Jim Fetzer Real Deal Appearance 2/10/14

You can listen to the show either by playing the clip in your browser or by downloading it from here.

Simon Shack and the “researchers” at the September Clues Forum have constructed their own mythology of the events of September 11, 2001. This blog post will further deconstruct the phony 9/11 mythology of the Clues Forum.

For the record here is the Myth that September Clues is advocating:

“TOUR GUIDE” to the September Clues research

It is fair to say the September Clues research has established these 4 main points:

1- The 9/11 imagery was nothing but a Hollywood-style film production, complete with actors in the role of ‘eye-witnesses’ or ‘firefighters’, staged ‘running crowds’, 3D-compositing and special cinematic effects. The ’9/11 movie’ was split into a number of short clips and sold to the TV audience as ‘newscasts’. The few clips featuring ‘airplanes’ (or dull silhouettes thereof) were computer-generated images – all of which in stark conflict with each other, as now comprehensively demonstrated in every imaginable manner, angle and method.

2- No commercial airliners were hijacked or – much less – crashed into the WTC towers, the Pentagon or the Shanksville field. No valid/verifiable records exist for : their airport logs/schedules, their numbered parts, their alleged passengers. Their reported speeds at near sea-level as well as the absurd visuals of their total, effortless disappearance into the WTC façades defy the laws of mechanics and physics – and the absence of visible wake vortexes in the WTC impact imagery also defies the laws of aerodynamics.

3- The World Trade Center Complex (9 buildings in all) were demolished with powerful explosives. No image-analyses of the tower collapses can help determine just what type of explosives were employed – since the videos are 3D animations and do not represent the real-life events. In reality, as they collapsed, the WTC complex was most likely enveloped by military-grade smoke obscurants. No real/private imagery exists of the morning’s events – ‘thanks’ to electromagnetic countermeasures.

4- No “3000″ people were trapped in the top floors/nor perished in the WTC towers. Only one thing was more important to the perps than avoiding a mass murder of 3000 US citizens : to sell the notion that “bogeyman Bin Laden” killed 3000 US citizens. We have renamed the ‘victims’ of these psy-operations “VICSIMS” (SIMulated VICtims). In fact, our research has seen the same pattern emerge in all the so-called “Al-Qaeda Terror Attacks” around the world (LONDON 7/7, MADRID 11, BALI, MUMBAI, etc…). In all logic, the very last aggravation the plotters behind these false-flag operations wish to have, are scores of real families hounding them forever with real questions and real class actions. Hence: NO real terror victims = Logical PsyOp rationale.

9/11 is but a giant – and still ongoing – money-making scam. It rotates around the most well-funded and profitable hoax of modern history. Everyone involved in the scheme is reaping a sizable return from their ‘investment bond’ which, naturally, has “SILENCE” printed all over it. For anyone to ‘speak out’ would be both ruinous and suicidal – a most distasteful option. To be sure, ‘suicidal heroics’ only exist in journalistic fairy-tales such as the outlandish news media’s narrative of 9/11 and its “nineteen religious fanatics”. The skeptics objecting that “too many people would have had to be in on this” fail to account for the most fundamental aspect of human nature: our survival instinct.

The master plan of 9/11 was to demolish the redundant, asbestos-filled WTC complex in Lower Manhattan – 9 buildings in all. The area would naturally be evacuated (as for all such demolitions) in order to prevent a slaughterhouse of dreadful proportions – not a good idea at all. To be sure, this was no mass murder scheme – just a formidable opportunity for massive financial gains and military propaganda. The military (and its various intelligence affiliates) would manage the ground logistics, such as securing the area, raising smokescreens to hide the proceedings from public view, and last but not least, electromagnetic countermeasures to keep any private cameras from filming the mayhem. The WTC complex was thus ‘safely’ destroyed in bright daylight. It was a magician’s trick, pulled off by sleight of hand to fool the few (the NY onlookers) – and with computer graphics to fool the world (the TV viewers).

Simon Shack: Twin Towers were Demolished by Dynamite

Below is an audio clip of Ab Irato reading a Simon Shack post.

Here are the main points:

1. All of the 9/11 events were fake including the collapse of the Twin Towers. Television viewers were shown pre-produced movie footage.

