FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. Judy Wood, 9/11, & Free Energy
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:07 am    Post subject: Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. Judy Wood, 9/11, & Free Energy Reply with quote

Dear Fellow 9/11 Truth Supporter,

My name is Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez, and I am a medical student. Throughout my rigorous undergraduate science and medical science coursework, I have had the privilege of receiving extensive training in the process of scientific analysis and evidence-based thinking.

I am writing to you today not only as a medical student, but also as a concerned American citizen, to ask for your help with something very important.

Have you heard of Dr. Judy Wood? Did you know she has been researching 9/11 since 2001 and has already filed several law suits against NIST and Congress demanding a new investigation and requesting that NIST’s false data gets reexamined? Surprisingly, Dr. Steven Jones has not supported Dr. Wood’s legal attempts to push for 9/11 Truth. Dr. Judy Wood has received many threats due to the research she has done and evidence she has gathered, and 2 of her friends that were involved in Cold Fusion / Free Energy research were murdered. In contrast, Dr. Steven Jones has not filed any such law suits, nor has he filed his nano-thermite findings with Congress or NIST.

I. Dr. Judy Wood has already filed several legal cases against NIST and many suspected military / defense / weapons organizations in 2007, including Data Quality Analysis (DQA), Request For Correction (RFC), and Qui Tam (whistle-blower) cases. She is actively pursuing 9/11 Truth with her lawyer, despite the lack of support she has received from Dr. Jones and his followers. One of the many reasons I believe that Dr. Jones may be misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement is because Dr. Jones has not filed his nano-thermite findings with NIST or with Congress, when he should have done so long ago if he truly wished to further the 9/11 Truth Movement. The many legal documents Dr. Judy Wood has filed in her pursuit of 9/11 Truth can be observed here:

1. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/NIST_RFC.html
2. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

II. Dr. Judy Wood was once a highly involved member of Dr. Jones’s group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, but Dr. Jones suddenly expelled her from the group a while ago, simply because he disagreed with her conclusion that some form of Directed Energy Weapon was used to demolish the World Trade Center buildings. Dr. Wood has gathered overwhelming evidence suggesting that a Directed Energy Weapon of some kind was used to vaporize (‘dustify’) the primary steel and concrete portions of the buildings into dust, while leaving paper, aluminum, and many other materials completely unharmed. She has collected an overwhelming amount of photographic evidence which led to this conclusion, yet Dr. Jones disagrees with her so strongly that he decided to ban her from the group.

III. It is important to consider the fact that Dr. Wood has actively been taking legal steps and scientific steps to pursue 9/11 Truth, yet Dr. Jones has banned her from his Scholars for 9/11 Truth group and has not supported her costly legal efforts to bring about a new 9/11 investigation. They both should be working together, but instead, Dr. Jones speaks negatively of Dr. Wood because he disagrees with her conclusions, even though her conclusions are strongly supported by evidence.

IV. After reviewing this evidence, it seems very possible to me that Dr. Steven Jones is pushing the nano-thermite theory to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement down a false path to prevent us from finding out the true criminals behind 9/11, and the true cause of 9/11, which is related to Cold Fusion, Free Energy, and Directed Energy Weapons. Yes, the nano-thermite theory does account for some of the evidence, but it most certainly does not account for all of it.

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin

V. Please thoroughly review the following information with an open-mind, for it seems as though we need to examine Dr. Jones’s motivations and figure out why Dr. Jones kicked Dr. Wood out of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth group a while ago, rather than collaborating with her to pursue 9/11 Truth. Please read this information thoroughly, for it is very, very important.

VI. Dr. Judy Wood received her B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering), M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia. Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bi-material joints. She has taught courses including: Experimental Stress Analysis, Engineering Mechanics, Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials), Strength of Materials Testing.

1. Dr. Judy Wood, Ph.D - 'The New Hiroshima' Presentation (Part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1JFCpFd6CA
2. Dr. Judy Wood’s website: http://www.drjudywood.com

VII. Here are some very informative videos discussing the reality of The Hutchison Effect and other suppressed technologies, such as Cold Fusion, & Anti-Gravity, and Military Energy Weapon Technology:

1. John Hutchison & The Hutchison Effect (Documentary | 68mins): http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5866006842090712676
2. Cold Fusion Is Real (Documentary | 45mins) : http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6562030534380820378
3. Boyd Bushman, a Senior Scientist of Lockheed Martin, on The Hutchison Effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57ZKTA7nx8U
4. Boyd Bushman, a Senior Scientist of Lockheed Martin, on Anti-Gravity Technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeNesaRUoJo
5. Colonel Tom Bearden on Military Energy Weapon Technology (1985) similar to The Hutchison Effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MovpYUD7fTY

VIII. Please review the following evidence regarding Dr. Steven Jones, so that you can become familiar with all of the evidence that has led myself, and many others, to conclude that Dr. Steven Jones is purposely misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement. First he interfered with the Cold Fusion / Free Energy movement, and now it seems he is interfering with the 9/11 Truth Movement. Please review these links thoroughly, and with an open-mind, before drawing any conclusions:

1. ‘Hoax exposes incompetence or worse at a Bentham Open Access journal’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06/hoax-exposes-incompetence-o r-worse-at.html
2. ‘Bentham Open editor-in-chief resigns after fake paper is accepted for publication’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06/bentham-editors-resign.html
3. ‘A Peer-review of Dr. Jones’s Research’: http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=trouble_with_jones
4. ‘The Scientific Method Applied to the Thermite Hypothesis’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html
5. ‘Steven Jones' Contributions to Science, Humanity and the Planet’: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/cc/CB.html
6. ‘WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?’ http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&tas k=view&id=91&Itemid=60
7. ‘Thermite and Glowing Liquid Aluminum’ http://drjudywood.com/articles/why/why_indeed.html#Thermite
8. ‘Steven Jones, Cold Fusion, & Free Energy’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ7.html
9. ‘Steven Jones and the WTC “Spire” video’ (2min 35sec): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO9Iv_4ZfNI
10. ‘No Thermite Used on 9/11’ by Andrew Johnson: http://911thermitefree.blogspot.com/
11. ‘Steven Jones helped cover up Cold Fusion, and now 9/11 Truth’: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lASyX1SP2UM

