Melted Boots at Ground Zero Prove Abnormally High Heat
More On The WTC Responders’ Melted Boots
By The Anonymous Physicist
In my China Syndrome archived articles here, I have previously noted that the rubble surface, throughout much of the WTC, was hot for several weeks after 9/11, and the skyscraper basements were hotter still-- molten metal-- up to six months after 9/11. But the proponents of the DEW and OCT hangouts continue to scream that there were no high temperatures during or after 9/11—because their hangout mechanisms are cold, and thus their scenarios themselves collapse, if high heat were demonstrated during or after 9/11. So let us now examine other testimony specifically in the matter of responders’ melted boots.
First this Red Cross site notes that WTC Responders often had to replace their boots "twice a day" at a Red Cross respite center--which also provided other essentials including “first aid, food, clothing… and counseling.”
Here a responder, Brendan Butkus— a UConn Physics major and former Marine, reports that, “The asphalt was so hot it melted boots and tires.” Note that the last item perhaps provides a new understanding for some of the photos of vehicles whose tires were burnt and/or gone. Just as responders’ boots melted if they walked on certain areas, so too vehicle tires melted if they were driven on to certain areas, beginning immediately after the towers were demolished.
Here we learn that, “boots were especially needed. The pile of twisted steel and debris was STILL SMOLDERING AFTER TWO MONTHS, and the heat was melting the soles on the workers' boots.”
Then this video of now disabled NYPD officer/responder, Craig Bartmer, has him stating he had “5 pairs of melted boots.” He also talks about how quickly, after 9/11, remaining steel beams were carted away. IMO, this was because the steel beams would have yielded evidence of vaporization and/or neutron bombardment which would have been irrefutable proof of the nuking of the WTC.
Despite all this, history has taught us that we should expect to see the continuation of the “big lie”— more claims of “no proof" of heat during or after 9/11 at the WTC. The responders and everyone else saying this are liars or crazy.” But it is quite clear just who the liars and shills are.
By The Anonymous Physicist
In my China Syndrome archived articles here, I have previously noted that the rubble surface, throughout much of the WTC, was hot for several weeks after 9/11, and the skyscraper basements were hotter still-- molten metal-- up to six months after 9/11. But the proponents of the DEW and OCT hangouts continue to scream that there were no high temperatures during or after 9/11—because their hangout mechanisms are cold, and thus their scenarios themselves collapse, if high heat were demonstrated during or after 9/11. So let us now examine other testimony specifically in the matter of responders’ melted boots.
First this Red Cross site notes that WTC Responders often had to replace their boots "twice a day" at a Red Cross respite center--which also provided other essentials including “first aid, food, clothing… and counseling.”
Here a responder, Brendan Butkus— a UConn Physics major and former Marine, reports that, “The asphalt was so hot it melted boots and tires.” Note that the last item perhaps provides a new understanding for some of the photos of vehicles whose tires were burnt and/or gone. Just as responders’ boots melted if they walked on certain areas, so too vehicle tires melted if they were driven on to certain areas, beginning immediately after the towers were demolished.
Here we learn that, “boots were especially needed. The pile of twisted steel and debris was STILL SMOLDERING AFTER TWO MONTHS, and the heat was melting the soles on the workers' boots.”
Then this video of now disabled NYPD officer/responder, Craig Bartmer, has him stating he had “5 pairs of melted boots.” He also talks about how quickly, after 9/11, remaining steel beams were carted away. IMO, this was because the steel beams would have yielded evidence of vaporization and/or neutron bombardment which would have been irrefutable proof of the nuking of the WTC.
Despite all this, history has taught us that we should expect to see the continuation of the “big lie”— more claims of “no proof" of heat during or after 9/11 at the WTC. The responders and everyone else saying this are liars or crazy.” But it is quite clear just who the liars and shills are.
posted by spooked at 8:06 AM
18 Comments:
lol, are you still pushing this crap? Does Anon Poplectic even know what "hangout" means?
Yeah, look in the mirror.
I think it's great that Anon Poplectic admits DEW was used.
and i think it's great that the wood proponents keep insisting that there was no great heat associated with the destruction of the wtc despite all the evidence of such.
LOL?
There are two ways to view these independent accounts of extremely high heat:
1) it is part of a massive disinfo campaign to cover up DEW, where people invented stories about their boots melting and about molten steel
2) these people are telling the truth
Given that the nuke scenario is much more likely overall than DEW, and also that I doubt that these and many other people are completely lying about heat at ground zero, I think the answer is #2.
We're not talking about something you could fool people with like planes shown on videos. These were real people with seemingly real accounts.
It is fascinating that the above demonstrates that the DEW shills are the same as the O.C.T. shills, just as I said. The above top sure looks like the retard, "Swart", posting anonymously, so as to not give away that DEW/OCT shills are one and the same.