2. The actual collapse of the Twin Towers wouldn’t be shown on TV.

3. Support for theories that claim exotic demolition methods were used on the WTC were derived from fake images and videos so those theories must be rejected.

4. WTC complex was hidden from view by military grade smoke obscurants before the demolition took place.

5. 12 years of bickering and circular debates about what explosives were actually used.

6. Dynamite has been used in all building demolitions. Dynamite was up for the job in 2001.

7. Biltmore hotel was demolished in 1977. The Biltmore was a 245 foot, 28-story high steel framed building. CDI needed to place charges on both sides of steel beams.

8. Most New Yorkers probably watched the Twin Towers getting demolished on TV.

Father Frank Morales Describes Ground Zero

Below is an audio clip of Frank Morales w/ Jim Fetzer from 10/2/07 describing first hand what he witnessed at Ground Zero in the immediate aftermath of the destruction of the WTC buildings. Compare what Frank has to say versus the September Clues version of Ground Zero. The Clues Forum guys would have you believe that the WTC complex was merely a movie set. That stands in stark contrast to the horror show that Frank and many other witnesses described at Ground Zero.

1. No chairs or desks found at Ground Zero.

2. The soil was rich and moist from the bodies of the dead.

3. 1,100 bodies vaporized. DNA was mixed in from different bodies.

4. Collapse of the buildings wouldn’t vaporize 1,100 people.

5. Very little debris found. Jet fuel can’t explain this.

6. The North Tower was referred to as the “2,000 degree pit.” The cherry picker removed pieces of molten steel from below ground level.

7. Workers were going around with red 1 lb bags collecting 1 inch or less pieces of bodies.

Can dynamite or kerosene explain the kind of devastation that Frank describes at Ground Zero? Of course not. Frank is clearly describing behemoth skyscrapers that were reduced to dust and 1,100 people that were completely vaporized. Only nuclear bombs can account for what was witnessed at Ground Zero.

Ground Zero

The term ground zero (sometimes also known as surface zero as distinguished from zero point describes the point on the Earth’s surface closest to a detonation. In the case of an explosion above the ground, ground zero refers to the point on the ground directly below the detonation (see hypocenter).

The term has often been associated with nuclear explosions and other large bombs, but is also used in relation to earthquakes, epidemics and other disasters to mark the point of the most severe damage or destruction. The term is often re-used for disasters that have a geographic or conceptual epicenter.

The term was military slang, used at the Trinity site where the weapon tower for the first nuclear weapon was at “point zero”, and moved into general use very shortly after the end of World War II. At Hiroshima, the hypocenter of the attack was Shima Hospital.

45hiroshima a-bomb

Ground Zero at Hiroshima

El Buggo and a number of other shills on the internet are claiming that nuclear weapons don’t exist. El Buggo states that he isn’t able to find Ground Zero at Hiroshima (no big crater) so he doubts that Hiroshima was actually nuked. El Buggo states that Hiroshima was merely firebombed and that the government is claiming it was nuked as an intimidation tactic. El Buggo is completely full of it. He’s most likely a paid shill so anything he says can be discounted.

The nuke-denying disinformationists attempt to play on the ignorance of the public of the actual effects of nuclear weapons. In this case an air-burst atomic weapon not leaving a crater at Ground Zero.

For the record here is a link to a 360° panorama taken by the US Army at Ground Zero in Hiroshima.

Hiroshima after the Atomic Bomb – Ground Zero (5 of 5) by US Army in Japan


The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was a 15 kiloton bomb that was primitive by today’s standards. Only 1.38% of its uranium actually fissioned. The main effect of the bomb was fire. The mass fire burned for 6 hours and consumed 4.5 square miles of the city.

The Little Boy Bomb:

Dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, it was the first nuclear weapon used in a war. Following are some approximate statistics for Little Boy. If you require more extensive information on this weapon, please contact us:

Weight: 9,700 lbs

Length: 10 ft.; Diameter: 28 in.

