Problems with the “Nuke” Theory of WTC Demolition

A number of people strongly state that nuclear explosives destroyed the WTC complex. People who have looked at other articles on this site will understand that this theory alone cannot explain all the evidence at the WTC. I highlighted the problems with the Nuke theory in an exchange I had with Ed Ward, MD. His responses were interesting.


—–Original Message—–
From: Ed Ward, MD [mailto:edward19@cox.net]
Sent: 16 February 2008 11:41
To: Chris North; ad.johnson@ntlworld….
Cc:
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Germany becomes the First Country to admit Clandestine Chemtrails Operations]

Chris you give great Mormon.  But, you are way off on Wood – head. 
 

Dr. Judy Wood – head of the still unamed DEW crew

According to Dr. Wood, some unamed Direct Energy Weapon can be the only cause of the WTC demolition. According to Dr. Wood, the evidence is overwhelming for DEW weaponry. The only thing lacking appears to be exactly which DEW was used. The ‘evidence’ bounces between microwaves, lasers, and lately even a Tesla DEW, Or, was it a combo since she has different DEWS doing different aspect of the debris.  Dr. Wood has also not noted how these/this/combo managed to work unseen in 5 acres of a 1/2 million pounds of dust – minimum.

The Wood ‘evidence’ somehow consists of selected applications for one method and possibly a combination DEW weapon. The mere mention of any type of possible DEW weapon becomes proof that it exists. Indeed, some of the DEW weapons do actually exist and are proven fact. The problem is that NONE of these supposed DEWs exist at anywhere near the size and power needed to turn 3 billion pounds of building into 2 billion pounds of dust. Which is not to say they don’t exist, I’m sure some of them do exist on the scale needed for the WTC, HOWEVER, THESE ARE MASSIVE FINELY TUNED MACHINES DEFINITELY NOTHING THAT IS PORTABLE. These massive DEWs require MEGAWATTS of power, but no need to worry about that either.

Indeed, some of these DEWS could produce the specifically quoted effect, HOWEVER THEIR METHOD OF ACTION IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND THEIR APPLICATION/EFFECT ARE NEVER APPLIED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES/EFFECTS THAT ACTUALLY OCCURED DURING THE DEMOLITION.

Ed Ward, MD


—–Original Message—–
From: Andrew Johnson [mailto:ad.johnson@ntlworld….]
Sent: 17 February 2008 10:53
To: Ed Ward, MD;
Cc:
Subject: RE: WTC Destruction, "The Nukers" and The Hutchison Effect

Dear Mr Ward,
 
As you copied me in on your response, I feel duty bound to respond.
 
There is, it seems, to a co-ordinated and deliberate effort to obfuscate the truth about what happened at the WTC, with various people stepping up to the plate to present or even "push" theories which only explain a limited set of evidence.
 
The best theories explain the most evidence – and this applies to both physical evidence and circumstantial evidence. I can confidently say that Dr Wood’s study and general conclusion explain the most evidence of any set of theories out there. Additionally, Dr Wood’s background is the most suitable of any of the people that have "stepped out of the box" to deal with 9/11 issues.
 
The problems with both the Thermite theory and the "Nuke" theory are that they cannot explain any of the evidence listed below.
 
1) There were no really bright flashes as the towers turned to dust.
2) There were no loud explosions as the towers turned to dust.
3) There was little or no heat in the dust cloud.
4) To my knowledge, there is no publicly viewable research on small, concealable nuclear explosives.
5) Nuclear explosives cannot account for the 24-foot circular holes seen in the buildings and in the street.
6) The nuke or "large explosive/incendiary" does not explain the flipped cars and vehicles.

So, for those saying nuke explosions did it, they aren’t like any other type of nuke seen – they are almost silent, give off no light and no heat. People have criticised Dr Wood for not being able to give the "serial number" of the weapon used. Well, all that I have seen for the nuke explanation is reference to some odd looking "micro nuke" kit on Joe Vialls’ website. If Dr Ward or any other researcher can point me in the direction of credible analysis or discussion of these supposed "micronukes", then I am happy to look at it and consider in view of the evidence.

 
My view on the nuke theory is also strongly affected by the, at times, laughable discussion between Bill Deagle (MD) and Prof Steven E Jones. Even though I am only a lowly graduate of Computer Science and Physics, I was extremely skeptical about some of their factual knowledge, such as that of Isotopes. I took the trouble to transcribe this incredible discussion (it took me 2 days!!) and I posted it here:
 

Where the nukers have some credibility is in the idea of a NUCLEAR PROCESS. We believe we know what this now is – and it’s related to cold fusion. I think that’s why Steve Jones is involved in all this (to help cover that up, by knowing which key evidence attention needs to be diverted from).

