 |
| Kim Jong Un and 9/11 nuke |
Update: Evaluation of the DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
Message 1 of 1
,
Jul 4, 2007
Update: Evaluation of the DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
Background Level of 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World
Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> clearly
nuggets:
1. "No Tritium Signs at the WTC", On page 7, 5. Sources and Fate of
Tritium at the WTC, paragraph 2, "We were informed by PANYNJ
authorities that there were NO TRITIUM SIGNS AT THE WTC, only
photluminescent ones (Lombardi, F.J. Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey, personal communication, 12/10/2001). This is entirely
consistent with our observations."
2. No Tritium Present in the Firefighter Equipment, On page 9, Last
paragraph, "It was concluded that fire and emergency equipment could
not have been a source of tritium,...".
3. A One Hour Dry Fire with 3000 Ci of Tritium Leaves 0.0000065% (6.5
Millionths of 1%) Tritium residue with 99.9999935% of the Tritium
escaping, page 8, Last paragraph,. Jensen, G.A.; Martin, J.B.
Investigation of fire at Council, Alaska: A release of approximately
3000 curies of tritium. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report
PNL-6523, Richland, WA, 1988. This is a very similar scenerio to the
plane fires in the WTC burning for 1 hour without water intervention.
0.000000065 X 3000 Ci original = 0.000195 Ci residual, = 195
millionths of 1 Ci, = Started with 3,000 Ci and ended with 195
millionths of 1 Ci (Curie - As long as the same unit value is used,
it does not matter what that unit is called. Think of a Curie as
just another unit of measurement like pounds, tons, kilograms, grams,
ounces, etc. As long as the same units are used throughout the
calculation one need not know the unit name nor be concerned with
it. Started with 3,000 pounds and ended with a residual of 195
millionths of a pound. Similar to leaving your car and when you come
back to the parking space, you would need an electron microscope to
find what is left.
(0.000000065 X 3 Quadrillion nCi = 195,000 nCi residual, 195,000
residual/3,000,000,000,000,000 (3 Quadrillion - original) = 1.95 nCi
residual/30,000,000,000 (30 Billion) = 1 nCi residual for every
15.385 Billion nCi escaping. (195,000 = 1.95 X 10 to 5th.
3,000,000,000,000,000 = 3 X 10 to the 15th))
The DOE report continues, "It was a free-burning fire, which consumed
the building in 1 hr. Tritium assessment was done 11 days after the
accident. The remaining GTLS tubes were mostly undamaged but
disfigured, indicating that all tritium had escaped. No air-borne
tritium was detected. All tubes were carefully wiped on surfaces, and
the HTO activity from the wipes amounted to 6.5×10−8 of that
originally present. No HTO was found in bioassay or environmental
samples. The release scenario at the WTC from the airplanes is
consistent with this accident. However, the Twin Towers collapsed
before their complete burning, so the fraction of tritium deposited
at the WTC might be larger."
"This oxide immediately vaporized due to the intense heat. Most of
the HTO would be transported in the vapor phase with the wind, since
the weather was dry on 9/11/01." Page 8, 3rd paragraph, DOE report.
This intense heat lasted for hours before water was brought to the
WTC. It is doubtful that anything other than residual Tritium was
subjected to collection by water with 99.9999% of the Tritium
escaping into the air.
(Note the disinformation provided after "However,... ". Whether or
not the building collapses is irrelevant. Just as a quantitative
value can not be defined under the scientific method as "well below
the levels of concern to human exposure", and reports the actual
value of 55 times background levels. The determining factors would
be heat, time and exposure. If anything all of those factors would
have been at least as large or larger. The burn times were almost
exact at 1 hour of burning for both fires. The heat, since it was
supposed hot enough to weaken steel according to the official
government theory, while the 3,000 Ci fire still had unmolten 'mostly
undamaged' glass tubes. Thin Glass tubes will melt long before
massive steel girder heat sinks will significantly weaken. The
supposed Tritium level only significant source is the 34 Ci in
the 'commerical airliners'. I'm not going to quibble about a couple
Curies. The DOE is scrounging to find a Curie here a Curie there.
I'll spot them their 2 Curies and give them an extra lagniape Curie
for a gimmie of 37 Curies. 34 of these Curies were slammed into a
building at 500 mph, consumed in a massive fireball and fire that
burned for an hour, certainly they were exposed to tremendously more
than the 3,000 Ci fire undamaged glass tubes.)
0.000000065 X 37 Ci original = 0.000002405 Ci = 2,405 nCi residual.
Started with 37 Ci, according to the laboratory data proven by DOE
lab testing, leaves 2.4 millionths of 1 Currie residue.
0.000000065 X 37 Billion nCi = 2,405 nCi residual.
There was 3.53 nCi/Liter of water at the WTC in one sample of
the 'flowing' water pool. 2,405 nCi/3.53 nCi/Liter of Water = 681.3
Liters (170 Gallons - Three 55 Gallon Drums) of WTC water accounts
for All of the expected Tritium residue.
How much water was sprayed on WTC 6? Approximately 1 Million
Liters. Since we only have 2 real specimens of all of the WTC and
they are from WTC 6, this sample's pool of water should have less
total volume (less dilution than the lower value second sample), so
it is fairly safe to assign a value of less than 50% and since the
ratio of the differences are 3/2, the assigned percentage of the
total volume of 1 Million Liters at 1/3 of the total. Bear in mind
this is a very crude calculation/approximation and is mainly being
used to show the massive amounts of Tritium present in the WTC
waters.
3.53 nCi/Liter of water X 333,333 Liters = 1,176,000 nCi for 1/3 of
the total volume of the rain and firefighters efforts. This is 6
times the amount of residual Tritium (only found on the tubes
themselves - every where else = none found) found in the 3,000 Ci
fire.
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave that amount
of residue = 18,000 Ci original. Again, this is only for 1/3 of the
total amount of water dispersed fairly evenly over WTC 6.
The second sample contains 2.83 nCi/Liter of water from a 'flowing'
water pool in WTC 6. Again, since it is the more diluted value it
has been assigned a percentage of the total volume that is larger
than the first pool of 'flowing' water.
2.83 nCi/Liter of water X 666,666 Liters of water = 1,885,000 nCi
present in 2/3 of the total volume of water present in WTC 6. This is
right at 10 times the residual Tritium of the 3,000 Ci fire.
For more on the water dispersal and simiilar information on TUs at
the WTC, see an earlier response to Prof Jones
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/8 and the breakdown
of 4 million gallons of WTC dilution.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/136
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave this amount
of residue (3 Million nCi)? 30,000 Ci.
The third sample from the NY sewers which must have a massive total
volume contained 0.164 nCi/Liter of Water. 0.164 nCi/Liter X
120,000,000 Liters = 19,680,000 nCi present in a total dilution of
the WTC waters. If one subtracts the amounts of Tritium residue
found in WTC 6 (3 Million nCi) that leaves us with 16.7 Million nCi
for the 250 feet wide by 35 deep craters surrounding WTC 1, WTC 2,
the DOE's 37 Ci, and the standard 20 TUs from environment anywhere in
the world that there is not man made nuclear contamination.
The DOE report gives a breakdown of the 30 Million gallons (120
Million Liters), the total volume of the Tritium diluting water on
Page 9.
Total original Tritium needed to leave the residues from the only 2
WTC samples with a dilution by the rain and fire fighters efforts =
48,000 Ci. To leave this amount of residual Tritium requires a huge
source of Tritium.
4. "Tens of Thousands Ci of Tritium" (original amount) did leave
traces of Tritium in the second DOE reported fires with Tritium.
