It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

9/11 Radiation??

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


All I could find just now (from here )

Early on the morning of Sept. 11, McArdle left the firehouse for a meeting with Fanning at the chief's office in Building 8 on Randalls Island. McArdle arrived to learn that Fanning had departed minutes before. A plane had struck the twin towers.
McArdle and Firefighter Jeff Borkowski dashed to the scene, arriving moments before the south tower collapsed. They began searching the rubble and came upon Daily News photographer David Handschuh with a broken leg. The time needed to carry Handschuh to safety kept McArdle and Borkowski from proceeding into the north tower before that also came down.
After a second close call, McArdle and the other Haz-Mat survivors formed two four-man teams to check the site for radiation, along with nerve and blistering agents. The results were negative, but the idea that we might face such dangers became more and more real in the days ahead.
"This is a war," McArdle said. "This is combat on American soil."


He's the author of 'Report from Ground Zero' which may be the reason there's scant info around now online.

You're right about the penetration of alpha, beta, gamma radiation. The only alpha counter I ever worked with consisted of an exposed metal plate with a thin wire stretched across it and a very high DC voltage applied between the two electrodes, just short of the breakdown voltage of the air gap. An alpha particle passing close to the wire creates an ionised trail in the air causing a flashover which is counted. Due to the low penetration of alpha particles the sensor has to be exposed (completely unenclosed).

Common Geiger-Muller tubes use the same principle but within an enclosed glass tube and the glass prevents them detecting alpha particles. There are much more expensive tubes with a mica window that allows some alpha penetration - these would probably be beyond the budget of hobbyists.

As to the suggestion of AVIRIS aerial scanning for ground level radiation, it would be pointless because alpha and beta particles would never get that far so gamma is all they'd detect and considering the inverse square law plus the distance from the source, the results would be highly unreliable.




posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

As to the suggestion of AVIRIS aerial scanning for ground level radiation, it would be pointless because alpha and beta particles would never get that far so gamma is all they'd detect and considering the inverse square law plus the distance from the source, the results would be highly unreliable.

As I pointed out however, the AVIRIS system did find a continued heat source at/under ground zero. The heat source contradicts the NIST report and implies an outside energy source. If it were an ongoing nuclear reaction the data set would be different. However the OP neither implies that it was ongoing nor that it was a continued nuclear reaction.

However, the AVIRIS pictures DO show an anomaly. It could not see any radioactive particles at all. It can see the footprint of a nuke/reaction.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Here is an e-mail about radiation at the WTC and Pentagon.

Only problem with this e-mail is the EPA blames the radaition on DU from the aircraft. But the 757 and 767 do not carry DU for counterweights they carry Tungsten, it only takes about 30 seconds of research to find this information.

Also this could be a reason the EPA wanted NASA to fly over with the AVIRIS.

www.xs4all.nl...

From: "Leuren Moret"

On Sept. 11, I called a medical doctor who lives 7 miles from the Pentagon and warned her
that DU could have burned in the hijacked jets that crashed (up to 3000 pounds were used in 747's). She turned on her gamma meter - radiation levels were 8 times higher than normal inside her house. She informed the Nuclear Information ResourceService in Washington DC[Phone: 202-328-0002], and the EPA, FBI, HazMat and other emergency response gencies went to the Pentagon to investigate.
A pile of rubble from the crash was radioactive, but the EPA rep said "oh... it's probably depleted uranium... it's not a health hazard unless you breathe it". Firefighters, Pentagon personel, and communities nearby DID BREATHE IT. There was no followup investigation, and what about the World Trade Center in NY? Radiation almost never gets into the media. It is a taboo subject.


From: "Dr. H. D. Sharma"
[Physicist]

It does not matter whether the planes that hit the World-Trade Towers and the Pentagon have DU or not as long as DU does not catch fire. If DU catches fire -- most likely it will just like in the case of the El-Al plane that caught fire outside Amsterdam
(Netherland), it will form aerosols of uranium dioxide. Inhalation of the aerosols can be harmful to human health depending on the quantity inhaled.

The presence of aerosols can be checked with the help of a simple radiation survey meter. Such meters are readily available and the site near the Towers should be checked for gamma-ray emitters as soon as possible. If you do not see any radiation from adioisotopes of thorium-234 and protoactinium-234, you are fairly certain that no DU has become airborne and it is unlikely to be harmful to human health.
Hari Sharma.




[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Also this could be a reason the EPA wanted NASA to fly over with the AVIRIS.


if you took time to view the AVIRIS link above, you would see who requested the flyover, the dates, and the reason. Please take the time to research before posting. It only makes you look immature.



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
edit: Double Post. I blame the monsoons.

[edit on 24-7-2008 by gavron]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
if you took time to view the AVIRIS link above, you would see who requested the flyover, the dates, and the reason. Please take the time to research before posting. It only makes you look immature.


I beleive you are the one that looks immature. I think its you that needs to do a little more research.

The EPA requested NASA to overlfy the WTC with the AVIRIS.

pubs.usgs.gov...

In response to requests from the EPA through the USGS,NASA flew AVIRIS on a De Havilland Twin Otter over lower Manhattan at mid-day on September 16 and 23, 2001. For these deployments, the Twin Otter was flown at altitudes of 6,500 and 12,500 feet.





