911 – Fracking – Radioactivity – Earthquakes | Nuclear Demolition | Energy (In)Security


By Enkidu Gilgamesh for Veterans Today


  1. Subsurface nuclear war!
  2. History of nuclear demolition
  3. Connecting with 911

1. Subsurface nuclear war!


The ClimateControl for Fracking Mafia (CCFM) is conducting a nuclear war against the USA and the world. The nuclear bombing occurs subsurface, some kilometers deep, within the rock formations! The deadly effect sometime comes abruptly as an earthquake and tsunami but the long term damage grows slowly as radioactive pollution!

If we only cautiously calculate the amount of 2 million fracking wells, each with about 30 kilotons of nuclear explosives, that means about 60 million kilotons of nuclear bombing of the USA. The radioactive fallout of this subsurface atom bombs partly comes out with fracking gas and water

When they fracture less deep and less tight rock formations, the single bomb may be much smaller than the known 30 kiloton one, but they use many of them and in larger areas, positioned in horizontally drilled tunnels.

The fallout is real, so why should we assume that nuclear blasting is not applied?

If they don’t use nuclear bombs, do we have a clear information about the explosive munition and materials?

Why is that such a secret?

Why not use “mini nukes” for that?

They deliver the biggest blasting effect with the smallest munition size

This video clearly explains why fracking explosives CAN ONLY BE NUCLEAR!


Sometimes, if a corrupt engineering asshole calculates the feasibility, also the big ones can be used. Think about the earthquakes and tsunamis of Haiti, Japan, Turkey, Greenland, Norway, Indian Ocean, New Zealand etc. etc.

Video shows New Zealand’s east coast devastated by 12m megaquake tsunami
06/03/2018, Newshub staff, Scott Palmer

Megathrust quake could bring 12m-high tsunami waves to New Zealand’s east coast video
BRAD FLAHIVE, Last updated 22:07, March 5 201

Following nice animation with a specific gun firing into the rock doesn’t explain all we need to know. This firing is part of the process, but it cannot prepare the rock for sucking up its content. The rock has to be broken by heavier explosions!

Just to show how efficient this perforations work!
I don’t doubt that, but I don’t buy that this is all to do!

Deadly earthquakes and tsunamis have become the daily normal, wherever fracking exploration is conducted!

Fracking Has an Enormous Radioactive Waste Problem—Just Ask Kentucky
Lax federal and state regulations have led to the illegal dumping of dirty drilling fluids
By Lorraine Chow / AlterNet September 2, 2017, 11:30 PM GMT

This produced water contains a cocktail of industry-secret chemicals, heavy metals and naturally occurring toxic or radioactive elements like selenium and radium. To deal with the fluids, energy companies either reuse it, store it in surface ponds, send it to wastewater treatment facilities, or truck it to deep injection wells

But these disposal methods aren’t always foolproof. A leaky pond or an ill-equipped wastewater treatment plant can inadvertently leach contaminants into groundwater or drinking water supplies, meaning public health and the environment could be at risk of exposure. And wastewater injection has been linked to a “induced” earthquakes in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma and Texas”

Fracking can contaminate rivers and lakes with radioactive material, study finds
@montaukian Wednesday 12 July 2017 16:55 BST

Stream sediments were found to be so radioactive they were nearly at the level that would require disposal in a specialist facility in some US statesIan Johnston Environment Correspondent

Stream sediments in Blacklick Creek immediately downstream of centralised waste treatment plant number one were found to contain [radium] levels that were about 200 times greater than activities measured in upstream and background sediments

Elevated concentrations of radium and other alkaline earth metals have now been detected in reservoir sediments about 19km farther downstream of this plant

Despite several other sources of contaminants such as coal bed methane, coal mine drainage, and flue gas desulfurization releases that can impact surface water quality, we document multiple lines of evidence that indicate the legacy of unconventional oil-and-gas wastewater disposal has impacted stream sediments and porewater [groundwater] on a watershed-scale

It is not my intention to connect things which don’t belong together, but when different things have something in common, than the methods must be the same!

We have ..

Every fracking site is a Ground Zero point!

2. History of nuclear demolition

In Soviet Union, nuclear demolitions were used for building artificial lakes, subsurface gas depots, reshaping river beds.

