NUKES at the WTC[W:20]

[mike2810]

Hey HD

Using your logic , wildland firefighters must have fought fires in areas where nukes went off. Oh wait , maybe it is just the natural pollutants from the results of burning vegetation.

Washington Post writes about firefighters and cancer – Wildfire Today

"It is also important to take steps to reduce the hazard in the first place. For wildland firefighters who don’t have the luxury of breathing air carried in a bottle on their back, avoiding cancer-causing smoke can be difficult"

I will admit, the article does not rule out the cancer causes did not come from nukes.:lamo

 

[Thoreau72]

Hey HD

Using your logic , wildland firefighters must have fought fires in areas where nukes went off. Oh wait , maybe it is just the natural pollutants from the results of burning vegetation.

Washington Post writes about firefighters and cancer – Wildfire Today

"It is also important to take steps to reduce the hazard in the first place. For wildland firefighters who don’t have the luxury of breathing air carried in a bottle on their back, avoiding cancer-causing smoke can be difficult"

I will admit, the article does not rule out the cancer causes did not come from nukes.:lamo

That's a good one Mike--the Washington Post. How surprising they would support the official story, eh? :lol:

 

[zyzygy]

That's a good one Mike--the Washington Post. How surprising they would support the official story, eh? :lol:

How surprising that your crank sites support crazy theories.

 

[mike2810]

That's a good one Mike--the Washington Post. How surprising they would support the official story, eh? :lol:

So you admit that there are other causes to the FFTR health issues and your link to a website on nukes does nothing to rule out the other causes.
Wildfire Today – News and opinion about wildland fire



and your source you provided is beyond reproach, right? Much like your use of Veterans Today, where the editor admits the majority of what is posted is false. Yet, you continue to believe in VT.

Back up your information with something other than a comic book source.

 

[mike2810]

That's a good one Mike--the Washington Post. How surprising they would support the official story, eh? :lol:

Well HD, seems a source you have used in the past agrees with the Post article. FFTR's developing cancers at a higher risk than the general population without working the 911 WTC sites.

Firefighter Cancer Support Network White Paper - Firefighter Health

When are you going to get around to addressing the issue that your articles you use do not rule out other causes for the cancer in first responders.
You must realize by now science is not on your side with your neutron bomb explanation.

 

[Deuce]

Found a new spot for you Maus to bump this thread.

Try The Nuclear Demolition of the WTC

He analyzes the USGS samples taken at WTC. As we've discussed before here, they found numerous elements from the Periodic Table present, and they are all products of nuclear fission. Strontium, Barium, Thorium, Cerium, Lanthanum and others were found together in mathematically related quantities that can be explained only by nuclear fission.

I wouldn't put much stake in someone who says barium and strontium presence above trace levels is "cast iron proof of nuclear reaction."

Both are found in CRT monitors.

He then talks about a correlation between the strontium/barium and zinc.

....which is also found in CRT monitors.

Cerium oxide is used to polish glass, lanthanum is also used in cathodes and batteries. The idea that these materials can only be present in a nuclear reaction decay chain is ludicrous.

And to top it all off: radiation profile distinctly rules out the nuclear bomb hypothesis. My man, you can't talk about nuclear decay chains while also ignoring the part of nuclear physics that proves you wrong.

(also, nuclear bombs would have a different debris pattern)

 

[zyzygy]

I wouldn't put much stake in someone who says barium and strontium presence above trace levels is "cast iron proof of nuclear reaction."

Both are found in CRT monitors.

He then talks about a correlation between the strontium/barium and zinc.

....which is also found in CRT monitors.

Cerium oxide is used to polish glass, lanthanum is also used in cathodes and batteries. The idea that these materials can only be present in a nuclear reaction decay chain is ludicrous.

And to top it all off: radiation profile distinctly rules out the nuclear bomb hypothesis. My man, you can't talk about nuclear decay chains while also ignoring the part of nuclear physics that proves you wrong.

(also, nuclear bombs would have a different debris pattern)

Also tell-tale huge explosions with mushroom clouds.

