More Nuke and other Lies and Stupidity from “Truthers”

Readers will remember ” Truther” B from a previous article.  Well, he is currently going on about nuclear weapons being used at the WTC despite the FACT that, as we see here, even “TRUTHERS” have debunked that claim.

“Truther” B provides the following Youtube video which purports to be after demolition. Just two problems: 1, the obvious fact that there WAS NO DEMOLITION, and two, it’s just a picture with no sound. That and the debris clould took a long time to clear.  There are many other problems with the claims of nuclear weapons, which I addressed in earlier articles here,here, and here.   “Truther” B cannot figure out that a nuclear blast with neither an electromagnetic pulse ( EMP) nor radiation is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

Now, let’s switch over to “Truther” A, also from a previous article.  At one point, ” Truther’ A claims to have seen old 1940s movies where they said, ” Pull it” when referring to the explosive demolition of a building.  There’s just two problems: 1: Movies, especially 70 year old ones, are NOT real life, and two, as we see here, demolition experts such as Brent Blanchard of Protec,    Jon Magnusson of Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Ron Dokell, retired president of Olshan Demolishing Company, and Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc.  In point of fact, the same site provides the following quotes from Brent Blanchard, and Mark Loizeaux, respectively: ”   We have never once heard the term ‘pull it’ being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a building, and neither has any blast team we’ve spoken with. The term is used in conventional demolition circles, to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment (excavators, bulldozers etc) to ‘pull’ the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement. This author and our research team were on site when workers pulled over the six story remains of WTC6 in late fall 2001, however we can say with certainty that a similar operation would have been logistically impossible at Ground Zero on 9/11, physically impossible for a building the size of WTC7, and the structure did not collapse in that manner anyway.

In the weeks following 9/11, several Protec building inspectors and staff photographers, including this author, were contracted by demolition teams to document the deconstruction and debris removal processes at Ground Zero. These processes included the mechanical pull-down of the remains of the U.S. Customs Building (WTC 6) and various other activities occurring simultaneously throughout the site,” and ”  Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. adds that the only way he can imagine the term being used is in reference to a process where the legs of a structure are precut and attached to cables, and then large machines are used to literally pull the building to the ground.”

Simply, put, only ‘TRUTHERS” are making the claim that “pull it” refers to explosive demolition.  “Truther” A makes the claim that when they used the plunger to set off explosives, the term “pull it” was used.  The trouble is, one does NOT pull the plunger to set the explosives off, they PUSH it.

Here are some other statements ” Truther” A makes in a futile effort to “prove” his claims.

He states that it was physically impossible for Flight 77 to hit the Pentagon, while ignoring the facts, such as numerous people saw the plane, not to mention the airplane debris all over the Pentagon lawn.

Next, ” Truther” A claims that the government said the planes caused the Twin Towers to evaporate. Not true- they said DISINTEGRATE.  Those are two different terms.  First, we have the dictionary definition of “evaporate, found here: ”


 [ih-vapuh-reyt]  Show IPA

verb (used without object), e·vap·o·rat·ed, e·vap·o·rat·ing.


to change from a liquid or solid state into vaporpass off in vaporvaporize.

to give off moisture.

to disappear; vanish; fade: His hopes evaporated. evanesce.
verb (used with object), e·vap·o·rat·ed, e·vap·o·rat·ing.


to convert into a gaseous state or vapordrive off or extract in the form of vaporThe warm sunevaporated the dew.

to extract moisture or liquid from, as by heat, so as to make dry or to reduce to a denser state: toevaporate fruit.

to cause to disappear or fade; dissipate: His involvement in the scandal evaporated any hope he had fora political career.”
Next, we have the dictionary definition of disintegrate, found here: ”


 [dis-in-tuh-greyt]  Show IPA

verb (used without object), dis·in·te·grat·ed, dis·in·te·grat·ing.


to separate into parts or lose intactness or solidness; break up; deteriorate: The old book is graduallydisintegrating with age.



to decay.

(of a nucleus) to change into one or more different nuclei after being bombarded by high-energyparticles, as alpha particles or gamma rays.
verb (used with object), dis·in·te·grat·ed, dis·in·te·grat·ing.


to reduce to particles, fragments, or parts; break up or destroy the cohesion of: Rocks aredisintegrated by frost and rain.” 
  As you can see, there is a difference, and as for the definition of disinegrate, there is NO SIZE RESTRICTION on parts that a whole can be broken into.
       Then again, ” Truther” A is the same moron who thinks that if the tail section of Flight 77 had sheared off, it sould have just plopped down on the Pentagon lawn instead of following the rest of the plane in, in CLEAR VIOLATION of Newton’s First Law of Motion, aka The Law of Inertia, which any physics book ( or Web site for that matter) will tell you states, ” An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.”
       Oh, and before any “truther” says there was no unbalanced force at the WTC, yes there was- the planes.  Yes, the planes did indeed have force as Newton’s 2nd Law which is often expressed as Force = mass times acceleration or F = ma.  Clearly the planes had mass. Now, as any physics book will tell you, acceleration is defined as a change in velocity over time ( and no, there is no restriction on time- even a split-second counts). Logic dictates that a plane slamming into a building at 400 to 500 MPH is going to experience a rather abrupt change in velocity over a very short period of time, therefore, per Newton’s 2nd Law, the planes had force.
       Of course, “Truther” A later proved that he knows nothing about REAL WORLD physics. When Fellow Debunker 4 asked ” Truther” A, ” Who was Newton,”  “Truther” A’s response was, ” Wasn’t his first name fig?”
       As we can see, one question you should NEVER ask a “truther” is, ” How stupid can you be?”  They take it as a challenge.   Einstein must have had “truthers” in mind when he said, ” Two things are infinite. The universe and human stupidity… and I’m not so sure about the universe.”
Einstein quote

Posted March 25, 2014 by Victor Chabala in Mocking Truthers, Opinion, Real 9/11 Facts

%d bloggers like this: