Let's Roll Forums

Let's Roll Forums (http://letsrollforums.com//index.php)
-   World Trade Center - Molten Steel & Other Unexplainable Oddities (http://letsrollforums.com//forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   Update: The US Government’s Usage of Atomic Bombs - Domestic - WTC (http://letsrollforums.com//showthread.php?t=22024)

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:04 PM

Update: The US Government’s Usage of Atomic Bombs - Domestic - WTC
 
Update: The US Government’s Usage of Atomic Bombs - Domestic - WTC

By Ed Ward, MD




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.

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC01-400noaa_wtc2.jpg

Light Detection and Ranging - LIDAR displays from NOAA - Dark Green = 0 to -30 feet.


Another LIDAR map shows the central portion depth of WTC 6 in the range of -35 to -55 feet. Besides the crater in WTC 6, note the two craters that surround WTC 1 (perimeters are 30 feet deep and 250 to 300 feet wide) and WTC 2 (perimeters are 30 feet deep and more than 300 feet wide - some overlapping of the explosions). WTC 1 - 110 stories tall - debris pile 6 stories with a 30 feet crater surrounding it. WTC 2 - 110 stories tall - debris pile 6 stories high with a 30 feet crater surrounding it. WTC 3 (Marriott) - 22 stories tall - debris pile 3 stories. WTC 4 - 9 stories tall - debris pile 3 stories (the only building that is even close to its correct debris height). WTC 6 - 8 stories tall - debris pile MINUS 3 stories. WTC 7 - 47 stories tall - debris pile 7 stories. The New York times has a crude interactive map placing the crater depth at -30 feet. According to the official story, beams from WTC 1 collapsed the building. However, the collapse did not make a debris pile. It made a debris hole. (BTW, no supposed unspecified vague ‘scalar’ weapon can make these massive craters beneath intact debris.)

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC02-lidar_sep19.jpg


For those not as familiar with the WTC site as the author, a reference map is included.

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC0...emapbyname.gif

The Persistent Hot spots:
Thermal images from September 16, 2001 show hot spots in the WTC 6 crater which persisted until at least September 18, 2001 as referenced by the composite illustration (below).

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC04-lg-map-therm1.jpg

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC05-groundmap16.jpg

Somehow, this WTC 6 hotspot did not show up on some sites despite being taken on September 16, 2001
More than one month later, October 18, 2001, there are still hot spots at WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7. Is WTC 6 cool or merely being reported as such again?

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC06-lg-map-therm2.jpg

More than 5 months later, February 12, 2002, WTC 1 is still hot.
http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC07-lg-map-therm3.jpg

Additional photos of WTC 6 and 7, click here.
The Pyroclastic Cloud from WTC 6?

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC0...etodustjg4.jpg

Within two seconds after the dust cloud from the WTC 1 collapse envelopes the area around WTC 6, a dust cloud suddenly and violently shoots up hundreds of feet into the air. (There is a much better video of this event that shows the area clearly and gives a much better view of the dust cloud upheaval. The video is part of 3 videos shown simultaneously on 3 small tv screens (from 3 different broadcasters) that are no bigger than 1/20 of the available screen size. I lost the link (computer crash and have spent close to 30 hours trying to find it) while looking for a decent sized screen shot of the particular video. If anyone has the link for this site, please send it to me so the article may be updated with the best information available.)

The 16 Inches Thick Steel Cores that Melt into Limp Noodles and Partially Vaporize:
After the outer structure of WTC 2 falls, a portion of the central core remains standing for almost 25 seconds then it appears to melt and vaporize. Two videos of the above scene can be found in "The Strange Collapse of the Spire." The second video with a clearer view of the spire’s demise can also be seen. The cores at the base of the WTCs are 16" thick steel rectangles - each side is 4" thick. (BTW, there is no conventional explosive or thermate combination that can produce this effect. Nor can any nanothermate, superthermate, super-duper thermate and explosives combination produce this effect. However, this reporter is anxiously awaiting the "scientific" introduction of invisible, invisibly acting, super-duper, double top secret, stealth-micro-nanothermate as the cause of what clearly is a thermonuclear post Flash effect.)