IX. Here are some important questions to ask ourselves when comparing the conclusions of Dr. Steve Jones and Dr. Judy Wood:

• How come steel and concrete were pulverized, aluminum had electrical burns, but paper was unharmed? Nano-thermite and heat do not selectively damage certain materials, so how come thousands and thousands of paper sheets were completely unharmed?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero during the attacks?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, where is all the molten steel? Thousands of pictures, yet not a single one shows large quantities of molten steel?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come the resulting steel and concrete dust clouds were not hot enough to burn the people it coated nor to set adjacent buildings on fire?
• If thermite alone caused the ‘collapses’, how come there was significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks?
• Why was the Alaskan magnetosphere normal until immediately before and during the 9/11 attacks, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks, even though they were not exposed to thermite?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side?
• How come Dr. Wood has already filed several legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies and NIST, yet Dr. Jones has not?
• How come Dr. Wood has already been taking legal steps towards demanding a new 9/11 investigation, yet Dr. Jones does not support her legal efforts?
• How come Dr. Jones has not officially filed or shared his nano-thermite evidence with Congress, NIST, or any official governmental body? Why the delay?
• Why is Dr. Jones just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which made it to the Supreme Court?
• Why isn’t Dr. Jones and his affiliates supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal efforts to pursue 9/11 Truth, regardless of whether or not they agree on a theory?
• Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers?
• Shouldn’t we all be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if we do not agree with her conclusions?
• Why was I removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition simply for asking Richard Gage to examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood?
• I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for bringing up Dr. Judy Wood to Richard Gage?
• Why did United States Army Major Doug Rokke spontaneously contact me to try and convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood and Energy Weapons?

X. Either Dr. Steven Jones is lying, or Dr. Judy Wood is lying. One of them is misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement, and the evidence points to Dr. Steven Jones. After thoroughly researching both of their stories and all of the evidence presented by both parties, I honestly believe that it is most likely Dr. Jones that is lying, and that he is using his fame and credentials to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement in the wrong direction to prevent us from supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal actions and taking legal action of our own, to ultimately prevent us from finding out the true cause of 9/11 and the true criminals responsible for the attacks.

XI. Also, I should let you know that I recently messaged Richard Gage and AE911Truth to ask him to contact Dr. Judy Wood, and as a result, I have been removed from the Petition Signers list on AE911Truth.org, despite the fact that I have donated over $100 dollars to Richard Gage and his organization over the past several months. As of the morning of March 4th, my name was removed from the AE911Truth petition, so it appears that I have been removed from the petition simply for asking about Dr. Judy Wood. This is very concerning, because I have not done anything wrong by asking Richard Gage to talk to Dr. Judy Wood and consider her research, yet AE911Truth.org has removed me from their petition simply for asking about her once in a private email. In addition, Richard Gage has never replied to any of my emails over the past several months, not even one of them, but Dr. Judy Wood has responded to several of my emails in just the last week. Oddly enough, Dr. Wood predicted that Richard Gage and Dr. Jones would ‘blacklist’ me for mentioning her, and she was right.

XII. Lastly, but most importantly, Major Doug Rokke from the U.S. Army contacted me recently and is trying to convince me that only nano-thermite or other explosives were used on 9/11, but NOT energy weapons. He refuses to acknowledge the existence of highly-advanced Energy Weapon Technology, other than lasers, that are possessed by the military-industrial complex. He does not want to meet with me in public, but insists that I come meet him at his private dwelling just outside of Urbana-Champaign. He has contacted me because I have recently been spreading information about Dr. Wood, and he insists that we meet in “private” so he can “show me something” related to proving that nano-thermite or other explosives were used on the WTC buildings, but not energy weapons. I’m not going to meet with him, because I asked Dr. Wood about him and apparently he is trying to cover up her work. Major Doug Rokke attended one of Dr. Judy Wood’s “New Hiroshima” presentations, and he sat in the front rows and repeatedly attempted to disrupt her, interrupt her, and yell unprofessional statements throughout her lecture to try and discredit her research. This is one reason I am not meeting with him. Another reason I am not meeting with him is because I recently contacted one of my Deans that I trust, and she said that Major Doug Rokke was fired from the University of Illinois a long time ago for claiming he was a professor, when in fact he is not. Apparently he has a long history of lies and deceit, so my Dean strongly suggested that I do not meet with him, and she is already making some calls about him given this recent information.

I strongly support the 9/11 Truth Movement as a whole and I definitely think we all need to work together to share ideas and information, so I truly hope that you will consider collaborating with Dr. Judy Wood in addition to Dr. Steven Jones, so we can all work together to bring about real 9/11 truth and justice. Even if Dr. Wood’s conclusions do not resonate with you, we are all still pursuing truth and justice regarding 9/11, and therefore we need to work together. It is very concerning to me that Dr. Jones has chosen to outcast Dr. Wood simply because he does not agree with her conclusions, when he should be supporting her many legal cases. If Dr. Jones is indeed misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement, he needs to be exposed so that this movement can continue to make progress and move forward.

Please let me know how what you think about all this.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and help,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M1 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com


Last edited by PookztA on Sun Mar 21, 2010 12:19 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fish5133
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2548
Location: One breath from Glory

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Abe. I am in contact with ae911truth. I will see what there side of the story is. Did you sign the list with your name "Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez "
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1694

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Dr. Steven Jones & Dr. Judy Wood Reply with quote

PookztA wrote:
"...simply because he disagreed with her conclusion that some form of Directed Energy Weapon was used to demolish the World Trade Center buildings.... Dr. Wood has gathered overwhelming evidence suggesting that a Directed Energy Weapon of some kind was used to vaporize (‘dustify’) the primary steel and concrete portions of the buildings into dust, while leaving paper, aluminum, and many other materials completely unharmed. She has collected an overwhelming amount of photographic evidence which led to this conclusion, yet Dr. Jones disagrees with her so strongly that he decided to ban her from the group.


