Elevator Motor-- Indication of EMP?
In the "Ground Zero Museum" is this striking piece-- a 10,000 pound elevator motor (or part of one) recovered from the rubble:
Basically, this looks like the inner rotor of a massive electric motor. The elevator cable would probably be pulled on the wheel section on the far end. Particularly, note the deformed electric coils.
My questions would be:
1) what happened to the rest of the dozen or so motors that must have been in each tower? How many motors were recovered?
2) what happened to the rest of the motor-- i.e., the stator or casing?
3) what caused the wires to become splayed out and the coils to become deformed?
One interesting possibility is this motor shows signs of a nuke-generated EMP-- the EMP being an electro-magnetic pulse that would hit this engine and fry the wires, causing them to splay outwards. Is this yet more evidence for nukes at the WTC?
(thanks to a reader for sending in this pic and noting the possible signs of EMP)
Basically, this looks like the inner rotor of a massive electric motor. The elevator cable would probably be pulled on the wheel section on the far end. Particularly, note the deformed electric coils.
My questions would be:
1) what happened to the rest of the dozen or so motors that must have been in each tower? How many motors were recovered?
2) what happened to the rest of the motor-- i.e., the stator or casing?
3) what caused the wires to become splayed out and the coils to become deformed?
One interesting possibility is this motor shows signs of a nuke-generated EMP-- the EMP being an electro-magnetic pulse that would hit this engine and fry the wires, causing them to splay outwards. Is this yet more evidence for nukes at the WTC?
(thanks to a reader for sending in this pic and noting the possible signs of EMP)
posted by spooked at 9:17 PM
5 Comments:
I am not sure I see evidence of EMP here. I went to the link and there is a larger photo. Looks like some wire still has white insulation. Indeed does this engine look like it was engulfed in fire, like the cars that I have written about, that were "half-baked"? Though this is clearly different, in that cars had much material to catch fire. But again I think I see white insulation which should have burned off.
Do you see that?
So I am not sure there is anything here one way or the other with any definitiveness.
One always has to remember, there was, from the outset, those purporting to be pro-nuclear 9/11, but who in reality had/have the Op of either hiding the China Syndrome (with bogus claims of 4th generation whatever, etc.) or other aspects that are false and/or ludicrous like the huge hidden reactors, or those who have nothing but great strangeness associated with their personnae, and who knuckled under the thermite guy when they "met."
IOW, many purporting to be pro-nuclear may either put out honest mistakes or deliberate disinformation meant to hinder--NOT promote--the nuclear 911 FACT. This kind of thinking should always be considered.
And,of course, if that is misunderstood in a trivial, personal way, so be it.
The history of my unraveling of this shows I had too much respect for those who put out nuke 9/11 stuff before me, and it took a while for me to see their Op.
Indeed in at least one case--the reactor nonsense--Spooked saw how that was so bogus before I wanted to admit that about its author. Although it appears to have good analysis proving fission occurred, including that ternary fission produces tritium.
So there will much misinformation and deliberate disinformation either innocently or by assets.
Indeed I have seen some of those who bought my books, using that fact to put out disinformation about what is in them, likely for devious ends.
So someone saying they bought my books does not automatically give them credence either. In some cases, I have seen some people lying about what is in the books. An Op we saw from the 3 (intel) stooges out of Portland, that I think we have not had to deal with lately after exposure here.
Anyway, no way to know in any individual case--at least not by me in this case.
It's just that I think unless something is definitive it often turns out to be counter- productive, to claim it shows something when it may not.
Just something to ponder, while we all learn...
Anonymous Physicist
You mean Dr. Deagle knuckled under? I don't understand why he claimed that the Finnish military expert was contracted to do the demolition of the towers.
No mention of Deagle above.
Epic fail, Pter, u r out.
Please read your first comment here. I thought that you were referring to Deagle.
Gosh, there is a great deal of worthwhile material above!
Post a Comment
<< Home