Page 9, first paragraph.
What is it with Tritium? Tritium is only made in our atmosphere
through nuclear interactions with the sun's radiation. It is very
evenly dispersed throughout the world at 20 TUs/0.0638 nCi of Tritium
(up from 10 pre nuclear testing, reactors, waste, etc). Any value
above 20 TUs must come from man made nuclear events. Man made
nuclear contamination is the only way to make the Tritium level rise
above 20 TUs. It takes alot to keep Tritium from dispersing and even
then 1/2 will be gone in 12.5 years.
Why is the usage of Micro Nukes so important?
Until it is shown the government is using them, the tyrants will
continue using them. The corporate media has already laid the
groundwork for blaming a nuclear explosion in a city on terrorists.
The usage Micro Nukes shows that the tyranny exists in more depth
than the original 'usual suspect' government departments, agencies
and both political parties.
The usage of Micro Nukes points to possible other national neo
fascist assistance with a most likely scenerio of Israel.
Thermate, explosives and thermonuclear devices are the only thing
that explain all of the WTC debris.
Why is Micro Nukes in the WTC being censored, hidden and scammed?
For the very reasons it is so important.
In order to be good disinformation, the disinformation must contain
some truths. One must not concern themself with the "interpreted"
disinformation (the non Tritium information on the terrorist attacks
has no bearing in the scientific method) - , but dig for the true
information/data that is hidden and included to give the
accuracy/acceptance of the disinformation. Some disinformation can
be an excellent weapon for truthers - multifacet - that shows what
was hidden, the source is unimpeachable since it comes from the
disinformers, and completely refutes the "interpretations".
Disinformation can sometimes contain 'nuggets of gold' as my friend
Captain May, (GhostTroop) would say. The DOE report, "Study of
Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified Background Level of 20 TUs
or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> had a trail
of gold nuggets.
How Does a Truth Finding Scientist Quantify At Least 55 Times
Environment Data Constants ( 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi Tritium) Quantity
as: "well below the levels of concern for human exposure" while
ignoring massive dilution of the sample. A scientist looking for the
truth would never and can not use 'well below the levels of concern
for human exposure' because it is not a value. "...well below the
values of human concern" is just a false reassuring feel good
statement and is completely useless. The statement does not even
lead to a value since the levels of concern are not given a value.
It appears that the scientists are using the EPA value of 8,000 TUs
for the 'level of human concern' - 400 times the environmental
amount. 399 times the environmental level does not get reported as a
level of concern. It only takes one particle of radiation to kill a
person. No amount of radiactivity exposure is safe. Some radiation
exposure is merely acceptable by this government and some scientists
based on a loss of life vs monetary expendatures to prevent excess
radiation. It's a simple cost/benefit scenerio, not a safety
scenerio.
If the reader is new to the information being evaluated, the author
suggests starting with the first article and reading them
chronologically. There should be around 200 references that many
times contain significantly more information than the individual
referance indicates.
Ed Ward, MD
911 Related Articles - Chronological:
Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/08/21/ward.htm
Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm
Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm
Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/04/16/ward.htm
Verifying the Source of WTC Tritium Levels that Are 55
Times "Background Levels" http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm
Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55
Times Background Levels http://www.rense.com/general77/levels.htm
Steven Jones Replies To Dr. Ed Ward
http://www.rense.com/general77/ward.htm
Prof Jones Gladly Assists Testing Unaffected WTC Items
http://www.rense.com/general77/profjh.htm
Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the
WTC http://www.911blogger.com/node/9590
9/11 Sicknesses consistent with environmental radiation contamination
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/06/22/01625.html
Articles referencing my micro nukes articles.
Ted Twietmeyer's excellent article on EMP effects: What May Have
Melted the WTC Vehicles.
Jerry Mazza's insights on 911 and current political scams: Ground
Zero Illnesses Come Back to Haunt Giuliani.
Radio Interviews on Micro Nukes in the WTC with Ed Ward, MD:
The Jeff Rense Program: (Linkage provided by Jeff Rense on his site
with this article's publication)
October 12, 2006 - 2 hours - Deals with the first article on Micro
Nukes with a small amount of information in the second article.
April 17, 2007 - Deals with the second and third articles on Micro
Nukes.
The Dr. Bill Deagle Show - Clay and Iron. Scroll down to:
March 22, 2007, March 28, 2007, April 9, 2007, April 26, 2007 and May
10, 2007 another show has been scheduled for June 26, 2007.
Micro Nukes in the WTC information has also also been presented on
reputable radio shows: CurrentTv with host Dr. Hesham Tillawi, Radio
Liberty with Dr. Stanley Monteith, and TruthRadio with host D'Anne
Burley.
Physicist Ron Larsen has called the (Micro Nukes in the WTC)
articles "a fresh perspective" (6:38), "Dr. Ward thinks like a
scientist" (8:28), "can spot hocum from yokum", "logical people like
yourself (Ed Ward, MD)" (55:20), "dealt with issues that were beyond
technical" (in other articles)(10:26), read several of my referenced
documented facts (over 100 of them in the first article) (11:00),
read the full quote of his later partial quote (12:30), noted the
beams thrown upward (1320). "spent several hours looking over the
research" (16:40), notes the pyroclastic flows, their ability to
carry fine particles and the "vaporization of metals" (25:32), notes
the problems with reflectivity of conventional heat vs much more
powerful neuton (ray) heat (32:17), makes a comparison between his,
Gspooner and my methods (44:00), "Dr. Ward is creating value for me"
(45:30), "clearly telling the truth", "neutrons could do something
like this (bend the 8 ton 6 inch thich beam) (46:08), and notes rare
legended LIDAR documented evidence of massive craters around WTC 1, 2
and in WTC 6 (46:36). Although, in what seems to be an interesting
reversal, his more recent newsletter does not seem to share the same
content. (From my open/personal letter to Alex Jones)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/135
http://media.putfile.com/RL-interview-Micro-Nukes-WTC
Update: Evaluation of the DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
The DOE report, "Study of Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified
Background Level of 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World
Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> clearly
nuggets:
1. "No Tritium Signs at the WTC", On page 7, 5. Sources and Fate of
Tritium at the WTC, paragraph 2, "We were informed by PANYNJ
authorities that there were NO TRITIUM SIGNS AT THE WTC, only
photluminescent ones (Lombardi, F.J. Port Authority of New York and
New
Jersey, personal communication, 12/10/2001). This is entirely
consistent with our observations."
2. No Tritium Present in the Firefighter Equipment, On page 9, Last
paragraph, "It was concluded that fire and emergency equipment could
not have been a source of tritium,...".
3. A One Hour Dry Fire with 3000 Ci of Tritium Leaves 0.0000065% (6.5
Millionths of 1%) Tritium residue with 99.9999935% of the Tritium
escaping, page 8, Last paragraph,. Jensen, G.A.; Martin, J.B.
Investigation of fire at Council, Alaska: A release of approximately
3000 curies of tritium. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report
PNL-6523, Richland, WA, 1988. This is a very similar scenerio to the
plane fires in the WTC burning for 1 hour without water intervention.
0.000000065 X 3000 Ci original = 0.000195 Ci residual, = 195
millionths of 1 Ci, = Started with 3,000 Ci and ended with 195
millionths of 1 Ci (Curie - As long as the same unit value is used,
it does not matter what that unit is called. Think of a Curie as
just another unit of measurement like pounds, tons, kilograms, grams,
ounces, etc. As long as the same units are used throughout the
calculation one need not know the unit name nor be concerned with
it. Started with 3,000 pounds and ended with a residual of 195
millionths of a pound. Similar to leaving your car and when you come
back to the parking space, you would need an electron microscope to
find what is left.
