Shaking Ground at Beginning of Tower Destruction, Hot Dust, Exploding Car-- More Evidence of Nukes (and EMP) at the WTC
“Don’t Ask Me How”, Says Fleeing Responder, As Car Catches Fire. Here’s Probably How.
By The Anonymous Physicist
You may recall my detailed analysis of EMT Patricia Ondrovic's eyewitness WTC destruction testimony.
I indicated her two interviews demonstrated that she witnessed cars catching fire, as WTC 5, 6, 2 were destroyed. She was in front of the lobby of WTC 6. She was knocked to the ground by a door exploding off of one of these cars that caught fire just as WTC 5, 6, 2 were being destroyed. I explained how EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse), from nuclear bombs, would intersect the car, and would induce great current in the metal, which degrades as heat and would then lead to fire, and the exploding car door.
Now we may have further corroboration that at least some of the so-called “toasted cars” may have been due to EMP, and also possible further evidence of the nuking of the WTC. Here we have Paramedic Robert Ruiz who has just barely escaped WTC2 being destroyed. First he describes [page 11], the ground near him shaking BEFORE the “collapse” starts. This could be evidence of an underground nuclear bomb going off before the top was brought down. He says, the ground shakes, and then WTC2 starts to come down, and he runs and survives under a nearby, “one foot…cutout” doorway, as he is pelted with debris.
Ruiz then states [page 16], "I was trapped there. Like things weren't bad enough already, the car that's parked right on that corner catches on fire. I don't mean a little fire, the entire thing. Don't ask me how. The entire car caught on fire. You would think maybe just a motor part or just the engine part. But this entire car just goes up in fire."
So we see that he can’t explain why the nearby car INSTANTLY catches entirely on fire. If it were hit by any fiery object, he would have seen and/or heard this, and would not be so incredulous. Note that he states the dust [pyroclastic] cloud was indeed hot at that time. But if the cloud was the cause of the entire car immediately catching on fire, wouldn’t it have done the same thing to him too, being right there (as was Ondrovic near her fiery car), and being engulfed by this same cloud? So the cloud was hot at that time, and in his area, but it is NOT that hot to toast him...as he is not metallic!
I assert that just as with EMT Patricia Ondrovic, Paramedic Robert Ruiz likely witnessed the effects of EMP. Perhaps even from what I called a “cleaner nuke” detonated after final “collapse” and described in my first article archived at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com. Certainly this deserves careful analysis of this possibility. So once again, analyisis of eyewitness testimony appears to corroborate the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and concomitant Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP.)
By The Anonymous Physicist
You may recall my detailed analysis of EMT Patricia Ondrovic's eyewitness WTC destruction testimony.
I indicated her two interviews demonstrated that she witnessed cars catching fire, as WTC 5, 6, 2 were destroyed. She was in front of the lobby of WTC 6. She was knocked to the ground by a door exploding off of one of these cars that caught fire just as WTC 5, 6, 2 were being destroyed. I explained how EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse), from nuclear bombs, would intersect the car, and would induce great current in the metal, which degrades as heat and would then lead to fire, and the exploding car door.
Now we may have further corroboration that at least some of the so-called “toasted cars” may have been due to EMP, and also possible further evidence of the nuking of the WTC. Here we have Paramedic Robert Ruiz who has just barely escaped WTC2 being destroyed. First he describes [page 11], the ground near him shaking BEFORE the “collapse” starts. This could be evidence of an underground nuclear bomb going off before the top was brought down. He says, the ground shakes, and then WTC2 starts to come down, and he runs and survives under a nearby, “one foot…cutout” doorway, as he is pelted with debris.
Ruiz then states [page 16], "I was trapped there. Like things weren't bad enough already, the car that's parked right on that corner catches on fire. I don't mean a little fire, the entire thing. Don't ask me how. The entire car caught on fire. You would think maybe just a motor part or just the engine part. But this entire car just goes up in fire."
So we see that he can’t explain why the nearby car INSTANTLY catches entirely on fire. If it were hit by any fiery object, he would have seen and/or heard this, and would not be so incredulous. Note that he states the dust [pyroclastic] cloud was indeed hot at that time. But if the cloud was the cause of the entire car immediately catching on fire, wouldn’t it have done the same thing to him too, being right there (as was Ondrovic near her fiery car), and being engulfed by this same cloud? So the cloud was hot at that time, and in his area, but it is NOT that hot to toast him...as he is not metallic!
I assert that just as with EMT Patricia Ondrovic, Paramedic Robert Ruiz likely witnessed the effects of EMP. Perhaps even from what I called a “cleaner nuke” detonated after final “collapse” and described in my first article archived at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com. Certainly this deserves careful analysis of this possibility. So once again, analyisis of eyewitness testimony appears to corroborate the nuclear destruction of the WTC, and concomitant Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP.)
posted by spooked at 8:53 AM
61 Comments:
EMP doesn't produce heat, you idiot.
Does it ever occur to you to actually look shit up before it spews from your cake-hole?
Baby Low yeild [sic], resident retard.
Since you know nothing about anything, you should get someone who can read and think before you post.
One can readily find information on the induced voltage and current and heat from EMP. One only needs to be able to read.
E.g., under EMP at this webpage:
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Electrical%20weapon
We have this quote: “Conductive metals will heat up, with thin materials perhaps softening and melting or starting fires.”
It also says: “small pieces of metal carried by a person could heat up as a result of the induced currents and cause burns”
There is a wealth of info on this, retard.
Anonymous Physicist
Why did the EMP not knock out all the TV cameras? Why did it not knock out all the other electronic devices in Manhattan?
Why did the building collapse from the top down, if the nukes were in the basement? If a nuke had gone off, the building would have collasped at the basement level first.
What caused the fires in the upper floors?
Oh and by the way - an EMP is only radiated when detonation occurs above 10km i.e. An atmospheric detonation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse
So your EMP could not have even been created!!! This theory is so typical of all the BS you people write. No one ever does any research. Wake up!!
I suggest its time for you to wake up and come join us in the real world you idiot!!
It also says: “small pieces of metal carried by a person could heat up as a result of the induced currents and cause burns”
In addition to what Brian wrote above, a car is not a "small piece of metal carried by a person" you inbred half-wit.
In review:
No EMP.
No radiation.
No seismic spikes.
No heat or blast effects.
No nukes, you kook.
Oh and by the way - an EMP is only radiated when detonation occurs above 10km i.e. An atmospheric detonation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse
Total bullshit. You could use some reading comprehension lessons.
Sword of Comedy-- you are STILL gold!
www.wtcnuke.com
www.nucleardemolition.com
Spooked please provide some scientific evidence that an EMP can be created at ground level.
Do you even know what the hell an EMP is? Do you even know how it is caused.
Did you read through the wikipedia article I referenced. I doubt it.
Here is the section regarding EMP's, their cause and how it depends on the altitude of detonation -
Firstly the definition of an EMP -
electromagnetic radiation from an explosion (especially a nuclear explosion) or an intensely fluctuating magnetic field caused by Compton-recoil electrons and photoelectrons from photons scattered in the materials of the electronic or explosive device or in a surrounding medium. The resulting electric and magnetic fields may couple with electrical/electronic systems to produce damaging current and voltage surges. See Electromagnetic bomb for details on the damages resulting to electronic devices. The effects are usually not noticeable beyond the blast radius unless the device is nuclear or specifically designed to produce an electromagnetic shockwave.
Why do you think the B-29 that dropped the nukes over iroshima and Nagasaki weren't brought down by the EMP? Because Detonation was below 10km.
Ho is it that TV camera's were still able to operate during the collapse? HUH EXPLAIN THAT!!!! AN EMP WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE CAMERAS OUT!
How is it that radios were still able to work? What about fire engines and cars etc. They were still working after the collapse. News Choppers.
HOW IS IT THAT ALL THIS ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT WAS ABLE TO WORK, IF THEY HAD SUFFERED AN EMP?