Sure they used also for fracking of oil and gas. Here is an indication.

The Soviets and the USA had an agreement about civil use of nuclear technology up to 150 Kilotons of power

The USA allowed it to be used for demolition of skyscrapers. The history of gas production from deep subsurface begins with the Gasbuggy project to evaluate the feasibility of nuclear demolitions for fracturing gas bearing rock formations.

Just by pressing some chemical water no rock can be broken! The fluid comes after nuclear demolition!

50 years ago, nuclear blasting for gas boomed. Today it’s a bust.
Excerpt from the December 17, 1966, issue of Science News BY EMILY CONOVER 1:12PM, NOVEMBER 25, 2016

NUCLEAR FRACKING In 1967, scientists lowered a 29-kiloton nuclear device deep underground, then detonated it at a depth of 4,240 feet. The explosion was intended to stimulate production of natural gas, as part of Project Gasbuggy

Atom blast for gas

A pair of simultaneous nuclear explosions, one more than 1.6 miles underground and the other 1,000 feet above it, have been proposed as a way to extract huge quantities of natural gas from subterranean rock. Each blast would be … about 2.5 times the size of the bomb used at Hiroshima. By breaking up tight gas-bearing rock formations, a flow of presently inaccessible gas may be made available.… A single-blast experiment, called Project Gasbuggy, is already planned. — Science News, December 17, 1966

Update On December 10, 1967, Project Gasbuggy went ahead, with a 29-kiloton nuclear explosion deep underground in northwestern New Mexico. The blast released natural gas, but the gas was radio­active. The area is still regularly monitored for radioactive contamination. Today, natural gas trapped below Earth’s surface is often extracted via fracking, which breaks up rock using pressurized fluid (SN: 9/8/12, p. 20). Though less extreme, potential links to drinking water contamination and earthquakes have stoked fears about the technique

Project Gasbuggy was an underground nuclear detonation carried out by the United States Atomic Energy Commission on December 10, 1967 in rural northern New Mexico. It was part of Operation Plowshare, a program designed to find peaceful uses for nuclear explosions[1]

Gasbuggy was carried out by the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory and the El Paso Natural Gas Company, with funding from the Atomic Energy Commission. Its purpose was to determine if nuclear explosions could be useful in fracturing rock formations for natural gas extraction[2]The site, lying in the Carson National Forest, is approximately 34 km (21 mi) southwest of Dulce, New Mexico and 87 km (54 mi) east of Farmington, and was chosen because natural gas deposits were known to be held in sandstone beneath Leandro Canyon[3] A 29 kt (120 TJ) device was placed at a depth of 1,288 m (4,227 ft) underground,[4] then the well was backfilled before the device was detonated; a crowd had gathered to watch the detonation from atop a nearby butte

The detonation took place after a couple of delays, the last one caused by a breakdown of the explosive refrigeration system. The detonation produced a rubble chimney that was 24 m (80 ft) wide and 102 m (335 ft) high above the blast center[5]

Following the Project Gasbuggy test, two subsequent nuclear explosion fracturing experiments were conducted in western Colorado in an effort to refine the technique. They were Project Rulison in 1969 and Project Rio Blanco in 1973. In both cases the gas radioactivity was still seen as too high and in the last case the triple-blast rubble chimney structures disappointed the design engineers. Soon after that test the ~ 15-year Project Plowshare program funding dried up.

These early fracturing tests were later superseded by hydraulic fracturing (fracking) technologies”

Project Gasbuggy was the first in a series of Atomic Energy Commission downhole nuclear detonations to release natural gas trapped in shale. This was “fracking” late 1960s style

Scientists lower a 13-foot by 18-inches diameter nuclear warhead into a well in New Mexico. The experimental 29-kiloton Project Gasbuggy device will be detonated at a depth of4,240 feet

The underground detonation was part of a bigger program begun in the late 1950s to explore peaceful uses of nuclear explosions

The Hiroshima bomb was about 15 kilotons

Plowshare Program

The 1967 experimental explosion in New Mexico was part of a wider set of experiments known as Plowshare, a program established by the Atomic Energy Commission in 1957 to explore the constructive use of nuclear explosive devices