The DOE report continues, "It was a free-burning fire, which consumed
the building in 1 hr. Tritium assessment was done 11 days after the
accident. The remaining GTLS tubes were mostly undamaged but
disfigured, indicating that all tritium had escaped. No air-borne
tritium was detected. All tubes were carefully wiped on surfaces, and
the HTO activity from the wipes amounted to 6.5×10−8 of that
originally present. No HTO was found in bioassay or environmental
samples. The release scenario at the WTC from the airplanes is
consistent with this accident. However, the Twin Towers collapsed
before their complete burning, so the fraction of tritium deposited
at the WTC might be larger."
"This oxide immediately vaporized due to the intense heat. Most of
the HTO would be transported in the vapor phase with the wind, since
the weather was dry on 9/11/01." Page 8, 3rd paragraph, DOE report.
This intense heat lasted for hours before water was brought to the
WTC. It is doubtful that anything other than residual Tritium was
subjected to collection by water with 99.9999% of the Tritium
escaping into the air.
(Note the disinformation provided after "However,... ". Whether or
not the building collapses is irrelevant. Just as a quantitative
value can not be defined under the scientific method as "well below
the levels of concern to human exposure", and reports the actual
value of 55 times background levels. The determining factors would
be heat, time and exposure. If anything all of those factors would
have been at least as large or larger. The burn times were almost
exact at 1 hour of burning for both fires. The heat, since it was
supposed hot enough to weaken steel according to the official
government theory, while the 3,000 Ci fire still had unmolten 'mostly
undamaged' glass tubes. Thin Glass tubes will melt long before
massive steel girder heat sinks will significantly weaken. The
supposed Tritium level only significant source is the 34 Ci in
the 'commerical airliners'. I'm not going to quibble about a couple
Curies. The DOE is scrounging to find a Curie here a Curie there.
I'll spot them their 2 Curies and give them an extra lagniape Curie
for a gimmie of 37 Curies. 34 of these Curies were slammed into a
building at 500 mph, consumed in a massive fireball and fire that
burned for an hour, certainly they were exposed to tremendously more
than the 3,000 Ci fire undamaged glass tubes.)
0.000000065 X 37 Ci original = 0.000002405 Ci = 2,405 nCi residual.
Started with 37 Ci, according to the laboratory data proven by DOE
lab testing, leaves 2.4 millionths of 1 Currie residue.
0.000000065 X 3 Quadrillion nCi = 195,000 nCi residual, 195,000
residual/3,000,000,000,000,000 (3 Quadrillion - original) = 1.95 nCi
residual/30,000,000,000 (30 Billion) = 1 nCi residual for every
15.385 Billion nCi escaping. (195,000 = 1.95 X 10 to 5th.
3,000,000,000,000,000 = 3 X 10 to the 15th)
0.000000065 X 37 Billion nCi = 2,405 nCi residual.
There was 3.53 nCi/Liter of water at the WTC in one sample of
the 'flowing' water pool. 2,405 nCi/3.53 nCi/Liter of Water = 681.3
Liters (170 Gallons - Three 55 Gallon Drums) of WTC water accounts
for All of the expected Tritium residue.
How much water was sprayed on WTC 6? Approximately 1 Million
Liters. Since we only have 2 real specimens of all of the WTC and
they are from WTC 6, this sample's pool of water should have less
total volume (less dilution than the lower value second sample), so
it is fairly safe to assign a value of less than 50% and since the
ratio of the differences are 3/2, the assigned percentage of the
total volume of 1 Million Liters at 1/3 of the total. Bear in mind
this is a very crude calculation/approximation and is mainly being
used to show the massive amounts of Tritium present in the WTC
waters.
3.53 nCi/Liter of water X 333,333 Liters = 1,176,000 nCi for 1/3 of
the total volume of the rain and firefighters efforts. This is 6
times the amount of residual Tritium (only found on the tubes
themselves - every where else = none found) found in the 3,000 Ci
fire.
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave that amount
of residue = 18,000 Ci original. Again, this is only for 1/3 of the
total amount of water dispersed fairly evenly over WTC 6.
The second sample contains 2.83 nCi/Liter of water from a 'flowing'
water pool in WTC 6. Again, since it is the more diluted value it
has been assigned a percentage of the total volume that is larger
than the first pool of 'flowing' water.
2.83 nCi/Liter of water X 666,666 Liters of water = 1,885,000 nCi
present in 2/3 of the total volume of water present in WTC 6. This is
right at 10 times the residual Tritium of the 3,000 Ci fire.
For more on the water dispersal and simiilar information on TUs at
the WTC, see an earlier response to Prof Jones
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/8 and the breakdown
of 4 million gallons of WTC dilution.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/136
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave this amount
of residue (3 Million nCi)? 30,000 Ci.
The third sample from the NY sewers which must have a massive total
volume contained 0.164 nCi/Liter of Water. 0.164 nCi/Liter X
120,000,000 Liters = 19,680,000 nCi present in a total dilution of
the WTC waters. If one subtracts the amounts of Tritium residue
found in WTC 6 (3 Million nCi) that leaves us with 16.7 Million nCi
for the 250 feet wide by 35 deep craters surrounding WTC 1, WTC 2,
the DOE's 37 Ci, and the standard 20 TUs from environment anywhere in
the world that there is not man made nuclear contamination.
The DOE report gives a breakdown of the 30 Million gallons (120
Million Liters), the total volume of the Tritium diluting water on
Page 9.
Total original Tritium needed to leave the residues from the only 2
WTC samples with a dilution by the rain and fire fighters efforts =
48,000 Ci. To leave this amount of residual Tritium requires a huge
source of Tritium.
4. "Tens of Thousands Ci of Tritium" (original amount) did leave
traces of Tritium in the second DOE reported fires with Tritium.
Page 9, first paragraph.
What is it with Tritium? Tritium is only made in our atmosphere
through nuclear interactions with the sun's radiation. It is very
evenly dispersed throughout the world at 20 TUs/0.0638 nCi of Tritium
(up from 10 pre nuclear testing, reactors, waste, etc). Any value
above 20 TUs must come from man made nuclear events. Man made
nuclear contamination is the only way to make the Tritium level rise
above 20 TUs. It takes alot to keep Tritium from dispersing and even
then 1/2 will be gone in 12.5 years.
Why is the usage of Micro Nukes so important?
Until it is shown the government is using them, the tyrants will
continue using them. The corporate media has already laid the
groundwork for blaming a nuclear explosion in a city on terrorists.
The usage Micro Nukes shows that the tyranny exists in more depth
than the original 'usual suspect' government departments, agencies
and both political parties.
The usage of Micro Nukes points to possible other national neo
fascist assistance with a most likely scenerio of Israel.
People generally like to know what is killing them.
Thermate, explosives and thermonuclear devices are the only things
that explain all of the WTC debris.
Why is Micro Nukes in the WTC being censored, hidden and scammed?
For the very reasons it is so important.
In order to be good disinformation, the disinformation must contain
some truths. One must not concern themself with the "interpreted"
disinformation (the non Tritium information on the terrorist attacks
has no bearing in the scientific method) - , but dig for the true
information/data that is hidden and included to give the
accuracy/acceptance of the disinformation. Some disinformation can
be an excellent weapon for truthers - multifacet - that shows what
was hidden, the source is unimpeachable since it comes from the
disinformers, and completely refutes the "interpretations".
