Dr. Judy Wood ~ Evidence of Breakthrough Energy on 9/11

[Snarky]

Would you say the same thing about all other groups that have used terror, supposedly in the fight for some cause? Was the IRA just using Irish independence/unification as a facade to justify their campaign of violence, for example?

Basically, just as with Dr. Wood, I don't think there's any good basis for dismissing the leaders' stated reasons and declaring them opportunistic frauds. While I'm sure there's some cynicism in every movement of any significant, and while some ideological groups have been known to deteriorate into mere gangsters or marauders, I think we're better off assuming that they are basically sincere in their motivations, twisted as they may be, unless proven otherwise.

[Andail]

All-in-all I'm enjoying this thread!  It's great entertainment.  It serves to prove a theory of mine (and I'm sure it's not just mine) that internet debates/arguments are completely pointless.

I don't think this is a particularly good position to take. People here are obviously rather invested in the subject at hand, so claiming you're just here to be amused strikes me as slightly condescending.

Also, I don't know why some people keep saying that internet debates are pointless. I don't think they're very different to real life debates, only that they're usually much better since people can provide links and sources, and also you can't backtrack or lie about what you've said earlier. If we should rate discussion contexts, I would say that discussing dr Wood during a late night pub crawl after some 5-6 beers would be much worse for... being the opposite to the things I just wrote.

A debate isn't pointless just because everybody doesn't suddenly end up agreeing - that would be beyond fruitful, that would be sheer magic. I for one find this debate rather rewarding because it's given me lots of new arguments against dr. Wood, formulated by people with special knowledge and insight that I didn't personally possess.

Now, let's reserve this thread for those who wish to debate the subject further. 

[Darth Mandarb]

I don't think this is a particularly good position to take. People here are obviously rather invested in the subject at hand, so claiming you're just here to be amused strikes me as slightly condescending.

I find those ripping into Monkey/Dr. Wood far more condescending than my simple comment.  It's all interpretation I guess.  I am enjoying this pointless debate.  I consider it, just my opinion here, to be pointless.  That doesn't mean I won't take part, just that I don't expect any real resolution other than it turning ugly and heated eventually.   I don't think I said, or implied, that I was only here to be amused?  I guess I could see how it could be misinterpreted as such though.  **shrugs**

Carry on.

[NickyNyce]

I think this is all mainly pointed at Dr. Wood and not monkey. There's no reason to be angry or mad at monkey for having an opinion, but Dr. Wood is another story. I think monkey has done an OK job at defending her theory considering how crazy I think it is.

So if the planes were holograms, how is it that the shadow of the plane was caught on video from street level in some of the videos. And if the explosions were really bombs, how did they make a plane shaped hole in the building in precisely the same place the planes hit. I'm not aware of bombs that make plane shaped holes in buildings, so I would say that the planes striking the buildings are way more believable. There were plane parts found all over the place, not all of the plane, which is of course not expected to be found, but some of it.

If you look at all the video of the towers collapsing, the inner core that is left standing does not disappear, it falls down seconds later which is very easy to see. Just because smoke or dust is seen coming off of it does not mean is turns to dust. Try looking at all the videos and not just one bad angle. The building does not collapse at free fall speed. Some of the outer shell of the building falls at free fall speed and clearly out races the rest of the building which is hidden in smoke from the fire and dust from the collapse

So what if they ambushed her and did it illegally. If that's what it took to ask her questions that she didn't want to answer, it doesn't change the fact that she can't have a conversation with him. She only wants to talk about things that are questionable, and is clearly not able to answer anything else in the video I posted. So what do people have to say about it...she's tired and wasn't prepared. Do you need to be prepared to talk about science if you're a scientist?

There are tapes of phone calls from the plane, and a voice recording from the cockpit of the plane that was hijacked, or are all these fake too?

Everything that happened on that day you're saying is fake...except of course for what Dr. Woods says. The whole entire world and all the videos, witnesses and family are wrong, but Dr. Woods is correct. The energy beam weapon was kind of fun, but the fake plane argument has turned this upside down. This is where what little argument she has falls apart.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lKYW89xEYg0

[Radiant]

It is worth noting that the highly scientific documentary known as "age of ultron" shows an uncontrolled demolition that doesn't involve the building toppling over onto the next building like a set of dominoes...

