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.

 

4 th generation thermonuclear hydrogen devices

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost

This is where we enter the mysterious realm of the so called "red mercury"

With it, one could make bombs of any yield, bombs small enough to fit in ones pocket, and have no worry of fallout.



Nice post. I've been trying to understand the technical aspects of this whole nuke issue. Not that I give it a shred of probability either.

Re: red mercury - The Wiz has pushed anti-matter as a trigger. Also in the realm of possible, I guess?

So let me ask - a pure fusion device would have explosive effects also, correct? It undergoes its reaction pretty much instantly, and so releases the heat energy instantly. And since even a TNT or any other chemical explosion is just an instantaneous release of heat energy, you get the same effect? Am I correct in this?

Re: radiation - Wouldn't neutrons released at the explosion affect the surrounding matter though and then make it harmful? I read in the OP's links that neutron bombs used on the battlefield would kill a tank crew, and not destroy the tank, but the tank would be radioactive for a short while, rendering it unusable. So this seems to be true.

Re: small nukes - I've seen where they could possibly be made to have only a few pounds of TNT eq. Easier to just use C-4 at that level.




posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by truthseekerpeacemaker
 


I understand they are 0.01 to 1.0 KT

www.active-duty.com...




posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


The neutron bomb is third generation, and over 25 years old, the 4 th generation would be or could be triggered by several primary ignitors and here is a link to them
brian-mcdermott.com...


Magnetic Confinement
This is currently the most popular form of fusion, having been researched for the past 50 years. Magnetic confinement schemes use huge toroidal (doughnut-shaped) chambers, surrounded by electromagnetic coils to trap and confine a plasma
Inertial Confinement (ICF)
This form of confinement involves compressing pellets of fusion fuel to ultrahigh densities using converging laser or particle beams. The beams impinge upon the pellet, ablating material on the surface, thus creating an inward implosive force. The fusion fuel burns, creating a high energy pulse of neutrons and charged particles
Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC)
This is a relatively small scale method of doing fusion developed by television pioneer Philo T. Farnsworth many years ago. It uses electrostatic fields and potentials to accelerate and collide ions of fusion fuel in a spherical geometry. An IEC device is quite easy to make, and can even be done by a determined individual for roughly $1000. It is unlikely that an IEC device will break even unless some drastic and novel design changes are made. At the present time, they are useful for demonstrating the concept of fusion, and as a low-cost neutron source for materials identification
Cold Fusion (LENR)
Cold Fusion, or "Low Energy Nuclear Reactions" (LENR) has been the subject of much controversy over the past few years. While there are many "types" of cold fusion experiments out there, the best known one involves running electricity through Deuterium Oxide (Heavy Water) in a process known as electrolysis. Using a Palladium cathode in the electrolysis system, one can expect to "bury" large amounts of Deuterium in the crystal structure of the cathode. Some believe that this can lead to exothermic fusion-like reactions.

FUSION IS NOT SPECIAL OR IMPOSSIBLE TO DO! You do not need a $200 million machine to do fusion. Accelerating high energy atoms of deuterium at one another to make fusion reactions is child's play. What's impossible is producing electricity from fusion reactions. I cannot do it, you cannot do it, the people with the $200 million machines cannot do it. The point of this page is to make a big deal out of how fusion really isn't a big deal.

THIS IS NOT COLD FUSION! This is very hot fusion, requiring energies in excess of 20keV!





posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   

There are some 10 ways to ingnite such a fusion ball besides the atomic bomb which is the only way the audience is generally aware of. Half of these could be useful in weapons applications. I just mention antimatter, nano-enchanced multi-stage compression explosives and "red mercury" (a secret Soviet-era invention to create a very high ignition temperature). Here Mercury refers to the red-hot planet, not to the element.
www.saunalahti.fi...




posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   
however on the blast question. because when a hydrogen bomb is detonated underground it causes a vault that does not breach the surface of the ground. That is if it is deep enough.
However underneath a building or say at the bottom of a main elevator shaft the blast will create a crater. there are several of these craters at the WTC location.
The EMP and overpressure and blast characteristics are greatly reduced in an underground explosion. Plus the elevator shafts and the central core columns would assist in focusing the disintegration cone straight upwards.
Plus if it is placed inside a cone of berryllium, which i understand will focus and direct the energy even more substantially.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:28 PM
link   
make your own fusion reactor for less than $10,000.00