Disinformation can sometimes contain 'nuggets of gold' as my friend
Captain May, (GhostTroop) would say. The DOE report, "Study of
Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified Background Level of 20 TUs
or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> had a trail
of gold nuggets.
How Does a Truth Finding Scientist Quantify At Least 55 Times
Environment Data Constants ( 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi Tritium) Quantity
as: "well below the levels of concern for human exposure" while
ignoring massive dilution of the sample. A scientist looking for the
truth would never and can not use 'well below the levels of concern
for human exposure' because it is not a value. "...well below the
values of human concern" is just a false reassuring feel good
statement and is completely useless. The statement does not even
lead to a value since the levels of concern are not given a value.
It appears that the scientists are using the EPA value of 8,000 TUs
for the 'level of human concern' - 400 times the environmental
amount. 399 times the environmental level does not get reported as a
level of concern. It only takes one particle of radiation to kill a
person. No amount of radiactivity exposure is safe. Some radiation
exposure is merely acceptable by this government and some scientists
based on a loss of life vs monetary expendatures to prevent excess
radiation. It's a simple cost/benefit scenerio, not a safety
scenerio.
If the reader is new to the information being evaluated, the author
suggests starting with the first article and reading them
chronologically. There should be around 200 references that many
times contain significantly more information than the individual
referance indicates.
Ed Ward, MD
911 Related Articles - Chronological:
Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/08/21/ward.htm
Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm
Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm
Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/04/16/ward.htm
Verifying the Source of WTC Tritium Levels that Are 55
Times "Background Levels" http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm
Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55
Times Background Levels http://www.rense.com/general77/levels.htm
Steven Jones Replies To Dr. Ed Ward
http://www.rense.com/general77/ward.htm
Prof Jones Gladly Assists Testing Unaffected WTC Items
http://www.rense.com/general77/profjh.htm
Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the
WTC http://www.911blogger.com/node/9590
9/11 Sicknesses consistent with environmental radiation contamination
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/06/22/01625.html
Articles referencing my micro nukes articles.
Ted Twietmeyer's excellent article on EMP effects: What May Have
Melted the WTC Vehicles.
Jerry Mazza's insights on 911 and current political scams: Ground
Zero Illnesses Come Back to Haunt Giuliani.
Radio Interviews on Micro Nukes in the WTC with Ed Ward, MD:
The Jeff Rense Program: (Linkage provided by Jeff Rense on his site
with this article's publication)
October 12, 2006 - 2 hours - Deals with the first article on Micro
Nukes with a small amount of information in the second article.
April 17, 2007 - Deals with the second and third articles on Micro
Nukes.
The Dr. Bill Deagle Show - Clay and Iron. Scroll down to:
March 22, 2007, March 28, 2007, April 9, 2007, April 26, 2007 and May
10, 2007 another show has been scheduled for June 26, 2007.
Micro Nukes in the WTC information has also also been presented on
reputable radio shows: CurrentTv with host Dr. Hesham Tillawi, Radio
Liberty with Dr. Stanley Monteith, and TruthRadio with host D'Anne
Burley.
Physicist Ron Larsen has called the (Micro Nukes in the WTC)
articles "a fresh perspective" (6:38), "Dr. Ward thinks like a
scientist" (8:28), "can spot hocum from yokum", "logical people like
yourself (Ed Ward, MD)" (55:20), "dealt with issues that were beyond
technical" (in other articles)(10:26), read several of my referenced
documented facts (over 100 of them in the first article) (11:00),
read the full quote of his later partial quote (12:30), noted the
beams thrown upward (1320). "spent several hours looking over the
research" (16:40), notes the pyroclastic flows, their ability to
carry fine particles and the "vaporization of metals" (25:32), notes
the problems with reflectivity of conventional heat vs much more
powerful neuton (ray) heat (32:17), makes a comparison between his,
Gspooner and my methods (44:00), "Dr. Ward is creating value for me"
(45:30), "clearly telling the truth", "neutrons could do something
like this (bend the 8 ton 6 inch thich beam) (46:08), and notes rare
legended LIDAR documented evidence of massive craters around WTC 1, 2
and in WTC 6 (46:36). Although, in what seems to be an interesting
reversal, his more recent newsletter does not seem to share the same
content. (From my open/personal letter to Alex Jones)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/135
http://media.putfile.com/RL-interview-Micro-Nukes-WTC
Ed Ward, MD
"sharp
spike of short duration" is how seismologist Thorne Lay of Univ. of
California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion
appears on a seismograph."
http://911truthout.blogspot.com/…/looks-like-ldeo-did-some-…
http://911truthout.blogspot.com/…/looks-like-ldeo-did-some-…
911truthout.blogspot.com
- Wayne Henderson likes this.
Joe Citizen Load of crap ... and you know it.
You are trying your best to get focus on this nuclear garbage ... so when they disprove it ... it will discredit the 911 truth movement. ...See More- Joe Citizen Look ... if people want to believe you ... it's up to them ... but to say that all the damning evidence is 13 years old and a waste of time ... stands out like a sore thumb ... that something odd is going on.
I know people in other 911 truth groups talk crap about nukes being used ... but they are fools if they say that "no bombs" were used that day.
So as I said ... the "only" difference between you and most of the other 911 investigators ... is that you say that the "bombs" used that day were nukes.
My outside observation would be that the clean up crews (that had to have been exposed to the radiation) could not have removed all the contaminated dirt etc.
Thus ... if an independent investigation is allowed ... and several core samples show no massive amounts of radiation ... the the entire 911 truth movement could be slammed down.
Is this the nuclear bombs agenda?
One quick way for you to redeem yourself in the eyes of many 911 truth investigators ... is to show us the radiation levels in the ground ... or from that day.
That should satisfy all parties involved. 
Dan Plesse These seismic graph should be enough plus DOE Tritium report.
Update: Evaluation of the DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
http://911truthout.blogspot.com/.../update-evaluation-of...
- Dan Plesse I just watched September 11 Revisited version 2 and guess what they choose to remove completely all the Underground Demolition Earthquake Rumble Witnesses, every single one deleted!
9 11 Underground Demolition Earthquake Rumble Witness Testimonies 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N-EL4_K4jA
Seismic Evidence Implies Controlled Demolition on...youtube.com
- Dan Plesse "radiation levels" is the job of the NNSA. So get off your ass and ask those guys for a change.
http://911truthout.blogspot.com/.../the-nnsa-started-2000...
NEW Witness 2011 #1
"Then all the sudden I get hit with a blast of heat like I was being burnt in an oven — like a sun’s rays just hitting you "
The NNSA Started 2000 and were ready for action by 9/11/2001 at World Trade Center
911truthout.blogspot.com
- Dan Plesse "Your seismic evidence does not show that."
Says who?
What does it show?
"physical difference of a 5000 pound tnt bomb exploding and a 2.5 ton nuclear bomb exploding? " I have no idea? Sounds like it would be the same BUT does TNT do all things that has been reported? i.e
Does TNT cause Very Fine Aerosols Post Sept 11 ?
- Dan Plesse Chances are you 1. Joe Citizen have no idea 2. or Will use the official theories to explain away these strange effects.
What caused all of these things? You never answered any of those issues.
Background Level of 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World
Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> clearly
nuggets:
1. "No Tritium Signs at the WTC", On page 7, 5. Sources and Fate of
Tritium at the WTC, paragraph 2, "We were informed by PANYNJ
authorities that there were NO TRITIUM SIGNS AT THE WTC, only
photluminescent ones (Lombardi, F.J. Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey, personal communication, 12/10/2001). This is entirely
consistent with our observations."
