911 Debate Nukes Vs No-nukes, between open-minded folks Options

[JimMac]

In one day, a new person Ed Ward has created nine threads promoting the idea that nukes were involved in WTC destruction. I submit that this idea should be debated in one thread, not nine.

Taking the devils advocate position, I have an open mind to the subject, but have seen no hard evidence. Mr Ed Ward has no credentials in the area of science, and for me his science sounds like junk. Yet he openly smears those who do have both credentials and reputation in science.

Ed Ward looks to me like a classic propagandist passing out disinfo pamphlets and doing so aggressively in volume, in other words it reads like an organized campaign.

Over..

[DoYouEverWonder]

He might be new around here, but he's done the same thing on other forums before.

However, it's not the substance of his posts that are a problem, it's his belligerent attitude toward anyone that even dares to ask a question and his obsession with tearing other people's work in order to justify his own conclusions. Everyone's wrong except for him it seems.

[Sanders]

S#it-stirrer. We've seen them before.

Thankfully, his posts will fall into the archives. 9? 5? 3? 1? Frankly I don't consider it worth my time to go and compile them all in to one thread. Call me lazy, I am. But the numerous threads are a testament to his pig-headedness (i.e. the drive-by-post nature of his appearance here) and I for one prefer to leave as is.

In honesty, I suspect some sort of mini-nuke may well have been employed at the WTC, or should I say, I wouldn't be surprised, not that some of other things that have been proposed may be valid. But Stephen Jones and his crew went to the trouble of assembling data and publishing a peer-reviewed paper. 3 cheers for Stephen Jones! Jones didn't say anything about nukes, nor did he look into it - he looked into the possibility that Thermite was used, and produced results. Period. Take it at face value I say, that doesn't exclude other threads of inquiry.

What we have here though is pot-stirring - getting people into a fuss about a non-issue. We have plenty of evidence, they just want us to expend our energy arguing about nukes and no-planes or whatever.

[GroundPounder]

i can't find my responses, but i wanted to add one thing. as i stated earlier, the nuke thing answers two big problems for me. the persistent hot spot and the elevated tritium. what is bothering me is the apparent lack of an emp. if that could be shown, we'd have a lock imho.

[DoYouEverWonder]

i can't find my responses, but i wanted to add one thing. as i stated earlier, the nuke thing answers two big problems for me. the persistent hot spot and the elevated tritium. what is bothering me is the apparent lack of an emp. if that could be shown, we'd have a lock imho.

After studying the buildings and the construction of the complex, I believe an assortment of weapons were used.

For the above ground parts of the structures, cutting charges and/or thermite plus thermobaric weapons in the elevator shafts would probably be enough. But the sublevels are another matter entirely. For that part I think they used small nukes. The EMP would be smothered by the collapsed debris from above. The persistent hot spots are right were you would expect them to be, if you deployed these weapons in the bottoms of the elevator shafts.

THE WTC buildings had freight elevators that you could drive into, in a midsized truck from the street level. By using the elevator shafts as a delivery system for these weapons, you could keep the big stuff off site until the morning of the attack, greatly reducing the risk of getting caught.

[GroundPounder]

The EMP would be smothered by the collapsed debris from above. The persistent hot spots are right were you would expect them to be, if you deployed these weapons in the bottoms of the elevator shafts.

you gotta have the explosion first, which means the emp comes before the collapse/debris right?

[DoYouEverWonder]

you gotta have the explosion first, which means the emp comes before the collapse/debris right?

No, I think they blew the top sections first and timed the lower and sublevels to blow about the same time the curtain of debris coming down from above reached the ground, in order to cover their dirty work.

For example, this picture from street level of WTC 2 collapsing, shows the lower floors still intact. (There's a better one that I'll post later if I can find it again)

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v411/DoYouEverWonder/WTC%204%20-%20WTC%205%20-%20WTC%206/WTC-2-collapse-SW-ground.jpg)

This post has been edited by DoYouEverWonder: Apr 22 2010, 01:17 PM

[rob balsamo]

His threads are all merged and is now placed on mod preview for spamming forum.

[JimMac]

i can't find my responses, but i wanted to add one thing. as i stated earlier, the nuke thing answers two big problems for me. the persistent hot spot and the elevated tritium. what is bothering me is the apparent lack of an emp. if that could be shown, we'd have a lock imho.

Have you checked the authenticity of the tritium data, and/or the claim resulting?

Also, there is a chemist in Ca. that did some air sample tests on the debris field fumes/emissions, forget the guys name, but he is apparently well-known, and Ed Ward has referenced him as a leading foundation underpinning his thesis. I mention this because i notice that tritium decays into helium, but i suppose the amts would be very small anyway

edited to add: Cahill is the Chemist's name

This post has been edited by JimMac: Apr 22 2010, 06:19 PM

[KP50]

After studying the buildings and the construction of the complex, I believe an assortment of weapons were used.