“The reasoning was that the relatively inexpensive energy available from nuclear explosions could prove useful for a wide variety of peaceful purposes,” notes a report later prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy. From 1961 to 1973, researchers carried out dozens of separate experiments under the Plowshare program – setting off 29 nuclear detonations

Most of the experiments focused on creating craters and canals. Among other goals, it was hoped the Panama Canal could be inexpensively widened. “In the end, although less dramatic than nuclear excavation, the most promising use for nuclear explosions proved to be for stimulation of natural gas production,” explains the September 2011 government report

In 1969, Project Rulison – at a site near Rulison, Colorado – detonated a 43-kiloton nuclear device almost 8,500 feet underground to produce commercially viable amounts of natural gas

The May 1973 Rio Blanco test consisted of the nearly simultaneous detonation of three 33-kiloton devices in a single well, according to the Office of Environmental Management. The explosions occurred at depths of 5,838, 6,230, and 6,689 feet below ground level. It would prove to be the last experiment of the Plowshare program

Although a 50-kiloton nuclear explosion to fracture deep oil shale deposits – Project Bronco – was proposed, it never took place. Growing knowledge (and concern) about radioactivity ended these tests for the peaceful use of nuclear explosions. The Plowshare program was canceled in 1975″

The 2011 U.S. Department of Energy report concludes:

By 1974, approximately 82 million dollars had been invested in the nuclear gas stimulation technology program (i.e., nuclear tests Gasbuggy, Rulison, and Rio Blanco). It was estimated that even after 25 years of gas production of all the natural gas deemed recoverable, that only 15 to 40 percent of the investment could be recovered. At the same time, alternative, non-nuclear technologies were being developed, such as hydrofracturing. Consequently, under the pressure of economic and environmental concerns, the Plowshare Program was discontinued at the end of FY 1975

Project Gasbuggy

Government scientists believed a nuclear device would provide “a bigger bang for the buck than nitroglycerin” for fracturing dense shales and releasing natural gas. Los Alamos Lab photo

A September 1967 Popular Mechanics article had described how nuclear explosives could improve previous fracturing technologies, including gunpowder, dynamite, TNT – and fractures “made by forcing down liquids at high pressure

An illustration from Popular Mechanics shows how a nuclear explosive would improve earlier technologies by creating bigger fractures and a “huge cavity that will serve as a reservoir for the natural gas

“Geologists had discovered years before that setting off explosives at the bottom of a well would shatter the surrounding rock and could stimulate the flow of oil and gas,” Nelson explains

“It was believed a nuclear device would simply provide a bigger bang for the buck than nitroglycerine, up to 3,500 quarts of which would be used in a single shot,” Nelson notes

The 1967 nuclear detonation produced 295 million cubic feet of natural gas – and Tritium radiation contamination

“Today, all that remains at the site is a plaque warning against excavation and perhaps a trace of tritium in your milk,” Nelson adds in his 1999 article

The Department of Energy, which had hoped for much higher production, determined that Tritium radiation contaminated the gas. It flared – burned off – the gas during production tests that lasted until 1973

Tritium is a naturally occurring radioactive form of hydrogen. A 2012 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission report noted, “Tritium emits a weak form of radiation, a low-energy beta particle similar to an electron. The tritium radiation does not travel very far in air and cannot penetrate the skin.”

According to Nelson, radioactive contamination from the flaring “was miniscule compared to the fallout produced by atmospheric weapons tests in the early 1960s.”

From the well site, Holcomb called the test a success. “The well produced more gas in the year after the shot than it had in all of the seven years prior,” he told Nelson

Today, hydraulic fracturing – pumping a mixture of fluid and sand down a well at extremely high pressure – stimulates production of natural gas wells. Read more in Shooters – A “Fracking” History

Parker Drilling Rig No. 114

In 1969, Parker Drilling Company signed a contract with the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission to drill a series of holes up to 120 inches in diameter and 6,500 feet in depth in Alaska and Nevada for additional nuclear bomb tests. Parker Drilling’s Rig No. 114 was one of three special rigs built to drill the wells.