[Crimson Wizard]

While I am at it, I'll just add couple of more notes:

1. Hurricane Erin. Check the Wikipedia entry for it's movements (i.e. closest to NY and most intense on 9/11). It received virtually no media attention.

I already noted before (you seem to ignored what I said though), that there are examples of media coverage listed on Judy Wood's own website: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/CNN_Erin.html.
Of course, the hurricane that never hit NY would receive less attention than terroristic attack on city in the later days.

You also seem to ignore the reply of NY citizen, telling you that this hurrican behavior was not unusual:

I live in New York, and anyone else that lives here knows that tons of these hurricanes go out to sea exactly like this one did. Only a rare handful ever hit NY. I would love to see the data on how many go out to sea. I've lived here for 40 years and I can count on one hand how many have hit NY. All of the rest turn exactly like that one did. If there was ever a threat, we would have been warned.

Also, I asked you, what is your vision on motives, reasons of those who did not cover this hurricane:
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=51989.msg636511229#msg636511229
Yet, you never gave answer. This still bothers me.

- unusually quiet collapse (e.g. "If a building was hitting the ground hard, why don't I remember the sound of it?" - EMT Michael Ober, p10)

This is a phrase out of context. If you read the full paragraph, you would see that the man describes how they ran away from falling building:

Just as we got to the Chiefs, the rumbling started again, and it was just like a sound I'll never forget. Days afterwards I heard a rumbling noise and I was hiding. You knew what was happening, we turned around and the second building was coming down. So we took off running again <...>

So he did hear it crumbling.
He also describes his state of a shock and "devastation":

Then I just, I don't even know... time was just a blur, I don't remember what time it was. <...>
I remember getting down there, that's about it. I don't remember exactly what we did once
we got down there. It was weird, it was probably the most devastating thing I've ever
seen in my life, and so much of it I can't remember.<...>
etc

So, he was obviously scared and in shock from what was happening. What he meant is not that there was no sound, what he sais is that he has lost many memories of the event. Maybe he was also still confused about whole thing when giving this interview (it was one month later).

Anyway, here's a video of one of the tower's collapsing with sound:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qiye0R-65RE
You may hear a rumbling when it falls.

Here I found a video of building demolition with sound:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMpJQgbKsms
There is a loud sound when the demolition starts (explosion, and cracking), but it turns to relatively softer rumbling noise. This rambling gets more quiet as the building collapses.

To me these cases sound similar.

E: tad corrected grammar and removed unimportant comments.

[NickyNyce]

I think those videos show very nicely that buildings that are collapsing don't make unbelievably loud noises like some would expect. They also create lots of dust for buildings their size. What a strange coincidence.

I think another big factor why the towers were crushed so badly is because they collapsed from the top down, and also from near the middle down while on fire. They didn't collapse down from the first floor.

[Crimson Wizard]

I think those videos show very nicely that buildings that are collapsing don't make unbelievably loud noises like some would expect.

Well, just to make it clearer, my main point was not that it's not loud. I would suppose that it's pretty loud if you happen to be right at the building. It's hard to tell for sure, because the recording devices do not do well with all the surrounding sounds on all of those videos, and sound often reach peak levels and distort.
My points were that that guy's phrase was taken out of context and probably did not mean what monkey (or whoever brings this as an evidence) implied; and second point was that the sound of WTC crumbling is pretty much usual compared to sounds of other collapsing buildings.

[Ryan Timothy B]

I get really upset with what this generation does where they try so hard to believe that something is more than it is.

This is why if a government had knowledge of extraterrestrial life - they would undoubtedly hide it. Just imagine the chaos if we can't believe two planes knocked down two towers.

I'm all for questioning events, but WTF Judy. Wtf.

