Nuclear 9/11

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=QPUrAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7WwFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3987%2C4548440

Question: How many subtitles contain the word Nuclear when referring to 9/11 by  Won-Young Kim?

“Nuclear explosion seismology, 7260 Theory and modeling“

“It is not possible to infer (with detail sufficient to meet the demands of civil engineers in an emergency situation) just what the near-in ground motions must have been.”   Won-Young Kim

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AGUFM.S11D..03K

“Urban Earthquakes, Nuclear Bombs and 9/11″
  Won-Young Kim

“He is one of the leading researchers in the United States in methods of
using seismic waves to discriminate between earthquakes, industrial
explosions in mines and quarries, and underground nuclear explosions. “
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-events/urban-earthquakes-nuclear-bombs-and-911

Is Won-Young Kim trying to tell us something about 9/11?

Dear Seismologist
Guns n Butter Indira Singh 9/11 mold, earthquake damage report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjIPEunSC40

“So,if
the data is not absolutely precise” location data has been truncated
and depth was removed completely because its a criminal cover up. All
the databases don’t contain 9/11 data and that was reason why I asked
Paul. Won-Young Kim didn’t have the expertise until later i.e “Urban
Earthquakes, Nuclear Bombs and 9/11″ “developed methods of monitoring
nuclear-bomb tests;” October 7, 2008 sound like he got mega dollars from
DOD after his 9/11 cover up Basement levels would have removed all
spikes.

Reply

Dan
Dan  I have no idea what you are doing with this data, but if you are
seriously pursuing research, please contact the head of the network,
won-young kim: wykim@ldeo.columbia.edu
(If you are pursuing conspiracy theories regarding the 2001 collapse
of the World Trade Center, I do not think it is useful to contact him.)

Dan– Not a useful avenue–but you are welcome to search our websites,  www.earth.columbia.edu and www.ldeo.columbia.edu,
which contain public information on Dr. Kim, and an image of the
collapse seismogram I believe., and to try Dr. Kim won-young . No one
has anything to hide.
 Cheers  Kevin Krajick
(212) 854-9729
[email protected]

More run around continued …… No exact data offered …

• Ron Morales What’s
  the point of that message from a USGS guy Dan. Sounds like he’s
  acknowledging that it’s hard to read such seismic signals. So what?

  February 9 at 11:27pm · “}” data-reactid=”.2i.1:3:1:$comment667464503297358_669406033103205:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.3.$likeToggle:0:$action:0″ href=”https://www.facebook.com/groups/602197473157395/667464503297358/?notif_t=group_comment_reply#” role=”button” title=”Like this comment”>Like
• Ron Morales “A
  “sharp spike of short duration” is how seismologist Thorne Lay of Univ.
  of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion
  appears on a seismograph.”

  So what? A tornado sounds like a train but that’s not evidence that trains are hidden
  in tornadoes. Are you claiming that the only thing that can create a
  sharp spike of short duration are underground explosions? And why would
  an underground explosion on 9/11 cause a building to start collapsing an
  hour later at precisely the point of plane impact high in the building?

  February 9 at 11:29pm · “}” data-reactid=”.2i.1:3:1:$comment667464503297358_669406513103157:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.3.$likeToggle:0:$action:0″ href=”https://www.facebook.com/groups/602197473157395/667464503297358/?notif_t=group_comment_reply#” role=”button” title=”Like this comment”>Like · 1
• Dan Plesse He
  is avoiding the answer and 100% of of all other blasts received ALL 4
  floating point numbers. Never has a blast NOT received ALL the data.
  They are hiding, just like you.

  seismologist Thorne Lay is looking at 9/11 seismograph, that’s so what. No more “so what’s”.

  Stop avoiding and concede already.

  February 9 at 11:34pm · “}” data-reactid=”.2i.1:3:1:$comment667464503297358_669407409769734:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.3.$likeToggle:0:$action:0″ href=”https://www.facebook.com/groups/602197473157395/667464503297358/?notif_t=group_comment_reply#” role=”button” title=”Like this comment”>Like

  “In fact, the recording for WTC1 (Fig. 2a) demonstrates the three types
  of wave characteristic of a brief explosive source confined in a
  compact, solid material: a P wave with a speed of 6000 m/s, the typical
  value for a very consolidated crystalline or
  sedimentary terrain (which is the case in the bedrock of Manhattan)”

  http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/RousseauVol34November2012.pdf

  5 kilotons (KT), because “low-yield nuclear weapons
  http://www.fas.org/faspir/2001/v54n1/weapons.htm

  Kevin James Thanks
  Dan. Excellent analysis of the seismic signals. “Only a powerful
  explosion at the base of WTC2 and a subterranean one under WTC1 could
  have produced the observed seismic waves. These basal explosions would
  facilitate the total, rapid
  disintegrations of the buildings.”

  February 9 at 11:50pm · “}” data-reactid=”.ss.1:3:1:$comment1419321531646160_1419353334976313:0.0.$right.0.$left.0.3.$likeToggle:0:$action:0″ href=”https://www.facebook.com/groups/1408668326044814/1419887728256207/?notif_t=group_activity#” role=”button” title=”Like this comment”>Like · 1

  Kevin James And
  that’s a great article on subterranean nukes. Of course, there was no
  missile penetrating the ground at WTC in order to place such a device.
  So there would have to have been tunnels through into the granite
  bedrock, yes? Is this then a vindication of (or at least some support
  for) Dimitri Khalezov’s theory of a nuclear demolition system already
  installed when WTC was built?

  
  

  
  

9/11 low frequency boom witnesses

9 11 nuclear fallout Evidence and Cover up with EMT Indira Singh Download

9/11 Static on TV from an Electromagnetic pulse from the nuclear reaction