Founded in Tulsa in 1934 by Gifford C. Parker, by the 1960s Parker Drilling had set numerous world records for deep and extended-reach drilling. According to the Baker Library at the Harvard Business School, the company “created its own niche by developing new deep-drilling technology that has since become the industry standard.”

3. Connecting with 911

Nuclear Demolition
Nuclear demolition of tall buildings

Demolition of very tall buildings is more problematical. The “crushed zone” of a 150Kt nuclear detonation will only extend to a height of about 300 meters. In a taller building, this will result in a relatively undamaged and heavy top section, with a narrow “damaged zone” beneath it. These zones will produce debris – ranging in size from the millimeter/centimeter scale to relatively big sections all perched on top of a “crushed zone” extending down to ground level. The net result of such a nuclear demolition project should be an undamaged building top section that will lose its support base and fall downwards through the pulverized structure, scattering some debris and the masses of fine dust outward until it reaches the ground

It is clearly theoretically possible to completely pulverize structures taller than 300 meters but it would require a nuclear charge greater than 150Kt in TNT yield, which, as mentioned above, is not allowed under the terms of the “Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976”. [1]

Dimitri Khalezov Discusses NUCLEAR 9/11: Twin Tower Controlled Demolition Explained
Reality is Stranger Than Fiction: Dimitri Khalezov discusses 9/11 with George Mapp in Bangkok
by George Mapp on February 5th, 2011

To get an additional confirmation you can look at a seditious diagram of the ‘70s that was used in a Wikipedia article dealing with nuclear tests:

The diagram has its own web address:

Just look at Figure (2) – an underground nuclear explosion as depicted on that diagram. And pay particular attention to a skyscraper for some truly strange reason shown right above the spot of the underground nuclear explosion. The problem is that in the ‘70s (this diagram is from the ‘70s) the nuclear demolition of skyscrapers was a well-known fact, so the concept of it managed to find its way even to such diagrams… Hope I have answered your question?

Because the cavities were filled with extremely hot radioactive materials in liquid state and the firefighters were ordered to poor water into the WTC debris (and through them – into the cavities underground)

I hope it is evident that this rock was molten!!!

Listen and learn it from the expert!

Peaceful nuclear explosions (PNEs) are nuclear explosions conducted for non-military purposes, such as activities related to economic development including the creation of canals. During the 1960s and 1970s, both the United States and the Soviet Union conducted a number of PNEs

In the PNE Treaty, the signatories agreed: not to carry out any individual nuclear explosions having a yield exceeding 150 kilotons; not to carry out any group explosion (consisting of a number of individual explosions) having an aggregate yield exceeding 1,500 kilotons; and not to carry out any group explosion having an aggregate yield exceeding 150 kilotons unless the individual explosions in the group could be identified and measured by agreed verification procedures. The parties also reaffirmed their obligations to comply fully with the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963

The Day America Was Punked



  1. Please end Your stream of WR and Orgon comments. This is not an article about Orgonism. You told enough about that.
    Write an article about Your topic and discuss it there.
    And don’t make any senseless claims about me “admiring anything”. The advancement of nuclear technology and weather management for geophysical warfare is evident. I am telling You what everyone can prove and what is deadly documented into the history by the USA atom bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki, plus all the nuclear detonations in the Pacific, and the tests in Soviet Union and USA.
    My coming article “DISTRACTION” is less about the WR, but the current fraud build on his name. I don’t care much about WR and could totally ignore him, if his name and some of his ideas would not be abused to distract from ongoing climate control.

  2. Enkidu: I am myself not quite sure that everyone would agree with the statement underneath the photo of the geological structure of the “ground zero” rocks, where it says : “ it is evident that this rock was molten”.
    What the photo shows is a layered structure of alternating whitish and greyish layers. From what I have seen in books about geology, layers are mostly interpreted as sediments, that originally had a horizontal orientation, forming a flat layered crust. Then, as time passes, the horizontal layers are subjected to mechanical stresses, and as a result become bent, flipped and cracked. Under stress wavy or sinusoidal deformations may result:
    Wobbles, little hills, valleys and depressions. Subsequent wear and tear, due to flowing water and winds may then result in the layers becoming visible, often as lines, more or less bent, and also as closed curves of approximate elliptic shape. And I think it might very well be something like that, that the photo shows.