Now that we have tied the evidence in with the Hutchison effect, I would say we can explain much more of the data better than anyone else. If one is to be considered a credible scientist and researcher, surely one must consider ALL the evidence, not just "cherry pick" what "looks good". In your writings, you seem to have repeatedly done this, which gives me cause for concern.

 


Dr. Judy Wood – head of the still unamed DEW crew 

What has this got to do with evidence? Everyone knows of my own support for Dr Wood and that of Dr Reynolds.

According to Dr. Wood, some unamed Direct Energy Weapon can be the only cause of the WTC demolition.  

She doesn’t/we don’t have a name for the weapon – but what does that matter? You think that having the name "Nuke" is sufficient for your theory to be credible?

According to Dr. Wood, the evidence is overwhelming for DEW weaponry. The only thing lacking appears to be exactly which DEW was used. The ‘evidence’ bounces between microwaves, lasers, and lately even a Tesla DEW, Or, was it a combo since she has different DEWS doing different aspect of the debris.  Dr. Wood has also not noted how these/this/combo managed to work unseen in 5 acres of a 1/2 million pounds of dust – minimum. 

I think you’ll find that Dr Wood deliberately kept the definition fairly loose "Energy which is directed". The Hutchison Effect fits this description well.

The WTC evidence is suggestive of a combination of technologies – the circular holes are suggestive of a directed beam of some kind, but the "random effects" tie up with Hutchison effect technology. Nevertheless, Hutchison does have samples with relatively circular holes too.

The Wood ‘evidence’ somehow consists of selected applications for one method and possibly a combination DEW weapon. The mere mention of any type of possible DEW weapon becomes proof that it exists.  

No – the 2nd statement is false. As you mention below, we know that certain types of weapons such as MTHEL and ABL already exist, so why are you making statements which are misleading or confusing?

 Indeed, some of the DEW weapons do actually exist and are proven fact. The problem is that NONE of these supposed DEWs exist at anywhere near the size and power needed to turn 3 billion pounds of building into 2 billion pounds of dust.  

You are talking about "White World" technology. I would strongly suggest that we should be talking about "black world" technology – as I have been saying for over 12 months.

 Which is not to say they don’t exist, I’m sure some of them do exist on the scale needed for the WTC, HOWEVER, THESE ARE MASSIVE FINELY TUNED MACHINES DEFINITELY NOTHING THAT IS PORTABLE. These massive DEWs require MEGAWATTS of power, but no need to worry about that either. 

You seem to know quite a bit about the types of weapons available. Here, also, you give a good example of ignoring evidence. In our radio broadcast with John Hutchison,  we described how we thought the process which destroyed the WTC used energy ALREADY IN the crystal lattice of the material concerned. Here’s a link for you – our explanation is about 5 minutes long:

video.google.co.uk/v…

Admittedly, I would describe this presentation as a little "rough and ready", being done "off the cuff" and unrehearsed and we only have our own personal resources and the help of friends like Ambrose Lane and Frank Ferguson to make this stuff happen.

Indeed, some of these DEWS could produce the specifically quoted effect, HOWEVER THEIR METHOD OF ACTION IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND THEIR APPLICATION/EFFECT ARE NEVER APPLIED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES/EFFECTS THAT ACTUALLY OCCURED DURING THE DEMOLITION.  

This statement is essentially false – the Hutchison effects tie up very closely with those seen on 9/11 and, as we have documented, those effects which seem to be ongoing to this day.

If I were you, I’d realise that there is now a "sea change" and more and more people are going to realise how free energy and the 9/11 are interwoven. Tactics of deliberate obfuscation and confusion (which is what seems to be going on) aren’t going to work much longer. This particularly true where Dr Wood and I have full transparency and significant details about our background are known or easily discovered.

Now, if you want to go on paying for Gas and polluting the atmosphere etc, it’s your choice – but it is now no longer mine and I would strongly suggest we look to a future where the "black gold, stranglehold" scenario is a thing of the past.

Regards

Andrew Johnson


 
I have added further comments below, should you or anyone else have the time or interest to read them.
 