Further evidence of tremendous heat can be seen in this 8 ton 6" thick I beam that is bent like a horseshoe without warping, kinking or splitting. A more comprehensive view of the I beam with an informative audio track can be seen here. (Again, there is no way for thermate to create this horseshoe, unless it is "miraculous" thermate. Nor, is there any unspecified vague "scalar" weapon that can do this even if the beam was isolated and not covered by some degree of 110 floors of concrete and steel.) Clearly, this is residual steel that has been exposed to massive and intense heat that is entirely consistent with a thermonuclear explosion and virtually nothing else can produce this single effect, let alone this and ALL the other irregularities.

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC0...0941_hires.jpg


The Elevated Tritium Levels:

The "well below levels of concern to human exposure" and "7 times less than the EPA limit" of Tritium in the environment are in actuality 27 to 35 times higher than should have been found in one sample, and 21 to 28 times higher than should have been found in the other sample. In spite of this fact it was deemed that no other testing was needed. In spite of the fact that no amount of radiation is considered "safe", it is merely "acceptable". This shows proof that even in the same general area there were varying degrees of dilution of the 10 ml samples prior their being collected and tested. Note that there is no notation about the size of the pools the samples were taken from.

The first few sentences of this analysis report start out actually dealing with testing samples. The report gives a value of 0.164 nCi/Liter with a standard deviation of +/- 0.074 nCi/Liter for sewer water (at least about 25% higher than should have been found). WTC building 6 samples were determined to have 3.53 +/- 0.17 nCi/Liter and 2.83 +/- 0.15 nCi/Liter. Then the report goes into pages of information have nothing to do with the study - the WTC, terrorist attacks, a "box model" that seemed to have absolutely nothing to do with determining the degree of dilution present in various areas, or any area, for 30 million gallons - or more appropriately since the study uses liters as measurement - 120 million liters of water. Sixteen million liters of water were dispersed throughout the site by rain and firemen had to dilute the amount of tritium present by varying degrees of 16 million liters of water. To find out the original concentration multiply the amount found per liter by any number from one to 16 million. Of course this completely ignores the other 104 million liters that may or may not have been dispersed as thoroughly as the 16 million liters previously noted.

The standard range for environmental Tritium is 0.1 to 0.2 nCi/Liter. Testing in areas other than the WTC revealed levels (less than) < 0.13 nCi/Liter. Ignoring the levels found in WTC 6 which were 30 times what should have been found, the sewer water contained 0.164 minus the standard environment range of 0.13 there is at least 0.034 more activity than should have been found after having been diluted 120 million times. This does not count the other areas of contamination levels inside the WTC that were 20 times that amount of Tritium activity and were diluted by varying amounts of 16 million liters of water.

The value of Tritium activity of sewerage water was reported three times - each time with a different standard deviation - 0.074, 0.74 and 74. The values for Tritium activity of samples in WTC 6 were reported twice with a different standard deviation - 0.17, 0.15 and later as - 17, 15. Without further investigation as to the correct standard deviation value, the data is useless. Perhaps, if the "scientists" had spent a little more time on reporting/evaluating what they were supposed to be doing rather than hedging, leading and biasing the information, they might have been able to report relevant and correct information. Insignificant things like the volume of the pools from which the samples were taken, actually taking more samples from the site than away from the site, or using the "box model" for evaluating the amount of dilution of samples from different areas. All of the facts presented regarding Tritium were taken from this government report.

The Discarded Ambulances and Fire Trucks: Too Dusty? Or Too Radioactive?

http://www.usavsus.info/WTC-911/WTC10-fk1967aa.jpg

Click here for more photos of fire and emergency vehicles discarded.

More Cancers:

By the end of 2006, there had been 400 diagnosed cancers in the WTC responders. Of these 400 cancer cases there are 75 blood cell cancers. At least one Stuyvesant high school (located very close to the WTC) student has also developed a blood cancer. A short list of the varied cancers includes thyroid (30), tongue and throat (25), testicular (16), brain (10), breast, prostate, and other soft tissue tumors in other areas of the body.


Original Article: The US Government’s Usage of Atomic Bombs - Domestic - WTC * Take the link what I discerned in 2006 and has been 'out there' since then - more than 1 million visits in the first month of my writing it. One will see the 'discoveries' of others since then were all things explained in 2006.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is entirely, completely and only my opinion based on the interpretation of the referenced information. While the views above may be shared by many millions exhausted by this government, they are only my views and I do not imply that they are actually shared by anyone else.

This article is not copyrighted and may be published, copied, dispersed, posted, and transported as long as the original URL, and authors" credit accompany it.

Dei Jurum Conventus
Ed Ward, MD

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:07 PM

The 'Traces Of Tritium' WTC 9-11 Lie Is Obstruction Of Justice By Accessories To Murd
 
The 'Traces Of Tritium' WTC 9-11 Lie Is Obstruction Of Justice By Accessories To Murder
http://www.rense.com/general85/911.htm

1. "Obstruction of Justice" - http://definitions.uslegal.com/o/obs...on-of-justice/ - "hiding evidence" is part of the classic textbook definition of Obstruction of Justice. To "conceal" or lie about evidence of a crime makes one an accessory after the fact to that crime. http://www.sagepub.com/lippmanstudy/.../Ch06_Ohio.pdf

2. Trace definition as it applies to quantity: Occurring in extremely small amounts or in quantities less than a standard limit (In the case of tritium, this standard level would be 20 TUs - the high of quoted standard background levels.). http://www.thefreedictionary.com/trace

3. The stated values of tritium from the DOE report "Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center". "A water sample from the WTC sewer, collected on 9/13/01, contained 0.164±0.074 (2ó) nCi/L (164 pCi/L +/- 74 pCi/L - takes 1,000 trillionths to = 1 billionth) of HTO. A split water sample, collected on 9/21/01 from the basement of WTC Building 6, contained 3.53±0.17 and 2.83±0.15 nCi/L ( 3,530.0 pCi/L +/- 170 pCi/L and 2,830 pCi/L +/- 150 pCi/L), respectively. https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf Pico to Nano converter - http://www.unitconversion.org/prefixes/pic...conversion.html Nano to Pico converter - http://www.unit-conversion.info/metric.html

4. 1 TU = 3.231 pCi/L (trillionths per liter) or 0.003231 nCi/L (billionths per liter) - http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q2282.html - (My original TU calculations came out to 3.19 pCi/L, but I will gladly accept these referenced minimally higher values. http://www.clayandiron.com/news.jhtml?meth...mp;news.id=1022 )

5. In 2001 normal background levels of Tritium are supposedly around 20 TUs (prior to nuclear testing in the 60's, normal background tritium water levels were 5 to 10 TUs - http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q2282.html ). However, groundwater studies show a significanlty less water concentration: Groundwater age estimation using tritium only provides semi-quantitative, "ball park" values: · <0.8 TU indicates submodern water (prior to 1950s) · 0.8 to 4 TU indicates a mix of submodern and modern water · 5 to 15 TU indicates modern water (< 5 to 10 years) · 15 to 30 TU indicates some bomb tritium http://www.grac.org/agedatinggroundwater.pdf But, instead of "5 to 15 TU" (which would make the increase in background levels even higher), I will use 20 TUs as the 2001 environmental level to give all possible credibility to the lie of "Traces".

6. Let's calculate the proven referenced facts. Tritium level confirmed in the DOE report of traces of tritium = 3,530 pCi/L (+/- 170 pCi/L, but we will use the mean of 3,530 pCi/L). 3,530 pCi/L (the referenced lab value) divided by the backgroud level of 20TUs (20 X 3.231 p (1 TU = 3.21 pCi/L) = 64.62 pCi/L as the high normal background/standard level. 3,530 divided by 64.62 pCi/L = 54.63 TIMES THE NORMAL BACKGROUND LEVEL. 3,530 pCi/L divided by 3.231 pCi/L (1 TU) = 1,092.54 TUs

7. This is my 'fave' because lies tend to eat their young. Muon physicist Steven Jones calls 1,000 TUs "The graphs below show that hydrogen-bomb testing boosted tritium levels in rain by several orders of magnitude. (Ref.: http://www.science.uottawa.ca/~eih/ch7/7tritium.htm ) - http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters...he-Hypoth\ esis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf Interesting isn't it.