Exactly which I distrust anyone who pushes their pet theory (be in conventional, thermite, nuclear, beam) as the sole method of destruction. It is kind of clever as a method of disruption as it means everyone is both right and wrong simultaneously.

[JimMac]

Exactly which I distrust anyone who pushes their pet theory (be in conventional, thermite, nuclear, beam) as the sole method of destruction. It is kind of clever as a method of disruption as it means everyone is both right and wrong simultaneously.

Esp when you could drive a D9 through some of the holes in the story. In this case i have noticed a bunch, even without looking hard. But, like Sanders, i am too lazy to get into it. My feeling is this provocateur will evaporate...or is that sublimate.. yes..

[DoYouEverWonder]

I knew I had a better pic buried around here somewhere.

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v411/DoYouEverWonder/WTC%20Squibs/WTC-2-collapse-N-low-squibs.jpg)

This is a rare picture showing the lower section of WTC 2 during the collapse. It's clear that squibs are ejecting from the centers of the lower level mechanical floors. And that the lower section of the building is still intact.

The same thing happened to WTC 1, but the images that have squibs are from centers of the upper level mechanical floors.

(IMG:http://www.bcrevolution.ca/images/wtc_small_1056.jpg)

I think this is clear evidence of timed cutter charges going off in key locations during the collapses.

This post has been edited by DoYouEverWonder: Apr 22 2010, 06:37 PM

[GroundPounder]

Have you checked the authenticity of the tritium data, and/or the claim resulting?

Also, there is a chemist in Ca. that did some air sample tests on the debris field fumes/emissions, forget the guys name, but he is apparently well-known, and Ed Ward has referenced him as a leading foundation underpinning his thesis. I mention this because i notice that tritium decays into helium, but i suppose the amts would be very small anyway

edited to add: Cahill is the Chemist's name

NIST, FEMA, ..somebody mentions the tritium and through hand waving dismisses it. that to me is a no-no. a little over 12 years later, half a tritium sample will have turned to helium. it just shouldn't show up even with the damn exit signs. that has got to be the lamest excuse i've heard in a while aside from fire, thermal expansion, guys in a cave...hmmm, well it's still lame.

[SanderO]

Using the mechanical floors for the attack makes sense. But the mechanical floors also had grilles and these would be the place that gas/dust etc could be ejected. The squibs are curious because if the are explosions they are not exploding out the any of the building parts.

Why done we see windows or grilles exploded out ahead of the squibs?

Why would explosive ejected be so localized? and so few?

What besides evidence of explosions might they be?

[JimMac]

Using the mechanical floors for the attack makes sense. But the mechanical floors also had grilles and these would be the place that gas/dust etc could be ejected. The squibs are curious because if the are explosions they are not exploding out the any of the building parts.

Why done we see windows or grilles exploded out ahead of the squibs?

Why would explosive ejected be so localized? and so few?

What besides evidence of explosions might they be?

If we had HVAC detail drawings on the building, it would probably explain it. There was obviously extensive duct work between the mechanical rooms and the other floors. Perhaps gases from explosions on above floors channeled down and found their way into the mechanical rooms and expelled out through the grills.

Is there any detail on the grills somewhere? I have never seen it. Maybe its on the floor plan working drawings.

This post has been edited by JimMac: Apr 22 2010, 08:19 PM

[DoYouEverWonder]

Using the mechanical floors for the attack makes sense. But the mechanical floors also had grilles and these would be the place that gas/dust etc could be ejected. The squibs are curious because if the are explosions they are not exploding out the any of the building parts.

One or two pics only tell a small part of the story.

Why done we see windows or grilles exploded out ahead of the squibs?

Hard to see that kind of detail based on the above pictures. I'd love to see the hi-res stuff that the gov won't release though.

Why would explosive ejected be so localized? and so few?

The first step in a CD would be to cut key columns and corners. Since most of the squibs are being ejected along the centerlines of the building, I would think that they wanted to peel the buildings apart like a banana. Accidents are random, controlled demolitions are not. These squibs aren't random events.

What besides evidence of explosions might they be?

There's too many of them and they all happen in key places for it to be anything else that I can think of.


Here's another picture of WTC 1 at the beginning of the collapse that I enhanced. This brought out the red dots that are lighting up inside the building. These red dots are not in pictures from the same camera that were taken before the collapse began.

