Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,714 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,953,631
Pageviews Today: 2,750,281Threads Today: 800Posts Today: 14,425
09:47 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 687593
Sweden
04/05/2010 02:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Well which is it??..Nano thermite or a Nuke??

There's certainly no need for both..

One of these theories is Bullshit..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 711379


Nuke. Just as Dimitri says, only a nuclear reaction can generate the energy needed to dissolve material into this micrometer size dust particles. The dust is proof of a nuclear blast.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 499484
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 03:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
The 9/11 truth movement is gaining too much traction.
Let's muddy the waters with as many alternate theories as possible.
Divide and conquer the truth seekers.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 935121


ROFL

The truth movement is going NOWHERE. After almost 10 years the truth movement has done nothing except look like a bunch of whining little pussy schoolgirls being led by cocksmoking CIA agents like Alex Jones. You "Bullhorn" people with your arrogance and half baked hypothesis.. which actually has the opposite affect, alienating the public even more and turning them off from 9/11 truth.

The nuke theory is the only one that accounts for all observed evidence. No "nano-thermite" can pulverize materials into micron fine powder, bend multi-tonne steel beams into shapes that defy explanation from EXPERIENCED steel workers, leave molten pits for months with continous water spraying and so forth..

Ironic isn't it.. the two theories most opposed by the "truth movement" just happen to be the ones closest to the truth, no plane and nuke theory. Then we have Judy Wood and her outrageous space beam theory which co-opted everything the nuke theory explained and basically made those of us saying nukes is true look like idiots..
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 788030
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 03:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 933520
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 03:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Heres the proof this is BS.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The next underground test was Teapot Ess, on 23 March 1955. The 1 kiloton explosion was an operational test of an atomic demolition munition (ADM). It was detonated 67 feet underground, in a shaft lined with corrugated steel, which was then back-filled with sandbags and dirt.[16] Because the ADM was buried underground, the explosion blew tons of earth upwards, creating a crater 300 feet wide and 128 feet deep. The resulting mushroom cloud rose to a height of 12,000 feet and subsequent radioactive fallout drifted in an easterly direction, travelling as far as 225 km from ground zero.


Dmitri says the devices are 1.5kt and 50m underground yet the test above was less kt and deeper and left a 300 ft wide crater.

DEBUNKED !
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 03:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Heres the proof this is BS.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The next underground test was Teapot Ess, on 23 March 1955. The 1 kiloton explosion was an operational test of an atomic demolition munition (ADM). It was detonated 67 feet underground, in a shaft lined with corrugated steel, which was then back-filled with sandbags and dirt.[16] Because the ADM was buried underground, the explosion blew tons of earth upwards, creating a crater 300 feet wide and 128 feet deep. The resulting mushroom cloud rose to a height of 12,000 feet and subsequent radioactive fallout drifted in an easterly direction, travelling as far as 225 km from ground zero.


Dmitri says the devices are 1.5kt and 50m underground yet the test above was less kt and deeper and left a 300 ft wide crater.

DEBUNKED !
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 933520


You fail, WTC nukes claim is 77 METERS underground that is about 250 feet underground.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Plumbbob Rainier was detonated at 899 ft underground on 19 September 1957.[17] The 1.7 kt explosion was the first to be entirely contained underground, producing no fallout.[20] The test took place in a 1,600[21] – 2,000 ft[22] horizontal tunnel in the shape of a hook.[22] The hook "was designed so explosive force will seal off the non-curved portion of tunnel nearest the detonation before gases and fission fragments can be vented around the curve of the tunnel's hook."[22] This test would become the prototype for larger, more powerful tests.[20] Rainier was announced in advance, so that seismic stations could attempt to record a signal.[23] Analysis of samples collected after the test enabled scientists to develop an understanding of underground explosions that "persists essentially unaltered today."[23] The information would later provide a basis for subsequent decisions to agree to the Limited Test Ban Treaty.[23]

from the same site...here is your contained underground, this is more comparable..!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
77 Meters = 252.6246719160105 Feet
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
77 Meters = 252.6246719160105 Feet
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203360


250 feet with 1.5 kt now sounds ENTIRELY PLAUSIBLE as the PERFECT distance down to destroy a building but not cause a mushroom cloud.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
67 = too shallow even with less than 1.5 kt
899 = overkill even with 1.7 kt

250 = plausible medium
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
I just received word from Dimitri that he has lost his publisher due to the fact they are now afraid to publish his book. The one offered on lulu was a scam and pirate job that he does not support and it is now not available.