2. No Tritium Present in the Firefighter Equipment, On page 9, Last
paragraph, "It was concluded that fire and emergency equipment could
not have been a source of tritium,...".
3. A One Hour Dry Fire with 3000 Ci of Tritium Leaves 0.0000065% (6.5
Millionths of 1%) Tritium residue with 99.9999935% of the Tritium
escaping, page 8, Last paragraph,. Jensen, G.A.; Martin, J.B.
Investigation of fire at Council, Alaska: A release of approximately
3000 curies of tritium. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report
PNL-6523, Richland, WA, 1988. This is a very similar scenerio to the
plane fires in the WTC burning for 1 hour without water intervention.
0.000000065 X 3000 Ci original = 0.000195 Ci residual, = 195
millionths of 1 Ci, = Started with 3,000 Ci and ended with 195
millionths of 1 Ci (Curie - As long as the same unit value is used,
it does not matter what that unit is called. Think of a Curie as
just another unit of measurement like pounds, tons, kilograms, grams,
ounces, etc. As long as the same units are used throughout the
calculation one need not know the unit name nor be concerned with
it. Started with 3,000 pounds and ended with a residual of 195
millionths of a pound. Similar to leaving your car and when you come
back to the parking space, you would need an electron microscope to
find what is left.
(0.000000065 X 3 Quadrillion nCi = 195,000 nCi residual, 195,000
residual/3,000,000,000,000,000 (3 Quadrillion - original) = 1.95 nCi
residual/30,000,000,000 (30 Billion) = 1 nCi residual for every
15.385 Billion nCi escaping. (195,000 = 1.95 X 10 to 5th.
3,000,000,000,000,000 = 3 X 10 to the 15th))
The DOE report continues, "It was a free-burning fire, which consumed
the building in 1 hr. Tritium assessment was done 11 days after the
accident. The remaining GTLS tubes were mostly undamaged but
disfigured, indicating that all tritium had escaped. No air-borne
tritium was detected. All tubes were carefully wiped on surfaces, and
the HTO activity from the wipes amounted to 6.5×10−8 of that
originally present. No HTO was found in bioassay or environmental
samples. The release scenario at the WTC from the airplanes is
consistent with this accident. However, the Twin Towers collapsed
before their complete burning, so the fraction of tritium deposited
at the WTC might be larger."
"This oxide immediately vaporized due to the intense heat. Most of
the HTO would be transported in the vapor phase with the wind, since
the weather was dry on 9/11/01." Page 8, 3rd paragraph, DOE report.
This intense heat lasted for hours before water was brought to the
WTC. It is doubtful that anything other than residual Tritium was
subjected to collection by water with 99.9999% of the Tritium
escaping into the air.
(Note the disinformation provided after "However,... ". Whether or
not the building collapses is irrelevant. Just as a quantitative
value can not be defined under the scientific method as "well below
the levels of concern to human exposure", and reports the actual
value of 55 times background levels. The determining factors would
be heat, time and exposure. If anything all of those factors would
have been at least as large or larger. The burn times were almost
exact at 1 hour of burning for both fires. The heat, since it was
supposed hot enough to weaken steel according to the official
government theory, while the 3,000 Ci fire still had unmolten 'mostly
undamaged' glass tubes. Thin Glass tubes will melt long before
massive steel girder heat sinks will significantly weaken. The
supposed Tritium level only significant source is the 34 Ci in
the 'commerical airliners'. I'm not going to quibble about a couple
Curies. The DOE is scrounging to find a Curie here a Curie there.
I'll spot them their 2 Curies and give them an extra lagniape Curie
for a gimmie of 37 Curies. 34 of these Curies were slammed into a
building at 500 mph, consumed in a massive fireball and fire that
burned for an hour, certainly they were exposed to tremendously more
than the 3,000 Ci fire undamaged glass tubes.)
0.000000065 X 37 Ci original = 0.000002405 Ci = 2,405 nCi residual.
Started with 37 Ci, according to the laboratory data proven by DOE
lab testing, leaves 2.4 millionths of 1 Currie residue.
0.000000065 X 37 Billion nCi = 2,405 nCi residual.
There was 3.53 nCi/Liter of water at the WTC in one sample of
the 'flowing' water pool. 2,405 nCi/3.53 nCi/Liter of Water = 681.3
Liters (170 Gallons - Three 55 Gallon Drums) of WTC water accounts
for All of the expected Tritium residue.
How much water was sprayed on WTC 6? Approximately 1 Million
Liters. Since we only have 2 real specimens of all of the WTC and
they are from WTC 6, this sample's pool of water should have less
total volume (less dilution than the lower value second sample), so
it is fairly safe to assign a value of less than 50% and since the
ratio of the differences are 3/2, the assigned percentage of the
total volume of 1 Million Liters at 1/3 of the total. Bear in mind
this is a very crude calculation/approximation and is mainly being
used to show the massive amounts of Tritium present in the WTC
waters.
3.53 nCi/Liter of water X 333,333 Liters = 1,176,000 nCi for 1/3 of
the total volume of the rain and firefighters efforts. This is 6
times the amount of residual Tritium (only found on the tubes
themselves - every where else = none found) found in the 3,000 Ci
fire.
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave that amount
of residue = 18,000 Ci original. Again, this is only for 1/3 of the
total amount of water dispersed fairly evenly over WTC 6.
The second sample contains 2.83 nCi/Liter of water from a 'flowing'
water pool in WTC 6. Again, since it is the more diluted value it
has been assigned a percentage of the total volume that is larger
than the first pool of 'flowing' water.
2.83 nCi/Liter of water X 666,666 Liters of water = 1,885,000 nCi
present in 2/3 of the total volume of water present in WTC 6. This is
right at 10 times the residual Tritium of the 3,000 Ci fire.
For more on the water dispersal and simiilar information on TUs at
the WTC, see an earlier response to Prof Jones
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/8 and the breakdown
of 4 million gallons of WTC dilution.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/136
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave this amount
of residue (3 Million nCi)? 30,000 Ci.
The third sample from the NY sewers which must have a massive total
volume contained 0.164 nCi/Liter of Water. 0.164 nCi/Liter X
120,000,000 Liters = 19,680,000 nCi present in a total dilution of
the WTC waters. If one subtracts the amounts of Tritium residue
found in WTC 6 (3 Million nCi) that leaves us with 16.7 Million nCi
for the 250 feet wide by 35 deep craters surrounding WTC 1, WTC 2,
the DOE's 37 Ci, and the standard 20 TUs from environment anywhere in
the world that there is not man made nuclear contamination.
The DOE report gives a breakdown of the 30 Million gallons (120
Million Liters), the total volume of the Tritium diluting water on
Page 9.
Total original Tritium needed to leave the residues from the only 2
WTC samples with a dilution by the rain and fire fighters efforts =
48,000 Ci. To leave this amount of residual Tritium requires a huge
source of Tritium.
4. "Tens of Thousands Ci of Tritium" (original amount) did leave
traces of Tritium in the second DOE reported fires with Tritium.
Page 9, first paragraph.
What is it with Tritium? Tritium is only made in our atmosphere
through nuclear interactions with the sun's radiation. It is very
evenly dispersed throughout the world at 20 TUs/0.0638 nCi of Tritium
(up from 10 pre nuclear testing, reactors, waste, etc). Any value
above 20 TUs must come from man made nuclear events. Man made
nuclear contamination is the only way to make the Tritium level rise
above 20 TUs. It takes alot to keep Tritium from dispersing and even
then 1/2 will be gone in 12.5 years.