Please explain that. Would love to see an explanation for that!!
Wake up people!
""wake up people!""
wake up to what, brian?
that 1400+ vehicles just spontaneously combusted because harry potter casted a spell on them? did "jet-fuel" splash on them even though some were a good mile away?
jet-fuel did not even burn the paint off my wheelbarrow.
fat man/little boy was 60 years ago - those were crude atomic bombs and are not representative of devices of today.
come on brian, wake up to what?
i will remind everyone that brian is under the impression that we believe that he actually believes that a hollow aluminum 767 with a lightweight smooth rounded nosecone can indeed defeat the massive pieces of steel and concrete of a wtc simply because it was traveling at the magic velocity of 500mph:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8009371&postID=9206573979448161610&isPopup=true
How did the EMP not affect the video camera's, the equipment of the tv stations. How did it not affect the news choppers.
How did it not affect the firefighters equipment - radios etc. How did it not affect the cellphones?
An EMP would have wiped all of this stuff out. You can't have an EMP that can selectively damage some things but not others. That is just PHYSICALLY impossible. Ions are not selective.
So please explain how an EMP can damage some cars but not camera's choppers, radios, cell phones, other cars, fire engines, fire fighting equipment, broadcasting equipment, computers, laptops and the hundreds of thousands of other equipment in the area?
How is that possible? Please explain. Really please do. A proper explanation of how an EMP can do this. You are theorising this, therefore YOU must provide the proof.
no brian, what is REALLY physically impossible is an aluminum 767 with a plastic nosecone punching thru the massive steel/concrete of a wtc like an armor piercing round.
what is REALLY physically impossible is for harry potter to cast a spell on all those autos that DID INDEED spontaneously combust.
anonymous physicist says that EMPs could do that. he also points out lots of other reasons why the wtc were most likely destroyed by nuclear demolition.
the only explanation that is called for at this point is for NIST/911 commission to exolain why they ignored the existence of these toasted autos in the first place.
and now it's probably about time for sword of comedy to chime in and once more say that no vehicles were toasted even though there are many photos of them.
^h.
Everything the troll/gestapo agent Brian says is a simple lie.
Examples:
"Why do you think the B-29 that dropped the nukes over Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't brought down by the EMP? Because Detonation was below 10km."
No retard. It wasn't brought down because "ancient" B-29s used primarily hydraulics, and not fancy electronic circuitry that could melt; it was also far away, by the time the nuke went off.
Then the regime's new scumbag here claims as they all do, that you only have EMP, if you have continent-wide EMP, from a high altitude megaton nuke. Lying filth, we are only talking about very localized EMP (from relatively very small nukes) a few blocks or so from Ground Zero. Do your homework lying shill, you will even find the map where phones or electricity went out. Most views of "collapse" are from far away. And most nearby cameras were confiscated and "played with" by your bosses at the gestapo agencies. And video interference is pointed out in some videos, such as "911 Eyewitness". And the "plane hit" videos, well shill, that has been proven to be TVfakery.
Then the shill writes about damaging computers etc. with EMP. Shill, the EMP likley did all that, but the nukes remember vaporized ALL electronics in the WTC buildings, along with the people, and everything else.
And shill, since even when asked here, you have never commented on the proven physically impossible OCT, NIST, Purdue scenarios, simulations and other detritus, this will henceforth be assumed you agree with them 100%.
You are just the latest regime agent/troll who spouts the same old lies. Basically summarizable as no "massive, massive nuke observed, therefore no nuke." The size of each nuke and its limited effects are laid out in my articles.
This was inevitable, with the retarded comments of swart-see above--proving untenable, the regime sends in someone with an engineering degree, but its the same stupid lies--of necessity, because the truth is on our side--being spouted with some "bigger words."
And why, if you are the regime's new gestapo engineer troll, you have no commment on my analysis of the strange smoke from WTC1? You are obviously here, from the regime to interfere with every possible post.
NOW YOU MUST PROVIDE DETAILED SCIENTIFIC PROOF TO BACK UP YOUR BELOVED MASS MURDERING REGIME'S IMPOSSIBLE OCT, NIST, and PURDUE SIMULATIONS & SCENARIOS.
We will wait till Hell freeezes over...
Anonymous Physicist
the 'sword and brian comedy hour' is pointless at this point.
the ground zero responders that are dying one after another and their families are not stupid - if they do not know why they are dying in droves by now then they will certainly figure it out before long.
anyway, it is not about the now - the truth will come out someday because it always does - always.
the only way that the PTB can prevent this is to perpetrate another even more heinous event.
will the sword and brian comedy hour escape this event?
unlikely, because they are simple fodder along with everyone else.
I am a South African. I have NO allegiance to any American govenrment or governemnet organisation.
Can you point me to a website that details the 1400+ cars that ignited. I would like to see where they were situated in relation to the building.
Why do you conviniently fit theories to what you want. All of a sudden when you realise your emp could not have extended past the walls of WTC, you say it was a limited EMP. Please explain how an EMP can limit itself in that fashion? It ahd to, otherwise all the electronic equipment in the surroundings would have been destroyed. NO evidence for that.
Where is evidence that video footage very close to the site was confiscated.
What about the witnesses who saw the planes impact? All liers?
Aircraft debris? How did that magically appear in crowded streets?
You are the one with the theory of EMP's etc, therfore it is your responsibility to prove it. Prove that an EMP can limit itself within the confines of a building.
Lying filth, we are only talking about very localized EMP (from relatively very small nukes) a few blocks or so from Ground Zero.
So we have a "limited" EMP, not heat, just EMP, that is so powerful that it blows up cars a mile away yet somehow does not send all of Manhattan back to the 1800s.
Just what the hell are you smoking, Anonymous Fizzle-pissed?
aircraft debris in the streets?
you mean the engine that wasn't even from a 767 that somehow landed under a scaffolding without even cracking the sidewalk?
talk about magically!
witnesses who saw the planes impact?
more witnesses claimed to saw a small plane or a missile than a 767, yet CNN shows us a 767 that melts right into a tower?
again, talk about magically!
NIST are the ones who claimed that the towers collapsed like pancakes, 1 floor onto the next, in only 10 seconds each.
1 problem with that is that most of the steel from each tower simply disappeared before it even hit the ground.
yet again, magically!
NIST & 911 commission are the ones who need to explain themselves, not any of us doubters.
if you are not even familiar with the oddly toasted cars of 9/11 then you certainly have not been qualified to even discuss them much less pronounce any judgements about them, isn't that right, brian?
however, here are the cars.
either defend the official govt/media/NIST/911commission 9/11 fairytale or simply accept that it was a lie from one end to the other.
many of us have studiously inspected every single aspect of 9/11 from day one.
WE are the skeptics, not you.
hit the road brian.
^h.
attention: sword of comedy!
is brian the structural engineer that you were harping on and on about for all of last year?
and you have the nerve to call yourself sword of truth!
as if.
I am awarse of the cars. I want to know what were the locations of the cars at the time of the supposed detonation.
As I am aware that many vehicles directly adjacent to the WTC caught on fire. The "1 mile" claim comes from photos of vehicles that had been removed from the site and stored elsewhere (particularly on South Street under the FDR Drive), awaiting removal by barge to Fresh Kills via the NYC Dept. of Sanitation's temporary marine transfer station at Pier 6.
The posistion of these cars at time of detonation would be intersting!
Oh I just love that site you linked me to! Space based weapons! So what happened to the nuclear detonation theory? Was a spaced based laser also used at the Pentagon? Becuase it is claimed that curiously, the same effect was observed on cars next to the Pentagon. This is shown on that site. I thought it was a missile that hit the Pentagon. Or was it an A-3 Skywarrior?
Interesting. Burnt out cars found at two separate sites where intense building fires raged. Who would have guessed.
Please provide a link to the witness testimonies that show more people saw a smaller plane or missile. I thought you claimed it was CGI? If it was CGI why use a missile. They had freaking nukes in the basement!!
