Size | Seeds | Peers | Completed |
---|---|---|---|
1.19 GiB | 0 | 0 | 0 |
911 9-11 WTC Judy Wood Star Wars Directed Energy Weapons DEW
Dr Judy Wood at the Breakthrough energy Movement conference, 2012 Holland
Title: The dawn of a new age, evidence of breakthrough energy technology on 9-11
For many years, we have heard that a “free-energy device is just around the corner,” but it never seems to come to fruition. Nikola Tesla wanted to give free energy to the world nearly 100 years ago but was afraid it would fall into the wrong hands and be used for destructive purposes. Well, that is no longer just a risk; it has already happened. However, until we understand just how powerful this technology is as well as how powerful the interests are that control it, we won’t see it in general use. We first need to respect what this technology can do, otherwise it would be like leaving a gun cabinet unlocked around children who do not know what guns can do. We also need the world to see what this technology has done. This technology was used to destroy the World Trade Center complex on 9-11-01 and was a demonstration of a new kind of free-energy technology in front of the entire world. As more people around the world recognize this, the less power the controlling interests will have. And if the entire world knows that free-energy technology exists, individuals can openly build their own devices and share their designs with others. It won’t be a secret!
BIO: Dr. Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division. Dr. Wood received her B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering), M.S. Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics, 1983), and Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992).
___
It is now more than a decade since 9-11 took place, and in all that time no unassailable, permanent, or, in pragmatic terms, politically influential progress has been made in determining exactly and irrefutably what took place on that day— or what did not take place.
But now Dr. Judy Wood, in this unique, powerful, landmark work of forensic scientific investigation, provides us at last with that determination: She shows us what did happen on 9-11. Although Dr. Wood’s scientific training and understanding are deep and complex, she has the gift of being able, without compromise, to express ideas of the greatest complexity in terms readily understandable to any interested and attentive lay person.
More must be said about these subjects in a minute, but this all-important fact remains: Those who study Dr. Wood’s research fairly, openly, and thoroughly will take away with them the gift of knowing once and for all what happened on 9-11. They will take away the gift of knowing that they have at last been shown the truth clearly and plainly, no matter how different this truth may be from what they have been told for many years by supposedly higher authorities, from the government itself on through newspapers, journalists, progressive radio programs and commentators, even figures from the so-called “9-11 truth movement.”
Dr. Wood’s research will give all those who study it carefully a solid foundation for the courage to believe not what they may have been told by one authority or another on any level and for many years, but to believe instead what their own minds, their own eyes, and their own reason tell them: That is, scientific truth as revealed through close forensic study of all of the evidence that has been left behind. As Dr. Wood says again and again, she arrives at truth through the study of evidence. The truth is not what anyone, no matter who they are, might say it is. To the place where the evidence leads, and to that place alone — that is where the truth is.
comment: Judy Wood's hypothesis on 9-11 is the only one I've heard so far that makes sense. Her theories are a great tool for unmasking false truthers, disinformation agents.
files:
audio
Dr. Judy Wood - Where Did the Towers Go.mp3
text
911 9-11 WTC Judy Woods Star Wars Directed Energy Weapons DEW.pdf
Where Did the Towers Go by Dr Judy Wood excerpt.pdf
videos
GlobalBEM - Dr Judy Wood _ Evidence of Breakthrough Energy Technology on 9-11.mp4
tags: 9-11, 911, wtc, star wars, DEW, dustification, false flag, inside job, future, technology, physics
Comments
Thank You
Another new theory which is also plausible.
Not plausible, she's a nut
Not plausible, she's a nut job
aye
right enough Datars, i am sure there has been a fair bit of debate about her on the old forums.
and if i remember correctly she was pretty much debunked.
she gets destroyed from question one here
edit to add.. SHE GETS FUCKING PWNED EVERY SINGLE QUESTION
EDIT AGAIN to add that... this guy is fucking brilliant, calm, fair, informed and does an exceptionally good job.
she though looks like an utter buffoon
EDIT AGAIN to add . seriously, WATCH THIS youtube video.
that guyt shows great patience and is fair.
she is shown to be just a blatant idiot,.... she gets ripped a new one every couple of minutes.
she is now made of 98.725% anus!
god help us!
Thanks aye for the YouTube
Thanks aye for the YouTube link. I rest my case, Nut...... Job.....
Up-Date: Yep! she is what she is. There is no real science to prove what she clams. Her comments about the photo and the debris field makes it clear she's a nut-job. Its this kind of stuff that make the 9-11 Truthers look bad
dustification of steel
They probably put some LSD in her drink to make her appear nutty and confused. She never appears nutty in her lectures though. Don't you think this is rather strange? The CIA just love doing such stuff. And then character assassination is a method to deviate people from the evidence. It's not about her, it's about the evidence, it's about physics, and it's about logic. Obviously this interview is a frame-up job, and Greg Jenkins tries hard to make Judy Wood look as nutty as possible.
The seismic data clearly shows that nine tenths of the mass of WTC had never reached the ground, therefore the process of dustification must have occurred. There's even that famous sequence of pictures showing a massive vertical steel bar fall to dust. And don't forget the strange event of car engines blowing up.
Ask any mainstream physicists about this, and they're simply clueless about how this may have happened, but it did. So apparently some unknown technology must have been used. And secret military technology, by definition, is secret and therefore unknown to mainstream scientists.
Ask yourself how a standard physics laboratory looked like back in 1938 when they developed the first atom bomb at Los Alamos, and compare this to the type of laboratories and technology they had access to at Los Alamos. It was like two different worlds. Why should it be different now? Talk about a runaway civilization.
