MINI-NUKED

Nope! Wrong! No mini-nukes! Geiger-counters proved it and yes I know!

There would be radiation that even a $10 probe you can buy at radio shack would notice, dumbass.

Fusion reactions don't leave radiation signature. Fusion technology has been developped by defense contractors all over the world.

High level tritium is a tell tale of fusion.

Google WTC tritium levels and educate yourselves.

Regards.

Yes they leave radiation WTF are you talking about???... but that's not the point here... cold fusion doesn't exist, sorry to burst your bubble.

Love how the car doors were fused to their chassis parked outside WTC1/2...

Oh, and more recently, small (<1cm) bits of human bone, found on top of a building blocks away from the WTC...

Then, there's the girders found lodged into buildings blocks away... I guess they hit a tank of compressed air on the way down, suitable to lift a 4-ton girder hundreds of feet into the air, and blow it into the side other another building?

Wrong.

You way out of your league and haven't a clue what you are talking about.

dang, i thought this thread was discussing a new cereal. i was wondering what the little nuke bombs would look like.

What a ridiculous webpage.

Mini-nuke
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Mini-nuke is a term used for a low yield nuclear weapon which has much less explosive power than the most powerful nuclear weapons available. Because of the relatively small yield, a state can plan to use these weapons while hoping to avoid negative public reactions associated with nuclear war. Any potenial plan to produce mini-nukes by the United States has been blocked by the United States Congress, which prohibited the development of any nuclear weapons with a yield of less than five kilotons, roughly a third of the power of Little Boy, the Hiroshima bomb. Previously, tactical devices such as the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle offered yields as low as tens of tons, but all existing devices in the U.S. arsenal have much higher yields. Nuclear bunker busters are a separate development, and utilize higher yield warheads, in the tens or hundreds of kilotons, in order to produce sufficient shock through the ground to destroy their target.

this whole idea is just so stupid.

Don't think so Dude!

"technical analysis shows that low-yield weapons would not be effective for these tasks. Low-yield earth-penetrating weapons cannot burrow deep enough and do not have a large enough yield to destroy deep underground targets; moreover, the explosion would not be contained for even low-yield earth-penetrating weapons, and would necessarily result in large amounts of radioactive fallout."

[link to www.ucsusa.org]

Well, SOMEBODY got it right :) Tritium, my friends! Thermate and Tritium - the TellTale, double-T giveaways :O Remember, it takes Two to Tango :)

Maybe they were only holigrams of mini-nukes that use small thermite missles to set them off?

LOL

the thermite is correct but putting Mini-nukes in the same sentence is a cunning way to try and trivialize the controlled demolition reality

First, you have the wrong 'fusion'. The OP is talking about a hydrogen bomb, which is based on the energy released by the fusion of hydrogen atoms to form helium atoms (just as occurs in the sun).

Second, there would be no geiger-counter-style radiation from a (hypothetical) 'pure' hydrogen bomb--i.e., one that does not rely on uranium or plutonium fission for ignition. We do not know whether the American government has ever actually developed a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, and anyone on this board who claims to know, for certain, that we have not is a liar.

In other words, a 'pure' hydrogen mini-nuke is not impossible but highly speculative.

Needless to say, we also do not know whether the American government has developed some other technology 'in between' conventional and nuclear weapons. Again, anyone who claims to be *certain* that we have not is a liar.

Well, you can allways call me ignorant and idiot, and you're wellcome because no ofense is taken by me.

But, I am not talking about conventional weapons, nor conventional fusion technologies.

Sandia labs has been testing the Z machine for a long time by now. And that is a form of fusion that releases 4 more times energy than is required for producing it (search for the paper from Haynes). That is what they let us know. Guess what they really have.

There is a group of highly trained scientists that have worked in fields of science that very few people know about, and all of them under secrecy oath for the USA defense department, since the 50's.

Can you spell anti matter? The technology for egg sized, city devastating antimatter bombs is said to be in posession of the US since the 60's.

You can think is all sci fi. But Be sure that a molten steel pool lasting for months required an amount of heat that can only be explained by menas of something like a thermonuclear reaction (fision, fusion, or antimatter).

Regards.

That technology does not exist, not even close. - This is where we are getting into the woo woo stuff. - The US didn't spend hundreds of billions in the 80's to equip conventional bombs on it's subs and missile silos for nothing.

'pure' hudrogen mini-nuke is not possible with today's technology....period.

And a regular mini-nuke (ala soviet suitcase bomb style) would have detectable radiation with a simple geiger-counter even with the smallest explosion.

Alpha particles get scattered and registered when CERN for example collides even just ONE ATOM.

This whole story is just ridiculous.

<----actual size mini nuke detonation!

SHILL

CT-nutcase

The Tango is still a Controlled Demolition - with a Mini-Sunburst to melt the steel :)

And for all you doubting Thomases out there who doubt that the technology exists: We got the evidence on 911 :O

If there is any truth to this it will come out eventually.

I love it!

CT1: "WTC fell down too perfectly - it must be a controlled demolition."

CT2: "WTC did not fall down perfectly enough - it must have been blown up by a mini nuke".

Ha!