Hi Abe,

I'm sorry, I am afraid I agree with Prof Jones on this. There is no such thing as a Directed Energy Weapon. There isn't a mechanism to power it or accurately directed it through the atmosphere. If such a weapon did exist then it would far too risky to use. Especially when explosives could do the job just as easily.

When Judy Woods was interviewed - the interview is up on youtube - she was not in the least bit convincing. All the bits of photographic evidence seem very suspect and circumstantial.

In the meantime, Prof Jones has collaborated with Neil Harrit on the nanothermite and frankly, that story stacks up. And the very thing that you claim about Jones could therefore be argued against Woods - its either ego or disinfo!

Personally, I'll stick with the stronger set of evidence.

Anyway - all seems like internal bickering to me - no doubt as part of someone else's agenda. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian neal
Site Founder
Site Founder


Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3138
Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Abe

I don't think your name should be on the AE list any more than mine. Just because you have donated to AE should not influence this. Equally just because you are inclined to support Prof Woods over Dr Jones should not influence this. You are a medical student. This is the reason you should not be included.

If you had graduated and if your discipline was in a field that is relevant to 9/11 then your opinion and support for AE would count for something. By registering support from anyone with a vaguely scientific background with little discernment, AE waters down the impact of its list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
hatsoff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
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

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
scienceplease 2
There is no such thing as a Directed Energy Weapon. There isn't a mechanism to power it or accurately directed it through the atmosphere. If such a weapon did exist then it would far too risky to use. Especially when explosives could do the job just as easily.


http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/Nielsen-EDEW.pdf
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1250734/U-S-Star-War s-laser-plane-shoots-ballistic-missile.html
http://www.deweapons.com/Event.aspx?id=245020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weaponeven on wiki!!
http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARTCL&ARTI CLE_ID=231684&VERSION_NUM=2&p=32&pc=ENL
http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-05/NLW-DEW.htm
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=676ea3eacdce2776ee052a 193c2a18e7&tab=core&_cview=0
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

just a few hints that DEW's exist, have done for a while and are getting more sophisticated. And don't expect to find a detailed article on the exact mechanism for bringing down 110 story buildings etc cos' they wouldn't tell you that would they!

To all the anti Wood gang - I guess if you are into the bible like many on this site, then you don't believe in science and you think the world is only 6,000 years old Rolling Eyes

I think it's disgusting the way people are treated on this site, by "mods" and all, re these issues.

Can no one think outside the box any more???

_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hatsoff wrote:

http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/Nielsen-EDEW.pdf
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1250734/U-S-Star-War s-laser-plane-shoots-ballistic-missile.html
http://www.deweapons.com/Event.aspx?id=245020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weaponeven on wiki!!
http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARTCL&ARTI CLE_ID=231684&VERSION_NUM=2&p=32&pc=ENL
http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-05/NLW-DEW.htm
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=676ea3eacdce2776ee052a 193c2a18e7&tab=core&_cview=0
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

just a few hints that DEW's exist, have done for a while and are getting more sophisticated.

And don't expect to find a detailed article on the exact mechanism for bringing down 110 story buildings etc cos' they wouldn't tell you that would they!


For me it isn't just a matter of proof of whether or not DEW exist. It's about the fact that the so called evidence of them being used, ie the "evidence" used by Wood/Johnson just does not stand up to scrutiny.

Hurricane Erin
Toasted Cars
Dustification
No debris at ground zero etc etc

It just doesn't hold any water.

Quote:
To all the anti Wood gang - I guess if you are into the bible like many on this site, then you don't believe in science and you think the world is only 6,000 years old Rolling Eyes


This is an interesting case in point to use. A lot of Christians on this site could link to many articles and pdf's which they believe could prove the case that the world is 6,000 years old. Just as you have done to prove that DEW exist.

But just as their evidence does not prove that the world is 6,000 years old, your own links do not prove that DEW were used on 9/11.

Quote:
I think it's disgusting the way people are treated on this site, by "mods" and all, re these issues.


I can think of at least one admin member that has given these issues a lot of time. He's even a Christian.

I myself have checked the evidence on this subject many times over and in my lay-opinion it just doesn't work for me.

I think it's disgusting how myself and many others who bring up valid evidence to the contrary get ignored again and again by the advocates of this theory which is bordering dangerously on cult-like status.

Johnson and his back slapping band of followers just pretend the evidence to the contrary, of which there is shed loads, isn't there and post the same old debunked stuff again and again and again...

Quote:
Can no one think outside the box any more???


Can none of the Johnson crew engage once in the evidence to the contrary? Just acknowledge it once?

Johnson...you had to admit that your "thermite free" accusation was bogus.

What about the rest?

It's alright saying "think outside the box" but let's not pretend the box isn't there ey?

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6340

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also keep an open mind, I just don't see how the DEWs are backed up with delivery mechanisms etc.
I don't doubt for one minute they are being worked on!

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who's to say also that the same agenda used to discredit Jones isn't being used by the power's that be to validate the existence of DEW?

The Wood methodology is to suggest that Jones' ties to the discrediting of the Fleischman and Pons theory of Cold Fusion proves he's been drafted in to steer everyone away from DEW being used on 9/11 with his Nano-Thermite theory.

Therefore, the same agenda could be applied to the Wood methodolgy.

The links posted to prove the existence and use of DEW could be being "cooked-up" to discredit the Nano-T theory and steer everyone into looking at DEW.

Round and round we go.

Until both the Jones and Wood crowd acknowledge the evidence to the contrary to their theory we will all continue to chase our tails.

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
scienceplease 2
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 1694

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps I should have said "there is no evidence that there is a practical DEW that could have been used on 9/11"

Last edited by scienceplease 2 on Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6340

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DEW is still a very loose term can I call my Heat Gun a DEW?
How about a Wind Tunnel?

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fish5133
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2548
Location: One breath from Glory

PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It would be nice to think that at some time in the not so distant future that a certain group of 911 truthers will be eating a bit of humble pie Embarassed and to be honest i would be more than happy to eat it if the real truth is found out and we see the real perps identified.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fish5133 wrote:
Hi Abe. I am in contact with ae911truth. I will see what there side of the story is. Did you sign the list with your name "Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez "


Yes, that is how I signed my name. I emailed Richard Gage to ask him if he heard of Dr. Wood and to ask him to look at her research and I never heard back from him and was removed from the petition within 48 hours of sending the email. Sad

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:16 am    Post subject: Re: Dr. Steven Jones & Dr. Judy Wood Reply with quote

scienceplease 2 wrote:
PookztA wrote:
"...simply because he disagreed with her conclusion that some form of Directed Energy Weapon was used to demolish the World Trade Center buildings.... Dr. Wood has gathered overwhelming evidence suggesting that a Directed Energy Weapon of some kind was used to vaporize (‘dustify’) the primary steel and concrete portions of the buildings into dust, while leaving paper, aluminum, and many other materials completely unharmed. She has collected an overwhelming amount of photographic evidence which led to this conclusion, yet Dr. Jones disagrees with her so strongly that he decided to ban her from the group.


Hi Abe,

I'm sorry, I am afraid I agree with Prof Jones on this. There is no such thing as a Directed Energy Weapon. There isn't a mechanism to power it or accurately directed it through the atmosphere. If such a weapon did exist then it would far too risky to use. Especially when explosives could do the job just as easily.

When Judy Woods was interviewed - the interview is up on youtube - she was not in the least bit convincing. All the bits of photographic evidence seem very suspect and circumstantial.

In the meantime, Prof Jones has collaborated with Neil Harrit on the nanothermite and frankly, that story stacks up. And the very thing that you claim about Jones could therefore be argued against Woods - its either ego or disinfo!

Personally, I'll stick with the stronger set of evidence.

Anyway - all seems like internal bickering to me - no doubt as part of someone else's agenda. Rolling Eyes


Hey there,

I too agree that one of them, either Dr. Wood or Dr. Jones, is most likely a disinfo agent, but the more I learn, and the more I contact them both, the more I feel confident in my conclusion that Dr. Jones is a fraud.

I have emailed Dr. Jones several times about Dr. Wood, and I have never heard back from him, not even once. One time I simply emailed him some of my concerns about the nano-thermite theory and how it does not account for all the evidence, to see if maybe he could explain away my concerns, yet still, no reply. I have sent many emails to Richard Gage and Dr. Jones over the last 2 months, yet not once have they ever returned one of my emails, not even once.

As for Dr. Wood, she has responded to each and every one of my emails within 24-48 hours. We have had in depths discussions about her research, and she has personally helped me to better understand where she is coming from, how she drew her conclusions, and why her conclusion that a Directed Energy Weapon was used to destroy the towers is the only possible explanation which accounts for ALL the anomalies and ALL of the evidence observed at or around Ground Zero during and after the attacks. She is a very cool lady and is very good at communicating if you email her.

Also, you claim that DEWs do not exist, but I beg to differ. The military uses DEWs right now, some for anti-missile purposes, others for keeping defenders at bay using focused microwave technologies.

Here is a link discussing whether DEWs exist or not: http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam7.html#possible

Hope this helps.

Thanks for commenting and asking questions,

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ian neal wrote:
Abe

I don't think your name should be on the AE list any more than mine. Just because you have donated to AE should not influence this. Equally just because you are inclined to support Prof Woods over Dr Jones should not influence this. You are a medical student. This is the reason you should not be included.

If you had graduated and if your discipline was in a field that is relevant to 9/11 then your opinion and support for AE would count for something. By registering support from anyone with a vaguely scientific background with little discernment, AE waters down the impact of its list.


That is fine that you feel that way Ian, but unfortunately AE911Truht encourages ALL people to sign their petition, even non-students. Since they allow ANYONE to sign their petition, you would think having a trained biologist and medical doctor in training would only add further support to their cause. It blows my mind that after donating much time, energy, and finances to Richard Gage and his organization, that he never replied to any of my emails, not even ONCE, and he silently removed me from the petition within 48 hours of asking him, in a private email, if he had heard of Dr. Wood, and if he would look into her research so that they could work together to more effectively bring forth Justice. I am very skeptical of Mr. Gage after being ignored by him and then removed from the petition. Very concerning to me.

Thanks for expressing your opinion,

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hatsoff wrote:
Quote:
scienceplease 2
There is no such thing as a Directed Energy Weapon. There isn't a mechanism to power it or accurately directed it through the atmosphere. If such a weapon did exist then it would far too risky to use. Especially when explosives could do the job just as easily.


http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/Nielsen-EDEW.pdf
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1250734/U-S-Star-War s-laser-plane-shoots-ballistic-missile.html
http://www.deweapons.com/Event.aspx?id=245020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weaponeven on wiki!!
http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARTCL&ARTI CLE_ID=231684&VERSION_NUM=2&p=32&pc=ENL
http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-05/NLW-DEW.htm
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=676ea3eacdce2776ee052a 193c2a18e7&tab=core&_cview=0
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

just a few hints that DEW's exist, have done for a while and are getting more sophisticated. And don't expect to find a detailed article on the exact mechanism for bringing down 110 story buildings etc cos' they wouldn't tell you that would they!

To all the anti Wood gang - I guess if you are into the bible like many on this site, then you don't believe in science and you think the world is only 6,000 years old Rolling Eyes

I think it's disgusting the way people are treated on this site, by "mods" and all, re these issues.

Can no one think outside the box any more???


Thank you for answering the quetsions of another forum goer with these links. I appreciate that. Sharing information is KEY, even if we do not agree on our conclusions. The ability for us to discuss things maturely, not get upset with each other, and share information with each other, is very very crucial. Thank you for posting this information for others to see.

Here is another good link talking about the existence of DEWs: http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam7.html#possible

Take care,

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GodSaveTheTeam wrote:
hatsoff wrote:

http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/Nielsen-EDEW.pdf
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1250734/U-S-Star-War s-laser-plane-shoots-ballistic-missile.html
http://www.deweapons.com/Event.aspx?id=245020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weaponeven on wiki!!
http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARTCL&ARTI CLE_ID=231684&VERSION_NUM=2&p=32&pc=ENL
http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-05/NLW-DEW.htm
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=676ea3eacdce2776ee052a 193c2a18e7&tab=core&_cview=0
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

just a few hints that DEW's exist, have done for a while and are getting more sophisticated.

And don't expect to find a detailed article on the exact mechanism for bringing down 110 story buildings etc cos' they wouldn't tell you that would they!


For me it isn't just a matter of proof of whether or not DEW exist. It's about the fact that the so called evidence of them being used, ie the "evidence" used by Wood/Johnson just does not stand up to scrutiny.

Hurricane Erin
Toasted Cars
Dustification
No debris at ground zero etc etc

It just doesn't hold any water.

Quote:
To all the anti Wood gang - I guess if you are into the bible like many on this site, then you don't believe in science and you think the world is only 6,000 years old Rolling Eyes


This is an interesting case in point to use. A lot of Christians on this site could link to many articles and pdf's which they believe could prove the case that the world is 6,000 years old. Just as you have done to prove that DEW exist.

But just as their evidence does not prove that the world is 6,000 years old, your own links do not prove that DEW were used on 9/11.

Quote:
I think it's disgusting the way people are treated on this site, by "mods" and all, re these issues.


I can think of at least one admin member that has given these issues a lot of time. He's even a Christian.

I myself have checked the evidence on this subject many times over and in my lay-opinion it just doesn't work for me.

I think it's disgusting how myself and many others who bring up valid evidence to the contrary get ignored again and again by the advocates of this theory which is bordering dangerously on cult-like status.

Johnson and his back slapping band of followers just pretend the evidence to the contrary, of which there is shed loads, isn't there and post the same old debunked stuff again and again and again...

Quote:
Can no one think outside the box any more???


Can none of the Johnson crew engage once in the evidence to the contrary? Just acknowledge it once?

Johnson...you had to admit that your "thermite free" accusation was bogus.

What about the rest?

It's alright saying "think outside the box" but let's not pretend the box isn't there ey?


To be honest, most of Judy's research is simply examining evidence. Rarely is speculation involved. She uses hundreds and hundreds of photographs, many from Congressional libraries and FEMA data bases, to examine anomalies observed on or around ground zero. She uses these anomalies to eliminate theories that do not account for them. In the end, only one theory can account for ALL the anomalies observed at ground zero. Some of these anomalies are: flipped cars several blocks away from ground zero, 1400+ cars that were mysteriously burnt and toasted even though they were many blocks away from ground zero, steel and concrete were selectively pulverized to dust while aluminum and paper were left unharmed, giant pieces of steel and metal were observed to be bent in very mysterious ways similar to the focused electromagnetic energy effect known as The Hutchinson Effect, several cars set on fire but the surrounding paper is not on fire, and much much more.

Here is a good place to start for exmaning just a small (but significant) chunk of the evidence Dr. Wood uses to draw her conclusions: http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam5.html

Hope this helps,

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GodSaveTheTeam wrote:
Who's to say also that the same agenda used to discredit Jones isn't being used by the power's that be to validate the existence of DEW?

The Wood methodology is to suggest that Jones' ties to the discrediting of the Fleischman and Pons theory of Cold Fusion proves he's been drafted in to steer everyone away from DEW being used on 9/11 with his Nano-Thermite theory.

Therefore, the same agenda could be applied to the Wood methodolgy.

The links posted to prove the existence and use of DEW could be being "cooked-up" to discredit the Nano-T theory and steer everyone into looking at DEW.

Round and round we go.

Until both the Jones and Wood crowd acknowledge the evidence to the contrary to their theory we will all continue to chase our tails.


I am a very honest person, and for that reason I will admit that yes, it is POSSIBLE that Dr. Wood could be disinfo, but in all honesty, she has shown me more human compassion and friendliness than any truther I have ever met. She has answered my emails diligently, usually within 48 hours of sending it, she has answered all of my questions personally, no matter how meticulous or redudant they have been, and she has predicted the occurrence of several events, for example, me being blacklisted and ignored by Richard Gage and Dr. Jones.

In addiiton, Dr. Wood already had filed legal Qui-Tam whistleblower cases in 2007, one of which made it all the way to the Supreme Court! I could not believe that I had not heard about her legal cases before, especially since Dr. Jones and Richard Gage should have been supporting her legal cases and spreading the word about them, if they truly wanted to bring forth a new and successful investigation. Even if they do not agree on her theory, the legal case is an entirely differnet story, and the fact that both of them did not support her case, and bad-mouthed her while the case was running, really concerned me. One would think that Dr. Jones and Richard Gage could set aside their differences and support Dr. Wood's legal case for the purpose of bringing out the truth and justice, but instead, Dr. Jones bad mouths her and Richard Gage removes me from his petition just for asking him about her in a private email.

All signs so far point to Richard Gage and Dr. Jones being disinfo, and no signs at all have pointed Dr. Wood as the disinfo agent. I first was skeptical of her, but my skepticism is now growing for Dr. Jones and Richard Gage. Also, she claims to have had many threats on her health and life and career, but as far as I know, Richard Gage and Dr. Jones have never been threatened.

Just my 2 cents,

-Abe

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pookzta,

I have looked at Judy Wood's website many times and found nothing of substance on there.

You say there is very little in the way of speculation on there?

I totally disagree.

Under a picture of a bunrt out car is a caption reading "why does this car not have any front tyres" or some such.

That is the very essence of speculation.

