Could 9/11 Have Been Done With FAE/Thermobaric Explosives?
By The Anonymous PhysicistMajor breakthroughs on the nuking of the WTC will be coming soon. For now, let us examine the theory that the WTC was demolished solely, or primarily, via thermobaric (Fuel/Air) explosives. Thermobaric or Fuel Air Explosives (FAE) produce great blast and overpressure. Their relatively high temperature (compared to other conventional explosives), and over-pressure can cause great damage to structure, and to humans. And I have written (coming soon), they were possibly used in the initial explosions (bogus “plane hits.”) But let us address whether thermobarics could have caused the final WTC demolition we saw, and the China Syndrome aftermath we know came to be.
We know from the towers’ missing mass (debris, rubble), and the dust testing that much steel structure was vaporized. We also have the quote, after examination, from fire engineering professor, Dr. Barnett, about his observing steel beams that he said showed evidence of vaporized steel from “extraordinarily high temperatures”, that led to a laughable “refutation” from a disinfo physicist (scroll down to comments). How anyone could believe anything from either of the two disinfo agents/physicists is beyond me.
Now the best thermobarics reach a temperature of about 2500 to 3000 degrees Celsius. Steel boils (vaporizes) at about 3000 degrees Celsius. I understand that most of the steel structure in the towers was treated with asbestos and other types of fireproofing, which would give it an effective higher vaporization temperature, thus likely beyond the range of even the best thermobaric/FAE explosives. We also have the issue of time, for an explosive that barely, maybe reaches the boiling point of steel, the explosive would not provide enough time to yield what Dr. Barnett saw. Does your water boil instantly, even though your burner has a temperature somewhat beyond water’s boiling point? No, it takes time-- but it would vaporize instantly if it were nuked! The “extraordinarily high temperatures” of a nuke, or neutron bombardment, would vaporize (boil) steel instantly. But even if we give thermobarics the benefit of the doubt; let’s say you wanted to have the rapid, mostly symmetric, virtual free-fall (some say faster than free fall, as this is not in a vacuum), 10-12 second complete destruction of the towers, would you employ an explosive that might possibly, barely vaporize some steel structure; or would you need and use something that instantly, overwhelmingly vaporized it— via multi-million degree temperature, and neutron bombardment?
For completeness now, thermobarics cause great damage to structure and to human beings. “The blast wave destroys UNREINFORCED (get it?) buildings” and the office of the Australian Minister of Defence states “Internal organs that contain air (sinuses, ears, lungs and intestines) are particularly vulnerable to [thermobaric] blast. The whole body may also be thrown by blast wind, which can result in fractures. Besides the obvious blast injuries, recent research has shown that there are neurological, biochemical and blood chemistry changes caused by blast effects.” But at least one thing is clearly missing… VAPORIZATION. As Spooked has posted here after reading Robert Shaler's book on attempted DNA matching of 9/11 victims, "Who They Were", some 1157 tower workers were missing completely and probably vaporized. Instant vaporization of people and structures, I have written, is well known from Hiroshima and Nagasaki to occur at, or near, the hypocenter of a nuke. And I already cited the steel vaporization which is not attainable, or not significantly so, with thermobarics, and less likely with asbestos-treated steel. And you don’t get the China Syndrome aftermath of six month long high temperatures and molten steel— that I have heavily documented with numerous articles here, and ensuing cancer deaths including thyroid, leukemia and lymph cancers— known radiation-induced cancers. Nor would thermobarics provide the responders’ later teeth falling out, or demolition-time burned or hanging skin WITHOUT FIRE, that I have repeatedly highlighted in my previous articles. Nor did we see the fireballs during “collapse” (a la the “plane hits”), that we would have, if thermobarics were employed in any appreciable sense during final demolition. All these missing, but necessary, actual WTC destruction, and aftermath, components prove that the main WTC demolition cause was NOT the hangouts of Nuke-Like, or Nuke-Light, thermobarics, or “DEW”.
In the final analysis, thermobaric explosives may well have been used for the “plane hit" explosions, and possibly also in a subsidiary capacity BEFORE the final destruction-- to allow for the use of what I have called “underpowered” nuke(s). Both the Finnish military expert and myself (months ago, now at www.wtcdemolition.blogspot.com) have basically written that keeping the nuking “under wraps” was much desired. Outer steel support structure would be cut or exploded with conventional explosives or cutting charges. I have written that the “innards” of the towers were vaporized by nukes, allowing the overpressure throughout to help "peel away" the outer structure. The Finnish expert details how this last part was likely assisted with conventional explosives, such as thermate or C4.
So we have seen that thermobarics cannot account for the actual WTC destruction and aftermath. What we witnessed on 9/11/01 at the WTC was the dreaded nuking of an American city by its most horrific enemy— its own federal government. More shocking nuclear proof is coming soon.