What do I need? How much does it cost?
These are some of the most frequently asked questions by newbies to the field of IEC fusion. Quite frankly, there is no definitive answer to either of them. What you need depends upon several factors, and the cost depends upon what you can get on the surplus market, what you already have, and how much you are willing to spend.
An experienced amateur scientist, with good scrounging skills, can probably spend under $200, depending on what equipment he or she already has. An inexperienced newbie, who wants fusion RIGHT NOW, can spend $8000 or more, and then realize that he could have saved a lot of money in retrospect. Most people fall somewhere in between these two extremes.
To make a fusor, you really only need a few things:
A vacuum chamber; preferably made of stainless steel for Fusion models, Pyrex is OK for non-fusion devices.
A vacuum pump capable of reaching pressures of 10-3 Torr (1 micron Hg) or deeper. A 2-stage mechanical pump is usually good enough. Lower pressures require oil diffusion or turbomolecular pumps in addition to a mechanical pump.
A high voltage power supply; this must be a direct current, negatively biased (i.e. positive grounded) power supply. For fusion models, this supply should be rated at 20,000 volts (minimum) and 20 milliamps. A surplus x-ray transformer, with the proper DC rectification, is typically the best option. For non-fusion demo models, you can use a neon sign transformer. If you have the cash, Glassman High Voltage sells amazing power supplies that are perfect for fusor work. I found one on ebay for a tenth of the normal price.
Deuterium gas; This gas is fairly easy to get in small 50 liter lecture bottles for about $250. It has no special regulations and is non-radioactive. You will need a regulator to go with the bottle in order to lower the pressure from 1500psi to about 2psi. *Tritium* is not obtainable by the amateur. Tritium requires a site license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with facilities more secure than most private homes. The Farnsworth team had to submit to weekly medical exams because of its radioactivity. Don't even think about trying to get Tritium. It is dangerous and illegal for the amateur.
A neutron counter; this is how you quantify your fusion results. A brand new, el cheapo neutron counter costs about $2000. Until recently, fusioneers had to wait around on ebay until a neutron counter rolled by. Now, there is a new technology out there know as a "Bubble Neutron Dosimeter." These are small tubes filled with a certain liquid, sensitive only to fast neutrons from fusion. They cost about $100 and have a shelf life of about a year.
Here is an abbreviated parts list of my Fusor, with approximate prices (For a full parts list, go here):

Vacuum pump........................................................................$75 on ebay
20,000 Volt, 50mA power supply...........................................$300 on ebay
Stainless Steel Chamber...........................................................$600 total
Neutron Detector.....................................................................$150 on ebay
50L of Deuterium Fuel..............................................................$245 from Advanced Specialty Gases
Various vacuum components and other peripherals.....................$????
Total.......................................................................................~$1500-1800
As you can see, it isn't exactly cheap. But you should realize that these parts were acquired over a period of 18 months, and only after researching as to their necessity in the project. It's the little things like valves and fittings that eat out your wallet. High vacuum equipment is also high precision equipment, making it fairly expensive.






posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney
however on the blast question. because when a hydrogen bomb is detonated underground it causes a vault that does not breach the surface of the ground. That is if it is deep enough.
However underneath a building or say at the bottom of a main elevator shaft the blast will create a crater. there are several of these craters at the WTC location.
The EMP and overpressure and blast characteristics are greatly reduced in an underground explosion. Plus the elevator shafts and the central core columns would assist in focusing the disintegration cone straight upwards.
Plus if it is placed inside a cone of berryllium, which i understand will focus and direct the energy even more substantially.


I've been reading up a little. It looks like the blast effects from the fusion is all you're saying was needed? And forget the neutrons then, right?

But what about the neutron release? Granted, the neutrons themselves don't last long at all, and so wouldn't be detected. But the irradiated materials that they interact with WOULD be detectable, right?

What are your thoughts about this - a nuke's blast is directed, in order to "vaporize" the core columns. So according to this theory, the nuke blast can't affect the concrete in the floors. So to account for that, all the floors are rigged with explosives. Why complicate things?