I've heard all the theories before and I have even debated them (albeit with none of the advocates of said theories).

Just look at the links in my sig.

I've said before that Jones may be in the services of some sinister agenda, but so may Wood.

That's why people have to read everything and believe nothing until they can prove it with their own research.

That's all I can really say, apart from check 9/11 controversies. It's all in there my friend.

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6340

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Surely a DEW wouldn't leave 30' lengths of steel that can be carted away?
and um cars everything but the steel? Surely if the flimsy steel in a car stands upto the DEW then the Steel Frame of the building would too?

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
gruts
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the question of how the unknown secret weapon turned the steel in the towers to dust but didn't turn the steel in the cars to dust (and left all kinds of other stuff unscathed) is one of many that I'd like the wood groupies to answer.

don't hold your breath though....

_________________
Nyetu pravdy v Isvyestyakh i nyetu isvyestyi v Pravde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I seem to remember one of the Wood followers saying that it was the dust cloud that causes the damage to the cars.

But then one has to ask, why doesn't it severely damage the building it engulfs for blocks and blocks and of course the people covered in that dust...

Anyone?

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GodSaveTheTeam wrote:
Pookzta,

I have looked at Judy Wood's website many times and found nothing of substance on there.

You say there is very little in the way of speculation on there?

I totally disagree.

Under a picture of a bunrt out car is a caption reading "why does this car not have any front tyres" or some such.

That is the very essence of speculation.

I've heard all the theories before and I have even debated them (albeit with none of the advocates of said theories).

Just look at the links in my sig.

I've said before that Jones may be in the services of some sinister agenda, but so may Wood.

That's why people have to read everything and believe nothing until they can prove it with their own research.

That's all I can really say, apart from check 9/11 controversies. It's all in there my friend.



She isn't basing her conclusions on one photo of a car not having front tires, what a misleading comment from you sir... shameful.

She has HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of photos showing anomalies at ground zero that can only be explained by The Hutchinson Effect and electromagnetic energy. The photos speak for themselves, as they show several anomalies and occurrences that cannot be explained by nano-thermite alone.

Here are just a few of the concerns that the photos raised in my mind that I want answered by the nano-thermite supporters. I sent an email to Dr. Jones and Richard Gage demanding answers to these questions since they have ignored every single one of my emails, so hopefully i can get some answers:

• How come steel and concrete were pulverized, aluminum had electrical burns, but paper was unharmed? Nano-thermite and heat do not selectively damage certain materials, so how come thousands and thousands of paper sheets were completely unharmed?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero during the attacks?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, where is all the molten steel? Thousands of pictures, yet not a single one shows large quantities of molten steel?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come the resulting steel and concrete dust clouds were not hot enough to burn the people it coated nor to set adjacent buildings on fire?
• If thermite alone caused the ‘collapses’, how come there was significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks?
• Why was the Alaskan magnetosphere normal until immediately before and during the 9/11 attacks, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks, even though they were not exposed to thermite?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side?
• How come Dr. Wood has already filed several legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies and NIST, yet Dr. Jones has not?
• How come Dr. Wood has already been taking legal steps towards demanding a new 9/11 investigation, yet Dr. Jones does not support her legal efforts?
• How come Dr. Jones has not officially filed or shared his nano-thermite evidence with Congress, NIST, or any official governmental body? Why the delay?
• Why is Dr. Jones just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which made it to the Supreme Court?
• Why isn’t Dr. Jones and his affiliates supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal efforts to pursue 9/11 Truth, regardless of whether or not they agree on a theory?
• Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers?
• Shouldn’t we all be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if we do not agree with her conclusions?
• Why was I removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition simply for asking Richard Gage to examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood?
• I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for bringing up Dr. Judy Wood to Richard Gage?

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
GodSaveTheTeam
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 575
Location: the eyevolution

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PookztA wrote:
She isn't basing her conclusions on one photo of a car not having front tires, what a misleading comment from you sir... shameful


Pookzta. I'm afraid like most of your friends at the Wood party, you've completely misunderstood my comment.

Take a couple of deep breaths and read it again...

It doesn't say she bases her conclusions on one photo does it now?

No.

What it does say, in reply to your own comment....

Pookzta wrote:


Rarely is speculation involved.


(Which is catergorically an untrue statement because that's all Judy Wood's website is. A mass of speculation)

it says...

Me wrote:

Under a picture of a burnt out car is a caption reading "why does this car not have any front tyres" or some such.


I'm using that statement of what you may find on her website as an example.

It doesn't matter if she uses a thousand photos.

Showing a photo and having a question under it is speculation and only speculation.

I'm sorry if you continue to fail to grasp that.

You continue as all the rest of your friends here on this site to completely ignore any evidence which goes against your belief system.

This is not truthseeking. It is believing something with a faith based biased.

You keep going on and on about the fact that they haven't done something that Wood has done.

A court case. Ok.

But is it a strong court case? If I can debunk Hurricane Erin and toasted cars etc with a couple of google searches then what do you think a high-paid legal-eagle or some such will do with her so called evidence?

Jones/Gage etc have something that Wood doesn't have...

The victim's families support. Not according to Johnson. Wood and Johnson have not even contacted the victim's families with

a)Her "evidence"

b)The fact she thinks Jones is a fraud.

Not according to an earlier thread anyway.

Why wouldn't Wood contact the families of the 9/11 victims with their concerns that Jones and Gage are frauds when the families support them?

Does this fact that the families support Jones/Gage therefore mean Jones/Gage are honest to goodness researchers and their evidence is flawless. No.

Therefore Wood and her court case do not prove so either.

I ask you again. Why not be the first Wood advocate to read the links below in my sig and engage with the counter evidence.

No one else at your party has done so yet.

Will you?

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/bobzimmerfan?feature=mhum#p/a
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6340

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Disco_Destroyer wrote:
Surely a DEW wouldn't leave 30' lengths of steel that can be carted away?
and um cars everything but the steel? Surely if the flimsy steel in a car stands upto the DEW then the Steel Frame of the building would too?