Do you think that the location where the engine part was photographed, on the corner of Church and Murray Street was the first and only spot it landed at? Did it not hit the road further up and roll and bounce there. It had a massive amount of energy. It would not stop dead. Perhaps it was lying in the middle of the street and was moved out the road to make way for vehicles. You have seen the photograph in isolation.
Still would be nice to see how an EMP can limit itself to the confines of the building. As far as I see it, the only explanation for this, is to fit your theories.
So I guess you are dropping your "brilliant" discussion of the B-29 and Hiroshima and EMP?
Now, Brian: "How did it not affect the firefighters equipment - radios etc." You ignorant vermin: it is well known that firefighters' radios went dead, and that led to the deaths of many of them, as they did not know they were recalled to get the hell out of there!!
So clearly you are here not as someone intersted in any of this, but only to lie, divert, distort, distract.
Now you brought in "1400 cars", no one here said that. Clearly you already know what website claims that--you are an idiot--to bring in something from a website and then ask which website you got that from--trying to do a set-up. As are the otehrs, you are an idiot and a shill. I hope the checks and bennies are good.
RE EMP and cars, the engineer Twietmeyer explained with some simple vector analysis and shielding aspect etc, how this could have occurred.
http://www.rense.com/general75/melt2.htm
RE "no planes": that has been proven here and at other websites that you know, and are listed on this blog.
Only a fucking regime troll goes to a website that has thousands of pages on something, then either never reads any of it, or pretends not to have done so, and has the gaul to ask for said information.
No one should take the time to answer that, shill. If it were my blog, you and swart, regime agents, would simply be banned. But Spooked has a good point, he has said he allows this just to show how stupid and ignorant the shills are.
Do your fucking homework, try to make it less obvious that you are a shill/troll for the regime;
and where are your comments on the strange smoke of WTC1??
Who cares if you are allegedly South African, you could still be a government agent, and likely are. And why did you misspell the word "government", every time you used it. Slipping up?
"I am a South African. I have NO allegiance to any American govenrment or governemnet organisation."
But the bottom line is, as I said:
"NOW YOU MUST PROVIDE DETAILED SCIENTIFIC PROOF TO BACK UP YOUR BELOVED MASS MURDERING REGIME'S IMPOSSIBLE OCT, NIST, and PURDUE SIMULATIONS & SCENARIOS.
We will wait till Hell freezes over..."
It's getting cold...
Anonymous Physicist
You still believe that it was 19 hijackers while, following this story, it should be 25?
If you believe in fairytailes, THEY STILL LET 6 GUYS WALK AWAY WITHOUT PUBLIC INVESTIGATION!!!
And people still wonder why everyting concerning 911 is questioned.
""Please provide a link to the witness testimonies that show more people saw a smaller plane or missile.""
no brian. you produce even 1 witness that saw a plane at all.
""Oh I just love that site you linked me to! Space based weapons! So what happened to the nuclear detonation theory""
phony claims of space weapons aside, that site does indeed have photos of the oddly toasted cars.
does it not?
do you suggest that the oddly toasted cars are not out of the ordinary even if they were moved?
if these toasted cars are nothing unusual then kindly explain how they got toasted at all.
NIST has not seen fit to even acknowledge these cars at all.
so far anonymous physicist is the only one who has offered any explanation for this phenomena - and his explanation does fit.
do you have an alternate explanation?
go get someone who does!
the pentagon? an A3 skywarrior?
who knows. do you know?
certainly a 757 did not do the damage that was observed at the pentagon.
you are becoming tedious brian, either explain the anomalies that are the official 9/11 fairytale or go get someone who can.
or shut the fuck up.
what time is it in south africa right now anyway?
""over 1400 cars""
i said that.
because that is what the only site that has photos of these cars says.
and here is my observation about that:
if that site is actually an official disinfo site and not simply a moron site then they have made a mistake in producing photos of these cars, have they not?
h is for ha.
The time is 21:45.
Are you doubtful that I am South African? Wel dan kan ek so praat en jy sal nie 'n fok weet wat ek se nie? Julle mense maak my mal. Julle is so aaklig, ek kan dit nie meer hanteer nie! Or what about this - Ndifuna doebola wena. Wena umnsunanuko. Faga lo pagadi pa lo inja.
I was born in Butterworth, South Africa. I have lived in South Africa all my life. HAve travelled to neighbouring countries, countries in Europe. I have never had the oppurtunity to travel to the US. But do intend to. Would love to tour the country see the sites. Particulary interested in visting the Kennedy Space centre, Smithsonians institute, Vietnam War museum and other museums in DC. Love to go to New York, LA and SAn Francisco.
Anyway. I don't find it strange that cars at the site of two building collapses are found to be burnt out. The fires that raged in the buildings was intense. The debris that was ejected in the collapse was immense.
"""The fires that raged in the buildings was intense."""
really.
does black smoke indicate a raging inferno or does it indicate a relatively low temperature oxygen starved smolder?
anyway, ms. edna cintron's presence amid this "raging inferno" would tend to prove otherwise.
but maybe she had a magic force-field around herself that protected her from said "raging inferno".
"""The debris that was ejected in the collapse was immense"""
really.
here is wtc2 and only 3/8 of it's mass remains.
photo of wtc2 being destroyed.
bear in mind that when this photo was taken only about 6 seconds had elapsed since it's destruction began.
where did the other 5/8 of it go?
where is the debris? and if there was debris why would it cause 1400+ vehicles to spontaneously combust rather than simply burying these vehicles with debris? (that wasn't even there anyway.)
brian, how many times do i have to remind you that you are becoming tedious - why do you not simply go get someone else to take over for you?
obviously you have failed to support even 1 aspect of the official 9/11 fairytale.
or maybe your task is to drag this out as long as possible? you might believe that you are succeeding at that but who is to say that my job is not to keep you fools occupied while thousands of 9/11 was an inside job and here is why: bumper stickers and flyers are printed out and distributed?
by the way:
飛行機がなかった
morons.
no wonder the u.s.a. lost in vietnam...
defeated by a bunch of cave-dwelling gooks! did you think that we would forget fatman/little boy?
morons.
h is for ha!
Please that picture of Edna is so evident that the fires were intense.
Why on earth do you think she is standing there? She getting a good view? Why isn't she trying to escape like the thousands of people who did. IS it because she can't? She couldn't escape because the fires elsewhere were so intense.
That spot would have had plenty of fresh air for her to breath and is probably the reason she was standing there. She wasn't standing anywhere else because the fires were to intense to.
She never escaped. Sadly and tragically, her husband identified her as one of the people seen jumping from the building. If the fires weren't so intense why did she not walk out?
Support the 911 fairytale? There are countless websites, forums and blogs that address all the wild conspiracy theories out there. If you haven't come across them, then here is one for you - http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
What are you trying to show by posting some words in some far eastern language? I spoke in 2 of my other languages to add weight to the fact that I am a South African. I speak 3 languages - English, Afrikaans and Xhosa - 3 of the 11 official languages in South Africa. You appeared doubtful that I was South African. Just trying to show you that I am.
truly i could care less if you, brian, are south african or lower slobovian!
you dare to try to subvert edna cintron's presence in the wtc - exactly where a 767 was alleged to have entered (and where there is no debris from such), and exactly where NIST asserts that it was "hot enough to deform the steel causing a pancake collapse", into supporting the official fairytale?
oh if you are indeed an "south african who holds no allegiance to the PTB" then you are truly despicable!
by the way, edna's husband DID NOT identify her as having jumped out - when she died, it was while holding on for dear life awaiting rescue - as ANY person who would be filmed standing and holding on for dear life in an opening full of fresh air would do.
later brian, you have once again failed.
remember that for every minute that i am distracted by your bullshit is a minute that you fags are also distracted.
see you fags in hell!
h.
So you are S. African, congratulations. I think Mandela is a great hero.