Why would it be necessary to "vaporize" the core columns at all? If you're gonna demo it, a few cutter charges would be more likely to succeed.

Why would you bury the nuke, thus decreasing its blast effects? Since they can be made to any output level, why not just make it the correct size for an aboveground blast? Why build a bigger than necessary bomb, just to bury it?

How do you know that the elevator shafts would focus the blast effects?



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   


does anyone know the yield of a suitcase nuke?


From 10t (.01kt) in what was called SADM - SPECIAL ATOMIC DEMOLITION MUNITION up to 250t (.25KT), yields of up to
1000kt (1kt) was called ADM - ATOMIC DEMOLITION MUNITION.

Even the smallest warhead (19 t, .01kt) has a lethal damage radius
of almost 1/4 mile from radiation

So explain why there were no radiaition casualties?

damage radius for 10t nuclear warhead



Thermal 104 meters
3rd deg flash burn

Blast 162 meters
4.6psi blast force

Radiation 350 meters
Lethal 500 rem dosage



Formula for calculation - need calculator with fractional exponents or
Microsoft EXCEL to do calculations




y= yield (in tons) /2500

Thermal y ^0.41*1000

Blast = y^0.33*1000

Radiation = y^0.19*1000

damage radius in meters




posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   
All of this is very interesting. I have a question to throw into the mix. seismic activity of the nuke blast. weather it was buried or just put in the basement. weather it was .01 KT or 100KT wouldn't it leave some sort of seismic event that could and would have been registered somewhere?

I am fascinated by these 4th and probably even 6th generation nuclear weapons and tech.
Richard Marcinko had said that the latest SADM that he got to know about was about 40ish pounds and were intended to blow out massive highway interchanges and bridges. Said that it looked like a stack of weights on one end and a 18 inch or so baseball bat thick stem that lead to the firing device which was attached to the other half of the stem.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 08:58 PM
link   


But what about the neutron release? Granted, the neutrons themselves don't last long at all, and so wouldn't be detected. But the irradiated materials that they interact with WOULD be detectable, right?


You are right Seymour

Laboratory Accident several years back in Japan - solution of highly
enriched uranium went critical and emitted large burst of gamma
radiation and neutrons.

en.wikipedia.org...

Afterwards Japanese scientists, to measure radiation exposure in
neighboring buildings hit on novel solution. Used brass 5 Yen coin -
contains 30% zinc. When zinc absorbs neutron becomes radioactive
isotope ZN 65 has long half life and which emits gamma ray at specific
energy level.



Following the nuclear accident at Tokai, Ibaraki in 1999, physicists Masuchika Kohno and Yoshinobu Koizumi showed how this coin could be used to estimate neutron dosage to the surrounding population, by measuring its zinc isotope ratios. They write:

The Japanese 5-yen coin is about 22 millimeters in diameter and 1.5 mm thick, weighs 3.75 grams and has a central hole 5 mm wide. We chose this coin for monitoring neutron exposure because it is widely circulated, the zinc content is precisely controlled, and the 65Zn generated has a convenient half-life (244.1 days) and gamma ray energy emission (1,115.5 keV). To obtain a record of the dosage of neutrons released as a result of the accident, we collected exposed coins from people's houses at distances 100–550 m from the facility.[1]
They concluded that the coin could offer information about the total neutron effect during the accident, and about shielding by modern Japanese houses, given that the coins were recovered from indoors.


en.wikipedia.org...

The common penney has been made of zinc (97.5% - copper plated)
since 1982. No residual radiation has been detected at WTC site



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR

Richard Marcinko had said that the latest SADM that he got to know about was about 40ish pounds and were intended to blow out massive highway interchanges and bridges. Said that it looked like a stack of weights on one end and a 18 inch or so baseball bat thick stem that lead to the firing device which was attached to the other half of the stem.


!!!!!!!!!!

Someone else knows who Richard Marchinko is!!!!

I wonder what a real SEAL thinks of Jesse the UDT guy (NOT a SEAL)Ventura lying about 9/11.......



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by BASSPLYR
 


the seismic register probably between 2.5-3.5

The neutrons affect the water inside the concrete.

The millions of degree heat enters the concrete and causes the water to vaporize and expand to twenty or more times its own volume. Sure we are talking about water trapped in the concrete.