 

[Thoreau72]

I wouldn't put much stake in someone who says barium and strontium presence above trace levels is "cast iron proof of nuclear reaction."

Both are found in CRT monitors.

He then talks about a correlation between the strontium/barium and zinc.

....which is also found in CRT monitors.

Cerium oxide is used to polish glass, lanthanum is also used in cathodes and batteries. The idea that these materials can only be present in a nuclear reaction decay chain is ludicrous.

And to top it all off: radiation profile distinctly rules out the nuclear bomb hypothesis. My man, you can't talk about nuclear decay chains while also ignoring the part of nuclear physics that proves you wrong.

(also, nuclear bombs would have a different debris pattern)

I don't put much stake in the claims of known liars, but that's just me.

Yes, I remember the big glass polishing operation in lower Manhattan. :lol:

 

[zyzygy]

I don't put much stake in the claims of known liars, but that's just me.

Yes, I remember the big glass polishing operation in lower Manhattan. :lol:

You have no answers to serious questions. You are trolling.

 

[Thoreau72]

You have no answers to serious questions. You are trolling.

You display a fascinating way of disregarding and denying all manner of facts and evidence.

 

[mike2810]

Oh look another article regarding FFTR and cancer.

Cancer and the San Diego Fire-Rescue Department – Wildfire Today

:Jason Curtis, a commercial film maker and photographer, has produced a short 8-minute documentary about the occurrence of cancer within the membership of the San Diego Fire-Rescue Department, interviewing 15 firefighters who talked about their job and the disease. Many of them looked back knowing what they know now, and wished they had done some things differently.:

Was the houses and brush fields nuked? Must of because some say that is the cause of cancer in firefighters. :lamo

 

[zyzygy]

You display a fascinating way of disregarding and denying all manner of facts and evidence.

Your Pavlovian responses are less than fascinating. Trutherism is a dead duck. Your are proof of that.

 

[Deuce]

I don't put much stake in the claims of known liars, but that's just me.

Yes, I remember the big glass polishing operation in lower Manhattan. :lol:

Um, skyscrapers have a lot of glass in them.

And in 2001, they had a ****load of CRTs in them.

The point is, declaring these materials can only come from nuclear explosions is silly. Particularly when your hypothesized nuclear reaction - based on known and predictable decay rates and chains - necessarily requires the existence of large quantities of hard radiation. And this point, strangely, went entirely unaddressed by you. I wonder why that is. What does Thoreau stand to gain from this behavior?

If you're just going to declare the whole thing is a lie, then you can't even make the claim that any of these materials were present at all. The readings come from "known liars." So, clearly, they just wanted you to think there was a magic nuke!!

 

[Thoreau72]

Um, skyscrapers have a lot of glass in them.

And in 2001, they had a ****load of CRTs in them.

The point is, declaring these materials can only come from nuclear explosions is silly. Particularly when your hypothesized nuclear reaction - based on known and predictable decay rates and chains - necessarily requires the existence of large quantities of hard radiation. And this point, strangely, went entirely unaddressed by you. I wonder why that is. What does Thoreau stand to gain from this behavior?

If you're just going to declare the whole thing is a lie, then you can't even make the claim that any of these materials were present at all. The readings come from "known liars." So, clearly, they just wanted you to think there was a magic nuke!!

Not surprising Deuce, you too seemed to have missed the critical part of the analysis: the presence of these elements together in mathematically related quantities (read: ratios) can be explained only by nuclear fission.

Maybe you missed it Deuce, but more likely you saw it but prefer to pretend that it means nothing. A similar pattern of behavior is assuming it means nothing about the quality of the work and any conclusions when almost all members of a government commission state in public that they were set up to fail.

Some of us are better at dot connecting than others.

Let the spirit of Occam apply: the reason WTC at the end of the day looked like a nuclear bomb had gone off is because A NUCLEAR BOMB (or more) had gone off. Sonnenberg the FEMA photographer's pictures clearly showed that unusual circumstance. His pictures clearly showed that whatever took the towers down, it was sure a hell not burning office furnishings and a natural collapse. Denial is not a river in Africa.