Strangely enough, this makes Dimitri sound more legit because HE CAN'T FIND A PUBLISHER YET.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
The effects of an underground nuclear test may vary according to factors including the depth and yield of the explosion, as well as the nature of the surrounding rock.[25] If the test is conducted at sufficient depth, the test is said to be contained, with no venting of gases or other contaminants to the environment.[25] In contrast, if the device is buried at insufficient depth ("underburied"), then rock may be expelled by the explosion, forming a crater surrounded by ejecta, and releasing high-pressure gases to the atmosphere (the resulting crater is usually conical in profile, circular, and may range between tens to hundreds of metres in diameter and depth[26]). One figure used in determining how deeply the device should be buried is the scaled depth of burial, or -burst.[25] This figure is calculated as the burial depth in metres divided by the cube root of the yield in kilotons. It is estimated that, in order to ensure containment, this figure should be greater than 100.[25][27]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
The effects of an underground nuclear test may vary according to factors including the depth and yield of the explosion, as well as the nature of the surrounding rock.[25] If the test is conducted at sufficient depth, the test is said to be contained, with no venting of gases or other contaminants to the environment.[25] In contrast, if the device is buried at insufficient depth ("underburied"), then rock may be expelled by the explosion, forming a crater surrounded by ejecta, and releasing high-pressure gases to the atmosphere (the resulting crater is usually conical in profile, circular, and may range between tens to hundreds of metres in diameter and depth[26]). One figure used in determining how deeply the device should be buried is the scaled depth of burial, or -burst.[25] This figure is calculated as the burial depth in metres divided by the cube root of the yield in kilotons. It is estimated that, in order to ensure containment, this figure should be greater than 100.[25][27]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203360


According to this formula you could do approximately .457kt with 77 meters of cover, a bit more if you had solid granite.

.4565kt cube rooted = .77

77 meters divided by .77 = 100 and that's what's needed to keep it underground.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 203360
United States
04/05/2010 04:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
With that I suggest that the kt was lighter than 1.5kt (around .5 only) and that would also line up with the lighter seismic readings and we would not have to get 5.5 mag, but only around 4-ish.
911thology
User ID: 935004
Thailand
04/05/2010 04:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Hey, guys. I read this thread and I found it out that you did not watch the movie attentively enough. I have never said that the nukes under the WTC were 1.5 kiloton. I said it clearly they were 150 kiloton. See the 100 times difference? For those who doubt it it is highly recommended to watch the part20 of the movie - it is explained there that the WTC demolition had nothing to do with any ADM, mini-nuke or anything of this kind. It was three old good 150 kiloton hydrogen charges that would destroy bigger part of New York if exploded above surface. Someone who pasted description of 1.5 kt nuke explosion above can't realize that there is a huge difference between a REAL underground nuclear explosion, a SHALLOW underground nuclear explosion and an atmospheric nuclear explosion. Besides, there is a huge difference between soft soil of Nevada desert and hard granite rock in Manhattan. Well calculated explosion of 150 kiloton in granite rock would only make a cavity of 100 meters in diameter and nothing more than this. No crater at all, no mushroom cloud at all. And the very same explosion of 150 kiloton above surface, or slightly sub-surface would totally wipe entire Manhattan from the map and, additionally destroy a big part of New York around and burn out the remaining part of New York (given that Hiroshima bomb was less than 20 kiloton you can imagine what is 150 kiloton). See the difference?
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov. The person who appears in the movie.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 194596
United States
04/05/2010 04:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Hey, guys. I read this thread and I found it out that you did not watch the movie attentively enough. I have never said that the nukes under the WTC were 1.5 kiloton. I said it clearly they were 150 kiloton. See the 100 times difference? For those who doubt it it is highly recommended to watch the part20 of the movie - it is explained there that the WTC demolition had nothing to do with any ADM, mini-nuke or anything of this kind. It was three old good 150 kiloton hydrogen charges that would destroy bigger part of New York if exploded above surface. Someone who pasted description of 1.5 kt nuke explosion above can't realize that there is a huge difference between a REAL underground nuclear explosion, a SHALLOW underground nuclear explosion and an atmospheric nuclear explosion. Besides, there is a huge difference between soft soil of Nevada desert and hard granite rock in Manhattan. Well calculated explosion of 150 kiloton in granite rock would only make a cavity of 100 meters in diameter and nothing more than this. No crater at all, no mushroom cloud at all. And the very same explosion of 150 kiloton above surface, or slightly sub-surface would totally wipe entire Manhattan from the map and, additionally destroy a big part of New York around and burn out the remaining part of New York (given that Hiroshima bomb was less than 20 kiloton you can imagine what is 150 kiloton). See the difference?
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov. The person who appears in the movie.
 Quoting: 911thology 935004



Thanks!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 194596
United States
04/05/2010 04:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Holy moley! 150kt is an amazing amount!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 194596
United States
04/05/2010 04:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Dimitri, how can you have the same ID as me....is this normal for GLP?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 935004
Thailand
04/05/2010 05:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Dimitri, how can you have the same ID as me....is this normal for GLP?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 194596

I don't quite understand what ID you mean? And if you mean ID that is shown to the left of message box, I have not a clue what is this and how to change it. In any case, I am in Bangkok, Thailand and it is very late here now, I want to sleep. If you have any questions (except those clearly answered in the movie) you can live them here, I will answer them when I wake up.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 194596
United States
04/05/2010 05:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Dimitri, how can you have the same ID as me....is this normal for GLP?

I don't quite understand what ID you mean? And if you mean ID that is shown to the left of message box, I have not a clue what is this and how to change it. In any case, I am in Bangkok, Thailand and it is very late here now, I want to sleep. If you have any questions (except those clearly answered in the movie) you can live them here, I will answer them when I wake up.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 935004



Nevermind, I read it wrong, you do not have the same ID, I was mistaken.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 788030
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 05:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Sincerely yours,
Dimitri A. Khalezov. The person who appears in the movie.
 Quoting: 911thology 935004


Dimitri thank you for the GREAT WORK and for joining the discussion.

I have a question about Mike Harari, was he the Israeli Diplomat that Briton expelled recently for his role in the Dubai Mossad operation?

PS have you considered releasing a downloadable E Book?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 935262
United States
04/05/2010 05:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
I'm interested Dmitri doesn't mention it but could it be that the built-in demolition schemes in tall-rise buildings were designed because of the danger of (smuggled-in) mini-nukes raising very high above the ground levels (the same way as he describes atmospheric/ground level detonation differences) - thus being themselves some cold-war security schemes?

Also here [link to drjudywood.com] we see the absorbent dirt interesting if it's possible to track it's source.

I'm sorry for the way i present my thoughts - i worked across St Paul's Chapel from May 2002 approximately for 13 months and now i'm sort of dying from some unknown illness, almost unable to talk and bedridden, and home bound - the most disturbing effect being suffocation. The disease itself started in 2004. I never checked what happened to my co-workers (especially older ones, - I was in good health at that time) and frankly i'm a bit afraid to.

Oh, well what else, thanks and hail to Dmitri! I still want the book to be published, but probably it will never happen, at least in my lifetime i guess.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 499484
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 06:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
I just received word from Dimitri that he has lost his publisher due to the fact they are now afraid to publish his book. The one offered on lulu was a scam and pirate job that he does not support and it is now not available.

Strangely enough, this makes Dimitri sound more legit because HE CAN'T FIND A PUBLISHER YET.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203360


Im hoping he has passed it around to friends and reliable persons.. because if he is genuine and correct his life is now in great danger.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 933520
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 06:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
what do you make of this ?