Fuel: Highly enriched uranium; “Oralloy”

Uranium Fuel: approx. 140 lbs; target – 85 lbs and projectile – 55 lbs

Target case, barrel, uranium projectile, and other main parts ferried to Tinian Island via USS Indianapolis

Uranium target component ferried to Tinian via C-54 aircraft of the 509th Composite Group

Efficiency of weapon: poor

Approx. 1.38% of the uranium fuel actually fissioned

Explosive force: 15,000 tons of TNT equivalent

Use: Dropped on Japanese city of Hiroshima; August 6, 1945

Delivery: B-29 Enola Gay piloted by Col. Paul Tibbets

Nuclear Weapon Thermal Effects

Large amounts of electromagnetic radiation in the visible, infrared, and ultraviolet regions of the electromagnetic spectrum are emitted from the surface of the fireball within the first minute or less after detonation. This thermal radiation travels outward from the fireball at the speed of light, 300,000 km/sec. The chief hazard of thermal radiation is the production of burns and eye injuries in exposed personnel. Such thermal injuries may occur even at distances where blast and initial nuclear radiation effects are minimal. Absorption of thermal radiation will also cause the ignition of combustible materials and may lead to fires which then spread rapidly among the debris left by the blast.

The fireball from a nuclear explosion reaches blackbody temperatures greater than 107 °K, so that the energy at which most photons are emitted corresponds to the x-ray region of the electromagnetic spectrum. For detonations occurring below 30,000 m (100,000 ft) these X-rays are quickly absorbed in the atmosphere, and the energy is reradiated at blackbody temperatures below 10,000 °K. Both of these temperatures are well above that reached in conventional chemical explosions, about 5,000 °K. For detonations below 100,000 feet, 35 percent to 45 percent of the nuclear yield is effectively radiated as thermal energy.

In addition to the high temperature of the nuclear fireball, the blackbody radiation is emitted in a characteristic two-peaked pulse with the first peak being due to the radiating surface of the outrunning shock. As the fireball expands and its energy is deposited in an ever-increasing volume its temperature decreases and the transfer of energy by thermal radiation becomes less rapid. At this point, the blast wave front begins to catch up with the surface of the fireball and then moves ahead of it, a process called hydrodynamic separation. Due to the tremendous compression of the atmosphere by the blast wave, the air in front of the fireball is heated to incandescence. Thus, after hydrodynamic separation, the fireball actually consists of two concentric regions: the hot inner core known as the isothermal sphere; and an outer layer of luminous shock-heated air.

The outer layer initially absorbs much of the radiation from the isothermal sphere and hence the apparent surface temperature of the fireball and the amount of radiation emitted from it decreases after separation. But, as the shock front advances still farther, the temperature of the shocked air diminishes and it becomes increasingly transparent. As the shock front temperature drops below 6,000 °K, thermal radiation decreases when the shock front becomes transparent to radiation from the interior. This occurs between 10-5 and 10-2 seconds after detonation. At about 0.1 second after detonation, the shock front becomes sufficiently transparent that radiation from the innermost, hottest regions becomes visible, producing a second thermal peak. This results in an unmasking of the still incandescent isothermal region and an increase in the apparent surface temperature of the fireball. This phenomena is referred to as breakaway. Before the second peak begins the fireball has radiated only about one quarter of its total energy. About 99 percent of the total thermal energy is contained in the second pulse. The duration of this pulse depends on the yield of the weapon and the height of burst (HOB); it ranges from only about 0.4 s for a 1 KT air burst to more than 20 s for a 10 MT explosion.

The rate of thermal emission from the fireball is governed by its apparent surface temperature. The thermal output of a nuclear air burst will then occur in two pulses), an initial pulse, consisting primarily of ultraviolet radiation, which contains only about 1% of the total radiant energy of the explosion and is terminated as the shock front moves ahead of the fireball, and a second pulse which occurs after breakaway.

The Ground Zero “Pothole”

Below is an excerpt from pages 390-3 of Khalezov’s 9/11thology:

Independent confirmations of the nuclear demolition. Molten rock, thermal maps, “Ice Age glaciers” and “hard evidence”

One might ask probably another question – are there any independent sources that could confirm that there were indeed three underground nuclear explosions in Lower Manhattan, apart from the ravings of the author of these lines and other “conspiracy theorists” of similar kind – such as above mentioned Mr. Tahil?