Regards
 
Andrew Johnson
UK

—–Original Message—–
From: Ed Ward, MD [mailto:edward19@cox.net]
Sent: 17 February 2008 11:13
To: ad.johnson@ntlworld….;
Cc:
Subject: Re: WTC Destruction, "The Nukers" and The Hutchison Effect

Scam BS.  There was minimum of 5 acres/ 1/2 billion pounds of dust.  The size of the nuke inside walls and 5 acres of 1/2 million pounds of dust more than allows for no bright flash.  And let’s not ignore the heat, true, all that lived only felt warmth BUT ALL FELT (some Very) WARMTH and many picked up off their feet and thrown feet or yards.  Again, the referenced size of the nuke easily allow it to satisfy all those conditions – this is brought out in my first article AND IS COMPLETE BS in any one that actually read my Micro Nuke articles.  The same blast of wind that threw people around may well have done the cars they make no references as to exact circumstances, just BS.
 
So I take offense at your false Scam BS as per referenced verified internet documents – but, then you’d probably have to actually read what you are commenting  about.  And Chris, THE NEXT GROUP EMAIL YOU PUT ME ON, I’M GOING TO FILE A COMPLAINT WITH YOUR ISP.  So, I suggest you STOP NOW
 
thank you,
 
Ed Ward, MD
 
Meanwhile HERES SOME FACTS FOR YOU – WHICH YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE
 

Will the Joneses and 911 ‘Truth’ Orgs Ever Legitimately Address the Referenced, Verifiable, Proven Facts that Are, In Total, Only Consistent With Micro ThermoNuclear Usage and which Have Never Been Noted or Addressed on a Scientific Level?

Steven Jones, Alex Jones, 911 ‘Truthers’ Orgs, Still Seem to Be Denying, Misrepresenting and Doing Their Best to Ignore the Following Facts and More. Why? This is a profound and crucial question.

Steven Jones, Alex Jones, and 911 ‘Truth’ Organizations all seem to be denying, misrepresenting, and doing their best to:

* Ignore PROVEN DILUTED TRITIUM LEVELS THAT ARE 55 TIMES NORMAL
BACKGROUND AND WOULD ACCOUNT FOR BILLIONS OF TRITIUM UNITS UNDILUTED.

Does it have to be Trillions of Units to be ‘significant’? Is this fact some kind of Greek Mythology Method and no longer available to the self proclaimed New Scientific Method as a fact?
See: www.rense.com/genera…

* Still seem to be denying, misrepresenting, and doing their best to ignore 3 Massive Craters (2 Craters 250 feet wide X 35 feet deep, 1 Crater (Middle of 8 story WTC 6) 120 feet wide and 45 feet deep? Did Thermate also burn these massive craters into the ground – yet somehow only caused 5 to 7 acres of other land to seer at 2,000 degrees?
See: www.thepriceoflibert…

* Still seem to by denying, misrepresenting and doing their best to ignore 5 to 7 acres of land at 2,000 degrees. The inuendo from the 911 ‘Truthers’ is that ”super thermate’ (superdoubletopsecret thermate) cut the girders (while somehow exploding), burned cars, and then brought 6 acres of land and debris to 2,000 degrees F. ‘Super thermate’ burns at the rate of 350 meters a second. To cut a steel beam in one spot requires significantly less than 350 meters of ‘super thermate’. The WTC took 12 seconds to fall. In order for a single strip or a 350 meter cube to burn for 12 seconds it would require a length of thermate 4,000 meters long. Then after 4,000 Meters of thermate would have burned, there was still more thermate that burned cars, and also raised the temperature of 6 acres of land to 2,000 degrees? How many Million ‘insignificant’ Meters of Thermate would that take?
See: www.thepriceoflibert…

* Still seem to be denying, misrepresenting, and doing their best to ignore wilting spires of 16 inch steel that withstood at least 1/2 Billion (‘insignificant’) pounds of building and then suddenly went limp? Was this ‘invisible superdupertripletopsecret thermate at work again?
See: www.thepriceoflibert…

* Still seem to be denying, misrepresenting, and doing thier best to ignore the virtually instant creation of 2 billion pounds of DUST? (This is TWO-THIRDS of the total mass weight of the towers). Did the
‘superduperdoubletopsecret thermate’ turn this mass of structure into DUST?

* Still seem to be denying, misrepresenting, and doing their best to ignore massive cancer (and a huge spectrum of cancer) in WTC responders and victims while the only known cause of all of these cancers is RADIATION and some of these cancers, such as testicular, have virtually no known cause except radiation?