But what does that prove? The f'ing British-run American Intel agencies have agents in every country on Earth, and lots of them. Like that shill in Afghanistan--they even can come in handy, when the USA takes over a country and installs their shill as "President." Like Saddam while I am at it.
And your B.S. on the cars is plain to see, as will follow. That some or many cars could catch fire after the destruction of the WTC gets no argument from me. I have myself thought that some could have gone up in flames from conventional forces involved that day. But you Brian are a shill because I have detailed Patricia Ondrovic's interviews several times, including here:
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/08/dew-evidence-actually-helps-prove-nukes.html
and now Ruiz' tale as well. And shill--for that is what you prove yourself to be--Ondrovic describes a strange pattern of flickering lights coming out of the ceiling inside the lobby of WTC 6, as the cars just outside, for no apparent reason, catch fire, and a door then explodes off one car and hits her, as WTC 5,6,2 start to come down around her. The cars catching fire near her, and the door exploding off of one car and hitting her occur before any falling debris (fiery or otherwise) hits the ground.
Now here this, that fucking CIA shill Woolsey that I outed here as taking control of those 503 responder interviews apparently did not know this was proof of EMP. So the idiots slipped up and did not redact this part of her testimony, as they did other parts! Too late now perps.
Since Ondrovic is standing right there, and did not get fried by any "DEW", the only thing that could have done that to the car and the ceiling, and fits, and FITS ALL OF THIS is EMP.
And now Ruiz has a similar tale that has been uncovered. I cannot know how many of the 1400 cars this applies to, as I am sure some caught fire from falling debris, but not with Ondrovic, and not likely either with Ruiz. And only a shill ignores such a crucial piece of evidence.
It has been said, "to burst a great lie, is the same as bursting a balloon, a thousand knives are not needed, one will suffice." And Ondrovic eyewitnessed account and broken ribs! (from being hit by that exploding car door) burst this balloon and demonstrate EMP from NUKES, along with other evidence I have cited in my articles. As I said, shill, YOU go get the URL for the map showing the phone and electrical outage in the WTC area. I won't post any other links here again for you, shill.
But, of course, with such a massive fraud, there are a thousand knives, as there is with the Apollo Joke, the Kennedy Assassination, and all the other lies of history.
Now RE Edna Cintron, clearly at the time she waves for help, there is no fire right near her--otherwise she'd be on fire herself. As to why she didn't get out, there's a possible sickening clue. Some who came down from high up reported that some stairwell entrances were LOCKED, in violation of state law, and all morality. Clearly the regime wanted to maximize tower deaths. Now someone who had a master key could have done that beforehand. Could it be the alleged "hero."?
So maybe Ms. Cintron tried, but couldn't open a stairwell door.
Now if you like some stupid website with their stupid lies, why are you here, except as an obvious troll/agent?
So once again, I must say
"NOW YOU MUST PROVIDE DETAILED SCIENTIFIC PROOF TO BACK UP THE MASS MURDERING REGIME'S IMPOSSIBLE OCT, NIST, and PURDUE SIMULATIONS & SCENARIOS.
We will wait till Hell freezes over..."
It's getting cold...
Anonymous Physicist
Edna Cintron would most certainly NOT have jumped!
She was holding on tightly right where Mr. Brian says that, "Fresh air was coming in".
She would have expected to be rescued in short order.
The ONLY reason that she might jump would be if a blast of incredible heat suddenly overcame her, or even FORCED her out!
Numeous things could have caused her to "fall". There were many explosions in both towers. One video shows people falling out when the other tower has explosions (the bogus second "plane hit.")
Other interactions could have led to her going over... I will leave that to your...
Numerous peer reviewed engineering journals (some of which have been in existance for 50+ years), have looked at the collaspe of the WTC. These journals are read by thousands of engineers worldwide. Not ONE single journal has ever come up and said the entire reason for collaspe is skeptical.
So mr physicist are all these thousands of engineers wrong? If all those thousands of engineers can't find fault with Purdue models etc, then why should I?
Where she is standing there are no fires. But if you look at a zoomed out picture you see floors just above her are raging with fires.
If the regime wanted to maximise deaths, then why not carry out the attack later in the day when the building had a higher occupancy? Why not demolish it from a lower point? Why is it that people above the imapct points were able to escape?
Actually, Ondrovic's testimony is pretty much useless, because she obviously suffered post traumatic stress disorder. She paniced and ran away to save her own ass, without bothering to look for anyone who needed help. She even mentioned that her fire fighting coat caught fire. And she kept right on running like a frightened child. Tell me that she wasn't trained to drop and roll in the sort of situation, and I will tell you that you know bugger-all about fire fighting or the training of fire fighters. And, in that case, you really need to vet your witnesses better.
brian are you high?
""Where she is standing there are no fires. But if you look at a zoomed out picture you see floors just above her are raging with fires.""
is that so? please link to this 'zoomed out picture'.
"raging with fires"?
if it was hot enough to destroy the integrity of the steel of the wtc causing it to totally poof in only 10 seconds (as observed and recorded for posterity) then it would certainly be hot enough to melt the hands of poor edna cintron as she clung to that very steel for her very life.
idiot, go get someone else to take over for you.
"""Numerous peer reviewed engineering journals have looked at the collaspe of the WTC. These journals are read by thousands of engineers worldwide. Not ONE single journal has ever come up and said the entire reason for collaspe is skeptical."""
ah. so when you say that, what you really mean is "i and whatever official group that i am affiliated with are choosing to ignore the fact that an explosion is not a collapse"?
why don't you just hit the road brian?
this one is classic!:
kalkoringi said:
She (ondrovic) even mentioned that her fire fighting coat caught fire
wow. could it have caught fire because 1/2 million tons of concrete dust was descending down onto her as the official fairytale would have us believe?
hardly.
or could it have caught fire because it was subjected to a very great heat?
what could officially cause this heat - gravity?
ha.
aren't those firefighting coats supposed to be fireproof anyway?
hmmm. what could possibly cause one of those to catch fire?
Great posts as usual, h. But Ondrovic' clothing catching fire may have been from that very hot car door that exploded onto her, and also broke her ribs. This all happened BEFORE COLLAPSE! and BEFORE PYROCLASTIC CLOUDS (unlike with Ruiz). So this is likely from either the very hot car door, or else thermal rays, via direct line of sight, from the nukes.
Remember, I have also cited other eyewitnesses at the WTC, before collapse and pyroclastic clouds, some blocks away, who reported great heat on their skin--again likely from thermal rays from a nuke. And, of course numerous people inside, like Felipe David, who felt great heat on his skin, sees no fire, but somehow ends up with burnt, hanging skin, like Hiroshima victims.
And this alleged new shill--likely swart--is filth for blaming a valiant responder and victim who barely survived. She had great trouble breathing shortly after this (much smoke inhalation by them, but broken ribs doesn't help) and had to be taken via ambulance to the hospital. So blame the victim, jerk swart/"K."
Her testimony before that Commission, and later, a blogger, are both consistent and credible. And it would be good to know what the CIA Woolsey creep had redacted from Ondrovic' testimony!
When evidence of EMP (Electromagentic Pulse) and nukes is presented, the shills either ignore it, and pretend such evidence doesn't exist (S. Jones), or like now, desperately try to find fault with it.
Anonymous Physicist
Pyroclastic flows??? What was there a volcanic eruption there as well? The following are causes of pyroclastic flow -
There are several scenarios which can produce a pyroclastic flow:
Fountaining of an eruption column from a plinian eruption (e.g., Mount Vesuvius's destruction of Pompeii, see Pliny the Younger). In such an eruption, the material ejected from the vent heats the surrounding air and the turbulent mixture rises for many kilometres through convection. If the erupted jet is unable to heat the surrounding air sufficiently, there will not be enough convection to carry the plume upwards and it fountains back down the flanks of the volcano.