Firstly, I would like to state that Mr. Tahil claims that there were only two underground nuclear explosions, not actually three. This is, by the way, yet another clear indication that he might be closely related to those culprits from the WTC demolition team. If he were an honest researcher, then, considering his supernatural shrewdness, he would never fail to notice the third nuclear demolition event – in regard to the WTC-7. To answer the actual question – yes, there are some independent sources, which indirectly testify to the same effect as the author of these lines.

An unprecedented article titled “Pictured: The 40ft ‘pothole’ that shows Ground Zero was once the site of an Ice Age glacier” appeared simultaneously in several newspapers, for example, in the UK “Mail”, published online on September 23, 2008.

The article featured quite an interesting photograph showing the excavated “bathtub” at “Ground Zero” along with an odd, giant, so-called “pothole” in the spot of one of the former Twin Towers. Edges of the “pothole” appeared to be covered in molten rock. There were actually three pictures of the so-called “potholes” – two of them inserted into the above mentioned article, and one more photo of the same series was used in another news article dealing with the same issue. Below is one of the first two:

article-1060043-02C3FC4B00000578-535_468x314

Here is the second photograph from that article:

article-0-02C2ECC500000578-922_468x703

Proof of ice: The giant ‘pothole’, seen in the lower half of this picture, is proof the World Trade Centre towers stood on what was once ground covered by an Ice Age glacier

You could really appreciate the description under the above photo… I mean, you could really appreciate the level of the desperation of the U.S. Government officials and their spin-doctors, who were tasked with the near impossible task – to say something comprehensible in regard to the incriminating cavities that had nothing to do with either the “kerosene”, nor with the supposed “mini-nukes”.

Yet, an even more seditious picture was leaked to the public at about the same time; it belonged to the same series of the so-called “potholes” photos. This one came with the Associated Press’ article published by “Science on NBCNEWS.com”. The article was named “Ice Age geology revealed at Ground Zero. World Trade Center dig uncovers 20,000-year-old, 40-foot-deep pothole”. The actual article could be found on this MSNBC news web page (at least, it was still there in the last days of December 2012).

The below one is that seditious photo showing the smooth edges of the molten rock I am talking about.

world-trade-glacial-hlg-7p_grid-6x2

These utterly seditious pictures were apparently taken illegally, since it was strictly prohibited to bring any photographic equipment into “ground zero” area, even when these words were still spelled with low-case letters, and when there were thousands of ground zero responders clearing enormous piles of the debris and searching for survivors.

It would be even more illegal to make such pictures of “Ground Zero” when the majority of the initial responders were banned from the site and only less than a hundred of the highly trusted people remained there to fix the unexplainable underground cavities.

Dimitri’s footnote:

On November 2nd, 2001, NY Mayor Giuliani suddenly and without any seeming reason has ordered city officials to limit the number of rescue workers trying to recover victims’ bodies to 25 each from the Port Authority police, NYPD and FDNY, and an additional 10 firefighters for fire suppression – which caused deep resentment among the firefighters and even some scuffles with the police – deployed to protect “Ground Zero” from those unwanted firefighters.

14_38_Tower-4-Site---September-2008

Can conventional explosive charges explain the massive pothole at Ground Zero?

Is it even remotely plausible that the “pothole” was a natural formation? That’s the spin this New York Times article tries to put on it:

This monumental carving was the work of glaciers, which made their last retreat from these parts about 20,000 years ago, leaving profound gouges in the earth and rocks from the Palisades, the Ramapo Mountains and an area of northern New Jersey known as the Newark Basin.

Plumbing these glacial features and souvenirs has been critical in preparing the foundation for Tower 4 of the new World Trade Center, being built by Silverstein Properties. The concrete footings from which its columns rise must rest on firm bedrock. Engineers need a clear understanding of the rock’s contours.

“You want to make sure you’re not perching something on a ledge,” said Andrew Pontecorvo, a supervising structural engineer at Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, which is working on the trade center project.