Both DEW and OCT hangouts collapse if the Demolition was hot and the aftermath was hot.
Both have been demonstrated, and all these witnesses, and videos and photos would easily win any honest court case over this issue. Both the hot demolition (See Dr. Barnett's statement of "vaporized steel" from "extraordinarily high temperatures") and the massive evidence of the China Syndrome aftermath must be denied by the regime shills. Two sides of the same coin---DEW/OCT.
That's why the biggest supporters of the DEW hangout is the regime itself (Kirtland Air Base and physicist, Doug Beason.) Not counting intel agents like Fetzer.
As the article said, the DEW/OCT shills will be screaming, "no heat during or after the demolition" regardless of the proof. They have no choice, they live or die by that lie. They are married to it. They are divorced from reality and truth.
Anonymous Physicist
The important thing is that Anon Poplectic admits that both DEW and mininukes were used.
Now we need to examine the boots in question (are there at least photographs available?) to determine to what extent they "melted" and to what extent they were dissociated by other processes. The stories of widespread high heat and "molten" metal have, of course, been conclusively disproven by the lack of steam during the post-9/11 rainstorms.
Onward.
"lack of steam during the post-9/11 rainstorms."
Link, please.
And I sure don't see where AP says DEW were used.
"Fires still burned deep inside the enormous pile of rubble and there was just enough rain falling to make it steam like a dragon blowing hot air out of its nostrils!"
http://keuilian.com/remember.html
And I sure don't see where AP says DEW were used.
Anon Poplectic calls DEW a "hangout." That means DEW were used, but not the only thing used. It's what the word means. Thus AP has conceded the point.
Unless, of course, Anon Poplectic is issuing his vitriolic jeremiads based upon a concept concerning which he has zero understanding.
Again.
http://www.google.com/search?q=wtc+rain+%22steam+explosion%22+molten
cf also the data of the DELTA group at UCDavis. The "smoke" went away during the rainstorms. The exact opposite of what you'd see with molten metal everywhere.
there are many photos of what looks like steam to me - these are found on prof wood's site where it is claimed that this seemingly (to me) steam is clouds of "molecular dissociation".
there is even a video clip of this steam linked to in the article.
ok, lets say that there was no steam, no heat, and thus no nuclear demolition of wtc -
how does the official fairytale account for the fact that much of the massive steel wtc core columns simply disappeared before it even hit the ground?
this fact can be verified simply by looking at photos taken, both of the collapse, and of the ground zero aftermath.
obviously the official NIST/911 commission fairytale is very wrong.
The nice thing about dealing with liars is that many can't stop themselves from ALWAYS lying.
This desperate DEW/OCT shill now lies and says that I said DEW was used, when I said in my articles that DEW is an evidence-free psyop with nothing to back its claimed use.
"Limited hangout" was used because the shills, like you, used any exotic phenomena present --from nukes, of course--to claim these phenomena coming from DEW.
So these phenomena that
I have described could not occur from conventional explosives or from pristine planes and pristine pancakes, were real, and that is why DEW could be called a hangout. The exotic phenomenaay be real, but from nukes. There is no evidence of DEW and massive evidence of nukes, evidence of high heat, evidence of radiation. And no evidence of DEW (which lives or dies on claims of "no heat, no radiation") which was created by regime shills to hide the nuking of the WTC on 9/11.
Read my articles, liar. Stop your obvious lies. Don't try to put words in my mouth. We can tell just who you are, don't you have enough forums to spread your stupid lies on, DEWhugger/Woodlover?
Have you no compassion for all those dying now from the radiation? Do they pay you enough to over-ride all maternal and human instincts?
Anonymous Physicist
The "smoke" went away during the rainstorms.
Well, duh, smoke WOULD be expected to go away from water being poured on hot burning rubble.
I don't understand why it is so hard for Wood and CB Brooklyn to see the difference between hot steam from a steam pipe explosion and some steam rising from hot rubble.
The fact is, there is no solid evidence for molecular dissociation, and there is no evidence that this was process involved in the destruction of the WTC.
As far as that picture of a "cold hole", it seems a bit silly to think that there would be molten steel at the bottom. I'm sure that hole was watered down extensively before anyone went down there. The hot spots would still remain under the rubble. There is no evidence that that hole was a hot spot itself.
What I would like to see is: 1) some REAL and DIRECT evidence for DEW use at the WTC, AND 2) a witness who was at ground zero and says the rubble WASN'T hot.
Find these, then we can talk more.
smoke WOULD be expected to go away from water being poured on hot burning rubble.
But, duh, the "Steam" would increase if there really molten metal everywhere. Will you ever acknowledge this? (You still have failed to acknowledge or offer an alternate hypothesis for the holes and cuts in the street and other buildings.)