  3. By the way, other people than WR were well aware of the impact of electromagnetic waves since the end of 19th century and the beginning of 20th century. They were using various waves for treating diseases. Here is a collection about that.


    The military was using climate and weather engineering as weapon since the 1920s, 1930 which become ripe enough to start the global climate control project in 1960.

    The scientists and technicians researching for the use of atom as WMD in Germany, Soviet Union and particularly in the USA with their Manhattan project were far ahead of anything people like WR could ever imagine. They were counting neutrons, protons, electrons and alpha, beta, delta radiation. They could calculate precisely the energy input and output.

    During all that developments and practical results, Mr. WR was still spinning around with his speculations and was using people as guinea pigs for something he didn’t really understand. Compared to all these research and the practical use of energy, his activities were not a poop on a mountain. In addition to that he was conducting dangerous and criminal tests.

  4. Please stop Your preaching about WR. Don’t expect to speculated what WR speculated about. You said enough about WR.
    So don’t talk to me with names of substitute prophets like WR, but talk on knowledge You have.
    What do You know how immune system works, how fauna and flora reacts under higher radioactivity.
    But consider that this is not an article about the effects of radioactivity on life. That may be discussed deeply somewhere else.
    If You are interested in life studies, please look at the flourishing fauna and flora in Chernobyl and around it.
    The immune system of all creatures reacts to higher radioactivity and compensates its destroying effects partly.
    One reaction is higher life frequency. More are born and more die but the balance is sustained.

  5. Sorry, I read the article about “ORANUR” and must admit, what I already said in my article about DISTRACTION, WR was more speculating then explaining anything. His speculations couldn’t be considered as a theory.
    He did not understand yet the impact of radioactivity and had not the means to research it deep enough and all his resources were robbed by the US military and secret services. So, please don’t come again around the corner with WR.
    You will understand why I consider all about him as distracting, when You read what his fake followers do with vinegar and copper tubes to make chemtrails “disappear”! Sad to say, but WR is not helpful, except giving false hope.

    The hope in my articles exists, because I am sure there is a way to come out of the current misery by clear and complete knowledge. I am explaining all aspects of climate control based on physics, meteorology, climatology, chemistry, biology, psychology. thermodynamics etc. No fake theories, no fake hope, no fake explanations and no fake prophets are required. If there is a mistake in the delivered knowledge, everyone may correct it. I will apologize. Everything is open and clear. The only thing we have to do is tear down the veil of distraction.

  6. My statements about Wilhelm Reich will be available in the coming article about “DISTRACTION”.
    Please don’t comment too much of Orgonism into my articles. It is more disturbing and distracting than explaining anything.
    Anything about Reichs work can be ignored for the explanations in my other articles.

  7. Use of denial as psychological defense mechanism…faltering.

    Just a few weeks ago I was able to frolic in denial about Chemtrails and nuclear controlled demolitions.

    Sweet, sweet, warm, comfortable, sweet denial.

    Thanks for taking that away from me, what do I owe you?

    I have a favorite pillow I sleep with, why not steal that away too? hehehe…

    Are there any videos of any other nuclear demolitions to compare the WTC Towers?

    I could swear that in some of the videos you can see a few sequenced explosions, especially in building 7. Is that wrong?

    Could they use conventional charges to weaken the structure before the single nuke charge? It could be a mix of both, couldn’t it?

    Great articles by the Author. All of them.

    • Sure they have cut some important points with thermite, which resulted in the fluid iron dripping down, this is clearly visible before shaking and downfall.

      And they have broke some core steel beams by huge conventional explosion, also this is reported by many witnesses.
      And not to ignore the “B-Thing” by the Gelatine team of Israeli “art students” where the room of their wooden balcony was filled with fuse cartons. The “gelatine” notion is a hint on military thermite. The”B” stands for bombing. They were jeering at the American people. They killed the people for “higher rewards”. Their balcony was at 300 meters, where the crushed zone of the nuclear fracturing ends. It seems that the upper part had to be separated with thermite cuts to prevent its bending to any side.

      So all required elements of demolition plus the nuclear explosion under the buildings were combined.
      I don’t understand why some people are fixed to have only one method. Even for conventional demolitions many methods are combined. What should be excluded, because it serves only for distraction is the use of “scalar waves”. It distracts from the underground to the space! 🙂 Far away from the crime scene. This is a spatial distraction method. Please read my article about distraction to understand more. It is not yet published here.

      No steal beam cab be torn into dust by any kind of radiation waves. Very high radiation like laser may be used to cut metal, but not to break it into dust.

    • Endiku, there was explosion, I saw that on one video. But I think it was prior to that steel melt evidence. Explosion causes enormous accelerations which leads to structural planar wave, a wave with high and low “pressures” moving from bottom to the top. Steel can deal well with those, but concrete instead very badly. Wave weakens on it’s way upward, because pulverizing concrete consumes energy.

      I think the demolition sequence was, first the explosion beneath the building to get rid of concrete. Then cutting the core steal beams with thermite. And then the whole weight of the building was on surrounding stainless steel beams. A tiny explosion may cause them buckling under such press. That was based on the assumption that those beams exterior of the building can carry the whole weight.

  8. @kaho
    This is not a “hypothesis” but evident and proved by ongoing nuclear fracking since the beginning of underground explosions.
    Every earthquakes shakes and breaks and releases some components, gaseous or fluid components of the mantle and crust. The reason of earthquake may be natural or artificial by nuclear bombing. You can see, smell measure that. Part of the radioactive radiation reaches the surface, irrelevant of depth of the explosion.

    • Enkidu: Yea, I wrote “hypothesis” in connection with Thomas Gold’s ideas about “The Deep-Earth-Gas Hypothesis”, which happens to be the title of his June-1980 article in Scientific American. I do have that issue lying around somewhere. But it’s rather long ago, and so I was not able to find it. But I recall being very fascinated by these ideas back then.
      At the time I also took part in an excursion to a big oil company’s geophysics lab. On that occasion I had the chance to talk to a visiting Professor who had given a lecture, and who happened to be one of the really big shot high energy physicists, but who was now working for the petroleum industry. I remember suggesting to him that nuclear energy might be used to extract the really deep petroleum reservoirs. If I recall correctly, he then gave me a really strange look, as if I’d fallen from the Moon. Of course I realized that I was being very politically incorrect. And of course my interpretation of his reaction was very subjective. His answer, however, was only this “A bomb, you mean?”. That’s all.

  9. Great article, thanks.
    It has been reported that — “on December 10, 1967 the U.S. exploded a nuclear device a mile and a half underground, about 22 miles southwest of Dulce, New Mexico…..it was called Project Gasbuggy and was explained by the U.S. Government as an experiment that would help ease the flow of natural gas trapped under hard, tuffa rocks in the entire region……it was an explosion of 30 megaton bomb, which caused a 5.10 magnitude earthquake in the area, extending all the way to Farmington”.
    This would lead to the military conducting test on cattle to determine
    the extent of contamination caused by the test and would fuel the “alien cattle mutilations” theory. But it was the DOE/DOD, not space aliens.

  10. Dear commentators and other readers,

    except from discussing the details of fracking, please consider that this article is about the method of subsurface explosions in general and the connection to the demolition of 3 WTC skyscrapers in September 11. 2001.

    Whatever You may assume about the extend of atom explosions for crushing and damaging the rock formations, please think abut the crushing and damaging impact, if the bomb is exploded under a tall building. The implementation and the way of crushing is easily observable by the huge amount of documentations about 9/11.

    You can see how the crushed material, steel or other hard components is dissolving into fine dust, before reaching the ground. You can also observe that the upper parts of WTC1 & WTC2 are remaining un-crushed. On the other hand the crushing peak goes above the top WTC7, therefore all building falls into dust.

    Seeing and realizing this, You may conclude that nothing else could bring these buildings down, no regular bombs or thermite alone, no airplanes, no heat, no pancake.