Engineers knew in advance that there were “discontinuities” in the bedrock at the southeast corner of the trade center site, where Tower 4 is situated. Some of these were revealed in the 1960s during the construction of the original slurry wall. (George J. Tamaro, who supervised that job for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, is a retired partner of Mueser Rutledge.)

And when parts of the slurry wall were rebuilt after 9/11, engineers found areas where the rock anchors that stabilize the wall would not hold, meaning there were voids in the bedrock.

Borings through the ground also showed large discrepancies in the elevation of the rock underneath. “It was extreme from the variation you would interpret to what we actually encountered,” Mr. Pontecorvo said.

Obviously, the bedrock topography could not be mapped with enough precision until all the soil was removed and the surface was fully exposed. But besides being an engineering necessity, the unearthing of geological features, especially a 40-foot depression known as a pothole, has offered scientists a rare window into the deep past.

“There are areas in local parks that have small vertical potholes exposed,” said Cheryl J. Moss, the senior geologist at Mueser Rutledge, “but I’m not aware of anything in the city with a whole, self-contained depression on this scale.”

Ms. Moss and Mr. Pontecorvo are scheduled to give an illustrated lecture on the site at 7 p.m. Wednesday at the Tribute W.T.C. Visitor Center, 120 Liberty Street, opposite the pothole.

It’s been called the Grand Canyon of Lower Manhattan,” Mr. Pontecorvo said.

Charles Merguerian, chairman of the geology department at Hofstra University and a consultant to Mueser Rutledge on the trade center project, put it even more simply: “Beautiful!”

It is very unusual to see such features near sea level,” he added.

Shown photographs of the rocks, Sidney Horenstein, a geologist and environmental educator emeritus at the American Museum of Natural History, said, “You don’t find such an array of rock types in the few places in the city that the glacial deposits are exposed.”

Across much of the trade center site, bedrock level is roughly 70 feet below street level. In the southeast corner, however, the pothole adds another 40 feet to the depth, meaning that its bottom is about 110 feet below street level.

Yet when the pothole filled with rainwater this summer, it looked like nothing so much as a little mountain pond. Crevices around the edge were filled with pockets of densely packed cobblestones, possibly some of the very stones that the glaciers used to do the carving.

“As the ice passed over New Jersey,” Ms. Moss explained, “it picked up local rocks such as red shale and sandstone and gray basalt from the Palisades. As ice melted from the advancing glacier, raging streams of water flowed in front of it. The strong currents picked up the sand, gravel and boulders and carried them downstream across the World Trade Center site.

“As these rocks bounced across the bedrock, essentially sandblasting the surface, the softer layers started to erode out and the harder rock left behind became polished. In places, the water swirled in whirlpools of varying sizes, carving out deep potholes and larger basins.”

Along the east side of the pothole, the rock layers run vertically — not horizontally. The result, where the surface has been carved away in a concave form, is an abstract canvas of swirling, concentric rings; not unlike a gouge in a wall that reveals many layers of old paint.

This speaks of a period far more ancient than the glaciers, about 500 million years ago, when the edges of the colliding North American and African continental plates got shuffled together.

“That’s when all this got pushed into a vertical orientation,” Dr. Merguerian said. He estimated that the rock around the pothole had once been 20 miles below the surface, based on the presence of a high-pressure mineral called kyanite.

Here are some pictures of the “Glacial Rock Formation at WTC Site

14_56_T4-Rock-Formation---Credit-Joe-Woolhead

14_56_T4-Rock-Formation---Credit-Joe-Woolhead-(2)

14_56_T4-Rock-Formation---Credit-Joe-Woolhead-(1)

14_56_T4-Glacier-End-of-August-2008---Credit-Joe-Woolhead-(1)

15 thoughts on “Jim Fetzer Real Deal Appearance 2/10/14

  1. Hi Don, I put a post up yesterday highlighting your outstanding work on 9/11, and also linking to 911U. I don’t know if you are familiar with that site. They have a very similar take to you. The only confusing part is whether fission or fusion has taken place, or both. I am guessing that whatever technology they used in these weapons, it’s obviously secret and several generations removed from the last known benchmark.

    • Thanks for the link! I did get a boost of traffic the last couple of days.