The neutrons do this and they heat the steel to about 7,000 degrees and it is a few thousand degrees above its boiling point so it vaporizes, sublimates and ablates, on its fall to the ground, leaving vapor trails of microscopic atom sized metal.

Also the detrium and titrium are only around for two to three days,

They would not allow geiger counters at the site for three days.

Plus washing everything with water also hides the neutron presence.

What other force could toss a 22 ton piece of steel two hundred yards, but the blast effect of a hydrogen bomb.

This is not a neutron bomb, it is a generation beyond that. neutron bombs are twenty five years old.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   
you dont "bury" the bomb in the ground. placing it at the bottom of the elevator shafts was already eight stories "undreground".

the water in the concrete vaporizes and in expanding turns the concrete into particulate matter. pyroclastically so to say.

hence the pyroclastic dust cloud.

the neutrons heat up the steel and boil it.

To shape this READ THIS Thedman. pure hydrogen bomb which contains absolutely no heavy uranium, plutonium or other highly radioactive element, you do not have radiation burns.

the shaped charge I believe is put into a berillium lined cone shaped covering to focus and direct the force straight up. Kind of like a "bunker buster" pointed up instead of down.


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."


The factual evidence indicates that our government is using and has used 3rd or possibly 4th generation hydrogen bombs domestically and internationally. The evidence for international usage is not quite as strong as the domestic usage, but when domestic usage is considered, the international usage seems inescapable. The process of exclusion
based on the known facts leaves only one viable option for the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings - a relatively pure hydrogen bomb.


click for full size 1





posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Prior to the demolition of the WTC buildings, the largest imploded building, Hudson's Department Store was 2.2 million square feet with 33 levels and required 2,728 lbs of explosive. The WTC buildings were significantly stronger than the Hudson's building, but it is doubtful more than a 0.01 kt bomb would be needed for the 47 center columns designed to hold many times the weight of the buildings.

This program produced (partial list) the following information for a regular 0.01 kt yields, air ignition: Fireball max light radius = 25.4 meters, Max time light pulse width = 0.011 seconds, Max fireball airburst radius = 10.6 meters, Time of max temperature = 0.0032 seconds, Area of rad. exposure = 0.12 sq. miles; Blastwave Effects: Overpressure = 5 lb/sq. inch (160 mph) radius = 0.09 km, 1 lb/sq. inch radius = 0.26 km; Underground ignition: Crater diameter = 56 feet with a Richter magnitude of 3.52. Thermal radiation damage range is significantly reduced by clouds, smoke or other obscuring materials. Surface detonations are known to decrease thermal radiation by half. A neutron bomb produces much less blast and thermal energy than a fission bomb of the same yield by expending its energy by the increase in the production of neutrons. Even the older neutron bombs produce very little long term fallout, but made considerable induced radiation in ground detonations. The half life of induced radiation is very short and is measured in days rather than years.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Damn Fm,

You are on the same line of thought I am. great info in those last posts! Many things to ponder.

Regarding Marcinko. that guy is a personal hero of mine. So much to learn from that guy. and he is very in the know. I have a SEAL buddy. A Lt. Cmdr (soon to be retired) from a west coast team, who over a few beers laughed at Jessie. He's not taken very seriously by most of the SEAL Community. marcinko however is. he admitted that they taught his tactics back in finishing school circa 1993, but that marcinko was slightly shunned as a person for his zeal and exposure of SEAL team secrets in his book series.

I love Marcinko. His Books kick ass except for his last two or three but he has a new one coming out in september that seems to have some pretty decent reviews. he comes out swinging in this one I guess.



[edit on 30-8-2008 by BASSPLYR]

[edit on 30-8-2008 by BASSPLYR]



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz



I've been reading up a little. It looks like the blast effects from the fusion is all you're saying was needed? And forget the neutrons then, right?
the neutrons did all of the damage the blast was contained in the bathtub
But what about the neutron release? Granted, the neutrons themselves don't last long at all, and so wouldn't be detected. But the irradiated materials that they interact with WOULD be detectable, right?

see analysis below

What are your thoughts about this - a nuke's blast is directed, in order to "vaporize" the core columns. So according to this theory, the nuke blast can't affect the concrete in the floors. So to account for that, all the floors are rigged with explosives. Why complicate things?