8. Thomas M. Semkowa, Ronald S. Hafnerc, Pravin P. Parekha, Gordon J. Wozniakd, Douglas K. Hainesa, Liaquat Husaina, Robert L. Rabune. Philip G. Williams and Steven Jones have all called over 1,000 TUs of Tritium, "Traces". Even at the height of nuclear bomb testing 98% - after thousands of Megatons of nuclear testing - of the rainwater tests were 2,000 TUs or less. <https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf>https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf

9. Over one year ago, Steven Jones, Alex Jones, Fetzer, Wood, most of the "BYU crew", most of the so called "911 Truth" groups/sites and indeed the public at large have been notified by me of the falseness of the "Traces" lie, but instead of promoting the truth and addressing it, have simply run from it and seem to be doing all in their power to suppress it. <http://www.rense.com/general80/prov.htm>http://www.rense.com/general80/prov.htm

10. It is also important to note that the tritium present was diluted by at least some portion of 1 million liters of water accounting for BILLIONS of TUs.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/136

Thermate, C4, Micro Nukes Prove 911 Was an Inside/Outside Job.
http://www.rense.com/general80/dprah.htm

The above are my opinion based on the proven referenced facts.

Ed Ward, MD :applause:

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:08 PM

Recently Declassified Video of Testing of the First Micro Nuke - The Davey Crockett - 0.018 kiloton

This .018 kiloton micro nuke video shows that a .018 kiloton micro nuke could easily have been basically contained with the WTCs.

The data presented is an above ground detonation. Its crude design would have been unfocused and would have been no where near as clean as a 3rd (neutron) or fourth generation nuke. Based on this referenced proven data, the size of an underground, focused, Minimum Residual Radiation - http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm - micro nuke explosion could have been 2 or 3 times as powerful and still been basically contained by the WTC buildings, possibly as large a 1 kiloton, but believe that would be about the maximum that could be used and still be effectively hidden.

Ed Ward, MD

http://www.rense.com/general87/micro.htm

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:10 PM

Understanding The Scam of Thermite on 911' by Dick Eastman, Dr. Steven Jones

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/481

A simple rebuttal to the lunacy of http://www.rense.com/general86/therm.htm

This BS 'Bogus Science' has been addressed previously by me with a tremendous amount of factual evidence so I will not spend much time on this scam BS other than to post the previous referenced facts.

I will address one statement that is so rediculous as to be laughable in its ignorance and stupidity if it weren't for the fact it being used to hide/scam the real facts of the destruction which by definition are those obstructing justice and accessories to murder: http://www.rense.com/general85/911.htm

"This was scientific proof that beneath the rubble of the twin towers were extreme hot spots in which iron boiled for more than 15 weeks. ...it became clear that an aluminothermic reaction like Thermite was creating these hot spots."

Similar burn-rates around 350 m/s are measured for these "super-thermites" http://www.mrs.org/s_mrs/sec_subscribe.asp...p;action=detail A proven quote from my article dealing with the "The BS 'Bogus Science' of 'Explosive SuperThermite' Versus the Facts of a 'Deflagration Material'. http://www.rense.com/general77/geddno.htm

There are approximately 2,628,000 seconds in a month. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...04102842AAuCDvw 2,628,000 seconds X 3.75 months = 9,855,000 seconds. 350 meters X 9,855,000 seconds = 3,449,250,000 meters (approximately 3.45 Billion meters or 2,14 Million miles) of thermite length would be needed to burn for 15 weeks.

Wow, that's kinda long but maybe the super duper double top secret thermate was also super thin and they were able to hide 2.14 million miles of super thin thermate, so how much would it have to weigh?

It takes about 1 gm of enhanced thermate to bring 1 gm of steel to melting point - a one to one ratio. So how much would it take to bring 5 acres of land 15 feet deep to the 1600 degrees?

"at the US NIST, the average density of dirt is 120 lbs per cubic foot." http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/230/235/weigh...toryof105-8.pdf

There are 27 cubic feet in a yard. http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/QQ/database/....04/carol3.html So 120 lbs/cubic ft X 27 cubic ft = 3240 lbs/cubic yard

One acre is equal to 4840 square yards and your pond is 15 feet or 5 yards deep therefore the number of cubic yards is 4840x15 or 72600 cubic yards.<http://www.blurtit.com/q6688887.html>http://www.blurtit.com/q6688887.html We have no official numbers on the depth of the 1600 degree temperature of the 5 to 7 acres of land, but unofficial estimates seem to indicate about 15 feet, so lets use that.

3240 lbs/cubic yd X 72600/per acre = 235,224,000 lbs/acre. At a minimum 5 acres of land was brought to seering temperatures so 235,224,000 X 5 = 1,176,120,000 lbs. So based on these basic approximate calculations the 'super thin invisible super top secret super thermate' would have to have been 2.14 Million miles long and would to have weighed approximately 1.176 Billion pounds.

