9/11 Scholars Forum

Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths

Nuclear Atmospheric Physicist Dr. Thomas Cahill On 911

University of California at Davis

Aerosol Analysis

The UC Davis DELTA Group (Detection and Evaluation of Long-range Transport of Aerosols) is a collaborative association of aerosol scientists at several universities and national laboratories in the United States. The DELTA Group has measured aerosols’ emissions from the 1991 Gulf War oil fires, volcanic eruptions, global dust storms and the Asian smogs.

The head of the DELTA Group is Professor Thomas Cahill, who due to his background in nuclear physics is an international expert in atmospheric sciences and the properties of aerosols.

From October 2nd, 2001 until mid-December 2001, a volunteer research team from the DELTA Group monitored the levels of atmospheric particles and aerosols in the atmosphere of New York, following the collapse of the World Trade Center.

An automated particle collection system was set up on the roof of 201 Varick Street, one mile north-northeast of the World Trade Center site. On February 11th, 2002, Professor Cahill gave a press conference to describe some of his findings. He made the following comments, quoted here from the UC Davis press release:

“The air from Ground Zero was laden with extremely high amounts of very small particles, probably associated with high temperatures in the underground debris pile. Normally, in New York City and in most of the world, situations like this just don’t exist.”

Is this a subtle hint by a man who can't speak his mind freely that a nuclear reaction occurred?

He further stated:

“Even on the worst air days in Beijing, downwind from coal-fired power plants, or the Kuwait oil fires, we did not see these levels of very fine particulates.”

The amounts of very fine particles, particularly very fine silicon, decreased sharply during the month of October.

“The US Davis DELTA Group’s ability to measure and analyze particle size, composition and time continuously, day and night, is unequalled. There were numerous events when bursts of wind lasting 6 to 8 hours carried unprecedented amounts of very fine particles to the sampling site. In the largest spike, the DELTA Group analysis found 58 micrograms per cubic meter of very fine particles in one 45-minute period – “an extremely high peak” Cahill said.


Many different metals were found in the samples of very fine particles, and some were found at the highest levels ever recorded in air in the United States.

However, there are few established safety guidelines for airborne metals. One metal for which there is a guideline, lead, was present at low levels in fine and very fine particles.

Some of the metals for which there are no guidelines that were present in very fine particles in relatively high concentrations were Iron, Titanium (some associated with powdered concrete), Vanadium, Nickel (often associated with fuel-oil combustion), Copper and Zinc. Mercury was seen occasionally in fine particles but at low concentrations. Many of those metals are widely used in building construction, wiring and plumbing. Some are common in computers. The metal of the coarse particles is still being analyzed.

What are these small very fine particles that Cahill was making such a point about? How could a metal aerosol be produced? Very high temperatures would be required indeed.

Very small particles are particularly dangerous since they can bypass the bodies natural defence mechanisms and if breathed in, enter directly into the bloodstream. They can also pass through HEPA filters, the finest grade of gas mask available and they can even enter the body through the skin. They are a serious hazard.

Anything with a diameter of less then 2.5 millionths of a meter is to be considered dangerous for these reasons.
The press release further states:

“There are no established safe limits for inhaled very fine particles. The closest reference is the US EPA “PM2.5” standard, which limits the allowable mass of airborne particles 2.5 micrometers to (0) Zero micrometers. That standard is based on health studies of typical air samples, in which very fine particles are a small fraction of the total mass. In contrast, in the World Trade Center dust samples analyzed at UC Davis, the very fine particles are a large fraction of the total mass.”

So we can understand that Professor Cahill would want to draw attention to the fine particulates for health and safety reasons. But is there more to it?

Prof. Cahill also explained the meaning of the generation of the particles to reporters more clearly:

“The presence of coarse particles immediately after days of rain indicated that they were being continually re-generated from a dry, hot source, not re-suspended from roadways and other surfaces.”

Cahills words. Continually Regenerated.

Is this another subtle hint by a man who can't speak his mind freely that a nuclear reaction occurred?

“The very fine particles were high in a number of species generally associated with combustion of fuel oil – such as Sulfur, Vanadium and Nickel, and incineration of plastics and other organic matter.”

“There were also an unusual, very fine, silicon-containing aerosol. This latter type of aerosol can be produced only by very high temperatures, including vaporisation of soil and glass.”

It doesn't take a rocket scientist, or a nuclear physicist to understand that in NYC on 911 fission occurred. I don't know what type of device(s) were used but I remain steadfast in my assertion that fission occurred in NYC on 911.

Views: 205


You need to be a member of 9/11 Scholars Forum to add comments!

Join 9/11 Scholars Forum

Comment by Jeff on February 21, 2012 at 4:01am
Comment by Jeff on February 21, 2012 at 3:37am

UC Davis Delta Group Ground Zero data: http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm

Comment by Jeff on February 21, 2012 at 3:26am

Open source link to USGS data: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/

Comment by Jeff on February 21, 2012 at 3:21am

Pages 19-42 provide the nuclear evidence Chuck.

Harrit posits a minimum of 29,000 tons of energetic compounds in the dust. The DOT has established tractor trailer vehicle limits: 8.5 feet (2.6 m) wide, 13.5 feet (4.1 m) in height, and 80,000 pounds (36,000 kg) gross weight. The weight limit is further restricted with a limit of 34,000 pounds (15,000 kg) per tandem axle and 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) per single axle.

It would require 725 tractor trailer loads. 29,000 one ton boxes would have had to have been off-loaded, taken to a service elevator and brought into the building. This is, of course, preposterous.

Moving 100 one ton boxes a day, that's 12 an hour, would require 290 days. Working 24 hours a day, around the clock, it still would have required almost 100 days working 24/7. Needless to say, this just didn't happen.

Comment by Chuck Boldwyn on February 21, 2012 at 2:29am
Thanks for the resource downloads to my iPad. I will review the 3 parts to see if I can find what I am looking for & for future reference.
I hope they reported everything & did not hold back on the info I most need.
You suspect the report is holding back the direct reporting of nuclear evidence.
The only other alternative is to analyze a dust sample myself for evidence of Al2O3.
Nuclear evidence would be great to find outnabout, also...
Comment by Jeff on February 21, 2012 at 2:09am

Thank you for responding Chuck. My book 'Dust' contains some of the data you're looking for and within the book are currently active links to the comprehensive USGS data. My books on 911, all of them, are free downloads. Dust contains unarguable data from pages 19-42. Beyond page 42 is speculation based on good data. There was silicon in the dust. I don't remember if it was classified as a Trace or Major element or what the PPMs ot % were across the 35 sample locations. Because the book has numerous high quality images and is uncompressed it required formatting in 3 parts.

An examination of 12 sample locations of dust from the WTC. The samples, provided by the USGS are analyzed using chemistry, mathematics and physics.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Comment by Chuck Boldwyn on February 21, 2012 at 12:13am
Where can I find the Official Analytical Reports on all the materials studied & analyzed, especially the white fumes above Ground Zero.
I am looking for traces of Al2O3, a major reaction product of the Thermate Incendiary Chemical Reaction.
The Silicon residue found may have come from the Silicon base or substrate that the Thermate chemicals were uniformly placed upon. Silicon should have been found, supporting the use of the Thermate found and analyzed by Prof. Neils Haritt & co-authors, to assist in bringing down the Towers, Thermodynamically.
Was Aluminum Oxide found anywhere, that if found would give conclusive proof for Thermate use on the WTC Complex?

© 2014   Created by James H. Fetzer.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service