Frothing at the mouth of the vent during degassing of the erupted lava at the mouth. This can lead to the production of a type of igneous rock called ignimbrite. This occurred during the eruption of Mount Katmai in 1912 which produced the largest flows to be generated during recorded history.
Gravitational collapse of a lava dome or spine, with subsequent avalanching and flow down a steep slope (e.g. Montserrat's Soufriere Hills volcano).
The directional blast (or jet) when part of a volcano explodes or collapses (e.g. the May 18, 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens) This rapidly transforms into a gravity driven current with distance from the volcano
The effects of pyroclastic flow on airliners became apparent after the flight of British Airways Flight 9, when a Boeing 747 operated by British Airways flew into the volcanic cloud of Mount Galunggung, causing the pyroclastic material to accumulate in and shut down all four of the jet's engines. It also caused St. Elmo's Fire and smoke in the cabin, because the bleed air valve was pushing the smoke into the air conditioning system.
No mention of structural collapse of buildings.
Please MR physicist can you explain how the EMP from the mini nuke was intense enough to fry the electronics in cars located a mile away such that they caught fire, but was unable to damage the firemans radios, other cars, fire engine trucks, helicopters, TV news cameras. Some of which was nearer to the scene than some of the EMP fried cars. Explain this. An EMP that is strong enough that it causes circuits to ignite, would have done some considerable damage to other electronics. This was not observed (TV cameras ran perfectly well that day). Appears that the EMP is very selective only hunts down cars.
I remember watching the first tower collapse the camera that caught it was pretty close. It didn't even suffer from static. How is that possible if an EMP is being radiated?
Now lets look at the issue of EMP's being radiated for surface detonations.
A surface detonation, or any nuclear detonation below an altitude of 10kms, radiates a charge separation EMP. Yet the effects of this are only felt WITHIN the severe blast radius of the explosion. So devices that suffer from this EMP, will be vapourised by the explosion anyway. So anything that survives the detonation, could not have suffered a hit from an EMP. It is outside of the sever blast radius.
This information is sourced at the wikipedia site I linked to previously.
Why were no EMP effects ever registered by the 150 US Nuclear tests prior to the Teak test on 8/01/1958? I'll tell you why. All test prior to that had been at altitudes lower than 10kms. This was the first high altitude test and hence, the first time the effects of an EMP had been felt.
Sources are here: List of all US nuclear tests -
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/nuclear/209chron.pdf
Source detailing the date that the first EMP was observed -
http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/permalink/meta-crs-9172:1
So please explain why they never felt an EMP for 150 nuclear detonations?
The answer is - EMP's radiated at detonations lower that 10km are not felt BEYOND the severe blast radius.
Hence, your EMP is not capable of damaging anything outside the confines of the explosion. Hence, your explanation that those cars were ignited by the effects of an EMP is wrong.
as if we don't know that the pyroclastic behavior of the wtc concrete dust cloud could only be the result of a very great heat, brian kindly provides 5 examples of pyroclastic clouds also generated by very great heat!:
Mount Vesuvius, Mount Katmai, Montserrat's Soufriere Hills volcano, Mount St. Helens and Mount Galunggung.
thank you brian, for reinforcing the fact that the wtc pyroclastic cloud could only be the result of a very great heat!
re; EMP:
A surface detonation, or any nuclear detonation below an altitude of 10kms, radiates a charge separation EMP. Yet the effects of this are only felt WITHIN the severe blast radius of the explosion. So devices that suffer from this EMP, will be vapourised by the explosion anyway.
how many phones in manhattan suddenly did not work?
when you say devices could you possibly be referring to the radios of the firemen who were in the wtc when it was poofed, and the fact that these radios not only suddenly didn't work, but were never found, meaning they were vaporized along with everything else in the wtc?
or by devices did you mean the aircraft that were ordered to land right before the wtc disappeared and then allowed to return right after?
don't forget that the ground was shaking and seismic spikes of 2.3 and 2.1 were recorded as each tower began to disappear.
this almost total bizarre disappearance of each tower allowed the wtc foundation "bathtub" to escape being destroyed as the giant core columns weighing many many many tons would have otherwise impacted it from a height of 1/4 mile.
thank you brian, for reinforcing the fact that the wtc pyroclastic cloud could only be the result of a very great heat!
He said no such thing.
how many phones in manhattan suddenly did not work?
Those that were affected by damage to underground lines from the collapses. Those that lost connection due to the destruction of cell sites in or on the WTC towers and of course those phones that were inside the twin towers.
None were damaged by EMP.
when you say devices could you possibly be referring to the radios of the firemen who were in the wtc when it was poofed, and the fact that these radios not only suddenly didn't work,
They were inside the building and were unable to transmit through walls and floors.
Radio repeaters inside the WTC were also damage or lost power due to the aircraft impacts.
but were never found, meaning they were vaporized along with everything else in the wtc?
Nothing was vaporized. The radios you claim are missing had a 500,000 ton building dropped on them.
don't forget that the ground was shaking and seismic spikes of 2.3 and 2.1 were recorded as each tower began to disappear.
Both the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and Brent Blanchard of Protec services have stated that there were no seismic spikes before, during or after the collapses.
Both LDEOs seismographs and Protecs portable seismographs in Manhattan recorded a gradual increase and subsequent dropoff of vibrations consistent with a gravity driven collapse.
brian did indeed reinforce, even if inadvertently, the fact that a pyroclastic cloud can only be a result of very great heat by providing 5 examples of such.
again, thank you brian!
Those [phones] that were affected by damage to underground lines from the collapses. Those that lost connection due to the destruction of cell sites in or on the WTC towers and of course those phones that were inside the twin towers.
None were damaged by EMP.
so YOU keep saying.
why should anyone believe YOU?
here is what others say:
""EM pulse was recorded by broadcast cameras with high quality electronic circuitry. This occurred at the same time as the seismic peaks recorded by Lamont Doherty during the beginning of the collapse. This is due to the Compton Effect and resulted in a large area power outage at the WTC.""
complete with diagram/map of areas affected.
from:
http://wtcnuke.com/fallout.php
Nothing was vaporized. The radios you claim are missing had a 500,000 ton building dropped on them.
then they would be squashed would they not?
unfortunately for YOUR lies the first responders have gone on record as stating that they never found a single phone, desk, filing cabinet or sink or toilet.
obviously they were not merely squashed.
in fact most of the bodies were never recovered because they were simply incinerated, not squashed.
and in fact if 500,000 tons had actually dropped onto the wtc foundation from that great height then the foundation would've been destroyed, flooding manhatten.
hit the road sword of liar, you do nothing but repeat the same lie over and over.
hey, how many fliars and bumper stickers and dvds do you imagine have been handed out just as we speak?
First of all, thank you Sword. Feels like I'm fighting World War 3 here.
Thank you. You have proved that you cannot understand that pyroclastic flow is only evident of a volcanic eruption.
No where on earth did I confirm that the cloud at WTC could only be caused by extreme heat.
I said that pyroclastic flows are caused by volcanic eruptions.
You are still assuming the cloud is a pyroclastic flow. It is not!!! The cloud observed at WTC does not have to be caused by a nuke. Many more plausible logical explanations exist for that observation.
The electronic devices I am referring to are the radios carried by emergency operators who didn't die in the collapse. The radios they communicated with later on in the day. How else do you think they communicated with eachother during operations around wtc7 etc? The EMP postulated here would have turned those little radios into mini explosives.
The emp was supposedly strong enough to set fire to cars, so why don't you hear about peoples cellphones exploding. Why don't you hear about TV camera's exploding all over the show?
So how is it that the EMP can only damage cars?? Cars that were located outside of the building??
But, as I demonstrated EMP's for surface detonation nukes cannot extend past the severe blast radius of the nuke. So how did the EMP severely damage cars, to such an extent that they ignited, yet does no damage to radios, cellphones and tv cameras. Fire trucks and police vehicles. How??