(Think DU in our servicemen and women in Iraq and Afghanistan…not to mention the indigenous peoples.)

There are a LOT more WTC proven FACTS that, in their totality, can ONLY occur because of a Micro Thermonuclear blast. However, I’m not going to waste my time since I suspect they are still denying, misrepresenting and doing their best to ignore all the facts of their supposed New Scientific Method that denies, misrepresents and ignores Proven, Referenced, Reliable, Hardcore Scientific Data under some pretext of the Greek Mythology Method.

Why haven’t these proven facts been noted and addressed on a scientific basis? Why aren’t they being openly discussed, EVER?

Eighteen months ago I published Micro Nukes in the WTC – General Information on WTC Evidence and Background Micro Nukes.
See: www.thepriceoflibert…

Ten months ago – I published Update: Micro Nukes in the WTC – Main Evidence – See: www.thepriceoflibert…

Seven months ago – Prof. Jones Denied, Ignored and Misrepresented Proven Tritium Levels 55 Times Normal Background Levels. Why did he do so?

Why will he not confront the SCIENTIFIC data and seriously deal with it?
See: www.rense.com/genera…

Last week, I published Thermate, C4, Nukes Prove 911 Was An Inside Job.

This is a list of most of my recent papers in the long series of scientific material I have presented elaborately detailing the use of Micro Nukes at the WTC…solid evidence that deserved open and public discourse in the 911 Truth movement and especially through the platform of the Jones program and his multiple web sites. In that Prof Jones refuses to discuss them, one can only wonder about the ‘openness’ of his scientific mind.

See the Evidence –
www.rense.com/genera…

My best to you and yours,

Ed Ward, MD

Independent Writer/Investigative Reporter And Devoted American Patriot

The Bogus Science (BS) of ‘Explosive SuperThermate’ vs The Facts of Deflagration.
www.rense.com/genera…

The New Improved ‘NWO’ Ready and Waiting Thanks to The People’s Psuedo- Revolution (religious fanatics).
www.thepriceoflibert…

Heath Ledger: Good Man, Caring Parent Lost to the Tyranny of this government (religious fanatics). I can think of no more fitting Martyr.
www.rense.com/genera…

We Have Nothing But the Blind Servitude of Slavery Until We Have a 100% Secure Election.
neworleans.indymedia…

Voting? Do You Buy a Ticket for a Fixed Lottery?
www.rense.com/genera…

BrEd – Dei Jurum Conventus – (God’s Rights (Unity)/Convention)

Ed Ward, MD;

groups.yahoo.com/gro…

ronpaul.meetup.com/1…

www.thepriceoflibert…

Independent Writer/Investigative Reporter/Media Liaison for The Price of Liberty
www.thepriceoflibert…


—– Original Message —–
From: Andrew Johnson
To: Ed Ward, MD ;
Cc:Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 5:23 AM
Subject: RE: WTC Destruction, "The Nukers" and The Hutchison Effect
Dr Ward,
 
To respond briefly:
  • I never mentioned the word phrase "BS".
  • I never discussed the actual quantity of dust – it is only relevant when one considers the total energy requirements, which I discussed in terms of a cold fusion-like effect rather than a hot one.
  • The idea of a virtually invisible nuclear explosion which is virtually silent is not supported by any evidence that I have seen.
  • The tritium effects are also seen in cold fusion reactions, but attempts were made to cover these up. Dr Wood’s study references this data on page 7. (Sorry, I forgot to mention this originally).
  • The wind affecting the cars SELECTIVELY, is not supported by evidence – wind doesn’t behave like this. We have video of the dust cloud and we know it was travelling at less than 100mph (perhaps more like 20 or 25 mph. Going by what Tornadoes do, I think winds well in excess of 100mph are required to flip cars.
I want be realistic about studying evidence rather than making disparaging remarks.
 
Regards
 
Andrew


—–Original Message—–
From: Ed Ward, MD [mailto:edward19@cox.net]
Sent: 17 February 2008 11:29
To: ad.johnson@ntlworld….
Subject: Re:REMOVE ME FROM YOUR CONTACT LIST WTC Destruction, "The Nukers" and The Hutchison Effect

REMOVE ME FROM YOUR CONTACT LIST FURTHER EMAILS WILL BE REPORTED AS SPAM/HARASSMENT/BS.
 
thank you,
 
Ed Ward, MD

Related articles...

Comments are closed.