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Storax Sedan was a shallow underground nuclear test conducted in Area 10 of Yucca Flat at the Nevada Test Site on 6 July 1962 as part of Operation Plowshare.


Sedan was a thermonuclear device with a fission yield less than 30% and a fusion yield about 70%.The explosive device was lowered into a shaft drilled into the desert alluvium 194 m (636 ft) deep. The fusion-fission blast had a yield equivalent to 104 kilotons of TNT (435 terajoules) and lifted a dome of earth 290 feet (90 m) above the desert floor before it vented at three seconds after detonation, exploding upward and outward displacing more than 11,000,000 t (11,000,000 LT; 12,000,000 ST) of soil.

The resulting crater is 100 m (330 ft) deep with a diameter of about 390 m (1,280 ft).

see pic . [link to en.wikipedia.org]

this bomb was 104 kilotons and 636 feet below ground.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 935262
United States
04/05/2010 07:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
what do you make of this ?

[link to en.wikipedia.org]


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 933520


[link to en.wikipedia.org] - that could be a critical column buckled..
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 711379
United States
04/05/2010 07:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
Can you imagine if a Nuclear bomb went off UNDER the
world trade center??

Just imagine an m80 under a trash can lid x 1 million..

The whole theory is impossible!!


You didn't watch the video, he explains the energy transfer that occurs with a deeply planted nuke, it's totally different from an above ground nuke.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 203360


Of course!!...WTF was I thinking... putin



deeply planted nuke and the energy transfer Thing.. cruise
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 788353
United States
04/05/2010 07:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
what do you make of this ?

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Storax Sedan was a shallow underground nuclear test conducted in Area 10 of Yucca Flat at the Nevada Test Site on 6 July 1962 as part of Operation Plowshare.


Sedan was a thermonuclear device with a fission yield less than 30% and a fusion yield about 70%.The explosive device was lowered into a shaft drilled into the desert alluvium 194 m (636 ft) deep. The fusion-fission blast had a yield equivalent to 104 kilotons of TNT (435 terajoules) and lifted a dome of earth 290 feet (90 m) above the desert floor before it vented at three seconds after detonation, exploding upward and outward displacing more than 11,000,000 t (11,000,000 LT; 12,000,000 ST) of soil.

The resulting crater is 100 m (330 ft) deep with a diameter of about 390 m (1,280 ft).

see pic . [link to en.wikipedia.org]

this bomb was 104 kilotons and 636 feet below ground.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 933520


This test, to me, makes it unlikely that 150 kt was used at WTC. It just seems to be way too much. Dimitri will have to show us the actual numbers for how this is possible without causing a crater and mushroom cloud. Dimitri?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 935343
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 07:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
He has already explained. Theres a difference between solid granit rock and the soft nevarda desert!! Think about it :)

Why hasnt this been PINED YET!!???
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 771709
United States
04/05/2010 07:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
He has already explained. Theres a difference between solid granit rock and the soft nevarda desert!! Think about it :)

Why hasnt this been PINED YET!!???
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 935343

No shit. WTF. Pin this. bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 931439
United States
04/05/2010 07:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
He has already explained. Theres a difference between solid granit rock and the soft nevarda desert!! Think about it :)

Why hasnt this been PINED YET!!???
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 935343


Here is the problem with his theory.
And you have to watch all 25 segments.

He claims a pressure wave went thru the building and turned it to dust.

How come the fragile windows aren't turned to dust and blow out?

How come nothing in the area experienced the same nuclear shock wave?

It just conviently went right up thru the core of 3 buildings without every touching it's surroundings?

Again, it didn't even affect the windows.

His theory falls apart.

Thermate has already been found and you can see the explosion wave.

Looks like a classic demolition to me with regular explosives.


Not nukes.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 935343
United Kingdom
04/05/2010 07:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: 9/11 Nuclear Demolition Of The WTC By Dimitri Khalezov **** MUST SEE *****
looks nothing like a classic demolition to me, my uncle agrees the same as he's been in demolition for 23 years...