      I am very familiar with 911U. I got a few parts of my mini-nuke theory from them. Be sure to check out the Anonymous Physicist, Jeff Prager and the King of Mini-Nukes Ed Ward. Ed is not always the most user friendly guy but he is fucking brilliant so be sure to read his stuff.

      To your main question: yes both fission and fusion took place at Ground Zero. See our Mystery Solved article from May of last year. The USGS dust samples prove U-235 fission took place and the Dept of Energy water samples that contained high amounts of tritium prove fusion took place. It appears that they used fission-triggered fusion bombs. Neutron bombs are hydrogen bombs in a modified case that allows neutrons to escape. This reduces the blast effects of the bomb but increases the neutron radiation. This is what we saw at Ground Zero: limited nuclear blasts that radiated 1,400 cars and vaporized 1,100 people.

      Just to take the analysis a step further it appears that the fission stage of the bombs were boosted by tritium. These were high tech nukes.

      • Thank you. I needed a pointer so will definitely read further into this particular issue and pass along (did I mention I am bad at science?). My take so far is that many people like myself recognized that 9/11 research was technically over our heads, and therefore we stayed away. And now that people like yourself have resolved the technical issues and can put it in layman’s terms, this is huge. My expertise is in detecting bs, and you know, they don’t give degrees in that so you’d just have to take my word for it, and you see the problem….but it’s all connected.

        Left brain + right brain = Truth.

  2. Hi Don!
    Is there anything to be found regarding what the bedrock looked like when they built the towers? I have seen many photos of the construction site on the internet, and I feel that if these pot holes would have been present then (if they were from the ice age) they would be visible. (My guess is they won’t.) Anything about that?

    • You bring up a great point Theresa! Who builds a skyscraper on top of a pothole? All of the pictures I have seen of the construction of the Towers show the foundations already in place. But there was no mention of the hole being there while the Towers were going up.

      Here is the North Tower scenario: first we have a 110 story behemoth standing there, then there are massive underground explosions, then above ground explosions that convert most of the building to dust in 11 seconds and it’s destroyed below ground level, then there is nothing but a mushroom cloud where the building once stood. After the smoke clears the ground is between 600-2,000 °F for 6 months after 9/11.

      When it’s all said and done lo and behold they find a 40′ self-contained “pothole” deep underground where the building once stood. How does that happen?

      Can an ancient glacier explain these things? No. But nuclear bombs fit the scenario to a T.

      • Well, it makes sense that at least someone should know bout the pothole being there if the towers were built from scratch in the late 1960. But it sounds like all geologists are surprised. I don’t know what that proves.
        But I have other thoughts on that.

        If this is the bomb hole with molten metal – where is the metal? It ought to have molten into the rock and have been blasted out of there to get it out. That surface looks way too smooth to have been blasted, and I see no metal.
        And speaking of smooth. Here’s an example of rock at Bull’s Bridge in Kent, Connecticut.

        A glacier did that.

        We have the same thing where I live at the dead falls of Porjus where the hydroelectric power station took all the water and revealed the rock underneath the waterfall. rocks laying on top of the bedrock start spinning from the water flow and dig pot holes in the bedrock. I’m not saying that’s what happened at ground zero, but it does look similar.

        What happens with glaciers is not only that the ice sheet rubs across the surface, but that it slowly melts and the water flows underneath it, dragging pebbles and rocks along, forming all kinds of odd shapes, like pot holes, sand ridges (eskers) and stuff.

        The stripes in the rock (granite and gneiss) forms when it cools slowly and different components stratify and then solidify. Particularly in gneiss, those layers then get waves and bends from the rock remoulding over the eons. There’s even a type of granite called spherical granite that has round rings. http://www.kristallin.de/orbiculite/kugelgesteine1-druck.htm

        To me, the surface of these very bizarre potholes don’t look heat affected. But I’m no geologist. My advice would be to contact one, though, and have an opinion from them.

        It would also be very interesting to see what the underground nuke test that you spoke of looks like now that it has cooled. Does it look anything like these photos?

        Just my 5 cents.