[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Why does it always come down to a bickerfest?

I hope you can see the futility of scanning for radiation from an altitude of 6000+'. You may be able to detect a Chernobyl type event from that height but that's about it. The AVIRIS scans were detecting the location of ground level hotspots (temperature wise) for the safety of cleanup crews working down there. What was the temperature of those hotspots?



[edit on 24/7/2008 by Pilgrum]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
What was the temperature of those hotspots?


Just too bad i have proven my points about AVIRIS can search for radiation and that the EPA DID request NASA to use it.

If you would have read the information from the source i posted you would know what the temps were. But then again i guess that is too much to ask from a believer.

I guess i need to take you by the hand and show you the information like the temps at the hotspots. I guess i also need to show you what Kelvin is in F since you cannot do research on your own?

1000 Kelvin = 1300 F

Table 1 Thermal Hot Spot Data
Location (Kelvin)
A 1000
B 830
C 900
D 790
E 710
F 700
G 1020
H 820



[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


I do know what the temperatures were and just wondered if you did. Those temperatures fall far short of what would be necessary to support some claims of what was going on in the rubble fires.

Do you have any details on the radiation hotspots detected by AVIRIS (if any)?



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Those temperatures fall far short of what would be necessary to support some claims of what was going on in the rubble fires.


So what claims are you talking about? The facts of the molten metals and steel that was found in all the basements and the debris field?

As far as radiation i have shown the e-mail. If you want more information i suggest you use the e-mails and phone number provided in the e-mail.


[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Yes, 1020 Kelvin (747C or 1377F) is not enough to cause those effects but we're specifically talking about radiation here and that's a different topic.

Did the AVIRIS scans reveal any radiation hotspots (excluding infrared) and if so, how 'hot' were they?



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Yes, 1020 Kelvin (747C or 1377F) is not enough to cause those effects but we're specifically talking about radiation here and that's a different topic.


What temp does the following melt at? Also what does each them do as far as igniting other metal when in a molten state, specailly aluminum

1. Aluminum
2. Tungsten
3. Magnesium
4. Titanium
5. Iron
6. Steel

We are talking about the thermal hotspots and the radiation, at least i am.

So please explain to me what would have caused all that molten metal and steel in all the basements and the debris field? I mean there was even molten metal in the basement of building 6.





[edit on 24-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Nuclear radiation is the subject

Are you claiming that the heat was coming from a nuclear reaction?

Did the AVIRIS scans reveal any radiation hotspots (excluding infrared) and if so, how 'hot' were they?



posted on Jul, 24 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Nuclear radiation is the subject


I am still waiting for an answer to my question. Can you be adult enough to answer?

What temp does the following melt at? Also what does each them do as far as igniting other metal when in a molten state, specailly aluminum

1. Aluminum
2. Tungsten
3. Magnesium
4. Titanium
5. Iron
6. Steel

The subject we were discussing recently was the fact (as i have proven) that the AVRIS system can look for radiation and the EPA was the agency that requested its use do to the fact they thought there might be radiation from the DU from the planes. (even though the 757 and 767 do not carry DU)



[edit on 25-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

The EPA requested NASA to overlfy the WTC with the AVIRIS.


Helloo, McFly??

Perhaps you should read my post on the previous page:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Look familiar?

I thought you aid you could do research?



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
However, the AVIRIS pictures DO show an anomaly. It could not see any radioactive particles at all. It can see the footprint of a nuke/reaction.


That sounds interesting - do you have a link to any more info on it (the anomaly and any suggestion of it being something nuclear)?



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


If you want to discuss melting points of materials please start another thread so this one doesn't get derailed although I'm sure there's plenty covering that already. I'm only concerned here with getting more info on any reported radiation associated with 9/11 crash sites.

Did the AVIRIS scans reveal any radiation hotspots (excluding infrared) and if so, how 'hot' were they and where were they?



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
Perhaps you should read my post on the previous page:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Perhaps you should read the statement i posted from the USGS source.

The USGS source i posted clearly states that the EPA requested the use of the AVIRIS. How many sources do i have to post before you can be mature enough to admi thtat the EPA requested the AVRIS?

Please read the following statement from the USGS slowly and as many times as it takes to sink into your closed mind.

pubs.usgs.gov...
In response to requests from the EPA through the USGS

It states that it was the EPA that requested NASA to overfly the WTC.



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
If you want to discuss melting points of materials please start another thread so this one doesn't get derailed although I'm sure there's plenty covering that already. ?


Why are you afraid to discuss melting points when it goes along with what caused the molten metal and steel?

The subject we are talking about is if fire, radiation or something else caused the molten metal and steel right ?




[edit on 25-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Cambridge University Twin Towers Theory Debunked
rinf.com... -twin-towers-theory-debunked/2353/

With that in mind



What happened to the top 20 floors of the WTC? I've been re-watching some of the 9/11 documentaries lately, and there is one question that don't seem to get asked, let alone answered. Why did the floors above the impact zone pulverize just like the rest of the towers?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I dont think it was a hydrogen bomb simply because its pretty damn destructive and would have really messed alot of stuff up over a very large area

youtube.com...


youtube.com...

Not saying Aliens did it but another technology did and it goes something like this
Particle Accelerator



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join