There are two plausible options here: Dimitri Khalezov's underground nuke theory, and then the directed energy weapon hypothesis.
There's just no other way to explain for the missing rubble, the dustification, and the seismic data. Dimitri tries hard to explain what he saw by conventional science, and he goes as far as this is possible within the framework of conventional nuclear physics.
Crush-zone physics after an underground nuclear fission may explain crushed and dustified rocks, but not dustified steel. Apparently there's a technology capable of disintegrating the structural integrity of steel, probably with surprisingly little energy, like the Hutchinson effect.
Hutchinson Effect Explained
https://youtu.be/TIqIT9avewU
Even before 9-11 had happened, it would have been reasonable to assume that the military owns such technology, and assuming they had such technology, then why not use it for their false flag?
You simply cannot make disappear 200'000 tons of steel with technology based on known conventional physics. And I doubt very much that a nuclear fission could dustify steel, but I could be wrong here.
No LSD in this women's drink
No LSD in this women's drink. This is the real deal, she's a REAL... Nut Job
dustification?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dustification
and check any other dictionary. she just made that word up!
if something is turned to dust it's pulverised.
the woman is a a bit of a raging nutbar.
No LSD involved..
All he does is very politely try to pin her down to the all important numbers... which she hasn't a clue about and specifics about her claims.... which again.. she has no clue about and avoids like the plague.
also note the vast usage of weasel words.
she's a muppet
Dr. Judy Wood - Dustification
Dr. Judy Wood - Dustification, what BS
Check out the YouTube and read the comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb2i8R5YlRk
yup..
she be an utter fuckwit.
Until any nay-sayers in this
Until any nay-sayers in this thread can explain the Hutchison effect, scalar energy and electrical and energetic effects that have yet to be named, I'd say all of you are the fuckwits. ;)
I tried to explain it on the old forum and it went over everyone's heads, so I guess you all should STFU and study Tesla, Hutchison, Dollard and all the other brilliant researchers in this field. Until then, it's all pearls before swine and all, I suppose... :P
nah man
I'll shout it out loud ,that woman is a fucking nutbar.
If you are saying that THIS PARTICULAR case.. this woman is 100% bona fide, talks sense, and isn't full of shit .. i am fucking gob smacked
she was vacuous in that interview, speaking in nothing but the vaguest terms, weasel words and refused to talk specifics.
SHE IS NONE OF THE ABOVE as I am sure all of the above could happily explain in specifics every question the interviewer asked
I am saying THIS woman , is more full of shit than the barracks waste pipes after curry night
Hutchison is a fraud,
unworthy of being mentioned in the same sentence as Tesla. Dollard has repeatedly failed to produce anything that works, despite being showered with money for decades. A lot of his former backers are pretty pissed off.
Here come the trolls
The calm interviewer touted here keeps operating with the idea that we plebes would be able to look up such a process that could "dustify" materials. He asks " where has it been done in a lab?" Here's where people fall into two camps: 1) the 'science" wonks like the critics here who think they know what there is to be known,... whereas they know only the mainstream presentations spoonfed to the peeps; and 2) those who can well believe that the military has tech beyond what we are allowed to know.
so our interviewer keeps coming back to mainstream ideas he knows: lasers, melting, vaporization. All of which would cause melting, not turning to dust. Also vaporization would send plumes up like smoke. At the beginning of the video it is shown how the dust falls down steadily and does not rise as would be with vaporization. By defeating his pet idea, he does not defeat that something other than what he can speculate was used.
It seems obvious that it must be something OTHER than his chosen straw man lasers and normally understood energy weapons. But what then would it be? Judy doesn't know the specifics (if it is black tech) but she knows what it isn't. This is a process of elimination.
No matter how hard the critics here try to put everyone down, they never address the anomalies and glaring outpoints, which would point to planned ops. The freefall, building 7 never hit by debris. What about building 6? you hear much of that either? it was gutted. by what? Where is the steel debris? Dust. How is it that immediately the next day fleets of trucks moved in and carted off the debris remaining, selling it to China; no forensic examination was able to be carried out. did you read about the vociferous complaints of the Fire dept and arson dept who are required by law to make a report following such events. Answer WHO blocked this.
You critics smirk but have nothing much else to show your intellectual curiosity. What about the pilots for 9-11 truth, or architects. Oh I know, you always come back and say (without any references) "it has been debunked." Well, WHO debunked so many professionals in their fields? Government shills? You critics are the shills. Con-troll-ed opposition.
holy shit
that was a bit muffled but I imagine that's normal when yer head is so far up your own anus your anal sphincter is worn like a necklace.
THIS WOMAN SHOWS HERSELF TO BE A BUFFOON.
she does a pretty good job of debunking herself
wow..........
having a check on Hutchinson...
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Hutchison
http://skepdic.com/hutchisonhoax.html
http://www.hutchisoneffect.ca/ (lol it's like a geo-cities/angelfire site... blingtastic!)
seems he's not so highly regarded and has admitted hoaxing in the past... not exactly what i would call a trust-able source
?
Her appearance makes her look like Mrs.Doyle from Father Ted trying to present something important.
why is there so much hostility to her theory in particular?
John Hutchinson??
John Hutchinson is a self-taught something in a woollen hat , what makes him such an authority on anything?
So both John Hutchinson and Judy Wood are assholes ...
Two assholes together just add up to a doubled asshole. Why quote one idiot to dispel the theories of another idiot?