Can you or Dr Wood answer this??

_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'


“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”


www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
gruts
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PookztA wrote:
She has HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of photos showing anomalies at ground zero that can only be explained by The Hutchinson Effect and electromagnetic energy blah blah etc

actually there are far more rational explanations.

in fact - none of the pictures on judy wood's website contain any evidence of secret exotic technoligies being used at the WTC.

what judy does is to deliberately avoid any rational and obvious explanation for what the pictures show and make up some speculative bs that has no basis in reality, which she then claims is "evidence".

but thanks anyway for confirming that you are just a troll.

and of course - most of your questions have already been answered in the threads that you are avoiding (surprise surprise).

The rest are just plain stupid or irrelevant or both.

Quote:
How come steel and concrete were pulverized, aluminum had electrical burns, but paper was unharmed? Nano-thermite and heat do not selectively damage certain materials, so how come thousands and thousands of paper sheets were completely unharmed?

this is an unbelievably stupid question.

first of all there is no evidence that steel was pulverised and there were huge piles of steel that wasn't pulverised. see this thread for example....

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18217

and are you seriously suggesting that something that destroys steel leaves paper unharmed?

can you explain how that works?

thought not....

and are you claiming that no paper was burned on 9/11?

and has it ever occured to you that the paper sheets to which you refer were undamaged for the simple reason that they didn't come into contact with anything that was burning? it's not rocket science is it? Rolling Eyes

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero during the attacks?

steven jones and others who think that thermite was used do not claim that thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, so your question is dishonest.

hmmmmmmm - truthseeking and dishonesty don't really go together do they?

and how many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero were there? what (if anything) is suspicious about them?

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, where is all the molten steel? Thousands of pictures, yet not a single one shows large quantities of molten steel?

again - the same dishonesty about thermite.

oh I see - if you haven't seen a picture of it - it doesn't exist.... Rolling Eyes

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come the resulting steel and concrete dust clouds were not hot enough to burn the people it coated nor to set adjacent buildings on fire?

this is getting repetitive and boring. yet again - your question is dishonest. there is also no evidence for the existence of "dustified steel". and plenty of people were badly burned on 9/11 (although - believe it or not - heat does tend to dissipate in air)....

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the ‘collapses’, how come there was significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks?

yawn - yet again the same dishonesty about thermite.

and the magnetosphere readings were nothing out of the ordinary.

Quote:
Why was the Alaskan magnetosphere normal until immediately before and during the 9/11 attacks, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?

see above.

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks, even though they were not exposed to thermite?

yawn - yet again the same dishonesty about thermite.

and the garbage about the "strange" damage to vehicles has been completely debunked in the threads you're avoiding (surprise surprise).

try these for example....

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=14231

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18171

Quote:
If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side?

as above.

Quote:
How come Dr. Wood has already filed several legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies and NIST, yet Dr. Jones has not?

I'm not a mind reader so I dunno. but Jones is a scientist and filing legal cases is not how scientists normally establish a case or promote a theory. they normally do it with research in the lab, and then publish papers, have them peer reviewed and so on - and that's what he's doing....

has judy wood managed to "dustify" steel in a lab yet?

silly question....

Quote:
How come Dr. Wood has already been taking legal steps towards demanding a new 9/11 investigation, yet Dr. Jones does not support her legal efforts?

why should he or anyone support a case that's based on complete garbage?

Quote:
How come Dr. Jones has not officially filed or shared his nano-thermite evidence with Congress, NIST, or any official governmental body? Why the delay?

he's not in any way obliged to do what judy wood is doing. he and others are free to publicise their research in the best way they see fit.

Quote:
Why is Dr. Jones just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which made it to the Supreme Court?

why are all your questions such obvious variations on a very limited theme? the reason nobody takes judy wood seriously is because her theories are a joke. get over it....

Quote:
Why isn’t Dr. Jones and his affiliates supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal efforts to pursue 9/11 Truth, regardless of whether or not they agree on a theory?

as above....

Quote:
Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers?

dunno - unlike you I'm not obsessed with Steven Jones and I doubt if you're telling the full truth anyway.

Quote:
Shouldn’t we all be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if we do not agree with her conclusions?

again - why should he or anyone support a case that's based on complete garbage?

Quote:
Why was I removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition simply for asking Richard Gage to examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood?

who cares? perhaps the fact you're an annoying, timewasting troll had something to do with it....

Quote:
I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for bringing up Dr. Judy Wood to Richard Gage?

should I get my violin out?

by the way richard gage has formed a very effective campaigning organisation and got hundreds of architects and engineers to join the cause. why hasn't judy wood done something useful like that?

now about that hurricane erin thread that you're avoiding (and andrew johnson has been avoiding for 5 months)....

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18218

have you got anything to say, or are you just the mindless spambot you appear to be?

_________________
Nyetu pravdy v Isvyestyakh i nyetu isvyestyi v Pravde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I respectfully disagree with ya.

Please check out the following links and get back to me, your opinion seems very uninformed.

Please review the following evidence regarding Dr. Steven Jones, so that you can become familiar with all of the evidence that has led myself, and many others, to conclude that Dr. Steven Jones is purposely misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement. First he interfered with the Cold Fusion / Free Energy movement, and now it seems he is interfering with the 9/11 Truth Movement. Please review these links thoroughly, and with an open-mind, before drawing any conclusions:

1. ‘Hoax exposes incompetence or worse at a Bentham Open Access journal’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06/hoax-exposes-incompetence-o r-worse-at.html

2. ‘Bentham Open editor-in-chief resigns after fake paper is accepted for publication’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06/bentham-editors-resign.html

3. ‘A Peer-review of Dr. Jones’s Research’: http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=trouble_with_jones

4. ‘The Scientific Method Applied to the Thermite Hypothesis’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html

5. ‘Steven Jones' Contributions to Science, Humanity and the Planet’: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/cc/CB.html

6. ‘WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?’ http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&tas k=view&id=91&Itemid=60

7. ‘Thermite and Glowing Liquid Aluminum’ http://drjudywood.com/articles/why/why_indeed.html#Thermite

8. ‘Steven Jones, Cold Fusion, & Free Energy’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ7.html

9. ‘Steven Jones and the WTC “Spire” video’ (2min 35sec): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO9Iv_4ZfNI


I respect your opinion, and hope you respect mine too.

