Mystery Solved: The WTC was Nuked on 9/11
By Don Fox, Ed Ward, M.D., and Jeff Prager
A
debate has raged for more than a decade about what caused the Twin
Towers to “collapse” in approximately 10 seconds each — 9 seconds for
the South Tower, 11 for the North. A large and growing percentage of the
public has become skeptical of the conclusion of the government’s
official NCSTAR 1 report, according to which, “NIST found no
corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
suggesting that WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
using explosives planted prior to 9/11.”
Skepticism of NIST’s conclusions is well founded. There is
eyewitness testimony as well as abundant video and audio evidence of
explosions at the WTC on 9/11. There is also seismic data that
demonstrates that high powered explosives were used to demolish the Twin
Towers. The gross observable video evidence — if you are willing to
believe your own eyes — shows that the Twin Towers were destroyed from
the top down and the inside out.
We believe that only mini-nukes — which were probably neutron
bombs — planted in the center columns of the buildings, detonated from
top to bottom and configured to explode upward, can explain what is
observed. If they were used to blow apart one ten-floor cube per
second, for example, then, since the North Tower stood at 110 floors,
that would have taken 11 seconds, while, since the top three cubes of
the South Tower tilted over and were blown as one, in that case, it
would have taken only 9, which coincides with NIST’s own times.
This is a controversial contention. Judy Wood, Ph.D., has proclaimed
that a Tesla-inspired directed energy weapon (DEW) was responsible for
the destruction of the WTC buildings and has vehemently denied
nuclear bombs were used. Steve Jones, Ph.D., and his followers promote
the theory that an incendiary (nanothermite) was the cause of the
destruction of the WTC buildings, while they also deny that nukes were
used. So these seemingly opposed camps agree on one thing: nukes were
not used on 9/11!
The nanothermite hypothesis has been discredited on multiple
occasions in articles by T. Mark Hightower and Jim Fetzer, including “Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 community?”, “Is ’9/11 truth’ based upon a false theory?”, and “Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”.
Since it is a principle (law) of materials science that an explosive
can destroy a material only if it has a detonation velocity equal to or
greater than the speed of sound in that material, where the speed of
sound in concrete is 3,200 m/s and in steel 6,100 m/s, while the highest
detonation velocity that has been attributed to nanothermite is 895
m/s, it should be obvious: You can’t get there from there!
The DEW hypothesis turns out to be difficult to test, since Judy Wood
defines DEWs as sources of energy that are greater than conventional
and can be directed, which even encompasses micro and mini nukes within
its scope. As earlier articles have explained, including “9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings II” and “Mini Neutron Bombs: A Major Piece of the 9/11 Puzzle”,
there are multiple grounds for preferring the mini or micro nuke
hypothesis over the DEW alternative, which emerge with particular
clarity from a study of the dust samples collected by the US Geological
Survey. It is ironic that, while the “thermite sniffers” also focus on
dust samples, they seem to have missed what we have to learn from them.
Indeed, the nuclear component of the decimation of World Trade Center
buildings 1, 2, and 6–where WTC-7 appears to be a separate case–is the
darkest and most closely guarded secret of 9/11. With so many folks
claiming different theories it is difficult for average people to know
what to believe. Fortunately, we have scientific proof of what happened
at Ground Zero. The dust and water samples reveal the true story of
what happened on 9/11. This article thus provides more of the scientific
evidence–especially from the USGS dust samples–that settles the debate
in favor of the demolition of the WTC buildings as having been a nuclear
event.
Debris Ejected over 600 feet
The explosives that demolished the Twin Towers were so powerful that
North Tower debris was ejected up at a 45° angle and out over 600 feet
into the Winter Garden. This feat alone puts an end to the notion that
the buildings were “dustified” where they stood or that an
incendiary such as nanothermite was the responsible for the destruction
of two 500,000 ton 110 story skyscrapers or that the buildings collapsed
due to fire. Consider these photos and graphs:
Debris was ejected at a 45* angle for over 600 feet and impacted with the Winter Garden
Engineers estimate that 1/3 of the buildings were completely
vaporized. And as Judy Wood likes to point out, no toilets were found in
the rubble. 90% of the debris from the Twin Towers destruction landed
outside the building’s footprints. What type of explosives could cause
this sort of damage? The only thing known to man that can explain this
is nuclear bombs.
Proof of Fusion
The Department of Energy (DOE) collected water samples from the basement
of Building 6 eleven days after 9/11 that showed tritium levels 55
times greater than background. How does this prove fusion?
Let’s start by defining “tritium”:
Tritium is an isotope of
hydrogen containing one proton and two neutrons. Tritium is radioactive
with a half-life of 12.32 years. Also Known As: hydrogen-3, 3H
(Helmenstine) The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission provides us some excellent background information on hydrogen:
Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe,
comprising approximately 90% of the luminous universe by weight.
Ordinary hydrogen (1H) accounts for greater than 99.985% of
all naturally-occurring hydrogen, whereas deuterium (2H) comprises
approximately 0.015%. By comparison, tritium (3H) represents only
approximately 10 to the -16 exponent percent of hydrogen
naturally occurring. Tritium is a rare but natural isotope of hydrogen
(H), and is the only natural hydrogen isotope that is radioactive. The
tritium atom is sometimes designated T to distinguish it from the common
lighter isotope. Notwithstanding the difference in mass, tritium can be
found in the same chemical forms as hydrogen. The most important forms,
from the perspective of atmospheric behavior of tritium, are tritiated
hydrogen gas (HT) and tritiated water (HTO). These tritiated forms
behave chemically like hydrogen gas (H2) and water (H2O).
Natural Sources
Tritium is generated by both natural and artificial processes.
Tritium is naturally produced primarily through the interaction of
cosmic radiation protons and neutrons with gases (including nitrogen,
oxygen and argon) in the upper atmosphere.
Anthropogenic Sources
In addition to its natural sources, tritium also has a number of
anthropogenic sources which account for the dominant proportion of the
global tritium inventory. Anthropogenic tritium sources include fallout
from nuclear weapons testing, nuclear reactors, future fusion
reactors, fuel reprocessing plants, heavy water production facilities
and commercial production for medical diagnostics, radiopharmaceuticals,
luminous paints, sign illumination, self-luminous aircraft, airport
runway lights, luminous dials, gauges and wrist watches, and others.
Commercial uses of tritium account for only a small fraction of the
tritium used worldwide. Instead, the primary use of tritium has been to
boost the yield of both fission and thermonuclear (or fusion) weapons,
increasing the efficiency with which the nuclear explosive materials
are used.
Thermonuclear Detonation during Nuclear Weapons Testing
Nuclear tests have been conducted in the atmosphere since 1945,
producing tritium in amounts that greatly exceed the global natural
activity, particularly during 1954 to 1958 and 1961 to 1962 when a
number of large-yield test series were undertaken. The tritium activity
arising from atmospheric nuclear tests can be estimated from the fission
and fusion yields of the weapons tests or from environmental
measurements. For example, the tritium activity produced per unit yield
is dependent upon the attributes of the device, as well as on the
characteristics of the detonation site, and tritium generation from
fusion reactions is much higher than from fission. The tritium that is
produced by a nuclear explosion is almost completely converted to
tritiated water (HTO), which then mixes with environmental
water. (“Investigation of the,” 2009)
What about WTC-6?
Damage to WTC-6 and smoke rising from it BEFORE the North Tower’s “collapse”
We have established that tritium is a rare hydrogen isotope, the
vast majority of tritium that is produced is used in nuclear weapons and
that the tritium produced by a thermonuclear explosion is converted
into tritiated water (HTO). Tritiated water WAS found in the basement
of Building 6 at concentrations 55 times background levels. Here is Ed
Ward’s breakdown of the DOE’s water sample data:
1. Trace definition as it applies to quantity: Occurring in extremely
small amounts or in quantities less than a standard limit (In the case
of tritium, this standard level would be 20 TUs - the high of quoted
standard background levels.) http://www.thefreedictionary.com/trace
2. The stated values of tritium from the DOE report “Study of Traces
of Tritium at the World Trade Center”. “A water sample from the WTC
sewer, collected on 9/13/01, contained 0.164±0.074 (2ó) nCi/L (164 pCi/L
+/- 74 pCi/L – takes 1,000 trillionths to = 1 billionth) of HTO.
A split water sample, collected on 9/21/01 from the basement of WTC
Building 6, contained 3. 53±0.17 and 2.83±0.15 nCi/L ( 3,530.0 pCi/L +/-
170 pCi/L and 2,830 pCi/L +/- 150 pCi/L), respectively. https://e-reportsext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf Pico to Nano converter - http://www.unitconversion.org/prefixes/picos-to-nanos-conversion.html Nano to Pico converter - http://www.unit-conversion.info/metric.html
3. 1 TU = 3.231 pCi/L (trillionths per liter) or 0.003231 nCi/L (billionths per liter) - http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q2282.html - (My original TU calculations came out to 3.19 pCi/L, but I will gladly accept these referenced minimally higher values.http://www.clayandiron.com/news.jhtml?method=view&news.id=1022)
4. In 2001 normal background levels of Tritium are supposedly around
20 TUs (prior to nuclear testing in the 60′s, normal background tritium
water levels were 5 to 10 TUs - http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q2282.html ).
However, groundwater studies show a significantly less water
concentration: Groundwater age estimation using tritium only provides
semi-quantitative, “ball park” values: · <0.8 TU indicates sub modern
water (prior to 1950s) · 0.8 to 4 TU indicates a mix of sub modern and
modern water · 5 to 15 TU indicates modern water (< 5 to 10 years) ·
15 to 30 TU indicates some bomb tritium http://www.grac.org/agedatinggroundwater.pdf But,
instead of “5 to 15 TU” (which would make the increase in background
levels even higher), I will use 20 TUs as the 2001 environmental level
to give all possible credibility to the lie of “Traces”.
5. Let’s calculate the proven referenced facts. Tritium level
confirmed in the DOE report of traces of tritium = 3,530 pCi/L (+/- 170
pCi/L, but we will use the mean of 3,530 pCi/L). 3,530 pCi/L (the
referenced lab value) divided by the background level of 20TUs (20 X
3.231 p (1 TU = 3.21 pCi/L) = 64.62 pCi/L as the high normal
background/standard level. 3,530 divided by 64.62 pCi/L = 54.63 TIMES
THE NORMAL BACKGROUND LEVEL. 3,530 pCi/L divided by 3.231 pCi/L (1 TU) =
1,092.54 TUs
6. This is my ‘fave’ because lies tend to eat their young. Muon
physicist Steven Jones calls 1,000 TUs “The graphs below show that
hydrogen-bomb testing boosted tritium levels in rain by several orders
of magnitude. (“Tritium in precipitation,”) (Jones, 2006) Yet, calls the
EXACT SAME LEVELS quoted in nCi/L as “Traces” and “These results are
well below the levels of concern to human exposure” (Jones, 2006).
Interesting isn’t it.
7. Thomas M. Semkowa, Ronald S. Hafnerc, Pravin P. Parekha, Gordon J.
Wozniakd, Douglas K. Hainesa, Liaquat Husaina, Robert L. Rabune. Philip
G. Williams and Steven Jones have all called over 1,000 TUs of Tritium,
“Traces”. Even at the height of nuclear bomb testing 98% –
after thousands of Megatons of nuclear testing – of the rainwater tests
were 2,000 TUs or less. https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf
8. It is also important to note that the tritium present was diluted
by at least some portion of 1 million liters of water accounting for
BILLIONS of TUs.
An important point that Jones glosses over is the dilution of water
in the basement of WTC 6. If not for copious amounts of water sprayed on
the WTC site undoubtedly the concentration of tritium would have been
higher than the measured 55 times normal background levels.
After WTC-6 has been hit and during the South Tower “collapse”
Chuck Boldwyn’s suggestion of where they may have been placed and the effects
To sum this up: we see a plume of smoke rising from Building 6,
photos that show the building was blackened and bombed out before ANY
debris from the Twin Towers hit it, a massive crater in the middle of
the building and the DOE found massive quantities of tritium in the
basement eleven days after 9/11. Only a thermonuclear explosion explains
all of this, which strongly suggests that WTC-6 was nuked. And there
is more proof.
An infrared image showing the huge crater in WTC-6 (to the left-foreground)r
Proof of Fission
The US Geological Survey collected samples of dusts and airfall debris
from more than 35 localities within a 1-km radius of the World Trade
Center site on the evenings of September 17 and 18, 2001. The USGS was
primarily looking for asbestos in the dust but they found a host
of elements in the dust that when analyzed properly proves that nuclear
fission took place at Ground Zero.
A quick glance at the chemistry table and immediately the presence
of the elements such as cesium, uranium, thorium, barium, strontium,
yttrium, rubidium, molybdenum, lanthanum, cerium, chromium and zinc
raise suspicions. But deeper analysis shows that these
elements correlate with each other according to relationships expected
in a nuclear fission event. Jeff Prager has done extensive work with the
USGS dust samples and we’ll use some of the slides from his Vancouver
Power Point presentation to help us analyze the USGS data:
Barium and Strontium
People might argue that strontium and barium could be found in building
debris and they would be correct however strontium and barium could
never, under any circumstances, be found as building debris constituents
in a demolition in these quantities.
The levels never fall below 400 ppm for Barium and they never drop
below 700 ppm for Strontium and they reach over 3000 ppm for both of
them at WTC01-16, Broadway and John Streets. Why?
Barium and Strontium are rare Trace elements with limited industrial
uses. The enormous peak in Barium and Strontium concentration at
WTC01-16 is readily apparent in the chart below. The concentration of
the two elements reaches 3130 ppm for Strontium and 3670 ppm for Barium
or over 0.3% by weight of the dust. This means that 0.37% of the sample
was Barium and 0.31% of the sample was Strontium by weight at that
location, WTC01-16, Broadway and John Streets. The Mean concentration
for Barium including the very low girder coating samples is 533 ppm and
for Strontium it’s 727 ppm. These are not Trace amounts. They are
highly dangerous and extremely toxic amounts. They are also critical
components of nuclear fission and the decay process.
Here we’re plotting the concentration of Barium at each location
against the Strontium concentration. The correlation between the
concentrations of the two elements, Barium and Strontium is extremely
high. The Coefficient of Correlation between the concentration of
Barium and Strontium at the outdoor and indoor sampling locations is
0.99 to 2 decimal places (0.9897 to 4 decimal places).
So we have a Correlation Coefficient between the concentration of
Barium and the concentration of Strontium of 0.9897, or near perfect.
The maximum Correlation Coefficient that is mathematically possible is
1.0 and this would mean we have a perfect match between the two factors
we’re examining and the data points would lie on a straight line with
no variation between them. To obtain a Correlation Coefficient of 0.9897
with this number of measurements (14) around Lower Manhattan is very,
very significant indeed.
What this means is that we can say that there’s a 99% correlation in the
variation in the concentration between these two elements. They vary in
lockstep; they vary together. When one element varies so does the
other. We can state with absolute mathematical certainty that any change
in the concentration of one of these elements, either the Barium or
Strontium, is matched by the same change in the concentration of the
other. Whatever process gave rise to the presence of either the Barium
or the Strontium must have also produced the other as well. Fission is
the only process that explains this.
Thorium and Uranium
Next we come to the detection of measurable quantities of Thorium and
Uranium in the dust from the World Trade Center, elements which only
exist in radioactive form. The graph below plots the concentration of
Thorium and Uranium detected at each sampling location. Again, the last
two locations, WTC01-08 and WTC01-09, are for the two girder coating
samples. The Uranium concentration follows the same pattern as Thorium,
although the graph scale does not show this markedly. Uranium follows
the dip at WTC01-03 and WTC01-16 but the highest concentration of
Uranium also matches Thorium in the second girder coating, WTC01-09,
at 7.57ppm. 7.57 greatly exceeds normal Trace element levels. This
equals 93 Becquerels per kilogram.
Normal background radiation is approximately 12Bq/kg to 40Bq/kg
with 40Bq/kg the highest level we would expect to see. This girder
contains more than twice the expected level of uranium. The second
girder contained 30.7 ppm of Thorium, 6 times as high as the
lowest level of that element detected. Thorium is a radioactive element
formed from Uranium by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present
in building rubble, ever. So we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear
fission event has taken place. As we said earlier, Thorium is
formed from Uranium be alpha decay. An alpha particle is the same as a
Helium nucleus, so this means we have one of the favored fission
pathways: Uranium fissioning into a Noble Gas and the balancing
elements, in this case Helium and Thorium.
The graph of Thorium versus Lithium including the Girder Coatings
has exactly the same form as the graph showing Thorium versus Uranium,
also including the Girder Coatings. Without the two Girder Coatings the
correlation of Thorium to Lithium in the dust is completely linear.
We therefore have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of
Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into
Lithium, has indeed taken place. It is out of the question that all of
these correlations which are the signature of a nuclear explosion
could have occurred by chance. This is impossible. The presence of rare
Trace elements such as Cerium, Yttrium and Lanthanum is enough to raise
eyebrows in themselves, let alone in quantities of 50 ppm to well over
100 ppm. When the quantities then vary widely from place to place but
still correlate with each other according to the relationships expected
from nuclear fission, it is beyond ALL doubt that the variations in
concentration are due to that same common process of nuclear fission.
When we also find Barium and Strontium present, in absolutely
astronomical concentrations of over 400 ppm to over 3000 ppm, varying
from place to place but varying in lockstep and according to known
nuclear relationships, the implications are of the utmost seriousness.
Fission occurred in NYC on 911. This graph (below) shows that (apart
from the very high peak in Sodium levels for one of the indoor dust
samples) the Sodium and Potassium concentrations both display this
now characteristic peak at location WTC01-16, the corner of Broadway and
John Street. Sodium has the same peak as Zinc at WTC01-22, the corner
of Warren and West, and like Zinc, falls to a minimum in the girder
coatings – far below the concentrations found in the dust. Potassium
is very similar except its concentration was not a peak at WTC01-02,
Water and New York Streets, but somewhat lower than the next location,
WTC01-03, State and Pearl Streets.
Zinc, Sodium and Potassium
There are clear correlations and relationships here which show that the
Potassium and Sodium concentrations did not arise at random. They are
products of radioactive decay. Remember that Strontium is produced by a
fission pathway that proceeds through the Noble Gas Krypton and then the
Alkali Metal Rubidium. Similarly, Barium is produced through Xenon and
the Alkali Metal Cesium. We know that Uranium fission favors these
pathways through the Noble Gases. Just as radioactive isotopes of
Krypton and Xenon decay by beta particle emission to produce Rubidium
and Cesium, radioactive isotopes of Neon and Argon also decay by beta
emission to produce Sodium and Potassium. We would indeed expect to find
anomalous levels of these elements present – what was found is again
consistent with the occurrence of nuclear fission.
We know beyond doubt that the only process that can cause Barium and
Strontium to be present in related or correlated quantities and any
process that can also cause Barium and Strontium to have such strong
relational concentrations across different samples, is nuclear fission.
We know that if nuclear fission had occurred that Barium and Strontium
would be present and a strong statistical correlation between the
quantities of each would be found, and we have that, in spades.
What else do we have? Quite a lot. About 400 ppm of Barium and
Strontium were measured in two samples of insulation girder coatings
(WTC01-08 and 01-09). The concentration of Strontium actually falls
somewhat below that of Barium in the second girder sample, WTC01-09, as
at WTC01-16, whereas in every othesample the level of Strontium
discovered was higher than Barium. Given the elevated levels of Barium
daughter products found in the second girder and even the highest level
of Uranium found (7.57ppm just West of and behind Tower One) this shows
that active fission was still ongoing in the second girder coating, in
the very same way as at WTC01-16 and therefore more Barium was found
then Strontium. In other samples where the rate of fission had slowed
down to give way to decay, the concentrations of Barium and Strontium
reverse, due to the different half-lives. Barium isotopes have a shorter
half-life then Strontium isotopes so they decay more quickly and after a
period of time when no new Barium or Strontium has been
deposited, Strontium will exceed Barium.
The fact that more Barium then Strontium was still found at WTC01-16
and WTC01-09 shows that the overall nuclear processes taking place
were somewhat favoring Barium over Strontium and hence Zinc as well. The
tighter cluster of Barium (400-500 ppm) and Strontium (700-800 ppm)
concentrations across widely separated sampling locations in Lower
Manhattan is cast iron proof that Nuclear Fission occurred. We know
that Barium and Strontium are the characteristic signature of fission;
they are formed by two of the most common Uranium fission pathways. The
fact that their concentrations are so tightly coupled means that their
source was at the very epicenter of the event which created the
dust cloud that enveloped Manhattan. This was not a localized
preexisting chemical source which would only have contaminated a few
closely spaced samples and left the remaining samples untouched. The
very high concentrations of Barium and Strontium at location WTC01-16
shows that active nuclear fission was still ongoing at that spot; the
dust was still “hot” and new Barium and new Strontium were being
actively generated, actively created by transmutation from their parent
nuclei.
The presence of Thorium and Uranium correlated to each other by a
clear mathematical power relationship – and to the other radionuclide
daughter products such as sodium, potassium, zinc, lithium, strontium
and barium – leaves nothing more to be said. This type of data has
probably never been available to the public before and it’s an
unprecedented insight into the action of a nuclear device. September
11th, 2001, was the first nuclear event within a major United
States city that we have incontrovertible proof for and this is without
question the most closely held secret surrounding the events of
September 11th, 2001.
Anyone seriously interested in 911 truth will naturally be compelled
to fully and thoroughly investigate the serious implications raised by
this report personally, and I strongly encourage this. The material is
complex yet if I can understand it anyone can. No one promised us that
the answers to 911 would come easily.
More compelling evidence
There’s more compelling and incontrovertible evidence we would like to cover now; in particular, we will discuss the elements:
Lanthanum
Vanadium
Yttrium
Chromium
Nickel
Copper
Lead
Zinc
In this graph Zinc has been divided by a factor of 10 to avoid
losing all the detail in the scaling if the ‘Y’ axis instead went up to
3000 ppm. The variation in Lead is matched by the variation in Zinc
almost perfectly across all sampling locations, including the Indoor and
Girder Coating samples.
Copper and Zinc
The concentration of Copper follows that of Zinc with one distinct
exception at WTC01-15, Trinity and Cortlandt Streets, just several
hundred feet East of Building Four. There seem to be two Copper-Zinc
relationships. If some of the Zinc was being formed by beta decay of
Copper, then the high Copper at WTC01-15 could reduce Zinc, since
formation of Zinc by that decay pathway would be retarded by material
being held up at the Copper stage, before decaying on to Zinc. Therefore
this graph does confirm that some of the Zinc was indeed being formed
by beta decay of Copper. This would at least be a very small mercy for
the civilian population exposed in this event since the Zinc isotopes
formed from Copper are stable, i.e. they are not radioactive.
The copper found in the Ground Zero dust is indicative of nuclear
fission. If we plot the concentration of Copper against Zinc and Nickel,
we obtain the graphs pictured here. The concentration of Nickel was
almost the same everywhere, except for the peak of 88 ppm matched by the
Copper peak of 450 ppm.
The Copper – Zinc relationship is very interesting, showing in fact
two distinct relationships again depending on isotopic composition.
There are two radioactive isotopes of Copper (Cu 64 and Cu 67) with
short half-lives of 12.7 hours and 2.58 days respectively which decay
into Zinc isotopes. The other two isotopes (Cu 60 and Cu 61) decay the
other way by positron emission into Nickel and in fact Cu 64 goes both
ways, into both Nickel and Zinc. This would explain why there strongly
appear to be two Copper – Zinc relationships.
The decay of radioactive Copper by beta particle emission into Zinc
would have been another source for the extraordinarily high
concentrations of Zinc found in the World Trade Center Dust.
Lanthanum
Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of Barium,
situated between Barium and Cerium. The concentration of Barium versus
Lanthanum is plotted in the graph below. This graph is almost identical
in form to the relationship between Barium and Cerium. A similar inverse
exponential (cubic) relationship is clearly visible. In this case,
Lanthanum is approximately equal to 5 times the cube root of Barium.
Lanthanum has a much shorter half-life then Cerium; most of its
isotopes have a half-life of only a few hours whereas beta decay by
Cerium is measured in half-life periods of a month to 10 months.
Cerium’s beta decay going back to Lanthanum occurs more quickly but
Lanthanum’s beta decay going back to Barium occurs in a similar
time-scale to that – a few hours, so we are left with the net effect of
Lanthanum’s beta decay being much quicker than that of Cerium, so the
concentration of Cerium remaining was higher than that of Lanthanum.
Yttrium
Yttrium is also a very rare element and should not be present in
dust from a collapsed office building. Yttrium is the next decay element
after Strontium. If we plot concentration of Strontium against Yttrium,
we see what happens in the graph above. Strontium 90 has a much longer
half-life (28.78 years) than most Barium isotopes so we would not expect
to see as high a concentration of Strontium’s daughter products as
those that are produced from Barium. This is in fact what we see – the
concentration of Cerium (next daughter product to Barium) is higher than
Yttrium, the next daughter product to Strontium.
Chromium
The presence of Chromium is also a telltale signature of a nuclear
detonation. Its concentration is shown plotted against Zinc and Vanadium
in the graphs below. There is a strong correlation between the Zinc and
the Chromium concentration. The Coefficient of Correlation is high,
0.89.
There is also an indication of strong correlation between Chromium
and Vanadium within 6 points of lying on an almost perfect exponential
curve, with one outlier, WTC01-03, the corner of State and Pearl
Streets, of 42.5ppm where the Vanadium concentration reached its
highest level.
Looking at the data for Zinc we see that the Zinc concentration for
WTC01-02, Water Street at the intersection of New York, is 2990 ppm and
this immediately stands out. In fact, for the outdoor samples, Zinc is
the most common Trace element at all sampling locations, with generally
between 1000 ppm and 2000 ppm except for this spike of nearly 3000 ppm
at WTC01- 02.
This equates to an enormous concentration of Zinc. 0.1% to 0.2% of
Zinc in the dust overall and at WTC01-02, 0.299% of the dust was Zinc.
This exceeds the concentration of the supposed “non-Trace” element
Manganese and Phosphorous and almost equals the elevated Titanium
concentration of 0.39% at that same location.
What process produced the zinc?
If we include the data for WTC01-16, the Correlation Coefficient
between the Zinc and Barium concentration is 0.007 to 3 decimal places,
from which we can conclude that there is absolutely no correlation at
all. But if we exclude that one sampling location, where Barium and
Strontium concentrations peaked, the correlation coefficient between
Zinc and Barium is 0.96 to two decimal places and between Zinc and
Strontium, 0.66 to two decimal places. So what happened?
This shows that the Zinc and Barium concentrations are closely
related and if we exclude what must have been an extraordinary event at
WTC01-16 as an outlier, the correlation is very good. The Product Moment
Correlation Coefficient is 0.96. The concentration of Zinc is now 3
times the concentration of Barium but the correlation between Zinc and
Strontium is not so clear, showing that the relationship must be more
indirect. This is to be expected since Barium and Strontium are produced
by different nuclear fission pathways.
In spent nuclear fuel, Strontium is found as Strontium Oxide (SrO) –
the Strontium produced by the nuclear fission explosion under the Twin
Towers will certainly have been oxidized to SrO by the heat. SrO is
extremely soluble in water, so some of the Strontium concentration
results obtained may have been distorted by the rain water which fell on
New York a few days after the towers were destroyed. There is a very
strong linear relationship between Barium and Zinc found at the World
Trade Center. This may indicate that a closely related nuclear
sub-process gave rise to them, which produced three times as much Zinc
as Barium by weight. If so, that would be a very unusual nuclear event.
Ternary Fission
There is a lesser known nuclear process that accounts for this, which
would be indicative of very high energies indeed. This process is known
as Ternary Fission. What is ternary fission? From Wikipedia:
Ternary Fission is a comparatively rare (0.2 to
0.4% of events) type of nuclear fission in which three charged products
are produced rather than two. As in other nuclear fission processes,
other uncharged particles such as multiple neutrons and gamma rays are
produced in ternary fission.
Ternary fission may happen during neutron-induced fission or in
spontaneous fission (the type of radioactive decay). About 25% more
ternary fission happens in spontaneous fission compared to the same
fissioning system formed after thermal neutron capture, illustrating
that these processes remain physically slightly different, even after
the absorption of the neutron, possibly because of the extra energy
present in the nuclear reaction system of thermal
neutron-induced fission.
True Ternary Fission: A very rare type of
ternary fission process is sometimes called “true ternary fission.” It
produces three nearly equal-sized charged fragments (Z ~ 30) but
only happens in about 1 in 100 million fission events. In this type of
fission, the product nuclei split the fission energy in three nearly
equal parts and have kinetic energies of ~ 60
MeV (Wikipedia contributors, 2013)
Mini-Neutron Bombs
We have evidence of nuclear fission and fusion taking place at Ground
Zero. Fission triggered fusion bombs fit the evidence. These bombs had
limited but powerful blast effects, a burst of neutron radiation as well
as EMP effects. Mini-neutron bombs appear to be what was used.
What is a neutron bomb?
A neutron bomb, also
called an enhanced radiation bomb, is a type of thermonuclear weapon. An
enhanced radiation bomb is any weapon which uses fusion to enhance the
production of radiation beyond that which is normal for an atomic
device. In a neutron bomb, the burst of neutrons generated by the fusion
reaction is intentionally allowed to escape using X-ray mirrors and an
atomically inert shell casing, such as chromium or nickel. The energy
yield for a neutron bomb may be as little as half that of a conventional
device, though radiation output is only slightly less. Although
considered to be ‘small’ bombs, a neutron bomb still has a yield in the
tens or hundreds of kilotons range. Neutron bombs are expensive to
make and maintain because they require considerable amounts of tritium,
which has a relatively short half-life (12.32 years). Manufacture of the
weapons requires that a constant supply of tritium of be available.
Neutron bombs have a relatively short shelf-life. (Helmenstine)
Per Sam Cohen,
“In a broad sense, the neutron bomb is an
explosive version of the sun; that is, the relevant energy it emits
comes from thermonuclear, or fusion, reactions involving the
very lightest elements. To be specific, its fuel consists of the two
heavier nuclei of hydrogen, named deuterium and tritium. By
means of a fission trigger, a mixture of these two nuclei is compressed
and heated, as happens in a hydrogen bomb, to cause nuclear reactions
whose principle output is in the form of very high energy neutrons. Also
produced will be blast and heat, but so predominant are the neutron
effects against human beings, who are a hundred to a thousand times more
vulnerable to radiation than blast and heat, that by bursting the
weapon high enough off the ground the only significant effects at the
surface will come from radiation. In so doing, the blast and heat
effects will not be strong enough to cause significant damage to most
structures. Hence, a bomb which, accurately but misleadingly, has been
described as a weapon that kills people but spares buildings.” (Cohen,
2006)
Neutron Radiation and EMP Effects
Neutron radiation and EMP appears to be responsible for the “toasted cars” found near Ground Zero. What is
neutron radiation? From the Shots Across the Bow Blog:
To understand neutron radiation, imagine a pool
table set for the start of a game. 15 balls are in the middle of
the table, with the cue ball set for the break. The cue ball is a free
neutron. When the neutron hits the nucleus, one of three things might
happen. First, if the cue ball doesn’t have enough energy, or hits at
the wrong angle, it caroms off, barely disturbing the pack of balls.
Second, if the ball has too much energy, it slams through the pack,
breaking it up. This is fission, and results in fission products, more
free neutrons, and energy. Third, if the ball has just the right amount
of energy, it just makes it to the pack and joins in, becoming
another neutron in the nucleus. Here is where our analogy breaks down,
because many times, when a nucleus gets another neutron, it becomes
unstable, and begins to decay, emitting alphas, betas, or gammas. This
is called ”activation” and is one of the trickier problems with neutron
irradiation and the physical properties of the irradiated matter can be
quite different from the original. (“A nuclear power,”)
A large quantity of high energy neutrons bombarding an object will
cause the atoms in the material to move i.e. heat up. This is why so few
bodies were found at Ground Zero – most of the people that were near
the Towers were vaporized either by the blast and heat effects of the
bombs or the neutron radiation that was released.
The “Toasted” Cars
Ted Twietmeyer has a post on Rense’s website that goes a long way
towards explaining the toasted cars found near Ground Zero. Twietmeyer
attributes the damage to aluminum vehicle parts such as engine blocks
and mirrors to strong EMP eddy currents produced by nuclear detonations
at Ground Zero:
“and what else do eddy currents create? HEAT if the
currents are strong enough. The stronger the eddy currents, the more
heat which will be generated. Although magnetic fields are being
created, they are temporary in aluminum because it is not magnetic, but
paramagnetic. This means aluminum will be affected by magnetism, but it
cannot be magnetized.
A vector is simply a line that shows direction and usually has an
arrow. Arrows are not shown above, in an attempt to simplify the image.
The direction of force is from upper left to lower right. The notated
image above provides a possible explanation for the location of the
source of the magnetic pulse, and why some vehicles were damaged and
others were not. This parking lot may be the best evidence in support of
my theory.
“Sacrificial vehicles” shielding others showing pulse vectors
Yellow lines indicate the pulse(s) blocked by the rear row of
vehicles. It appears the entire outside of all rear vehicles were
destroyed. Note how several hoods on the rear row of vehicles have white
dust or ash, indicating an intense heat originating from under the
hood. This is probably caused by the engine block vaporizing, and the
white dust may be aluminum oxide. If the vehicles are still around
somewhere in a junk yard, some simple lab tests will confirm this.
White lines show the pulses that reached the vehicles in the
foreground. Orange shapes around each car show the damage threshold
line. The cars are basically undamaged below these lines and some might
be repairable. If it wasn’t for “sacrificial” vehicles at the rear,
those in the foreground would have been completely burned.
Note that white and yellow lines are not meant to be a literal
interpretation to show size of the pulse, how many lines of force hit
each vehicle, etc… Each line is intended to show only the direction the
pulse(s) came from. Regardless of whether this parking lot is close to
the WTC or not, it clearly shows that the nuclear device (or pulse
source) was high above the ground. If the pulse source were close to the
Earth, then vehicles in the foreground would have been completely
shielded from the pulse.” (Twietmeyer, 2007)
Ed Ward’s take: I believe some of what he attributes to EMP was done
by neutrons – in particular his linear evaluations (angle computations)
would seem more neutron than EMP. EMP should tend to flow around – seems
to be a correlation of dust cloud carrying EMP. So the linear blockage
of cars protecting other cars would seem to be more appropriate
for neutrons. Other than that seems on the money, IMO.
The Temperature of the Pile
Temperatures at Ground Zero were 600 to 1,500 °F or even higher for 6
months after 9/11. Firemen were fighting fires at Ground Zero for 99
days after 9/11. AVRIS data showed that temperature in one spot was
1,341 °F on 9/16/01. These high temperatures could be attributed to
neutron bombs that were detonated underground in order to destroy the
foundations of the Twin Towers. Some of the hotspots may have been
unexploded nuclear fissile material reacting underground. The workers at
Ground Zero experienced hellish working conditions. One Ground Zero
worker, Charlie Vitchers, describes the nightmare:
“The fires were very intense on the pile, the heat was very
intense. In some places you couldn’t even get onto it. In some areas
where you could walk, you’d travel another five feet and then you could
just feel the heat coming up and you would have to just back off. You’d
say to yourself, “I can’t see a fire, but I can feel the heat,
so something’s wrong here,” and you’d back off.
That was one of the concerns we had about putting equipment on
the pile, because the operators were sitting eight or ten feet up above
the debris pile in their cabs and couldn’t feel the heat. But they’re
carrying a hundred gallons of diesel fuel, hydraulic hoses, and
other flammables, and there was nothing to stop the heat from wrecking
the machine. If they got stuck in a place where the heat was so intense
that it set his machine on fire, that operator wasn’t going to make it
out.
We were so lucky. We didn’t lose anyone. We lost a lot of
equipment, mostly due to collapses, but didn’t have any piece of
equipment catch on fire or anything like that. But hoses melted,
and there was a lot of damage to tires- some of them melted just from
being too close. I mean, the bottom of your shoes would melt on some of
the steel. Some of that was so hot you could feel the hair on the back
of your neck start to burn when you walked by. There were
cherry-red pieces of steel sticking out of the ground. It was almost
like being in a steel-manufacturing plant. You just couldn’t physically
go near that stuff.
Every time a grappler grabbed a piece of steel and shook it out,
it would just fan the fire, like a fan in the fireplace. All of a sudden
there’d be smoke billowing out. The Army Corps of Engineers eventually
supplied us with infrared aerial shots of where the heat was. It was
like looking at the blob. The fire was moving under the pile. One day it
would be here, it would be 1,400 degrees, the next day it would be
2,000 degrees, then five days later it wouldn’t register over 600
degrees.” (Stout, Vitchers & Gray, 2006)
We are not so naive as to suppose that Steve Jones or that Judy Wood
would be converted by the evidence we have presented, where Judy and her
followers, in particular, have proven to be
completely hostile to even very modest criticism of her work.
But we believe that the evidence derived from the dust samples
collected by the USGS–which, after all, is a government agency–provides
overwhelming proof that contradicts the government’s own “official
account” and establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the destruction
of the WTC was a nuclear event.
Conclusions of this Study
Evidence for fission and fusion abounds at Ground Zero. Tritiated water
in any significant quantity is a telltale sign of a thermonuclear
explosion. A 170 meter high plume of smoke was observed rising from
Building 6, and massive amounts of tritiated water were found in
the basement. It appears to be beyond reasonable doubt that this
building was nuked, because no alternative explanation is reasonable.
The Twin Towers were 500,000 tons each and destroyed in 9 and 11
seconds respectively with debris ejected hundreds of feet out. There can
be no doubt that the Twins Towers were nuked as well.
The USGS dust samples prove beyond all doubt that nuclear fission
took place at Ground Zero. Fission triggered fusion bombs such as mini
or micro neutron bombs explain the dust and water sample evidence
perfectly.
The destruction of the Twin Towers was an unprecedented use of
nuclear bomb technology. The public had never before witnessed anything
like it. While Steve Jones and Judy Wood, among others, have added to
uncertainty over what happened to the WTC buildings on 9/11, the mystery
has finally been solved. The World Trade Center was nuked on 9/11.
Donald Fox has done extensive research on the
role of mini-nukes by Dr. Ed Ward and on work by The Anonymous Physicist
on the towers and has formulated an account of how it was done and why
there is more to this story relative to very low-yield thermonuclear
devices. See his blog at http://donaldfox.wordpress.com.
Jeff Prager, founder of an award winning
magazine for Senior Citizens, in 2002 he tried to prove 19 Muslims
hijacked four planes and attacked us. By 2005, he realized this was
false, sold his business, left the US and began to investigate 9/11
full-time. See 9/11 AMERICA NUKED, Part 1, Part 2.
Ed Ward, M.D., among the leading experts on the use of nukes on 9/11, maintains an extensive archive about them at his “Weblog of Tyranny”, http://edwardmd.wordpress.com/, and has also appeared as a guest on “The Real Deal”, which you can hear at radiofetzer.blogspot.com,
References
A Nuclear Power Primer: Part 3: How Does Radiation Hurt Us and How Much Does it Take? (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.shotsacrossthebow.com/index.php/site/comments/a_nuclear_power_primer_art_3_how_does_radiation_hurt_us_and_how_much_does_/
Clark, R., Green, R., Swayze, G., Meeker, G., Sutley, S., Hoefen, T.,
Livo, K., Plumlee, G., Pavri, B., Sarture, C., Wilson, S., Hageman, P.,
Lamothe, P., Vance, J., Boardman, J., Brownfield, I., Gent, C., Morath,
L., Taggart, J., Theodorakos, P., & Adams, M. USGS Spectroscopy
Lab, (2001). Environmental Studies of the World Trade Center Area After
the September 11, 2001 Attack (Open-File Report 01-0429). Retrieved from
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) website: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/
Cohen, S. (2006). F*** you! Mr. President: Confessions of the Father
of the Neutron Bomb. (3rd ed., pp. 123-124). Retrieved from http://www.AthenaLab.com/Confessions_Sam_Cohen_2006_Third_Edition.pdf (Cohen, 2006)
Helmenstine, A. M. What is a Neutron Bomb? Retrieved from http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/neutronbomb.htm (Helmenstine)
Jones, S. (2006, September 28). Hard Evidence Repudiates the
Hypothesis That Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers. Retrieved from http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the- Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf
Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada,
(2009). Investigation of the Environmental Fate of Tritium in the
Atmosphere (INFO-0792). Ottawa: Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
(CNSC). http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/pubs_catalogue/uploads/Investigation_of_Environmental_Fate_of_Tritium_in_the_Atmosphere_INFO-0792_e.pdf (“Investigation of the,” 2009)
Semkow, T., Hafner, R., Parekh, P., Wozniak, G., Haines, D., Husain,
L., Rabun, R., & Williams, P. U.S. Department of Energy, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (2002). Study of Traces of Tritium at the
World Trade Center (UCRL-JC-150445). Retrieved from llnl.gov website: https://e reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/241096.pdf
Stout, G., Vitchers, C., & Gray, R. (2006). Nine Months at Ground
Zero: The Story of the Brotherhood of Workers Who Took on a Job Like No
Other. (Google eBook ed., pp. 64-65). Simon and Schuster. Retrieved
from http://books.google.com/books?id=4VD–5- T5IcC&lpg=PA62&ots=I8PEz77ZPT&dq=ground zero grappler&pg=PA64 (Stout, Vitchers & Gray, 2006)
Ternary fission. (2013, March 22). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 19, 2013, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ternary_fission&oldid=546177060
Tritium in Precipitation. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.science.uottawa.ca/eih/ch7/7tritium.htm
Twietmeyer, T. (2007, March 24). What May Have Melted the WTC Vehicles. Retrieved from http://rense.com/general75/melt2.htm (Twietmeyer, 2007)
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=250022
The views expressed herein are the views
of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any
other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners. Legal Notice
Posted by
Jim Fetzer
on May 1 2013,
With
9649 Reads,
Filed under
9/11,
Editor,
WarZone.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the
RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Posts