Why would it be necessary to "vaporize" the core columns at all? If you're gonna demo it, a few cutter charges would be more likely to succeed.

cutter charges could not explain molten steel three months after 911

Why would you bury the nuke, thus decreasing its blast effects? Since they can be made to any output level, why not just make it the correct size for an aboveground blast? Why build a bigger than necessary bomb, just to bury it?

How do you know that the elevator shafts would focus the blast effects?

[any blast force will take the path of least resistance in my common sense reasoning. It sure is refreshing to have an intelligent discussion with someone about this.
/b]


The neutrons heated the metal up. Hence molten steel under rubble piles for more than three months.

Here is an analysis of a sample of steel from WTC



Clue: The natural balance of elements at the WTC samples has changed into heavier isotopes. Some nuclear force has been able to inject neutrons into the nucleus of various elements present at the WTC area. See the table below.
List of Elements in the USGS analysis of WTC debris that should show readily detectable
Neutron Activation:

Element Isotopes, Isotope Percentages in Nature, Mean Percantage in USGS analysis:
Silicon - 28 Si 92.23%, 29 Si 4.67%, 15%
Carbon - 12 C 98.9%, 13 C 1.1% stable, 2%
Sulfur - 32 S 95.02%, 33 S 0.075%, 3%
Iron - 56 Fe 91.72%, 57 Fe 2.2%, 58 Fe 0.28%, 1.63%
Nickel - 58 Ni 68.08%, 59 Ni 1/2 life 7600 years, 60 Ni 26.22%, 61 Ni 1.14%, 37 ppm
Niobium - 93 Nb 100%, 94 Nb 1/2 life 20,000 years, 8.3 ppm
Beryllium - 9 Be 100%, 10 Be 1/2 life 1.5 mil years, only 3 ppm
Potassium - 39 K 93.256%, 40 K only plant animal, 1/2%
Titanium - 48 Ti 73.8%, 49 Ti 5.5%, 0.25%
Chromium - 52 Cr 83.79%, 53 Cr 9.5%, 116 ppm
Cobalt - 59 Co 100% , 60 Co 1/2 life 5 years, only 6ppm
For an example, Iron is expected to have the Fe(58) isotope, which contains two additional neutrons, 0.28% naturally, but somehow there was 1.63% of these heavier, but still stable iron isotopes in the WTC sample.



In response to this myriad of disease, a statement of environmental mercury has been claimed. That claim is not verified in testing of air and particle debris samples by private citizens and organizations. It is possible the mercury quotes are from the federal source of science, the United States Geological Survey's analysis of the WTC dust debris. The USGS's leached analysis did show mercury at the 3rd lowest concentration of metals at the mean value (mv) of 0.011 parts per Billion (ppB). The most abundant element concentration in the leaching tests was Strontium at 1,000 ppB (1 ppM) - 100,000 times more than the mercury value. It appears that the leaching of the sample was only partial and inadequate as the reader will see from the spectrometry values.

Why would only mercury be quoted when there were so many other more dangerous elements at higher concentrations than mercury? While the regular elements like Copper - mv 136 ppM, Silver - mv 1.66 ppM, and Vanadium - mv 31 ppM, some of the other significant elements were: Barium - mv 533 ppM, Strontium - mv 727 ppM, Cerium - mv 91 ppM, Yttrium - mv 57 ppM, Lanthanum - mv 46 ppM, Molybdenum - mv 11 ppM, Thorium - mv 9 ppM, Uranium - mv 3 ppM, Beryllium - mv 3 ppM, and Cesium - mv 0.6 ppM - partial listing. For readers that are not familiar with most of these elements, here is a link to their relevance.


[edit on 30-8-2008 by fmcanarney]



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by fmcanarney

the neutrons heat up the steel and boil it.



Do you have any links to this? This is the first time I've heard of that.

I've always believed that the very reason of a neutron bomb (yes i know you're NOT talking about a neutron bomb) was that it had less blast effects and saved infrastructure.

Now according to this, neutrons also destroy infrastructure?



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Originally posted by fmcanarney

Don't take it the wrong way but there's a couple of things here that I question:


The millions of degree heat enters the concrete and causes the water to vaporize and expand to twenty or more times its own volume. Sure we are talking about water trapped in the concrete.