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M1 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
gruts
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmmmmm - why is belonging to the judy wood cult mainly about attacking steven jones?

and why are your questions about steven jones and richard gage so obviously biased and dishonest?

and why do you always fail to answer the questions that people ask you?

and when it's pointed out that you're wrong/lying/making things up - why do you just continue to do it regardless?

do you have anything meaningful to say in support of judy wood?

or - to put it another way - is there anything of substance that you can possibly say to support her?

because after going through her website I couldn't find any evidence for her "theories" that had a leg to stand on, and her fanboys who occasionally turn up here just repeat the same old stuff just like you have.

the "lack of rubble/dustified steel" bs is explained here (among other places):

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18217

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=13077

the "toasted cars" bs is explained here (among other places):

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=14231

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18171

and the hurricane erin bs is totally debunked here:

http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=18218

so do you have anything else to say on the subject that doesn't just repeat the same old irrational speculation and made up garbage that has already been completely discredited?

or is judy wood really the complete charlatan that she appears to be?

_________________
Nyetu pravdy v Isvyestyakh i nyetu isvyestyi v Pravde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gruts
Major Poster
Major Poster


Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
where is all the molten steel?

have you checked the evidence?


Link


there's a very long evidence-filled article on the subject with multiple links and photos here:

http://8real.proboards104.com/index.cgi?board=buildings&action=print&t hread=1157444399

I await your analysis with interest....

_________________
Nyetu pravdy v Isvyestyakh i nyetu isvyestyi v Pravde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PookztA
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Mar 2010
Posts: 73
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1st of all: Glowing metal could be molten aluminum, it does not have to be steel. Countless experiments have shown that molten aluminum glows bright orange at most temperatures, and only glows "silvery" at a narrow range of low temperatures. This has been confirmed time and time again, so it is very alarming that Dr. Steven Jones continuously claims that the molten metal observed would have had to be molten steel, because this is a FALSE and FRAUDULENT claim. It is WELL KNOWN that molten aluminum glows orange most often. See for yourself:


(molten aluminum glowing bright orange, as expected, at normal atmospheric pressure, during day light conditions. Source)

2ndly: If all of the steel was melted in that building, we should have had ENORMOUS pools of molten steel, pools so large that they would have been visible to everyone, and at least appearing in ONE photograph. It is very possible that the small group of firemen that claim to have seen molten metal could have been seeing molten aluminum. Still, why wouldn't ONE photo appear showing significant quantities of molten metal? Where did it all go? That whole building's core structure should have been melted by the thermite, that shoud be producing RIVERS and LAKES of molten metal. Where did it all go?!?! Why do only a small group of firemen claim there was pools of molten steel? Wouldn't the enormous rivers and lakes of molten steel have been witnessed by countless people, not just a small group? Perhaps nano-thermite was just used to cut the base of the buildings but an Energy Weapon disintegrated the vast majority of it? Isn't that possible?

Thirdly: If thermite caused a majority of the steel in that 1/4 mile high building to melt, or even to generate super hot steel dust, how were their survivors found within the building still??? These people would have been burnt to death by the air temperature at the very least! How come the people coated by the dust were not burnt AT ALL? Surely nano-thermite generated dust would have been extremely hot, yet it did not burn the people it coated, not one bit! Why? How? How did thousands and thousands of paper sheets survive such high temperatures? Surely they would have at least been burnt on their way out of the building. How were cars started on fire, but thousands of sheets of nearby paper were completely unharmed? High temperatures are not selective, they burn EVERYTHING they contact, so how did fragile paper and people survive the in the building but cars blocks away caught on fire??? Amazing.

Lastly: If any of you needs a refresher as to what Dr. Steven Jones is doing to the 9/11 Truth Movement, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with what he did to the Cold Fusion movement after being tipped off by his source of funding, the government's Department of Energy (DoE). This short video clip briefly discusses how Cold Fusion was real, and not only did Dr. Steven Jones rush to publish a false report to completely discredit the movement, but when MIT University later went on to verify the results, someone mysteriously changed their data during the publication process, which resulted in the MIT professor who lead the study resigning from MIT in protest. He was then MURDERED. Here is the short video clip:

Link


9/11 is about FREE ENERGY folks, I hope someday you all wake up to this. Sure, nano-thermite could have been used in part, but there is no doubt in my mind that FREE ENERGY was the major method used to bring down those buildings.

_________________
Abrahm
Spreading Psytrance & Love in the Midwest USA

Quote:

9/11 Challenge: Explain the Evidence http://pookzta.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Micpsi
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 505

PostPosted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GodSaveTheTeam wrote:
I seem to remember one of the Wood followers saying that it was the dust cloud that causes the damage to the cars.

But then one has to ask, why doesn't it severely damage the building it engulfs for blocks and blocks and of course the people covered in that dust...

Anyone?


Er, because people and buildings are not metallic, whereas the corrosive, acidic dust and sulphurous smoke created by burning gypsum in office wallboards chemically attacked anything made of steel:

Fe + H2SO4 = FeSO4 + H2,

the ferrous sulphate formed in the surfaces of cars and fallen girders then oxidizing into reddish-brown ferric oxide if the steel had been heated by red-hot embers falling on them:

2 FeSO4 = Fe2O3 + SO2 + SO3

(BTW, I have time neither for Wood NOR Jones, so don't think I am defending Wood - the cars were NOT burned by some some exotic DEW. Nor were they burnt by nano-thermate suspended in the smoke. They were corroded by acidic smoke. Simple as that).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group