        Theresa

      • This is about the best photos I’ve found of the site. Looks like a lot of dirt. You don’t build 110 storey skyscrapers on top of dirt so there must be better photos of the excavated site somewhere:

        World Trade Center
      • Theresa,

        The pothole appears to be below the level of the structural steel. Retained heat from the nuclear blast melted the steel but it doesn’t look like metal actually flowed into the pothole itself. The rocks do appear to have been molten at some point.

        In the NY Times story “Dr. Merguerian estimated that the rock around the pothole had once been 20 miles below the surface, based on the presence of a high-pressure mineral called kyanite.”

        So that tells us that those rocks were under a lot of pressure at some point. Either they were 20 miles under the surface or something else exerted a lot of pressure on them. Underground nukes explain the pressure and the elevated temperatures at the surface for 6 months after 9/11.

        We’ll track down a geologist to take a closer look at this.

        The Storax Sedan nuke test was in desert sand not bedrock so it’s not a great comparison with Ground Zero.

    • The most likely scenario: conventional charges were used on the outer parts of the Towers and mini-nukes above ground to take out the 47 core columns. Bigger nukes underground to destroy the foundation. The underground nukes caused the high temperatures that persisted for months after 9/11.

  3. I don’t have any knowledge of geology but I live in an area of mountains intercut with glacial valleys, there is exposed rock everywhere and I have NEVER seen anything that looked like the rock in that pothole. As a photographer I have tons of photographs of the local glacial rocks and not one shows circular formations.

  4. Since I find no “reply” button, I’ll just add my stuff here at the bottom.
    I’m not sure this particular part of the mystery is going to be the smoking gun. To my uneducated but very alert eyes it actually looks like flowing water formed this pit. But I’m the first to change my mind when new facts are found. I think a geologist is our best shot. But to make it “double blind gold standard” as in science, it would be good if the geologist would answer from the photos without knowing this was found at ground zero. I get a feeling that many professionals’ interpretations are heavily impacted by cognitive dissonance, and you will not get a sincere answer. A lot of people will not want this pit to be from a nuke, even if all evidence points in that direction (in their eyes). So don’t tell them where it is located, and ask only if it’s made by a melting glacier or and underground nuke “test” so you will get a neutral answer.

    It woulds improbable that the rock would melt and there would be molten steel but it would not flow down into the pot hole.

    Plate tectonics has very strange workings on the earth’s surface. There’s fossils of fish and ammonites in high mountains, there’s new rock leaking out and filling out the separating plates at the mid atlantic ridge. There’s “boiling plumes” of the surface of the earth moving much like syrup but on a geological time scale. Kyanite, like diamonds or preidot form under high heat and pressure over time. That is not unusual. Still it’s found in the norwegian high mountains, as well as on the volcanic island of lanzarote. Finding rock from very deep inside the earth’s crust would not be unusual, per se. What would be unusual is probably this rock still bearing the imprint of glacial wear that has moved around significantly. A geologist would be able to tell if this rck would have been above or below sea level at the last ice age.

    The geologist would also be able to tell you wether kyanite can form from a nuke blast. I suspect it would need longer time to crystallise. Rock that is molten and then solidifies reasonably quickly (in a geological time frame) will be less crystalline and more like glass. A glass or bubbly lava like surface would be what I would expect if a nuke had formed this cavity. As it is now, the very surface that we see shows the lines of stratified granite like that which is sawed out of mountain sides and used for counter tops.

    It sure will be interesting to know what a geologist would say about this.
    Theresa

    • (FYI: The replies only go so many levels deep.)

      We KNOW there was a MASSIVE underground explosion before the North Tower “collapsed.” See my post from last year: https://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/project-gnome/

      So I strongly suspect the pothole was caused by that blast. But it is possible that the underground nuke created another hole and the pothole was a natural formation. I highly doubt it but it is possible. The geologists they interviewed stated that such formations are rare at sea level. We’ll definitely want to get a geological 2nd opinion.

      • Yes, the underground explosion is pretty much a fact as I understand it. I will go into reading your post on project gnome to find out more. I guess it’s possible that the underground nuke actually did not create any hole in the bed rock, but rather destroyed the basement of the building. Was there an equal explosion in the other tower? And building 6? Is there any crater for wtc6? That one was gutted out prior to the towers evaporating.

Comments are closed.