The information and research here is not about chemical reactions, but atomic level reactions. It includes patents, video proof, and debunks the misinformation being put out by others like ae911truth.org. The simplest explanation is usually the truth. There was no exotic thermite, jet fuel, explosives, etc that destroyed over 100 stories of steel, office furniture, huge concrete steel reinforced floors, etc. EVERTHING was turned to dust by simply striking the target with mass. That mass was neutrons produced by a 4th generation nuclear fusion reaction. No big explosions, no fire... simply the production of neutron's. The future energy was available years ago. The patents where created years ago. The tech was used on the towers.
https://twitter.com/paulmuaddib61/status/1187020428943990786
http://thereal911report.com/
view the rest of the comments →
[–] ACatIsFineToo ago
It's a series of screencaptures from twitter, how do you suggest I read it in a coherent manner? Most of the things there are random snippets from fusion research for power plants.
Also, "harvesting" neutrons makes no sense outside of trying to create a nuclear chain reaction. Neutron embrittlement is a massive barrier to fusion power, but would be absurdly impractical to use as a weapon. Leaving aside that it would kill anyone present.
[–] justjakk [S] ago
Are you suggesting that a fusion bomb would not kill anyone or that nobody was killed? What happened on 911, was a fusion bomb that obliterated EVERYTHING, except porous material like paper. Bodies where disassembled, Steel, EVERYTHING blown apart at an atomic level via neutrons striking the protons and neutrons.
[–] ACatIsFineToo ago
Like I said, and maybe I'm not properly understanding how to read that website, I couldn't figure out what was actually being claimed. I certainly wasn't claiming no-one was killed, I was saying that if there was a massive release of neutrons at the site it would have killed anyone nearby.
What is actually being claimed here? I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I can't follow the website and still don't know.
If it's a miniature h-bomb? That's achievable, but doesn't seem like it would have much advantage over conventional explosives.
"Blowing apart everything on an atomic level" - wouldn't create visible dust and would create massive evidence in the form of isotopes of the breakdown products created. The entire site would have been dangerously radioactive for years later. And hydrogen bombs do most of their damage from release of conventional thermal energy, not from neutrons.