Why is the usage of Micro Nukes so important?
Until it is shown the government is using them, the tyrants will
continue using them. The corporate media has already laid the
groundwork for blaming a nuclear explosion in a city on terrorists.
The usage Micro Nukes shows that the tyranny exists in more depth
than the original 'usual suspect' government departments, agencies
and both political parties.
The usage of Micro Nukes points to possible other national neo
fascist assistance with a most likely scenerio of Israel.
Thermate, explosives and thermonuclear devices are the only thing
that explain all of the WTC debris.
Why is Micro Nukes in the WTC being censored, hidden and scammed?
For the very reasons it is so important.
In order to be good disinformation, the disinformation must contain
some truths. One must not concern themself with the "interpreted"
disinformation (the non Tritium information on the terrorist attacks
has no bearing in the scientific method) - , but dig for the true
information/data that is hidden and included to give the
accuracy/acceptance of the disinformation. Some disinformation can
be an excellent weapon for truthers - multifacet - that shows what
was hidden, the source is unimpeachable since it comes from the
disinformers, and completely refutes the "interpretations".
Disinformation can sometimes contain 'nuggets of gold' as my friend
Captain May, (GhostTroop) would say. The DOE report, "Study of
Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified Background Level of 20 TUs
or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> had a trail
of gold nuggets.
How Does a Truth Finding Scientist Quantify At Least 55 Times
Environment Data Constants ( 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi Tritium) Quantity
as: "well below the levels of concern for human exposure" while
ignoring massive dilution of the sample. A scientist looking for the
truth would never and can not use 'well below the levels of concern
for human exposure' because it is not a value. "...well below the
values of human concern" is just a false reassuring feel good
statement and is completely useless. The statement does not even
lead to a value since the levels of concern are not given a value.
It appears that the scientists are using the EPA value of 8,000 TUs
for the 'level of human concern' - 400 times the environmental
amount. 399 times the environmental level does not get reported as a
level of concern. It only takes one particle of radiation to kill a
person. No amount of radiactivity exposure is safe. Some radiation
exposure is merely acceptable by this government and some scientists
based on a loss of life vs monetary expendatures to prevent excess
radiation. It's a simple cost/benefit scenerio, not a safety
scenerio.
If the reader is new to the information being evaluated, the author
suggests starting with the first article and reading them
chronologically. There should be around 200 references that many
times contain significantly more information than the individual
referance indicates.
Ed Ward, MD
911 Related Articles - Chronological:
Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/08/21/ward.htm
Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm
Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm
Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/04/16/ward.htm
Verifying the Source of WTC Tritium Levels that Are 55
Times "Background Levels" http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm
Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55
Times Background Levels http://www.rense.com/general77/levels.htm
Steven Jones Replies To Dr. Ed Ward
http://www.rense.com/general77/ward.htm
Prof Jones Gladly Assists Testing Unaffected WTC Items
http://www.rense.com/general77/profjh.htm
Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the
WTC http://www.911blogger.com/node/9590
9/11 Sicknesses consistent with environmental radiation contamination
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/06/22/01625.html
Articles referencing my micro nukes articles.
Ted Twietmeyer's excellent article on EMP effects: What May Have
Melted the WTC Vehicles.
Jerry Mazza's insights on 911 and current political scams: Ground
Zero Illnesses Come Back to Haunt Giuliani.
Radio Interviews on Micro Nukes in the WTC with Ed Ward, MD:
The Jeff Rense Program: (Linkage provided by Jeff Rense on his site
with this article's publication)
October 12, 2006 - 2 hours - Deals with the first article on Micro
Nukes with a small amount of information in the second article.
April 17, 2007 - Deals with the second and third articles on Micro
Nukes.
The Dr. Bill Deagle Show - Clay and Iron. Scroll down to:
March 22, 2007, March 28, 2007, April 9, 2007, April 26, 2007 and May
10, 2007 another show has been scheduled for June 26, 2007.
Micro Nukes in the WTC information has also also been presented on
reputable radio shows: CurrentTv with host Dr. Hesham Tillawi, Radio
Liberty with Dr. Stanley Monteith, and TruthRadio with host D'Anne
Burley.
Physicist Ron Larsen has called the (Micro Nukes in the WTC)
articles "a fresh perspective" (6:38), "Dr. Ward thinks like a
scientist" (8:28), "can spot hocum from yokum", "logical people like
yourself (Ed Ward, MD)" (55:20), "dealt with issues that were beyond
technical" (in other articles)(10:26), read several of my referenced
documented facts (over 100 of them in the first article) (11:00),
read the full quote of his later partial quote (12:30), noted the
beams thrown upward (1320). "spent several hours looking over the
research" (16:40), notes the pyroclastic flows, their ability to
carry fine particles and the "vaporization of metals" (25:32), notes
the problems with reflectivity of conventional heat vs much more
powerful neuton (ray) heat (32:17), makes a comparison between his,
Gspooner and my methods (44:00), "Dr. Ward is creating value for me"
(45:30), "clearly telling the truth", "neutrons could do something
like this (bend the 8 ton 6 inch thich beam) (46:08), and notes rare
legended LIDAR documented evidence of massive craters around WTC 1, 2
and in WTC 6 (46:36). Although, in what seems to be an interesting
reversal, his more recent newsletter does not seem to share the same
content. (From my open/personal letter to Alex Jones)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/135
http://media.putfile.com/RL-interview-Micro-Nukes-WTC
Update: Evaluation of the DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
The DOE report, "Study of Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified
Background Level of 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World
Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> clearly
nuggets:
1. "No Tritium Signs at the WTC", On page 7, 5. Sources and Fate of
Tritium at the WTC, paragraph 2, "We were informed by PANYNJ
authorities that there were NO TRITIUM SIGNS AT THE WTC, only
photluminescent ones (Lombardi, F.J. Port Authority of New York and
New
Jersey, personal communication, 12/10/2001). This is entirely
consistent with our observations."
2. No Tritium Present in the Firefighter Equipment, On page 9, Last
paragraph, "It was concluded that fire and emergency equipment could
not have been a source of tritium,...".
3. A One Hour Dry Fire with 3000 Ci of Tritium Leaves 0.0000065% (6.5
Millionths of 1%) Tritium residue with 99.9999935% of the Tritium
escaping, page 8, Last paragraph,. Jensen, G.A.; Martin, J.B.
Investigation of fire at Council, Alaska: A release of approximately
3000 curies of tritium. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report
PNL-6523, Richland, WA, 1988. This is a very similar scenerio to the
plane fires in the WTC burning for 1 hour without water intervention.
0.000000065 X 3000 Ci original = 0.000195 Ci residual, = 195
millionths of 1 Ci, = Started with 3,000 Ci and ended with 195
millionths of 1 Ci (Curie - As long as the same unit value is used,
it does not matter what that unit is called. Think of a Curie as
just another unit of measurement like pounds, tons, kilograms, grams,
ounces, etc. As long as the same units are used throughout the
calculation one need not know the unit name nor be concerned with
it. Started with 3,000 pounds and ended with a residual of 195
millionths of a pound. Similar to leaving your car and when you come
back to the parking space, you would need an electron microscope to
find what is left.
The DOE report continues, "It was a free-burning fire, which consumed
the building in 1 hr. Tritium assessment was done 11 days after the
accident. The remaining GTLS tubes were mostly undamaged but
disfigured, indicating that all tritium had escaped. No air-borne
tritium was detected. All tubes were carefully wiped on surfaces, and
the HTO activity from the wipes amounted to 6.5×10−8 of that
originally present. No HTO was found in bioassay or environmental
samples. The release scenario at the WTC from the airplanes is
consistent with this accident. However, the Twin Towers collapsed
before their complete burning, so the fraction of tritium deposited
at the WTC might be larger."
