Comment: Maybe just quicksand?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Beware Fetzer. He tanked the (see in situ)

Maybe just quicksand?

It might have just been the huge straw man that is the tower destruction that he got bogged down in.

I suspect that many of the things they say are true. I imagine that many methods were used, probably more than have been theorized about so far too. It’s very muddy by design.

I have seen the Nano-thermite evidence, the unreasonable hot spots in the debris, the fact that there wasn’t really enough above ground debris. Either there was a really big hole under the towers, or a lot of the debris vaporized, possibly both and more.

The biggest difference between a regular explosive and nuclear explosive is the power/size ratio. Designing a shaped nuke the size of a coffee can would be easy. A small one wouldn’t radiate the entire area for centuries. Most radiation would be contained in the debris.

There was evidence of higher than normal radiation at the debris site and in the debris being hauled away as quickly as possible.

I don't doubt the existence of space based lasers. A movie in the early 80's fictionally detailed such a weapon.

Also, recall that the FBI approached the sit-com "Get Smart" in order to acquire a shoe telephone in the 60's. They weren't real then, but someone made it so in pretty short order.

They certainly had space based weapons in the 80’s, the Star Wars SDI used nukes instead of lasers, but an upgrade in the last 20 years is possible.

Perhaps Fetzer just got caught in the straw, and did it with poor timing?

I will keep a more critical eye on him though, lest he get caught in the straw designed into Sandy Hook. ;)

Just open the box and see