    • How about ultrasound? It is a fact that strong ultrasound of the right frequency can break molecular bonds.
      Drilling, sawing and filing are examples of mechanical methods that break molecular bonds. These operations produce chips of millimeter and sub-millimeter size. To produce finer fragments, crushing and grinding is the way to go. But that works best on metallic oxides. Any way, the basic idea is that in order to grind a given material object to fine dust, a lot of mechanical work is needed.
      Another example is a bullet shot into a brick wall. It penetrates to a certain depth – the stopping distance, and a cylindrical hole has been created, whose original material has been crushed into dust. The high speed bullet’s kinetic energy has then been transformed into mechanical work, the quantity of work (Joules) needed to make the crushed part of the brick into dust.
      I wonder if it wasn’t Judy Wood who invented the word “dustify” for making something into dust. Recently I saw a note saying that Judy Wood’s book had been outlawed.

  11. Since oil and gas are abiotically produced from the earth, and they come up to the surface naturally, anywhere there are natural cracks in the earth, all they have to do is drill down, in those areas. And old fields that go dry, WILL refill on their own from below. But I guess they are too greedy, huh? Short-term profits must be made, even if it destroys the oil fields long-term, and even if it kills everyone?

    • The oil they drill for is hidden and closed as small droplets within the rock formations. You could wait millions of years for that to come out naturally and most of it would not accumulate for production but just evaporate without any industrial use.
      The idea is fracking is to smash the rock formation, that these droplets may escape to drilled well or have to be pressed out with high pressure water.
      So even if oil and gas may be produced in the Earth mantle all the time, You don’t get it for free and without huge technical efforts. Smashing the rock with nuclear bombs is the most efficient method and enables to get oil and gas also out of tight rock. This type of gas is named “tight gas”.
      But for pressing the this treasure out, huge amounts of water is required. This water is delivered to the area of exploration by methods of climate engineering.

    • Yes, water injection into the oil wells is a well known trick in the petroleum industry. But I don’t know if the oil forms drops while it is still inside the rocks. But I imagine it is the capillary effect that causes the oil not to want to leave the rock formations so easily. That must also be the reason why so-called “surfactants” are added to the injected water. The surfactant will then change the various surface tensions, which makes it easier for the oil “to let go” of the rocky medium in which keeps it trapped there. I believe sea water is often used for this. Any way, you can probably easily look it up. My knowledge is mainly from various lectures I have attended over the years – listening to the experts, but not recalling too many details. Any way, it is an experimental process, where new technologies and theories are being tried out all the time.

    • There is also something called “Darcy’s law” that is important in petroleum engineering. It tells you how much fluid can flow through a porous medium, under the influence of a given pressure gradient. The quantity Q turns out to be proportional to the porosity κ of the medium and inversely proportional to the viscosity μ of the fluid. To get the oil out of the rock, one therefore needs to reduce its viscosity, and at the same time increase the rock’s porosity. The first thing may be achieved by injection of water, and the second thing by crushing the rock by means of mechanical force, e.g. explosions.

    • Most people really won’t believe that America is nothing more than one big resource extraction operation. The destruction of the environment and poisoning of the population is part of the plan. Eventually the U.S. will be one continuous wasteland of death and no one will be able to live here.
      This has been the plan for more than a hundred years.
      The U.S.A. will cease to exist and it’s population ‘genocided’.
      It’s not too late to stop it, but people are just brainwashed and controlled.
      As long as CNN and Fox say that everything will be alright, people will continue to deny the obvious.

    • Harry: You are right. In Darcy’s law Q = κ A ( p2 – p1 )/(μL) the constant κ (kappa) is the permeability of the medium, and not the porosity, as I wrote. Porosity can be just lots of holes like a Swiss cheese, whereas permeability is due to cracks and tunnel-like structures that let fluids pass through.

  12. Whilst it MAY be true, that on some occassions, nuke weapons have been used experimentaly in underground explosions for one purpose or another, I do not buy the claim that they are being used willy nilly for fracking. In fact the article it’self clearly states that in one case the gas derived from such an event was contaminated with radiation, thus unable to be used, so what’s the point of it all ?
    There’s also another factor which has not been considered anywhere in this article. It is FACT, that bores drilled for water sources in Australia are producing water contaminated with radioactive materials despite no nuclear weapons ever having been used. Our CSIRO claims there is natural occurrences of uranium in our geological make up and any water passing through such strata will become contaminated. Our indigenous peoples have been drinking this water now for many generations, whilst our Government simply ignores the dangers posed by consuming such water.

    • That is true. After all, the nuclear fuel (for the reactors) is usually obtained by mining. The radioactive elements are mostly heavy (high atomic number), and within the deep high temperature inner regions of the Earth, where molten stone predominates, the heavier metallic elements, such as Uranium, would tend to sink to deeper levels – by virtue of the Archimedean Principle.
      It is also known that the radioactive decay of unstable nuclear isotopes generates the heat that has kept the Inner Earth in a molten state for many billions of years.

    • @kaho, Your knowledge about the reason of inner heat is not complete, but I don’t want to delve into this topic here. Just let me say that it is mainly the the pressure by the critical material mass which ignites the core of a planetary object!

      @eddy, when You follow the track of sources and particularly look at the documentary film about how fracking began, You will learn, that gas from tight rock can only be explored by nuclear explosions.

      The “fine art of fracking” is to place the explosion in a way that the radioactive contamination can be reduced to minimum. The used power is not the heat but the shaking which crushes and breaks the rock. By avoiding to press the water directly into the ground zero of each explosion, less radioactive material is pressed out. So the method have been improved. For the Gasbuggy project the water was directly pressed into to the bore well. Therefore the contamination was higher.

      Getting aware of the extend of fracking all over the globe, exploring huge amount of tight gas, You should be assured that if the only way of crushing is by atom bombs, than it is used.

      That clearly explains also the huge earthquakes, where exploration of gas and oil begins after the catastrophe, e.g. in Haiti!

      1. Atom explosions & Eathquakes
      2. Boring into the crushed and damaged rock formation above the ground zero.
      3. Shooting holes into the crushed rock and pressing water to drive out the droplets of oil and gas.

      The fracking industry presents only point 3!

  13. Absolutely stunning! Thanks for teaching us so much!
    I have the impression that freaking f#cking fracking makes no sense from the purely financial aspect knowing that any fuel flow from fracking rapidly declines, and even more catastrophic if you include all the “collaterals”: water & soil contamination, earthquakes, possible demands, expenses of zioagencies for the coverup, bribes, high salaries of corrupt scientists, managers, engineers & technicians to shut up, etc.

    So the endgame is…?
    Eradication of superior life from big portions of the planet? Genocide? Genetic degradation? More negative energy to harvest by the ethereal parasites? Utter destruction of targeted countries?…?

    • Fracking remains very profitable, as long as the profiteers don’t need to care for the “collateral” damage by radioactive contamination, earthquakes, sunlight deficiency, oxygen deficiency and all health problems.
      Currently all efforts are invested in distraction and dumbification of the masses. That costs some 100 millions and most of that is paid by the victims, who finance the corrupt and idiotic politicians and scientist and the so called NGOs. The NGOs are non-governmental, because they directly serve the globalist perverts.

      Consider this from another point! If the oil and gas industry can only exist by further expansion of NUCLEAR FRACKING and if fracking can only be done by global water cycle management, than climate control is the only choice for the survival of the oil and gas industry and also the Petrodollar empire.

      The eradication comes slowly and the control and profits grow during that time. It is inevitable! Therefore the propaganda talks about “biodiversity” and “adaptation”.

    • Can humans adapt to an atmosphere with less Oxygen?
      Can corals, shells, fish, crab, marine mammals adapt to a ocean water with less Oxygen?
      Can algae and other plants get adapted to a world with less sunlight?

      No, so the only consequence is “EXTINCTION” of these non-adaptable “parasites”! You need to think like the psychopaths, to understand their apologies and intentions.

      The problem is not that the perverts and psychopaths are dangerous criminals, our problem is the dumbness of the

    • I guess humans won’t stay around for ever. In the distant future, millions of years from now, there will be rock formations in which geologists visiting the Earth, will find our laptops in fossil form: Mountain upon mountain made up of fossilized laptops and other gadgets that humans once used in enormous quantities.

      BTW Are you familiar with Thomas Gold’s hypothesis, published in Scientific American in 1980?
      “There is much evidence indicating that earthquakes release gases from deep in the earth’s mantle. Such gases may include methane of nonbiological origin, which could be a vast resource of fuel.”