Retard/shill, if you read my articles and posts, I have said that several small nukes were used in the towers--along its vertical dimension, and not just basement nuke(s). I have pointed out the differences between my hypotheses and the others who rightly claimed nukes were used, but claimed only basement nukes were used.
Everything you try has been addressed. Flying planes and choppers nearby, as collpase time approached were military --ALL OTHERS WERE CALLED OFF--and "hardened" for EMP. You find the maps of phone and electric outage around he WTC. I won't repeat myself, since these things are in my articles.
I already also posted this article showing how EMP could have affected cars, etc, and the shielding and vectors involved.
http://www.rense.com/general75/melt2.htm
You can repeat the same stupid lies, but the comparative photos prove the case:
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm
Anonymous Physicist
Now Hell is really getting cold, shill.
You were supposed to prove the impossibilities of the OCT, NIST and Purdue simulations, and "hypotheses."
Nothing...
I thought so.
A.P.
pyroclastic flow is only evident of a volcanic eruption.
wow brian! yet again you insist that the pyroclastic flow of a cloud can only be the result of volcanic eruption - ie: very great heat.
what the devil do you think that the pyroclastic flow of a volcanic eruption cloud is? cold?
unless you insist that the wtc pyroclastic cloud was some sort of anomaly, it could only be a result of very great heat as well.
hats off to you brian!
surely your bosses must be patting you on the back for this entire exchange!
h is for ha.
Mini-nukes???? Please can you give an indication for the yield of these weapons? You are theorising it, therefore YOU must back up this claim with some proof to this claim! Some indication of what the yield of all your mini nukes are.
Please provide proof that an EMP of a surface detonation of a nuclear weapon can be felt beyond its severe blast radius. You are claiming that this is possible. Hence, you need to somehow refute evidence experienced in all surface detonations of every nuclear weapon ever. Thats into the thousands. Good luck.
Do news agencies carry hardened EMP video cameras? Are police cars EMP hardened? Fire trucks? CEll phones? Personal laptops? Those phones that went out were because ground lines were severed with the collapse of the building. Your EMp was so strong that it fried the circuits of a car to such an extent that it caused the whole car to burn. Then how is it that it did not turn peoples cell phones into firey little bombs?
Observation planes of nuclear tests have suffered EMP damage, but were still able to land. And this was from a high altitude detonation (70,000+ft). That aircraft had far more complex circuits than any car does. Yet, it did not ignite into a fireball. Circuits suffered damage, but did not burst into fire.
Note the pic on rense.com, with the NYPD car on fire. Are the cars all around it EMP proof? Why are they not on fire?
You claim the EMP was strong enough to vapourise the ring of steel in a steering wheel. Please provide calculations of the enrgy required for this. Prove that an EMP from such mini nukes, could provide such energy, while somehow not damaging electronics in the surroundings.
It can do all this vapourisation, yet, it can't vaporise tv camera's cell phones, photographic camera's, cars sitting right next to burn out cars.
What on earth is the following statement saying - When a magnetic field hits steel, the energy becomes trapped and barely penetrates it.
Where is it trapped? What trapps it. Can't be the steel, it doesn't penetarte it. How does it vapourise it then.
Has this vector deflection theory been reviewed by any scientific journal?
How is it that the one vehicle from this link to a screen capture of a security camera is burning, but the others aren't. how did this camera survice the steel vapourising EMP. How did any steel survive this EMP on that regard?
http://www.studyof911.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=12&pos=5
How did this traffic light survive the emp? (4th pic) Why isn't that mercedes on fire. How is it that the pumps on fire trucks are able to operate? The EMP would have knocked out those circuits? (5th pic).
In the 6th pic bottom left hand corner. Why did that radio not explode or vapourise?
How did those fire trucks that were close enogh to be crushed by debris not ignite from the EMP? (2nd pic)
http://www.stevespak.com/fires/manhattan/wtc2.html
Since when is the steel in a steering whell susceptable to an EMP? EMP's affect circuits. If you take that line of argument then any steel strand is susceptable to being "vapourised"by an EMP. There would have been alots of other damage out there then.
Your EMP theory is full of holes!
Nuclear bombs don't even form pyroclastic flows. Pyroclastic flows are produced by volcanoes only. A pyroclastic flow is hot. Not denying that. The cloud of dust and debris observed after a nuclear explosion, is exactly that! A cloud of dust and debris. Its by definition not a pyroclastic flow. This is an issue of semantics.
Look, shill, the EMP explanation is the best theory to explain the observation. You have provided no alternative explanation for the suddenly combusting car.
Your point that only things in the severe blast wave radius would be affected by an EMP-- and these things would be vaporized-- makes no sense, as how would anyone ever be able to measure an EMP in this situation? Severe blast radius is a poorly defined term in any case.
Finally, there is abundant evidence for mini-nukes as we have posted at this site before.
shut the fuck up brian.
obviously every single aspect of the official govt/media explanation of 9/11 is nothing more than nonsense and we have shown exactly what is wrong with it and why since the very day after 9/11.
have you or fag of truth even once tried to defend even one aspect of this official fairytale?
no.
again, shut the fuck up!
"Brian" Shill, you so shilly leave out elements of my explanation, and also try to put words in my mouth, proving that you are a shill, and are here as an agitator, and have absolutely no interest in the truth.
RE Ondrovic and EMP, my full accounting details how she saw strange, never before-seen light flickering in the ceiling of the WTC6 lobby, and at that time the cars catch fire, as the buildings start to EXPLODE. You leave out the lights aspect, while I put ALL the observed phenomena together and it sure fits a moving electromagnetic field, from very nearby nukes.
I, of course, never said EMP vaporizes things, liar. I have written what is well proven that EMP induces a curent which heats metal (and I cited a URL in an earlier post to your comrade Swart) that noted fire can result.
As far as "pyroclastic flow", eat some cauliflower:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO_Tz3FhkMo&mode=related&search=
These explosive-caused flows, however, I have written, started out hot, but due to the very rapid expansion, cooled quickly, in terms of time (and distance from Ground Zero.) Only the nearest vehicles were affected by EMP or hot clouds, many others may have caught fire from the hot falling debris, perhaps including mlten metal and even radioactive things that fell on them [see my articles on fizzled or damaged, unexploded nukes]. Just as the WTC ground melted firemen's boots for weeks afterwards, this same stuff [read all my articles, shill] likely also exploded onto vehicles during nuclear demolition!
But with Ondrovic, things are clear--nothing but EMP fits the timeline and all the observed facts.
Corrupt shill, that pyroclastic clouds have not been "officially listed" as occurring during the nuclear bomb detonations all along a skyscraper, is because that was not perpetrated before 9/11/01. Your using circular logic and citing now-antiquated definitions is lame. Rapidly expanding, flowing hot gases with particulate matter within is basically the operant definition. And certainly that's the initial condition just after (nuclear) tower explosions.
Once again photo comparison helps prove the whole point.
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm
If all you have is circular logic, lies, ommissions, and "semantics", you have nothing.
And we are waiting, it's getting very cold in Hell...
You were supposed to prove the impossibilities of the OCT, NIST and Purdue simulations, and "hypotheses."
Nothing...
I thought so.
A.P.
Now that is a good point @ 11:17...
The official explanation for the WTC destruction as given to us by NIST has been proven to be wrong.
Obviously there was no pancaking of floors one onto the next.
One only needs to see a photo of it to discern that much.
Why does it matter to Brian if there was EMP or not?
Brian, shouldn't you either be explaining why the photos of the WTC explosion do not coincide with what the 911 commission said happened or else admitting that the 911 commission was wrong?
Okay I think Geoff is right.
Brian is winning this stupid battle! Not because he is right, but because he is succeeding in side stepping the real issue of whether the Government told the truth or not.
Did the Government tell the truth about what happened in 9/11?
I don't think that they did and this blog does explain that too.
Why does this blog allow Brian to keep evading that? You should just block his comments until he either supports or rejects the Government's 9/11 conspiracy theory.
Please provide a link to for me detailing what you think is impossible with the NIST study.
