etc seems to suggest that something more simple would have been used.

I think its either a micronuke, or some hightech exotic explosive.

Damocles, did you miss this link I provided :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
my last post there :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In there are other links, to the StudyOf911 forums, where I dedicated a lot of work into possible detonation methods used on 9/11 and at other earlier events.
www.studyof911.com...

The source of the info you asked for is in there, I think in post #12 and 14, look for :
General Benton K. Partin
Strategic Investment Newsletter

EDIT a PS :
""which releases a lethal cloud of chemicals, ammonium nitrate and aluminium silicate. This cloud is energized with what is described as a “high potential electrostatic field. etc.”

I think you must read first the ""cloud of chemicals,"" (not stated in this text which ones exactly!), then the next ones.
I suppose the aluminium silicate is used as a sensitive receptacle for the electrostatic field induced on the mix.

[edit on 20/5/07 by LaBTop]

no, i didnt misread it actually...i am just confused as to why they'd use petn or ammonium nitrate in a thermbaric....AN i know for sure needs to be "wet" and detonates like crap, thats why usually it needs to be packed fairly tightly and set off with a booster.

petn is another unusual choice but makes a little more sense than AN.

kind of a moot point for me though, i still dont think there were explosives used. but thats just me apparently lol, im ok with that.

if yer ever curious as to why i still think that lab, go up to one of my last posts and click the h2h link. i laid out my calculations for what it would have taken (hypothetically of course) etc

Have already done that days ago, and it was a very good HeadToHead thread.
And you both gave a few new points of view, to be inserted in the probability chain.
Both well done and in a mature manner.

That's why it is better to list as many of the facts observed at 9/11, and see if a proposed theory will cover most or all these facts.

You and me are a bit handicapped, since it is difficult to address classified materials.
And there will be some, we both don't know about, and nobody in these forums will know about for a long time to come.

Originally posted by Damocles
but tbh, i really cant see a thermobaric of any type at work in the wtc's honestly...but thats just me.

I'm not sure what happened - but we were kicking it around here as to what it might be if there was something going on, and the comment came up that if you could weaken the core structure in the center a bit, the bang at the top sort of looked like a small load of high-impulse thermobaric like the HIT in the SMAW-D HIT warheads, which is sort of like a SMAW-NE on steroids.

The joke was going around that the helicopters in the video were firing SMAW-D's into the windows below the strike with some sort of time delay fuzing.

Originally posted by Damocles
no, i didnt misread it actually...i am just confused as to why they'd use petn or ammonium nitrate in a thermbaric....AN i know for sure needs to be "wet" and detonates like crap, thats why usually it needs to be packed fairly tightly and set off with a booster.

petn is another unusual choice but makes a little more sense than AN.

I think the source of the link was sort of concocting stuff and that's what he knew about from listening to Murrah building news.

On a totally unrelated subject, the stuff supposedly in the truck at the Murrah building was actually a sort of kinepak instead of anfo. I don't know why they don't mention it.