The mininuke-only hangout, like the thermite hangout, covers for the planetary DEW control-bid being put into place following the rigged proof-of-concept on 9/11.
The willful ignorance of the likes of Anon Poplectic lays the groundwork for brutal global dictatorship.
Fairy:
Here's the challenge from Spooked:
"What I would like to see is: 1) some REAL and DIRECT evidence for DEW use at the WTC, AND 2) a witness who was at ground zero and says the rubble WASN'T hot."
No reply, as usual.
Instead we get: "The mininuke-only hangout, like the thermite hangout, covers for the planetary DEW control-bid being put into place following the rigged proof-of-concept on 9/11."
Gobbledy goop like Wood's website. By your moronic quote, you imply that--and I have seen this from DEWhuggers, even Wood implies it-- that nukes were used. And as I, and the Finnish military expert have stated, conventinal explosives were used in subsidiary fashion to allow a lower powered nuke(s) to be used.
Now if you and other DEWhuggers admit nukes were used along with conv. explosives, per the above, what phucking need was there for DEW, space beams, and the like??? And from where, and by whom please.
And once again, there's not one shred of evidence that DEW, space beams, etc. were used.
I love the way Wood started her Madison, WI talk by saying "9/11 was not Pearl Harbor, it was Hiroshima" after I sent my article alluding to Hiroshima to Spooked. Except in the lying/regime agent way Wood is using it--it was Hiroshima/NOT. It was Hiroshima but without radiation, etc.
When there is much evidence of the radiation, from the WTC victims' hanging skin, the teeth falling out of responders, the "rare" cancers of thyroid, blood and lymph well known to occur from radiation exposure, not dust inhalation, and much more, even the WTC photo that regime agent Steven Jones had to orangeify because it had the blue light of nuclear reactions (see my articles on the criticality of "tickling the dragon's tail" experiments.)
Yes, it's easy to see the interconnectedness, the collusion, of the 3 ludicrous regime hangouts: OCT, Thermite, and DEW. Each one assisting in trying to hide the evidence of the nuking of the WTC on 9/11.
So take your lying Hiroshima/Not, or Hiroshima/Light, and get out of here. It WAS (a smaller version of) Hiroshima, with much improved versions of nukes, but nukes nonetheless.
And when it comes to steam coming off of watered WTC rubble: The DEW (really OCT) shills will scream, "no steam." But then when photos or videos or eyewitnesses' descriptions have said yes, steam--well, then it was the newly discovered "molecular dissociation clouds" phenomena. Both ad hoc and a croc.
The truth is, only the PTB have the ability to have promoted. far and wide, such an evidence-free set of gobbledy goop, and I have well described how and why they did so.
Anonymous Physicist
Holes and cuts in the ground and in surrounding buildings could be made by a combination of falling debris and by planted explosives.
I think there really is no evidence for ground zero being "cold". If it rained, I would imagine that that would have some cooling effect on the hot debris, and indeed lessen the steam.
Now here is where it gets interesting. Normally, putting water on a hot pile would cool the heat and extinguish the fires. And I imagine the water had some temporary cooling effect. But the heat kept coming back! This would be explained perfectly by unexploded nukes that are undergoing low level fission without reaching criticality and are thus generating constant heat.
I think it is instructive for everyone to read the entirety of one of the articles I cited in my first article on the China Syndrome aftermath to 9/11.
From this URL on Chernobyl,
http://www.psaindia.org/Reviews4.html
I took this quote:
"‘China Syndrome’ of meltdown had taken place inside the reactor core. Thermal explosion and outbreak of fires in over thirty places were due to high-temperature and falling uranium core fragments on to the roofs of adjacent buildings."
Note that if these nuclear reacting fragments were not cleaned up (taken away, treated and presumably buried somewhere), they'd still be there releasing great heat. This is similar to what I have proposed regarding nuclear reacting fragments from fizzled or (conventionally only) exploded mini-nukes. From such redundant nukes high up in the towers giving rise to area-wide, two month long, high temps and to basement fizzled nukes giving rise to the six month long, even greater heat, and molten metal hotpsots.
See how the Chernobyl article cites that sand was one of the things immediately brought in and dropped on top of the radioactive core. Wood's own site describes how on the very first night of 9/11, Giuliani had many truckloads of sand or earth brought in. As I have said, everything on her cite relates more to nukes and not to "DEW."
Note also how the Chernobyl article indicate how those first responders were "not around to receive their awards." But other articles indicate how the cancer death toll takes decades to properly observe and analyze.
The relatively quick, and increasing number of "rare" thyroid, blood, and lymph cancers among 9/11 responders is both foreboding and indicative of what some 9/11 responders were exposed to.
Anonymous Physicist
Post a Comment
<< Home