Your debugging attempt is accepted but I will address each point.
A blast up elevator shafts has no connection to stairwells.
Lack of flash and blast. A nuke in the basement does not flash out of upper stories. As for blast, there are very specific seismo recordings documenting a high energy pulse PRE COLLAPSE. And no, not the plane hits. Which show up too. Also, witness in basement saw 20 ton steel doors get blasted open and crushed. Evidence indicates truck with bomb in underground garage and mostly likely positioned precisely under shafts for maximum effect.
Unburned people in dust clouds. Open to debate; blast energy converted to breaking material apart and forming dust clouds has nothing to do with unburned people. The cloud may not have been thermally very hot as such. However, I note that many people, over time and continuing to now, have cancer very likely from short-lived radioactives in the dust clouds.
As for disparaging 'inside information' I accept scoffing but I am honest, and have much more not disclosed info. This material is real, and we know who pulled off the takedown. Not just one party. Foreign and domestic.
The elevators and stairs are both in the central core. How did they not hear such an event? They say the noise came from above.
This is a claim. I would love to see the seismographic data from the source regarding your claim of an energy pulse pre collapse. Thank you!
If this is ionizing radiation creating dust clouds, how does it not relate to people being burned? If it is thermal, how does it not relate to people being burned? How were there no radiation burns, especially considering "the nukes emitted radiation" that "heated [the] metal burned its paint off"?
How did they not hear? It happened BEFORE the people began panic fleeing.
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.htmlhttps://serendipity.li/wot/bollyn2.htm
3. You are confusing ionizing radiation with thermal radiation.
4. As I mentioned, dial-a-nukes are configurable for what radiation is given off. And on the car burning, it is obvious that intervening buildings screened some radiation beaming but some got through in a narrow pattern to the cars.
No radiation burns: again, you do not have a full model or understanding. As I said, energy was emitted in bands that do not affect newspapers (carbon and human tissues) but which is absorbable by metals.
They were in the building preceding, during, and after
Your source correctly indicates that these are surface waves (Rayleigh waves), not waves that travel through the earth (Primary and Secondary seismic waves), as well as characterizing that it was "the interaction between the ground and the building foundation", ie how hard the building was pressing down onto the earth lessened and the ground sprang up. There are no other CD or underground nuclear blasts whose seismic signature was Rayleigh waves only.
I am not confusing anything, I am addressing both. Either way there is an issue with evidence consistency.
Pure assertion about "dial-a-nukes". Show me the wavebands that are absorbed by metal and which do not affect human tissue. Steel's best absorption spectrum at 1040nm is ultraviolet and will most certainly burn and irradiate you.
The detected waves happened after plane crash and BEFORE collapse as a triggering energy source would.
repeating ELI5: ionizing radiation is NOT thermal energy. It is X-rays, basically. Furthermore, your model is flawed. You assume all energy that was emitted was ionizing? A nuke can emit many kinds of radiation across the spectrum, depending on design parameters and adjustable values. A bomb emitting an EMP pulse can couple into metals, i.e. wires and cables, yet not touch human tissue.
UV as best does not preclude absorption of other energy such as X-rays and in particular E/M waves that couple right into metal but their magnetic fields will not affect human tissue. Also we know that tissues are poor at absorbing X-ray energy, obviously medical and dental.
Your argument against evidence consistency is weak given that there are multiple pieces of evidence that are strong. Why don't you consult your rabbi on this.
Your debugging attempt is accepted but I will address each point.
As for disparaging 'inside information' I accept scoffing but I am honest, and have much more not disclosed info. This material is real, and we know who pulled off the takedown. Not just one party. Foreign and domestic.
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html https://serendipity.li/wot/bollyn2.htm 3. You are confusing ionizing radiation with thermal radiation. 4. As I mentioned, dial-a-nukes are configurable for what radiation is given off. And on the car burning, it is obvious that intervening buildings screened some radiation beaming but some got through in a narrow pattern to the cars. No radiation burns: again, you do not have a full model or understanding. As I said, energy was emitted in bands that do not affect newspapers (carbon and human tissues) but which is absorbable by metals.
The detected waves happened after plane crash and BEFORE collapse as a triggering energy source would.
repeating ELI5: ionizing radiation is NOT thermal energy. It is X-rays, basically. Furthermore, your model is flawed. You assume all energy that was emitted was ionizing? A nuke can emit many kinds of radiation across the spectrum, depending on design parameters and adjustable values. A bomb emitting an EMP pulse can couple into metals, i.e. wires and cables, yet not touch human tissue.
UV as best does not preclude absorption of other energy such as X-rays and in particular E/M waves that couple right into metal but their magnetic fields will not affect human tissue. Also we know that tissues are poor at absorbing X-ray energy, obviously medical and dental.
Your argument against evidence consistency is weak given that there are multiple pieces of evidence that are strong. Why don't you consult your rabbi on this.