"This oxide immediately vaporized due to the intense heat. Most of
the HTO would be transported in the vapor phase with the wind, since
the weather was dry on 9/11/01." Page 8, 3rd paragraph, DOE report.
This intense heat lasted for hours before water was brought to the
WTC. It is doubtful that anything other than residual Tritium was
subjected to collection by water with 99.9999% of the Tritium
escaping into the air.
(Note the disinformation provided after "However,... ". Whether or
not the building collapses is irrelevant. Just as a quantitative
value can not be defined under the scientific method as "well below
the levels of concern to human exposure", and reports the actual
value of 55 times background levels. The determining factors would
be heat, time and exposure. If anything all of those factors would
have been at least as large or larger. The burn times were almost
exact at 1 hour of burning for both fires. The heat, since it was
supposed hot enough to weaken steel according to the official
government theory, while the 3,000 Ci fire still had unmolten 'mostly
undamaged' glass tubes. Thin Glass tubes will melt long before
massive steel girder heat sinks will significantly weaken. The
supposed Tritium level only significant source is the 34 Ci in
the 'commerical airliners'. I'm not going to quibble about a couple
Curies. The DOE is scrounging to find a Curie here a Curie there.
I'll spot them their 2 Curies and give them an extra lagniape Curie
for a gimmie of 37 Curies. 34 of these Curies were slammed into a
building at 500 mph, consumed in a massive fireball and fire that
burned for an hour, certainly they were exposed to tremendously more
than the 3,000 Ci fire undamaged glass tubes.)
0.000000065 X 37 Ci original = 0.000002405 Ci = 2,405 nCi residual.
Started with 37 Ci, according to the laboratory data proven by DOE
lab testing, leaves 2.4 millionths of 1 Currie residue.
0.000000065 X 3 Quadrillion nCi = 195,000 nCi residual, 195,000
residual/3,000,000,000,000,000 (3 Quadrillion - original) = 1.95 nCi
residual/30,000,000,000 (30 Billion) = 1 nCi residual for every
15.385 Billion nCi escaping. (195,000 = 1.95 X 10 to 5th.
3,000,000,000,000,000 = 3 X 10 to the 15th)
0.000000065 X 37 Billion nCi = 2,405 nCi residual.
There was 3.53 nCi/Liter of water at the WTC in one sample of
the 'flowing' water pool. 2,405 nCi/3.53 nCi/Liter of Water = 681.3
Liters (170 Gallons - Three 55 Gallon Drums) of WTC water accounts
for All of the expected Tritium residue.
How much water was sprayed on WTC 6? Approximately 1 Million
Liters. Since we only have 2 real specimens of all of the WTC and
they are from WTC 6, this sample's pool of water should have less
total volume (less dilution than the lower value second sample), so
it is fairly safe to assign a value of less than 50% and since the
ratio of the differences are 3/2, the assigned percentage of the
total volume of 1 Million Liters at 1/3 of the total. Bear in mind
this is a very crude calculation/approximation and is mainly being
used to show the massive amounts of Tritium present in the WTC
waters.
3.53 nCi/Liter of water X 333,333 Liters = 1,176,000 nCi for 1/3 of
the total volume of the rain and firefighters efforts. This is 6
times the amount of residual Tritium (only found on the tubes
themselves - every where else = none found) found in the 3,000 Ci
fire.
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave that amount
of residue = 18,000 Ci original. Again, this is only for 1/3 of the
total amount of water dispersed fairly evenly over WTC 6.
The second sample contains 2.83 nCi/Liter of water from a 'flowing'
water pool in WTC 6. Again, since it is the more diluted value it
has been assigned a percentage of the total volume that is larger
than the first pool of 'flowing' water.
2.83 nCi/Liter of water X 666,666 Liters of water = 1,885,000 nCi
present in 2/3 of the total volume of water present in WTC 6. This is
right at 10 times the residual Tritium of the 3,000 Ci fire.
For more on the water dispersal and simiilar information on TUs at
the WTC, see an earlier response to Prof Jones
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/8 and the breakdown
of 4 million gallons of WTC dilution.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/136
Approximate amount of original Tritium required to leave this amount
of residue (3 Million nCi)? 30,000 Ci.
The third sample from the NY sewers which must have a massive total
volume contained 0.164 nCi/Liter of Water. 0.164 nCi/Liter X
120,000,000 Liters = 19,680,000 nCi present in a total dilution of
the WTC waters. If one subtracts the amounts of Tritium residue
found in WTC 6 (3 Million nCi) that leaves us with 16.7 Million nCi
for the 250 feet wide by 35 deep craters surrounding WTC 1, WTC 2,
the DOE's 37 Ci, and the standard 20 TUs from environment anywhere in
the world that there is not man made nuclear contamination.
The DOE report gives a breakdown of the 30 Million gallons (120
Million Liters), the total volume of the Tritium diluting water on
Page 9.
Total original Tritium needed to leave the residues from the only 2
WTC samples with a dilution by the rain and fire fighters efforts =
48,000 Ci. To leave this amount of residual Tritium requires a huge
source of Tritium.
4. "Tens of Thousands Ci of Tritium" (original amount) did leave
traces of Tritium in the second DOE reported fires with Tritium.
Page 9, first paragraph.
What is it with Tritium? Tritium is only made in our atmosphere
through nuclear interactions with the sun's radiation. It is very
evenly dispersed throughout the world at 20 TUs/0.0638 nCi of Tritium
(up from 10 pre nuclear testing, reactors, waste, etc). Any value
above 20 TUs must come from man made nuclear events. Man made
nuclear contamination is the only way to make the Tritium level rise
above 20 TUs. It takes alot to keep Tritium from dispersing and even
then 1/2 will be gone in 12.5 years.
Why is the usage of Micro Nukes so important?
Until it is shown the government is using them, the tyrants will
continue using them. The corporate media has already laid the
groundwork for blaming a nuclear explosion in a city on terrorists.
The usage Micro Nukes shows that the tyranny exists in more depth
than the original 'usual suspect' government departments, agencies
and both political parties.
The usage of Micro Nukes points to possible other national neo
fascist assistance with a most likely scenerio of Israel.
People generally like to know what is killing them.
Thermate, explosives and thermonuclear devices are the only things
that explain all of the WTC debris.
Why is Micro Nukes in the WTC being censored, hidden and scammed?
For the very reasons it is so important.
In order to be good disinformation, the disinformation must contain
some truths. One must not concern themself with the "interpreted"
disinformation (the non Tritium information on the terrorist attacks
has no bearing in the scientific method) - , but dig for the true
information/data that is hidden and included to give the
accuracy/acceptance of the disinformation. Some disinformation can
be an excellent weapon for truthers - multifacet - that shows what
was hidden, the source is unimpeachable since it comes from the
disinformers, and completely refutes the "interpretations".
Disinformation can sometimes contain 'nuggets of gold' as my friend
Captain May, (GhostTroop) would say. The DOE report, "Study of
Traces (Traces = 55 Times the Quantified Background Level of 20 TUs
or 0.0638 nCi) of Tritium at the World Trade Center",
<http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/241096.pdf> had a trail
of gold nuggets.