The neutrons do this and they heat the steel to about 7,000 degrees and it is a few thousand degrees above its boiling point so it vaporizes, sublimates and ablates, on its fall to the ground, leaving vapor trails of microscopic atom sized metal.


One hypothesis has a fusion device below the building with some means of 'focussing' the intense flux upward with a limited angle of dispersion but the intensity of such a beam is still going to be maximum at the source, immediately above the device in this case. Yet the observed initial failure of the buildings (WTC1 & 2) is maximum at the level of the plane strikes. Such a device and location (in the basement) would have totally obliterated the area immediately above it like core columns, producing a very different collapse to what actually happened.

People contain far more water than concrete yet those who barely escaped the collapse were not vaporised despite being closer to the supposed explosion?


They would not allow geiger counters at the site for three days.


FDNY had 2 hazmat teams scanning the WTC site almost immediately after the collapse of WTC1. They were trained experts (also trained in counter-terrorism) specifically looking for any radiation, nerve or blistering agents being present to assess the hazards presented for recovery teams. They found none of the above just hours after the attack. Phil McArdle of FDNY headed a Hazmat team and his 'letter from ground zero' account of that day can be read here.


Also the detrium and titrium are only around for two to three days,


Deuterium and Tritium are still just isotopes of hydrogen and react chemically the same as normal hydrogen, forming heavy water and tritiated water when combusted (there were fires). The amount of tritiated water detected on site is consistent with the known amount of tritium on site and in the planes (beta-light type exit signs for example). Tritium has a half-life of about 8 years from memory so its presence there could still be detected today if it's in the form of tritiated water.



Plus washing everything with water also hides the neutron presence.


Maybe that's just a poor choice of words but it makes it sound like free neutrons can just lie around and be flushed away with water. A fast free neutron only comes to rest when it impacts and attaches itself to the nucleus of another atom. Larger nuclei make better targets so the heavier elements tend to absorb most of the neutrons but they never come to rest until they've been 'captured', possibly creating new radioactive isotopes in the process.

I saw the mention of 'dial-a-yield' type devices ranging from about 0.01kT equivalent. Let's say the hypothesised device was an order of magnitude smaller again at 0.001kT - that's the equivalent of 1 ton of TNT!
There is no evidence of such an explosion having happened and if it had, much of Manhattan would have been turned into a wasteland.

Just my thoughts on it.


[edit on 31/8/2008 by Pilgrum]



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Craters below the WTC site post 911 as evidence of thermonuclear hydrogen bombs:
www.thepriceofliberty.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink">www.thepriceofliberty.org...


March 05, 2007

The Mysterious Craters:


A thorough examination the debris of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings reveals further evidence of massive power and heat - a thermonuclear blast. WTC 6 was 8 stories high. The total height of its central debris of the crater was about 30 to 50 feet below sea level and about 120 feet wide. Eight stories of building collapses and leaves a hole at least 30 feet deep.



[edit on 31-8-2008 by fmcanarney]



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Pilgrum
 

I think the focus of this weapon could be very narrow.

find a video of the top twenty or so floors toppling off to the side. The physical law of inertia would have this huge section of building (20%) of the mass of the tower continue to travel in the same direction it was going. Following the path of least resistance which was over the side of the remaining standing tower below it. One would expect to see it after the dust settles lying outside of the original perimeter of the building somewhat intact. But it has vanished and is non existant. Where did it go and how did it vanish?
there were cutting charges that initiated its topple, perhaps some of the cutting charges in the preliminary ignition sequence were damaged, and did not cause the top to come straight down.
However, getting off the topic of cutting charges, as I thing they were just used on the outer shell. With the hydrogen bomb(s) used to disintegrate the core.
This top (20%) of the tower is toppling, and seconds into its movement it changes direction, or is vaporizes, and never apperas on the ground.
There is no thermite, thermate, C-4, PETN, PDTN, ANFO, or other explosive save one that could explain its disappearance.
Earlier I said bombs.
The towers were heavily reinforced at one third and two thirds their total height. It is possible that there were three hydrogen bombs with one each being placed immediately below the reinforced flooring sections. This demolition began at the top of the towers and progressed downward at a speed just as fast as a gravity driven demolition.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join