 

[zyzygy]

Not surprising Deuce, you too seemed to have missed the critical part of the analysis: the presence of these elements together in mathematically related quantities (read: ratios) can be explained only by nuclear fission.

In the opinion of a guy on a crank site. Do you have any real proof?

 

[zyzygy]

Let the spirit of Occam apply: the reason WTC at the end of the day looked like a nuclear bomb had gone off is because A NUCLEAR BOMB (or more) had gone off. Sonnenberg the FEMA photographer's pictures clearly showed that unusual circumstance. His pictures clearly showed that whatever took the towers down, it was sure a hell not burning office furnishings and a natural collapse. Denial is not a river in Africa.

It was not a nuclear bomb.

 

[Quag]

It was not a nuclear bomb.

And it didn't look like a nuclear bomb had gone off.
Is it just me or are the truthers that are still left getting farther from reality with each passing day?

 

[Quag]

In the opinion of a guy on a crank site. Do you have any real proof?

He doesn't need real proof, he has his fear and hatred of the ebil US govt!

 

[zyzygy]

And it didn't look like a nuclear bomb had gone off.
Is it just me or are the truthers that are still left getting farther from reality with each passing day?

Where was the mushroom cloud? Nowhere. the truthers that are left don't seem to know what kind of temperature a nuclear bomb would create.

 

[Quag]

Where was the mushroom cloud? Nowhere. the truthers that are left don't seem to know what kind of temperature a nuclear bomb would create.

Well in HDs defence he claims it was a nuke that didn't explode (hence the lack of a nuclear explosion), that melted the steel (that no one has ever found) by radiation and that it emitted no radiation(hence the reason there was no massive radiation spike detected) and exploded in the basement causing the whole structure to collapse at free fall (even though it didn't).

Sad part is unlike Balsamo who openly admits he is in it for the $$$, HD actually believes this nonsense

 

[Deuce]

Not surprising Deuce, you too seemed to have missed the critical part of the analysis: the presence of these elements together in mathematically related quantities (read: ratios) can be explained only by nuclear fission.

Which is not remotely true. The decay ratios aren't even close to being correct based on the time the samples were taken.

Maybe you missed it Deuce, but more likely you saw it but prefer to pretend that it means nothing. A similar pattern of behavior is assuming it means nothing about the quality of the work and any conclusions when almost all members of a government commission state in public that they were set up to fail.

If their data is bad, you can't use it to support the nuke theory.

Some of us are better at dot connecting than others.

The key aspect of a conspiracy theorist isn't believing in something that is factually wrong, but rather having ridiculous interpretations of things that are true.

Let the spirit of Occam apply: the reason WTC at the end of the day looked like a nuclear bomb had gone off is because A NUCLEAR BOMB (or more) had gone off. Sonnenberg the FEMA photographer's pictures clearly showed that unusual circumstance. His pictures clearly showed that whatever took the towers down, it was sure a hell not burning office furnishings and a natural collapse. Denial is not a river in Africa.

... it did not remotely look like a nuclear bomb, or bomb of any kind, went off. Bombs send things outwards, with great force. Not just little pieces. A nuke would have sent the entire structure scattering across the city. Occam's Razor says that if it was a nuke, we should have seen a big mushroom cloud and a large crater.

Instead, we saw rubble that looks like a collapsed building... because a building collapsed.

 

[zyzygy]

Instead, we saw rubble that looks like a collapsed building... because a building collapsed.

That can't be because the gub'ment is EVIL!

 

[Quag]

That can't be because the gub'ment is EVIL!

Which sums up the starting point of pretty much every single truther.

 

[zyzygy]

Which sums up the starting point of pretty much every single truther.

He's gone again. He'll be back with the same nonsense. He does this with monotonous regularity.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Please excuse me if I wasn't about to read through 87 pages of nonsense, but I do have a question for the whack jobs who think a "nuke" was involved in taking the towers down.

Were there any radiations levels found that were above normal?

There are radiation monitors in various areas of the city due to the proximity to the Indian Point nuclear power plant, and they were in place long before 9/11.