How Does a Truth Finding Scientist Quantify At Least 55 Times
Environment Data Constants ( 20 TUs or 0.0638 nCi Tritium) Quantity
as: "well below the levels of concern for human exposure" while
ignoring massive dilution of the sample. A scientist looking for the
truth would never and can not use 'well below the levels of concern
for human exposure' because it is not a value. "...well below the
values of human concern" is just a false reassuring feel good
statement and is completely useless. The statement does not even
lead to a value since the levels of concern are not given a value.
It appears that the scientists are using the EPA value of 8,000 TUs
for the 'level of human concern' - 400 times the environmental
amount. 399 times the environmental level does not get reported as a
level of concern. It only takes one particle of radiation to kill a
person. No amount of radiactivity exposure is safe. Some radiation
exposure is merely acceptable by this government and some scientists
based on a loss of life vs monetary expendatures to prevent excess
radiation. It's a simple cost/benefit scenerio, not a safety
scenerio.
If the reader is new to the information being evaluated, the author
suggests starting with the first article and reading them
chronologically. There should be around 200 references that many
times contain significantly more information than the individual
referance indicates.
Ed Ward, MD
911 Related Articles - Chronological:
Bombs in the WTC Buildings Proves Nothing to Racist-Fascist Bigots
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/08/21/ward.htm
Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm
Update: Micro-Nukes at the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/03/05/ward.htm
Update: Proves Micro Nukes in the WTC
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/04/16/ward.htm
Verifying the Source of WTC Tritium Levels that Are 55
Times "Background Levels" http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm
Prof. Jones Denies, Ignores, Misrepresents Proven Tritium Levels 55
Times Background Levels http://www.rense.com/general77/levels.htm
Steven Jones Replies To Dr. Ed Ward
http://www.rense.com/general77/ward.htm
Prof Jones Gladly Assists Testing Unaffected WTC Items
http://www.rense.com/general77/profjh.htm
Vancouver Conference: Drs Deagle and Jones debate Micro Nukes in the
WTC http://www.911blogger.com/node/9590
9/11 Sicknesses consistent with environmental radiation contamination
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/06/22/01625.html
Articles referencing my micro nukes articles.
Ted Twietmeyer's excellent article on EMP effects: What May Have
Melted the WTC Vehicles.
Jerry Mazza's insights on 911 and current political scams: Ground
Zero Illnesses Come Back to Haunt Giuliani.
Radio Interviews on Micro Nukes in the WTC with Ed Ward, MD:
The Jeff Rense Program: (Linkage provided by Jeff Rense on his site
with this article's publication)
October 12, 2006 - 2 hours - Deals with the first article on Micro
Nukes with a small amount of information in the second article.
April 17, 2007 - Deals with the second and third articles on Micro
Nukes.
The Dr. Bill Deagle Show - Clay and Iron. Scroll down to:
March 22, 2007, March 28, 2007, April 9, 2007, April 26, 2007 and May
10, 2007 another show has been scheduled for June 26, 2007.
Micro Nukes in the WTC information has also also been presented on
reputable radio shows: CurrentTv with host Dr. Hesham Tillawi, Radio
Liberty with Dr. Stanley Monteith, and TruthRadio with host D'Anne
Burley.
Physicist Ron Larsen has called the (Micro Nukes in the WTC)
articles "a fresh perspective" (6:38), "Dr. Ward thinks like a
scientist" (8:28), "can spot hocum from yokum", "logical people like
yourself (Ed Ward, MD)" (55:20), "dealt with issues that were beyond
technical" (in other articles)(10:26), read several of my referenced
documented facts (over 100 of them in the first article) (11:00),
read the full quote of his later partial quote (12:30), noted the
beams thrown upward (1320). "spent several hours looking over the
research" (16:40), notes the pyroclastic flows, their ability to
carry fine particles and the "vaporization of metals" (25:32), notes
the problems with reflectivity of conventional heat vs much more
powerful neuton (ray) heat (32:17), makes a comparison between his,
Gspooner and my methods (44:00), "Dr. Ward is creating value for me"
(45:30), "clearly telling the truth", "neutrons could do something
like this (bend the 8 ton 6 inch thich beam) (46:08), and notes rare
legended LIDAR documented evidence of massive craters around WTC 1, 2
and in WTC 6 (46:36). Although, in what seems to be an interesting
reversal, his more recent newsletter does not seem to share the same
content. (From my open/personal letter to Alex Jones)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EdWard-MD/message/135
http://media.putfile.com/RL-interview-Micro-Nukes-WTC
Ed Ward, MD
Philip Joy
Chat Conversation Start
October 24th, 1:40am
She sees my post but no replies.
I need an invite - I got the go ahead from Norma
October 24th, 10:05am
Tried to invite you. Still says you are blocked. Working on it.
October 24th, 1:18pm
thanks Today's 9/11 awareness
The New York Times 9-11 Oral Redacted Histories http://redpillnumbertwo.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-new-york-times-911-redacted-oral.html 
redpillnumbertwo.blogspot.com
October 25th, 4:16am
Dan
you're back. I would like to apologize for the delay, and, in fact
apologize that you got blocked in the first place. You have a lot to
offer here and have always behaved like a gentleman.
October 25th, 1:17pm
Blex got me back in last night. Shared some outstanding issue with Ellen Mariani case. I still don't know the issues.
new interviews here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG0b5Fdhb-8#t=533
www.youtube.com
about an hour ago
Sorry
Dan, I tried but failed to find the point in the discussion so can I
ask you again personally, re the Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory
Discrepancy?
Are the seismic readings for WTC 1+2 Dr Wood quotes now revealled to have been too LOW?
And
if they were too low, and some significant magnitude was the fact, why
is it that we do not see large waves running across the Hudson from the
disturbance of the bedrock.
what is the reading for WTC 7?
"Are the seismic readings for WTC 1+2 Dr Wood quotes now revealled to have been too LOW?" AND one spike
NOT accounted for
Woods low activity seems higher
Interesting. Does Dr Wood appear to know that there are contradictory seismic records and that someone got to them?
core point is the missing spike from PAL station.
Which should coincide with what?
I have know idea, maybe WTC 6!
Interesting, WTC 6 is generally assumed to have happened during the dust cloud roll-outs, though no-one actually says.
I only have seen the graphs, I am not sure if the details will ever be public.
It could be WTC 7 also
That would be easy to decide timewise, as WTC7 was much later in the day.
Do you see the large spike at 5:15 ?
I emailed a bunch of people but no replies for comment.
which of the graphs on your blog would I be looking at for this?
The New Jersey Station.
PAL is New York they look above the same distance.
about the same distance.
Each graph is a little different. They are not clones.
the BRNJ looks like something happened
at "20"
at 15 yellow box
My
problem is that I don't understand seismology graphs. Clearly the BRNJ
appears to record something missing in the PAL. And your image of Indian
nuke test suggests the shape is nuke not quake.
That's what
i got
So do you link this with the rumblings?
Its all connected. The body part map, rumblings witnesses etc. DOE WTC Tritium Report - 911
I
am worried about the absence of effects on the surface at these points.
I would expect to see a significant seismic reading doing something to
the water on the Hudson. What size reading is required to set off a
tidal wave?
"What size reading is required to set off a tidal wave?" I think those are caused by underwater collapses .
Common
sense tells me that seismic activity in the bedrock - which is
underwater by virtue of being below sea level, would be expected to
produce some effect on the water of the Hudson. The only thing is I
don't know what degreee of sudden seismic shock is required to disturb
water. I know from the amateur footage of rumblings, taken from islands
opposite, that no such disturbance of water was manifest.
CNN Fakes from Youtube claims these waves happened.
7.5 is required for a tsunami, but lower values must cause disturbance. How high is the new reading you have spotted?
|
No comments:
Post a Comment