If it is so obvious there was no pancaking of floors on to the next please provide sources or references from reputeable sources detailing this.
Tell me what you think is wrong with the NIST study, Purdue models or any other report and then I may be in a postion to comment. By and large I agree with these studies. That is obvious, otherwise I would not be questioning you about your theories. Stop asking me that.
I don't need to explain about the WTC explosion. It wasn't an explosion. It was a collapse.
I am in agreement with the NIST study. So are thousands of engineers from organisations such as ASCE, IStructe, SAACE, SAICE.
My theory is backed up by witness accounts, evidence of debris, peer reviewed structural engineering analysis. To mention but a few reasons.
Your EMP is the most selective device ever. It can create a current inside a steering wheel, such that its intensity is strong enough to ignite it, YET it only causes a light to flicker. How ludicrous is that. The filaments in a light are much thiner, therefore would ignite much easier than the steel in a steering wheel.
If you use this theory, why don't peoples watches catch fire?
I still have not seen any calculations relating to magnetic intensity, induced current and the ability to ignite objects. This is your claim. Where is the proof to it?
If you are not certain what a severe blast radius of a nuclear detonation is, I suggest you read up on nuclear weapons. I have not come up with a theory that an EMP for surface detonations of nuclear weapons does not extend further than the severe blast radius. This is what scientists have observed in every single surface nuclear detonation ever. This numbers into the thousands. EMP's have only been experienced in high altitude detonations. Since open atmosphere testing was banned in 1962, no EMP's have been experienced since. Military scientists actually express doubt as to how hardned their electronics are against an EMP, because they have such limited antiquated data availabel on EMP's because they simply have not experienced ANY since 1962.
Is that a coincidence? No high altitude detonations no EMP.
So this shows that your emp for your nukes could not have extended past the confines of the building. This is your severe blast radius.
Instead of flaming me, provide explanation as to how the items I identified in the pictures survived your ultra selective EMP.
That comparitive photo - are they at the same scale. Was the photo taken at the same distance from the event? You cannot compare the two if there the scales are different. Its called perspective. Thats like taking a picture of a 1m tall child and placing it next to a 2m tall guy. If the camera is at different distances, it could look like they are the same size. Hence your photo will prove 1m=2m.
If the NIST report was proven wrong, please forward me links to the multi party analysis that was undertaken. Was this analysis of NIST published and peer reviewed?
If you can show me this perhaps I may believe your version of the events. So where is the documented and reviewed proof that NIST is wrong. Not photo's a thourough scientific analysis.
hey brian you are as full of shit now as you were in your very 1st comment to this blog!
it has been pointed out to you many times what is wrong with the NIST report, the 9/11 commission report and the purdue animation.
hit the road fool.
Not photo's a thourough scientific analysis.
shut up liar, as if photos aren't good enough - what do you think this "pancaking" should be invisible? you are a phony structural engineer - that guy is right, you should be banned from here. simply for lying.
here, the billiard ball example:
http://drjudywood.com/articles/BBE/BilliardBalls.html
Brian writes:
"I don't need to explain about the WTC explosion. It wasn't an explosion. It was a collapse."
As A.P. would say, Hell has now officially frozen over.
So we finally got this %$&# to go on record and state what we knew the shill's "views" are.
All shills have the same "view" as follows: "the government has never lied, despite its "investigation findings" being physically impossible in a thousand ways. [No, agent, I won't waste my time posting this to you, it's been done a thousand times already, it's all over this blog and in many places.] The gov't never lies except when it itself admits it lied. Then it gets a pass."
BTW, the shill never commented on the strange, non-hot, smoke in A.P.'s article... Naturally, there is no genuine desire for scientific analysis, only a blatant attempt to infiltrate and screw up one of the very few sites on the net not run by a shill.
Getting back to explosion vs. "collapse". There, is of course, no point in posting all the photos and videos of the massive explosion(s), all the eyewitness and recordings of explosions even before the final one, and all the scientific analyses that were done.
There is no point, what is needed is what one person above said, just ban such a creature/shill.
Honest discussion, and debate, is one thing, but to have such creatures here and diverting things, and making honest people waste time and energy is a tragedy.
Clearly a paid agent of the PTB--who came with a prepared legend and tried too hard with his paragraph of, is it, Afrikaans.
Be gone shill.
If Spooked doesn't ban such an entity, we all should not respond with anything more than posting the word "shill" after any unfortunate posts from this one and the others of his ilk--who likely have the same paymaster..
Your photo's do NOT prove anything to the contrary. If you think so, please publish an article. So that it can be reviewed.
Why is it that there are ZERO scientificly verifed peer reviewed articles that discount NIST's theories on all regards?
Why is it your EMP can only select few targets but not others. Other targets more suscpetable to an EMP?
Why is it, if someone questions you, you automatically assume government agent. I live in South Africa. If you don't believe it then - gaan naaai jou domb ma se gwar. I wish I could be paid to write on this board!! In process of buying a new car. The money would help.
I live in East London. I work in Pearce street in Berea. You don't believe I live in South Africa, then i'm sure spooked can pull my IP. See where it originates.
I don't really care about who did what on 911.
I don't live in the US.
I am not the one who wakes up every morning in a country, where I believe the government purposefully killed people in this grand conspiracy. I am not the one who wakes up to that. YOU ARE!!
If you really believe your country is that evil, then why don't you do something concrete about it?
Why don't you do some proper study and analysis of your photo's produce a proper peer reviewed journal that can be accepted worldwide as fact? HUH?
This would do wonders for your movement. Instead all you have to say about NIST is - photo's don't look like a pancack collapse so its all wrong. No one will accpet this argument unless you provide a study, with accepted engineering and scientific principles.
You are doing nothing to work against your "evil" government. About time you did something, if you really and truelly believed in your movement.
So come on stand up and be counted!! Do something constructive for the movement, instead of basing expectations of what you see in photo's as pure fact.
Have some conviction here people. Everytime you say its impossible, based purely on a photograph, without a detailed scientific, peer reviewed investigation, the EVIL government wins.
You need to start backing up claims with generally accepted scientific principles, if you want to start winning the war against the government that you wake up to every morning. The government that provides you with all those services you take for granted.
6 years have passed and still not a single verified study has emerged from your circles. You have alot of catching up to do. So quite swearing at get down to bussiness!
I have never banned anyone from here and I don't intend to now.
About EMP, only a shill says that EMP are only produced at high altitudes.
Very intense EMPs are in fact generated by nuke explosions at high altitudes. The wikipedia article clearly says that EMP can be produced at lower altitudes but they don't travel far-- certainly not for a thousand miles as with atmospheric blasts.
The kicker here is in fact that we are talking about limited short distance EMPS, that could even be in the severe blast wave of a micro-nuke set off near the base of a WTC tower. We are NOT talking about an EMP that fries all of lower Manhattan, though clearly we don't know the extent of the effect.
Finally, we can't rule out that there were EMP weapons that were specifically used at Ground Zero along with other devices.
brian said:
""I don't really care about who did what on 911.""
then why don't you shut the hell up already?
peer reviewed! ya right.
""Do something constructive for the movement,""
did you think for even one minute that bumper stickers and flyers and dvds were not being distributed on a regular basis?
your NIST heroes lied.
we can all see the explosions with our own eyes.
I must admit I am unaware that you guys are handing out bumper stickers.
Congratulations.
I would however like to reiterate my point, that you need some concrete proof. Some scientific studies. Bumper stickers help, but if you don't have some scientific studies to back up your claims, you have a hollow leg to stand on.
Millions of people have looked at those videos. Not everyone comes to the same conclusion as you do. So if you want to motivate your point, DROP the videos. DROP the photographs and write some scientific papers about your theories. Get them reviewed and accepted. This will do more for your movemnet in one day, than a billion videos could do in 60 years.
