| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hatsoff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 173
Location: liverpool; the city that speaks out, always, scouseland, in the island formerly known as the UK
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:15 pm Post subject: 9/11's delayed legacy: cancer for many of the rescue workers |
 |
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/11/cancer-new-york-rescuers?C MP=AFCYAH
in yesterdays guardian
mentions | Quote: | | Amid the pollutants within the giant pile of 1.8m tons of debris and the surrounding air were 90,000 litres of jet fuel from the two stricken planes |
hmm thought fuel combusted...
_________________
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good people to do nothing.
Edmund Burke
Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.
Einstein
golden ratio
mass and gravity both exist only as a means to acheive mathematical self-embedding of everything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:38 pm Post subject: Re: 9/11's delayed legacy: cancer for many of the rescue wor |
|
|
Interesting point, either the jet fuel burned up in the huge fireballs seen, or is Pilkington suggesting that regardless of the fireballs all the fuel somehow remained "in the air" without any combustion whatsoever.
If all the fuel remained uncombusted then what "weakened the steel" 
I suppose we'd have to find out how much under fuel capacity each flight was at the "planes point of impact"  ...
Perhaps Pilkington is hypothesisng that the kerosene combusting with all the other materials in the towers creates a different effect than burning just in air.
Whatever he means, and I'm certainly not clued-up enough for the "science" of it, he seems to omit the clearly suspicious behaviour by the EPA regarding the air-quality at GZ in the days post-9/11.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/08/earlyshow/main1985804.shtml
| Quote: | Insider: EPA Lied About WTC Air
Scientist Says It Covered Up Truth In Saying Ground Zero Air Was Safe
James M Klatell
Thousands of people who worked to clear the wreckage of the World Trade Center after 9/11 have had lung problems. Could their illness have been prevented? Tracy Smith has an exclusive report.
(CBS) A scientist for the Environmental Protection Agency is charging that the agency lied when it claimed the air at ground zero was safe to breathe in the weeks after the 9/11 attacks.
In an exclusive interview, Cate Jenkins. Ph.D., tells The Early Show national correspondent Tracy Smith that wasn't so, and EPA officials knew it, but covered up the truth.
Many workers who sifted through the wreckage have since come down with serious respiratory illnesses.
On Sept. 13, 2001, then-EPA head Christine Todd Whitman told reporters at ground zero, "We have not seen any reason — any readings that have indicated any health hazard."
Asked by Smith if EPA officials lied, Dr. Jenkins responded, "Yes, they did." |
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fish5133
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2568
Location: One breath from Glory
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One presumes the Guardian reporter meant the emissions of burnt jet fuel or maybe not,.
The bi products of burnt kerosene are the same stuff that comes out of the jet engines every day in our skies and consist of hydrocarbons, co2 and other nasties (nitrous oxide?) The hydrocarbon particles from spent jet fuel would have been spread all around ground zero and beyond.
_________________
JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