[Cassiebsg]

What I want to know is Woods view on the Pentagon... Was that also imaginary or did the government needed a good excuse to justify remodelling?
Oh, wait... this is probably one of those "not relevant stuff" that she likes to dismiss....

[Mandle]

What I want to know is Woods view on the Pentagon... Was that also imaginary or did the government needed a good excuse to justify remodelling?
Oh, wait... this is probably one of those "not relevant stuff" that she likes to dismiss....

Interesting point! If I remember correctly though the plane that hit the Pentagon actually hit the one section that had just actually been remodelled (and fortified) as the start of entire overhaul of the building...

[Ryan Timothy B]

I did not know about this until today. It aired 6 months before 9/11.

[embed=640,480]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIJeJEoShBc[/embed]

Edit: But anyway, the only conspiracy theory I'm willing to give any consideration to is that a government entity set the whole thing up - it's plausible but I don't give it much weight. Any theories with the planes being a "distraction" and that there was actually explosives in the buildings, or an "energy beam" (which is the WORST theory by far) is complete bullocks IMO.

[selmiak]

But anyway, the only conspiracy theory I'm willing to give any consideration to is that a government entity set the whole thing up - it's plausible but I don't give it much weight.

Well, the gov armed Al Quaeda to fight for them against the russians in afghanistan. While it is possible that some double agent infiltrated the Al Quaeda back then and passed on the plan he got from some sick warmongers I doubt it. But I think they at least knew about the 9/11 attacks and still let it happen.
If any intelligence agency knew about it and was monitoring the whole thing they couldn't have revealed what they knew without unpleasant questions afterwards, like where did you know this from, are you like... buildung the ultimate surveillance machine into the internet or what? So someone in the military might have decided it's better to sacrifice 3000 people, when you can go to war afterwards, have some economic boom in the weapons industry and build an even denser surveillance state on your way to conquering the world. This is the ultimate excuse for going to war (besides: this country's undemocratic leader is just like / worse than hitler / a terrorist that plans another 911). Who needs proof when you can say Hitler and 9/11 in one sentence!

[Mandle]

I did not know about this until today. It aired 6 months before 9/11.

Yeah...lol...The pilot episode of "The Lone Gunmen" TV show...I only saw that episode a few years after 9/11 and thought it in such bad taste (thinking it was recently made) that I googled it and was STUNNED to find out that it came out 6 months before 9/11...

Then I wondered if Osama Bin Laden had maybe seen the episode and had gotten inspired by it but realised that the perps would have already been in the USA attending flight schools at the time the show aired...

Also a book called "Titan" about a massive "unsinkable" passenger ship that hit an iceberg in the mid-Atlantic and sank on its maiden voyage also came out about a year or so BEFORE the Titanic disaster occured...

So, do artists have some kind of foresight due to their gift of perceiving unsensed links between commonplace things or are these just huge coincidences?

Back to the track of this thread though:

What about the fact that Al Qaeda had already attempted to bring down the WTC by bombing it from underground parking garages once before and failed. Was this just a part of the conspiracy to set up the likelyhood of them trying again via a different route and succeeding?

Why wouldn't Dr. Evil have just deployed his energy beam weapon on this first attempt to achieve the same result as on 9/11? Or was he still trying to bargain the ransom price up from the ONE MILLION DOLLARS?!

[monkey424]

Howdy y'all. I'm glad we're all having fun with this thread. I just want to thank you all for contributing. I think it's healthy to discuss the issues. Far from pointless. There are so many unanswered questions, so why not talk about it? Even if an idea sounds far fetched, we should have the courage to at least give it some thought.

-------------------------------------

Crimson Wizard

The quote I was referring to was on page 10.

Michael Ober said:

I don't remember the sound of the building hitting the ground. Somebody told me that it was measured on the Richter scale, I don't know how true that is. If the building is hitting the ground that hard, how do I not remember the sound of it?

He then talks about dust:

The smell was just --- it has a distinct smell. I've been to Manhattan many times since then, and that smell just brings back every single...I don't know if it's like World Trade Center cement. I don't know what exactly it is. It's just that like, the smell that we inhaled so many times with the rest of the dust and everything in the parking garage. It's just a nasty smell.

More on dust later..

Regarding Hurricane Erin, CNN.com might have mentioned the hurricane but it was virtually unreported on the TV networks. But as local New Yorker NickyNyce points out this may not be so unusual since hurricanes off the coast of NY typically behave like this. Fair enough.

-------------------------------------

NickyNyce

Where in NY do you live? Are you familiar with the site? I believe many of the surrounding buildings that were at least partially destroyed on 9/11 were later demolished as a result of that damage.

1. North Tower (WTC1)
2. South Tower (WTC2)
3. Marriott Hotel (WTC3)
4. WTC4
5. WTC5
6. US Customs House (WTC6)
7. WTC7
8. St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church (all but disappeared on 9/11)
9. Bankers Trust Building (130 Liberty Street)
10. Fiterman Hall (30 West Broadway)
11. 4 Albany Street
12. 130 Cedar Street
13. 133-135 Greenwich Street
14. 21-23 Thames Street
15. 90 West St.

Do you know anything about these buildings, or can you confirm these buildings were demolished? Surely some could have been repaired if they were just damaged by regular old falling debris (kinetic energy). Apparently the Bankers Trust Building was repaired, then dismantled soon after due to alleged mould infection. Once stripped down to grade level some steel columns were revealed to be severely corroded.

-------------------------------------

THE PLANES!!!

Cassiebsg

You (and others) may be interested in this video featuring Dr. Morgan Reynolds - The fake planes of 9/11.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c4d2Mt2a6iM

Dr. Reynolds was the other contributor to the Qui Tam case with Dr. Judy Wood. His research focused more on the planes rather than the buildings. The video covers the other plane crash sites and gives more information about the WTC site, including the impossible physics and suspicious plane debris found at ground zero.

-------------------------------------

Greg Jenkins

What sort of person conducts an illegal ambush interview? A slimy cunt, that's who! The Greg Jenkins video is blatant propaganda commissioned by those who knew Dr. Judy Wood was getting too close to the truth. The guy is so slimy, he reminds me of a Batman villain (guess which one).

-------------------------------------

9/11 - FINDING THE TRUTH

Jenkins is just one of many dodgy and suspicious characters intent on undermining Dr. Wood. Many are affiliated with the so called "truth movement". If you are interested in learning more about the 9/11 cover-up you should become familiar with the work of Dr. Wood's colleague Andrew Johnson.

1. Compilation of articles "9/11 - Finding the Truth" by Andrew Johnson:

http://www.checktheevidence.com/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf

----------

2. YouTube video discussing Andrew Johnson's work:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMPlJ9C__Q

----------

3. Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson together discuss various aspects of their work:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7ChzRz4pmKc

----------

4. Reynolds, Wood and Johnson discuss the 9/11 memorial:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UZeZvz_2wzo

Play from 56:00 to hear a recording of someone inside the building as it was turning to dust. The recording is hard to listen to, so discretion is advised. It might be hard for some people to disconnect emotionally but it is somewhat necessary to do this to actually analyse the subtle evidence in the recording.

------------------------------------------

Underwriters Laboratories

This company certified the WTC structural steel and also performed a fire simulation test on a scale model as requested by NIST. The myth that fire did it should be busted.

http://www.911truth.org/ul-executive-speaks-out-on-wtc-study/

------------------------------------------

EMT Alan Cooke

He reported explosions at the seaport along FDR drive.

http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/NYT9-11AccountsAnalysis/txt/9110040.txt

------------------------------------------

BACK TO THE FUTURE

Ryan Timoothy

The Lone Gunman clip you posted is among many TV shows and movies that hint at 9/11, including the Back to the Future trilogy, The Simpsons, Terminator 2, Men In Black, and many others. Just YouTube it. I didn't want to mention this until someone else did. I don't consider this solid evidence, but it is creepy. It may all just be a coincidence, like Hurricane Erin.

[Radiant]

Howdy y'all. I'm glad we're all having fun with this thread. I just want to thank you all for contributing. I think it's healthy to discuss the issues. Far from pointless. There are so many unanswered questions, so why not talk about it? Even if an idea sounds far fetched, we should have the courage to at least give it some thought.

That's a hilarious remark which completely misses everybody else's point.

No, there aren't actually "so many unanswered questions" - there are many answered and explained questions, and then there's conspiracy theorists that reject the given answers because they discredit their pet conspiracy.

Science is not about taking a far-fetched idea and trying to find support for that (and selectively ignoring any and all facts that don't fit). In fact, science is pretty much the exact opposite of that.

But yes, we're having fun.

[monkey424]

Golly gosh! That was a quick response! You responded to the one thing that didn't relly warrant a response! Please read all that other stuff I talk about, and then respond to something that actully deserves a response.

[Radiant]

You responded to the one thing that didn't relly warrant a response!

No, I responded to the foundation of your argument, as it makes assumptions that are clearly incorrect.

This means that "all that other stuff you talk about" is unsound, and doesn't deserve a response. Start with the premise; if your premise is wrong, there's no point to the rest of the argument.

[Mandle]

I have watched Dr. Reynold's video and I just have to ask the obvious question:

If the plane crash in Shankesville was faked then WHY was it so "BADLY" faked?

Let's look at two possible options:

(1) The crash actually happened: A massive plane nosedived into the ground at huge velocity which just does not happen in normal airplane crashes and the crash site does not look comparable to normal airplane crashes where the pilots were still attempting to save the plane right up until the point of impact.

(2) Somebody with mind-boggling resources and power prepared a fake crash site but did not bother to make a "realistic" crater size, did not set fire to enough of the surrounding area, and did not scatter at least a few plane parts around the site to even make it seem semi-"realistic" as per what the expected result of the crash should have been. Furthermore they even allowed first responders into the area to comment on the lack of debris, lack of spreading fires, etc.

Isn't it just much more likely that there is a huge gap between what we expect to see from such a crash and what we see from what actually happened, than that somebody faked it without adding in all the details of what people would expect to see?

If these guys are such masterminds then why the hell didn't they throw a few tons of aviation fuel around the site, set it on fire, and plant some random plane wreckage here and there? Or even just crash a real plane there by remote control for that matter?

There is also a huge problem with Dr. Reynold saying that planes are too flimsy to break through the steel structure of the towers or penetrate the concrete of the Pentagon but should have made a much larger crater in Shankesville.

Dirt absorbs and spreads energy very efficiently. We have little to no data on how a crash site should look of a plane nose-diving straight into the ground. It was not a WW2 "bunker-buster" with explosives designed to dig out a huge crater. It was a light-weight (for its size) plane with fuel that I'm guessing did not fully ignite because of some sort of "blow-out" effect from the very force of the crash...Only guessing but yeah:

Why wasn't it "faked" better?

[Khris]

This Reynolds guy is clueless. I started watching the first video and skipped ahead. I happened to land at the part where he discusses how THEY should at least fake the planes consistently, and then he says the plane hitting the Pentagon should've turned on impact, with the tail section getting flung off: https://youtu.be/c4d2Mt2a6iM?t=648

Really? Come on. I mean, seriously? Did he throw a model airplane at a wall to determine that? What a clueless and arrogant idiot.

monkey424: stop focusing on "9/11 + beam weapon". You need to read up what the problem with conspiracy theories is in general. You got caught up in this one, and you keep ignoring the facts and arguments that clash with it. You are hyperskeptical of the official version, but don't apply even the most basic skepticism to Wood's claims (which is typical of conspiracy believers).

You need to understand that it is ALWAYS possible to provide the kind of "evidence" you keep posting, even if the hypothesis is completely absurd and obviously false. Piling video on top of video is going to do nothing for us, no matter how convincing you think they are.
There are very well-made documentaries full of Ph.D.s in white lab coats out there that provide ample evidence why climate change isn't happening, vaccines cause autism, HIV/AIDS doesn't exist, the earth is the center of the universe, etc etc. Go watch those, then read what's wrong with them, and you'll get an inkling of our position here.