I would personally love to read some solid well reviewed and globally accepted scientific studies that disputed the officail versions. This would be a landmark in history. I have no mtivation to serve the wills of any US government. My interest here is to look at what happened. I review both sides. I have found the Truth movement to be lacking verified, generally accpeted well documented proof of any claims they have made.
If more of this was available, I'd be happy to accept that version, should it be proven to be valid. Nothing in 6 years has surfaced.
Sorry Spooked, I must yet again disagree with you on the EMP.
I am asking politely. Why has no EMP ever been experienced in the thousand plus surface detonations? The wikipedia article specifically states - But this only occurs within the severe blast radius for detonations below about 10 km altitude.
I fail to understand how the EMP can be so selective. It can burn some cars but not others. It is claimed as limited. But the energy required to heat a steel wire in a steering wheel hot enough to ignite the steering wheel, is intense enough, that it would have been felt and observed at many levels. It was not observed to do this. It can heat the steel so severly in a car, but watches and other smaller objects (containing softer more susceptable materials)escape this EMP.
Spooked your version is in contradiction with Anonymous Physicsts version. You claim near the base, he claims it had to be higher up because of his magnetic vector theory. If it is lower down his magnetic vector theory falls apart.
Why did it start collapsing from the floors above the impact, if the nuke was at the bottom?
There is a lack of clarity in the location of the nuclear devices.
""My interest here is to look at what happened""
well then do so.
because what NIST said happened does not fit the with videos of what happened nor with photos of the debris. nor was the 911 commission's stupid pancake explanation possible in only 10 seconds - if at all.
like that guy said before, it doesn't matter if there was EMP or not.
it doesn't matter if it was nuclear demo or death rays from above or even the hand of god squashing it flat.
all that matters first is that NIST and the 911 commission and purdue obviously lied.
a case has been filed against NIST by real scientists.
and only a shill would pretend to be so blind.
there is no truth movement.
there are lots and lots of obvious reasons why official scientists would support the official story. there are of course lots of other trained scientists who have decided that the official story is wrong in various ways. Some of these people go by their real names, other do not.
The fact is, what happened on 9/11 to those three giant skyscrapers was unheard of before, and NO ONE has proven the top-down collapse model by which WTC1 and 2 went down.
But beyond that, these were no "collapses", the buildings were obliterated. The concrete was turned to dust and structural steel disappeared along with over 1000 people inside. The buildings were blown to smithereens, to put it colloquially. If you can't see that from the videos, then look at pictures of ground zero.
About EMP-- my only point is that they can explain the odd vehicle fires and some other strange phenomena people witnessed, but I am not wedded to EMP. I am wedded to the fact that the towers were blown to shit. And nukes have the power to do what was seen at the WTC. Further, nukes do make EMP even at ground level, the EMP strength is just much more limited. I can't explain the directionality, but unfortunately we only have part of the picture.
Both AP and I have explained that there were bombs in the upper parts of the towers that aided the top down demolition. But there were undoubtedly bombs in the basement as well.
Plus, there is extremely strong evidence that no commercial aircraft hit the towers, which automatically means bombs in the building and that the whole thing was rigged up.
Finally, what the official story SIMPLY CANNOT EXPLAIN is the extreme heat that lingered at ground zero for months, as well as the reports of molten and partly vaporized metal found there.
What I can't fucking stand is people who people who are oh so skeptical that the towers were blown up, but have no problem whatsoever with the official bullshit story for 9/11.
I don't mind talking with someone who is open-minded, but if someone can't seem to open their mind to this evidence, what is the point of all this?
Brian, the Shill once again, at the same time, omits what I have said, and tries to put words in my mouth.
Read my articles, agent. If you can't comprehend them, get someone to help you. And if you refuse to read them, don't comment on my work.
I have written that numerous WTC buildings were nuked at the same time. This included WTC2 and 5 and 6 right where Ondrovic was. So whether the EMP that caused the light "show" in WTC6 and then heated up the cars near her came from WTC2 above or from the basement nuke in WTC6 right near her, or both, I do not know.
Why don't you, shill, explain the light show in the ceiling she saw, and the car catching fire and the car door exploding off it and hitting her, breaking her ribs? All this before anything "fell" onto the ground.
And, as Spooked mentions, the regime has EMP weapons galore (powered by non-nuke sources), and you can find that on the net. Do your homework, if you care, but you don't. EMP from nukes could have been augmented by such devices which would have limited range.
As Spooked said, and I have said, we grow weary of the obvious shills who say, if no massive nuke, then no nuke.
And I just love how this ignoramus, says publish it in standard journals. That's like saying get your documentation put out on the mainstream media!!
Jerk, you obviously don't know [or pretend not to know] what totalitarianism is! That's when the regime doesn't let you get a word of truth out in the MSM and in "standard" journals. Who the fuck is the one so naive? We had the NM architect prof. who said the next day, only explosions could do that; he was forced to retract.
Did Nazi Germany allow journal articles to print that the Reichstag fire was done by the new regime? No your bosses don't allow the truth.
Every corrupt, lying thing you say shows you are working for these filth. That you may (or may not) be in S. Africa--who cares, as was said, this regime and their British masters have scum in every country on earth working for them.
Are you of British descent? Please answer.
And finally shill, when one [you]says,
"I don't care what the photos and videos of the explosions show, there were no explosions, because the regime said there were no explosions--even though their ludicrous explanation is in blatent violation of the laws of Physics, and real photos and videos don't count, once the regime has said something else happened--even if that something else is impossible, and proven by all the photos and videos not to have occurred..."
Well that summarizes what you have said perfectly, filth.
Anonymous Physicist
I am not of British descent to answer that question. My ancesters are of French descent. Arrived in South Africa in the 1700's.
Why do you get so ANGRY. Tempers flare here faster than an EMP induced fire.
I am very open minded. Willing to consider anything that makes sense.
Maybe it is my engineering background, but when I read the NIST rport it by and large seemed fine to me. There were some aspects that were not taht great, but the general theory for collapse seems sound to me. Now I know you are going to swear at me for my opinion and I know you are going to call me a shill (what ever that means?).
My general theory for collapse (heat induced structural failure - which is basically what NIST claims) was formulated on 9/11/01. My colleauges at the time had exactly the same theory. NIST confirmed out theories. We have all seen the countless videos and photo's. Nuclear weapons never cae to mind.
I apologise that I don't agree with you. But in life that is the case. Everyone has a right to their own opinion.
I just don't find the nuclear demolition theory plausible. I don't find evidence you provide for it as plausible. Your theory about no planes is also extremly suspect.
One thing I find iritating is that you immediately believe any testimonyt that could be used to support your theory, but ignore any testimony that goes against your theory as lies, disinformation. This is double standards. I am willing to look at any testimony. Read the full context of it. You however, tend to write it off immediately as lies.
This is why debunkers get iritated with you. You apply double standards in analysing witness testimony. You look at a photo and if it looks like something you believe it to be that. Any evidence that contradicts your belief is taken as lies.
When I came across the nuclear theroy. I looked into it. I looked up the info about EMP's. All available scientific data, gathered from well over a thousand nuclear tests, seems to contradict your theory. I simply ask for a better explanation of it, guided along various lines of questioning. No straightforward answer is given. I am flamed, sworn at, accused of complicity in mass murder, told I'm lieing about where I live, called a shill (whatever that is). No civility is observed.
"brian"-- somehow I doubt your tenaciousness here is so innocent. But, whatever. I try to keep a civil tone, but I do get annoyed with people who don't "get" any of our points and whine how we are wrong.
If you want double standards, there is a great deal of evidence that the official story ignores -- and that you ignore-- and which I am not going to go through here again. But this evidence is why we have these alternative views. It is not fantasy created out of nothing but imagination-- our alternative views are based on facts that don't fit the official story.
No one is saying that buildings can't undergo failure because of fire-induced weakening, but we DO say that this effect doesn't come close to accounting for the totality of the evidence for what happened to the towers on 9/11.
--spooked
Post a Comment
<< Home