• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

this time its nukes at gz

yes I have seen this, and I am embarrassed to say that he is in the same profession as I.

Dear god help me, what they sometimes allow to graduate.

TAM:(
 
*head asplodes*

Good Ed that's just awful. I love the part where the guy talks about "hot spots" in the debris... yeah... we call those "fires."
 
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm

Update: The US Government’s Usage of Atomic Bombs - Domestic - WTC
By Ed Ward, MD
Click to expand...

Will this post vaporize at LCF? Are they using nukes to destroy threads at LCF? That could explain why loyalist LCF posters suffer from brain vaporization? Like the metal in the video that vaporized?

Ed Ward has gone on a short trip to crazy land. His nukes forgot to go BOOM. Even a neutron bomb leaves a big hole, not a pile.

More repeats of dumb ideas.
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said:
yes I have seen this, and I am embarrassed to say that he is in the same profession as I.

Dear god help me, what they sometimes allow to graduate.

TAM:(
Click to expand...

I hear you, TAM. I feel the same way when someone mentions Philip Berg :(
but the truth is that no profession is immune from having a few nutcases as members, and no profession is immune from having members become nutcases at some point in their lives.
 
I think it's funny that the physics blogger over at Debunking 9/11 concluded that the falling tower produced an energy level equivalent to a small nuclear device all by itself.
 
Rahne Everson said:
I think it's funny that the physics blogger over at Debunking 9/11 concluded that the falling tower produced an energy level equivalent to a small nuclear device all by itself.
Click to expand...

A very small nuclear device -- I estimated 0.16 kilotons TNT equivalent per tower -- but that inference is accurate.

However, it is trivial to demonstrate that no bombs of such magnitude were detonated at the WTC.
 
Just that, really? Well it certainly goes to show that the general perception of explosive tons is really overexagerrated.
 
T.A.M. said:
yes I have seen this, and I am embarrassed to say that he is in the same profession as I.

Dear god help me, what they sometimes allow to graduate.
Click to expand...
I can understand the feeling so well.

Most truthers on this forum have the same university degree as I have. :(
 
Does this nuke theory include my all time favourite CT invention, the "Cone of Destruction"? (You think I'm joking, don't you?).

Also, does it include the evidence (presented by Dylan Avery himself, I believe) that proves EM radiation from a nuke because a digital video camera captures a flickering Burger King sign?

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
Does this nuke theory include my all time favourite CT invention, the "Cone of Destruction"? (You think I'm joking, don't you?).

Also, does it include the evidence (presented by Dylan Avery himself, I believe) that proves EM radiation from a nuke because a digital video camera captures a flickering Burger King sign?

-Gumboot
Click to expand...
And what about ionizing radiation?
Do they have no idea (well, I know the answer to that) how much ionizing radiation would be given off even by a suitcase nuke?
They can't even do the simplest of research.
 
The Quest guy got his plan from an MD. He takes the MDs word because the guy is an MD. Obviously Quest is not an intelligent man.
 
firecoins said:
The Quest guy got his plan from an MD. He takes the MDs word because the guy is an MD. Obviously Quest is not an intelligent man.
Click to expand...

I guess it's slightly better than taking some guy on the internet's word for it because they're some guy on the internet.

You know, like how getting hit by a bus is slightly better than getting hit by a freight train. Like that.
 
T.A.M. said:
yes I have seen this, and I am embarrassed to say that he is in the same profession as I.

Dear god help me, what they sometimes allow to graduate.

TAM:(
Click to expand...
Hey! At least your guy isn't supposed to know anything about fizicks and engineering...We got to deal with the comatose professor...
 
R.Mackey said:
A very small nuclear device -- I estimated 0.16 kilotons TNT equivalent per tower -- but that inference is accurate.
Click to expand...

Tactical nukes go down to about 10 tons of TNT worth, whereas my estimate agrees with yours. A 10 ton of TNT tactical nuke would release about 40 GJ of energy, whereas the most conservative estimate of the tower's potential energy is about 10 times that at 400GJ (which would be 100 tons or 0.1 kt of TNT).

Of course energy is only half the picture... nukes and building collapses release energy in very different ways differing greatly in average power, maximum instantaneous power, etc, etc.
 
gumboot said:
Also, does it include the evidence (presented by Dylan Avery himself, I believe) that proves EM radiation from a nuke because a digital video camera captures a flickering Burger King sign?

-Gumboot
Click to expand...


No, but he does quote a study that found radioisotopes in the dust:


Radionuclides. We analyzed the gamma spectrum of the samples using an EG&G/Ortec high-purity Ge detector (50% relative efficiency) gamma counter (EG&G/Ortec Instruments, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN). We analyzed approximately 50 peaks based on statistical significance (counting/lack of interferences). These included thorium, uranium, actinium series, and primordial radionuclides. Liquid scintillation analyses were conducted for emissions on the total dust and smoke samples using a Packard Tri-Carb Model 2770 TR/SL (Packard Instrument, Meriden, CT). The MDA for alpha radioactivity was 0.30 DPM (0.14 pCi) based on a NIST-traceable 226Ra standard (National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD). When placed in the liquid scintillation fluid, the WTC samples are somewhat darker than the backgrounds and calibration standard, which may cause slight underreporting of the beta activity due to quenching and standard-to-sample efficiency bias.
Click to expand...


Oh, except for one little thing:


We found only background levels of alpha radionuclide activity by liquid scintillation counter analysis of all three samples. Beta activity was slightly elevated, but not more than twice the background level. There were no levels of gamma activity > 1 Bq/g except for naturally occurring potassium-40.
Click to expand...



Someone should warn him that the ground around his home likely contains similar levels of Uranium contamination, and that his basement probably has more contamination that this just from Radon.

Seriously, 0.14 pCi? Less than one Pico Curie?

The basis for the curie is the radioactivity of one gram of radium. Radium decays at a rate of about 2.2 trillion disintegrations (2.2 x 102) per minute. A picocurie is one trillionth of a curie. Thus, a picocurie (abbreviated as pCi) represents 2.2 disintegrations per minute.
Click to expand...



Must have been Nukes!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom