Orange Glow in the WTC rubble at 3:33

likely part of the nuclear aftermath:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKGOHywFrjc&NR=1

Just like at 2:45 in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jy_q2w9tSQ

Seriously, "nuclear aftermath"? WTF is that even supposed to mean?

that the WTC were taken down by nuclear weaponry.

in any case, I think the case for micro-nukes at the WTC is pretty strong and the overall best explanation for the WTC destruction.

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com

screwballs...the other group thinks the President is an alien.
...

another OCTist into the fold here

the number of "OCTists in the fold" is pretty near the population of the planet.

the real question is-- what was used to blast the towers to bits?

I say micro-nukes.

I know it's hard to believe, but the evidence best fits nukes.

You have opened my thinking into new directions.

I think the screwballs who propose outre' theories like (especially like) this idiotic nuclear 'theory' need psychiatric help.

Here's a clue: Pointing out the insanity of the truthers doesn't require total acceptance of the so-called 'official' version.

that somehow don't leave behind alpha, beta, or gamma emitters.

Spooked seriously, do some research on radiation. An RDD would be bad enough in DT NYC, but an actual fissionable device, no matter how "micro" would leave such a radiation signature to make GZ so hot as to cause every visitor to the vicinity so signs and symptoms of radiation sickness within days.

we don't know what emissions there were as the data hasn't been released.

And there have been plenty of GZ sicknesses and cancers. Just that most people blame it on toxic smoke.

Sid

and remember, we're not talking Chernobyl levels here

and the EPA kept a tight lid on air quality for months after 9/11

Sid

For starters, I have worked extensively with radiation in a lab, and have taken radiation safety training.

What do you got?

Sid

though it depends on what your specialty was and how long ago.

I've taken undergrad physics and physical chemistry, but in any case the point is that I have much more than a lay knowledge of radiation.

It seems like you're just making shit up.

too bad for you

Because a nuclear weapon releases a hell of a lot.

and the dust had elevated beta emissions.

there was measured tritium there as well, that could not be fully accounted for by the official story.

Anything at all? Youtube and blogspot don't count.

there are of course lots of articles on the cancers

the tritium study:
google "tritium wtc 9/11" look at #3--
"Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory"

It's a pdf so I'm not giving the direct link.

the bit about the beta-radiation is here:
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2002/110p703-714lioy/lioy-full.html

note--
"When placed in the liquid scintillation fluid, the WTC samples are somewhat darker than the backgrounds and calibration standard, which may cause slight underreporting of the beta activity due to quenching and standard-to-sample efficiency bias."

I understand why you wouldn't want to actually link to it.



http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1678&context=lbnl

that we are talking orders of magnitude of difference and the signs of symptoms of silica or toxin inhalation is different from radiation poisoning.

You know, people actually do know these things. They are in books. You don't have to make shit up on your own and peddle it as plausible.

and the difference between radiation poisoning and severe toxin exposure is not as black and white as you think, if you think about the symptoms that would be presented-- nausea, vomiting, fatigue, etc.

I know one first responder said he and others teeth fell out, a classic radiation exposure sign

But it's not like people were thinking nukes, so they wouldn't suspect it.

But we're not talking about Chernobyl levels of radiation here. The radiation would have been much more limited-- and mostly hot in certain spots.

The WTC dust was slightly radioactive too.

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/


the 33 is a tip off
http://33-watch.blogspot.com/

Congratulations, you managed to find something even more batshed insane than the "Nukes at WTC" theory.

If it wasn't for David Chandler being busy telling us how much it looks like a controlled demolition, we'd be able to hear the collapse completely without any major explosions, which debunks the batshed David Chandler is spewing.

wow-- talk about denial!

use your EYES!

You're the one shutting down one of your major sense organs, the better to misinterpret the data.

nose.

Why would or should someone be expected to know that what is being shoved up their nose is indeed explosives.
One would assume to obtain the advantage needed to actually shove something up ones nose an element of surprise would be necessary to achieve this advantage.
Therefore if the person or the shoveee is surprised that would make it unfair to expect the shovee to know WHAT exactly is being shoved up their nose. Plus most explosives are
of a certain size and bulkiness that would make any expectation of it being shoved up your nose unreasonable.
Now it is true you also might be talking about another bodily orifice that can have things shoved up it. But that office is on the other side from where the eyes are
making any knowledge of what is indeed being shoved up it all the more unlikely.
So given this context I find your statement to be as illogical as the rest of the stuff you post.

'33 is a tipoff'? Hmm, in any given large number, there is a 1% chance that two adjacent digits will be '33'. What next, wherever the number 6 appears (about 10% chance) it's also code because 6 = 3+3?

If you're going to go down this route then I say every time the number 69 appears, anywhere, it's part of a secret conspiracy whose goal is to promote oral sex.

who subscribes to this nuke theory, of which there is no evidence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y

there is, in fact, lots of evidence--

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com

this is a good intro into WTC demolition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c

I think everyone else in this discussion can safely dismiss whatever they have to say, regardless whether we agree on other issues.

It looks amazingly like a fire. How can you tell the difference?

hang onto the film . . . they're probably changing it right now!

have allowed it to remain in the public view.

Those government ops guys are slipping up. :sarcasm:

Compelling evidence. Make sure you sticky this up on the "TRUTH Wall" you have in your basement/NWO-proof bunker.

Could explain why so many got ill after helping with the clean-up. Easy cover-up right?