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v411/DoYouEverWonder/Misc/WTC-1-collapse-charges.jpg)

Notice how the dots light up on a diagonal line / - Since they wanted to tip the top toward the Plaza and away from the surrounding streets, this is how you would want to slice the building, to get it to fall in that direction.

[DoYouEverWonder]

If we had HVAC detail drawings on the building, it would probably explain it. There was obviously extensive duct work between the mechanical rooms and the other floors. Perhaps gases from explosions on above floors channeled down and found their way into the mechanical rooms and expelled out through the grills.

Is there any detail on the grills somewhere? I have never seen it. Maybe its on the floor plan working drawings.

Debris will take the path of least resistance. The debris coming down from above, with nothing in it's way still hasn't reached the floors where the squibs are ejecting. That would indicate that the squibs are being caused by something else.

[tnemelckram]

Might as well toss my two cent's worth in.

Is there data showing the distribution of the strength or occurrence of the detections of nuclear by products over the entire area of all three WTCs? In other words, are the detections stronger in one place or area than the others, or exclusive to one place or area?

Let's say the data is either exclusive to or significantly stronger in the WTC 7 rubble as opposed to the other two. Then I'd postulate that there was a nuclear powered electricity generator or other power generator in WTC 7 to ensure an unending supply of power to the "Emergency Command Center" or other government offices in WTC 7. It would be a back up to the fuel powered one with the fuel tanks we have heard about. After all, who knows how long there would be a lack of power in an "real emergency"? How can you presume that there is enough fossil fuel to last when you don't know for sure how long it will be needed for a "vital function". If these big shot functions were any where near as important as the big shots claim they are, there would be an arguably foolproof backup like a nuc.

This post has been edited by tnemelckram: Apr 22 2010, 08:50 PM

[JimMac]

Debris will take the path of least resistance. The debris coming down from above, with nothing in it's way still hasn't reached the floors where the squibs are ejecting. That would indicate that the squibs are being caused by something else.

I'm not sure you construed correctly what i wrote. I was mentioning that gases from an explosion above , say 15 floors above, would travel down through the HVAC. This would happen at very high speed, and probably did happen. Whether or not its the cause of the squibs, we cannot know, but it makes sense to me. It doesn't negate that there might be explosions going on, on lower floors either.

What i see (with my eyes) are entire floors being exploded uniformly downward at a constant rate of about 1/8th sec per floor. So in one second of time, 8 floors are blown in sequence downward. The gases from the floors above the mechanical room are going to reach that floor BEFORE the mechanical room itself explodes. So in one second the gases from eight floors above would have forced their way into the mechanical room, blowing out any duct back-flow controls which happened to be in the way.

This is more of a common sense observation than a theory.

[SanderO]

There is no way that those buildings would collapse any way but straight down regardless of how the structure was "dismembered" It would take enormous energy to get them moving laterally.

Both tops did tilt before they dropped down... the south 20° to the se and the north tower to the south 8°. In each case the sufficient amount of columns were destroyed or pushed out of alignment and they tilted. When the titling part encountered the standing part the crush up and crush down tool place the upper part started to come apart... and then the explosions came and the real show started.

The only reason for squibs in the center as far as I can tell would be if they were on the north or south face of the north tower and the east and west face of the south tower. These would be in line with the space which went through the core... dividing the express elevator shafts. However the key columns to destroy would be the 4 corner columns of the core 501, 508, 1001 and 1008 which carried 2 x the load of most of the other core columns and 30% of the floor load.

If dropping a bunch of floors was the mechanism for collapse... they would place explosives at the 36' long columns. This would begin to destabilize 6 floors with one blast. And to drop the floors, only 12 beam stubs connecting the core columns to the girders which supported the floors would be required.

The floors spanned from the girders surrounding the core to the facade columns. What would happen if the girder was detached from the columns? The floors would now be completely supported by the facade. The floors would also likely as square donuts collapse at the inside (core side) and pull (or break free) from the connections at the facade.

The facade depended on the floors to support them laterally. The collapsing floors might rip out a whole row or two of facade panels and the ones atop would be unsupported and this would lead to the entire floor system above to loose support on the facade side. Breaking the corners would certainly facilitate the facade loosing its stability as each faced provided lateral support the the adjacent facade. Breal the corners and the tube become four thin planes ready to topple.

The destruction likely took place at the mechanical floors and at about the same time. Once the first explosions went off their debris descended and concealed the others... which were likely not as powerful. Having 30 or 40 stories weighing a few hundred thousand tons dropping in an avalanche of concrete and steel will do a lot of damage to the structure below.

Fire did not get this one going, but once it got going gravity easily pulled the structure apart and the floors dropped, the facade peeled or was thrown away and the core structure mangled. Not a progressive collapse... more like an avalanche.