The 911 Traces of Tritium Lie is Obstruction of Justice by Accessories to Murder. http://www.rense.com/general85/911.htm

Other Referenced Factual Articles of Evidence

TCN&911WIJ - Thermate, C4-like explosive, a Nuclear device & 911 Was an Inside/Outside Job!

1. Three Massive WTC Craters - See us gov LIDAR proof: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm

2. Five Acres of WTC Land Brought to Seering Temperatures in a Few Hours by an 'Anaerobic, Chlorine Fueled "Fire" - Impossible by Basic Laws of Physics. See us gov Thermal Images proof: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm

3. Tritium Levels 55 Times (normal) Background Levels assessed a numerical value of 'traces' and 'of no human concern'. See us gov (DOE report) proof:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/141

4. An Impossible "Fire" (Combustion Process). See Laws of Physics for Fire/Combustion Process and Dr. Cahill's data on 'anaerobic incineration'. http://rense.com/general77/newlaws.htm

5. 3 Billion pounds of building instantly turned into 2 Billion pounds of micronized dust. http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm

6. 16 inch steel Spires that withstood 1/2 a Billion pounds of building falling on them and suddenly turn into limp noodles and partially vaporize. http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm

7. Hiroshima effect cancers in responders and locals. http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm

All of the above are facts are proven with referenced links of reputable data sources - many are from the government itself and more... Ed Ward, MD - 911 Related Articles - TCN&911WIJ - Chronological:

Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/08/21/ward.htm
Micro-Nukes at the WTC http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm
Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm
Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC ttp://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/04/16/ward.htm
Verifying the Source of WTC Tritium Levels that Are 55 Times "Background Levels" http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm
Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55 Times Background Levels http://www.rense.com/general77/levels.htm

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:18 PM

'Thermite?' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/484

National Geoscamics has caused me to re-evaluate my position on 'thermite'. I no longer believe it was used to cut steel.

Take a look at this... http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/911Demolition1.htm And the fact flexible contact linear thermite didn't exist then or now. However, flexible contact linear cutting charges have been around since at least 1995. Plus, thermite is hard to light, a timing nightmare.

1 wiring with cutting charges with explosiveback up, or

2 wirings one for explosives and one for thermite? and it's added problems? I don't think so.

But, thermite makes a great cover for a nuke. The amount of 'thermite residue' was fairly large (nothing more than rust and aluminum), and we all saw thermite burning after the crash/fire - according to NG jet fuel is hard to light - but thermite grenades would ignite residual jet fuel after the initial missile blast and would fit the thermite I saw on video.

Thermite is cover for the massive amount of nuclear heat from the micro IMO.

The only thermite I saw was one of the dinky thermite grenade quality.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/484

There is alot more, but that basically gets you up to speed.

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:28 PM

'Unexplained abonormalities?' = 0

Everything is 100% covered by micronukes, demo/cutting charges to cover the nuke explosion (both are needed one to cover the one that removes all the macro evidence). It's 100% explained and it's CLASSIC TEXTBOOK RESIDUE OF A NUKE.

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 16:45 PM

Where the hell am I? Every other 911 reform site, I'm banned, moderated, and attacked by admin and the good ole boys of the site. Here, the admin actually thanks me for my stuff and has posted it for exposure. The truth no matter where it points is a hard row to hoe.

Interesting and Unusual -.

Thanks for the 'Thanks' Phil - my pleasure and your assistance is appreciated.

Best,

Ed

Not many can take the full truth. LOL, now I feel right at home after being banned for BS... ;-)

Ed Ward MD

EdWardMD 31 Jul 2010 17:22 PM

Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm

Diagram of charges and nuke placement...
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier2.htm

Crash Course on Military Explosives...
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/explosives.htm

Information on nukes via the Bali Blast.
http://www.cuttingedge.org/NEWS/n1715.cfm

trueblue 31 Jul 2010 17:25 PM

Hi Ed,
welcome to letsroll!!!

yes, it is an interesting and unusual place! :lol:

2getherwestand 31 Jul 2010 17:49 PM

My apologies Ed.At first glance i thought you were another "no-planer" type new member.I was wrong.You actually posted some very good stuff.Welcome to Lets Roll.Stick around,the rides just starting to get good.(by the way,i've had a relationship with a girl for the past 9 years who has a brother named-Ed Ward)Once again,i apologize and welcome to Lets Roll.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2011 Lets Roll.com All Rights ReservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger