Dr Wood's claim that 80% of the steel from the towers was turned to dust.

I said I dont remember, I just remember the number look it up and let me know.

 

I did. The only bomb with 97% fusion efficiency is the Tsar Bomba. Unfortunately for your claims, it is also the largest bomb ever made with a nominal yield of fifty megatons and instead of the size of a golf ball, weighs 60,000 pounds. It still uses a fission bomb to initiate the fusion reaction, but to keep the yield at 50 Mt instead of the feasible 100 Mt, lead tampers were used instead of uranium ones, which keeps the fission reaction down and leads to the high efficiency.

So, you claim a 10 ton TNT equivalent explosion isn't enough to wipe your nose. What about a 50,000,000 ton explosion? Think that would be noticed, or do you think the towers would have contained an explosion of that magnitude?

 

"Don't remember" isn't the same as "never knew" yet I expect "never knew" is really what you mean here. You're clearly not familiar with nuclear physics or you wouldn't have tried to claim that a "mini nuke" could be contained in a golf ball sized package. You also wouldn't try to claim that such a device would not be detected prior to use.

Highly efficient weapons release large amounts of energy. Poorly efficient weapons release large amounts of radiation. In order for a nuclear explosion to take place in each instance you need a minimum amount of mass. This is the point of the chart I posted. It lists the critical mass for elements that are capable of explosion. You'll note that none of them would fit inside a golf ball in a non critical state. This means it would blow up when you tried to cram it in the golf ball. If you have less than a critical mass, you don't have a radioactive chain reaction, you just have a lot of radioactive material tossed around.

This was the big fear of what is possible if a terrorist gets their hands on radioactive material. They don't need to achieve a radioactive chain reaction to kill a bunch of people. All they have to do is blow it up with conventional explosives so that the material is distributed over a large area.

Unfortunately for you, however, this rules out any possibility that it was used as a demolition method. Either the actual demolition event was too small, affecting too little of an area to be an efficient nuclear device, and a "dirty" bomb would have been no use in demolishing the building. Beyond that we, along with a host of other nations, would have detected the radiation released by a dirty bomb and would have known right away what it was.

 

well when you all come out here pretending that mrrs do not exist for pne then I have to make a point dont I, thanks for admitting that WAY back in the 50's they had 97% pure fusion and with boron etc there is no reason they cant bring that number up to 99%, well within the trituim levels found on the site.

 

you got that backwards

on second look pretty much your whole post is worthless

 

Koko, your claims are so moronic that it is hard to believe you can function in society. A true "pure fusion bomb" does not require a fission bomb to ignite the process. The Tsar Bomba still required a very large fission bomb to set it off, but the end result is so massive it dwarfs the fission explosion. Don't confuse pure fusion bomb with people discussing the percentage of the explosion caused by fusion vs fission. Do some research. Realize how stupid your claims are.

Here is some homework. Find a fusion bomb currently in production that doesn't require a fission bomb to set it off. Go ahead. Prove me wrong or admit the smallest fusion bomb, even at 99% efficiency (which requires a larger fusion explosion), would pretty much wipe out NYC even if it is with little radiation.

 

nothing is absolute except your extremist interpretations.
well pal you set me up with top priority clearance and I will hows that.
as usual moving or constructing goal posts to paint yourself into a defensible position by exaggeration and impasse. keep it real.
if you knew what I was talking about you would have already dropped it.

 

Nope. I got it right. You read it wrong or you didn't understand it. The post is worthless to you in the same way that diamonds are worthless to pigs.

Tsar Bomba was tested on October 30, 1961. Truthers can never get their facts straight.

Second, Tsar Bomba's destructive energy did not come from the fusion reaction. The fusion reaction's purpose is to release neutrons which speed up the uranium's fission reaction. This is the efficiency that is talked about. The fissile material is more efficiently fissioned by the existence of the nearby fusion reaction. It's the fission reaction that does most of the destruction. In fact, the actual test shot's power was reduced in half by removing uranium, not by removing fuel for fusion. Remember what I said before about fusion? Only elements lighter than iron release energy by fusion. The fusion fuel was not the uranium the removed. The fusion fuel is a hyrdogen isotope. (hence the term H bomb)

In order to compress hyrdogen into a fusion reaction you need a massive amount of energy, say the gravity of a star or a nuclear bomb. We've also accomplished it with magnetic fields but in all instances more power was used to initiate and contain the reaction than was actually released by the reaction.

That just goes to show that:

1. This not accomplished with golf balls
2. At the scale of golf balls very little energy is released.

 

Why should he know what you're talking about when you don't know what you're talking about? Otherwise why would you need "top priority clearance" in order to provide evidence of what you assume to be true?

 

Your lies and bull(*)(*)(*)(*) were exposed and now you're doing the chicken dance as you run away at top speed. Classic koko! He (*)(*)(*)(*)s up so bad not even he can spin it so he pretends everyone else is exaggerating and moving goal posts. Thanks for proving just how little you actually know, koko. It's been fun!

 

You should pay closer attention, I already went over that. Looks like a cut and paste to me.

 

call your attorney LOL shees

 

Im just doing what I do

 

You mean it looks like someone that knows what they are talking about? You're right. I do know what I'm talking about. It's not cut and paste, however. Some of us are able to support our arguments on our own; without parroting crap we find on the internet that sounds good, but that we don't completely understand.

 

Recycling garbage and hoping nobody notices you're full of (*)(*)(*)(*)?

 

no I mean it looks like you parroted some website.

tell us again how that yield eff works lol

 

Again, contrary to your own method of argument advancement, I do not need to plagiarize to get my points across. Then again, you think that somewhere there's a multi stage golf ball sized device capable of compressing a fissile material into a critical mass. I have no idea where you came up with an idiotic idea like that.

What part of the fission / fusion energy discussion do you need me to re-explain to you? Obviously you didn't understand it because you had no response at all other then to say you thought I copied it from someone.

 

I already told you

 

Does that work in the court room?

I already told you, your honor.

Oh you did? I'm sorry. Case dismissed.

 

yeh it does actually

except I usually address them by their first name sometimes the last name.

but judges are a lot smarter than people on these boards, they usually "get it".

 

So you're a lawyer now???

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

Dr. Judy Wood will be speaking at the Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference while those sitting in the dark will continue to unsuccessfully try to debunk her research.

[video=youtube_share;v2uzN2NBk1o]http://youtu.be/v2uzN2NBk1o[/video]



I'm Emmanuel Goldstein and I approve this message
​

 

I was wondering what a legitimate conference would want with a retarded dental technician with paranoid delusions.... until I checked the rest of the speakers. Wow. Some of those are SERIOUS fruitcakes! Judy should feel right at home with those whackos.

 

Haha the best appeal to authority ever, putting the alphabet soup after the name. "She can't be nuts, she's educated." I love it. As far as the rest, exactly what Patriot911 said, I thought this was going to be for real but it turns out to just be bull(*)(*)(*)(*) in a new wrapper. How come they don't present this information in the country it happened in? Why Holland?

 

B.S. Bull (*)(*)(*)(*)
M.S. Mentally Schizoid
Ph. D. Piled Higher and Deeper.

Truther alphabet soup explained.