Dr. Steven Jones & Dr. Judy Wood

Originally posted by dereks
She is actually - you seem to think the "truth" movement is homogenous in their conspiracy theories - They are not. Some "truthers" claim no plane hit the Pentagon, others admit that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon, some claim flight 77's door was not opened during the entire flight, others claim that is wrong.

Exactly. The 9/11 Truth Movement is a very loose term that is designated to describe all of those who do not believe the official story in my opinion.

Just because some major 9/11 Truth organizations do not support Dr. Wood does not mean she is not part of the truth movement.

If anything, many of the 9/11 Truth organizations were created by corrupt people to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Those people who planned 9/11 definitely helped to plan the 9/11 Truth Movement, because they had to have known people would question it. This is where people like Alex Jones and Dr. Steven Jones comes in, in my opinion, to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement away from the truth.

I honestly believe that FREE ENERGY was used, in great part, to bring those towers down, and that by covering up 9/11, "they" are also covering up the truth about suppressed Free Energy technology.

Just my 2 cents.

-Abe

A few concerns I wanted to address about the nano-thermite theory.

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 most 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:


9/11 is about FREE ENERGY folks, in my honest opinion. 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.

Originally posted by PookztA

Just because some major 9/11 Truth organizations do not support Dr. Wood does not mean she is not part of the truth movement.

If anything, many of the 9/11 Truth organizations were created by corrupt people to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Those people who planned 9/11 definitely helped to plan the 9/11 Truth Movement, because they had to have known people would question it. This is where people like Alex Jones and Dr. Steven Jones comes in, in my opinion, to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement away from the truth.


Just my 2 cents.

-Abe

She has a theory, that's all, no proof.

Just like the guy who claims 100% it was a UFO that brought down the Towers. He is convinced he is right.

Steven Jones is trying to solve the puzzle of 911 , and you believe him to be Dis-info?

But your Space laser , that only you believe in , is the answer.

Judy is the dis-info sir.

I can just hear the MSM with this!!

FOX NEWS REPORTER " Apparently the Truth Movement has had a revelation, and now believes Space Weapons brought down the Towers.

Sean,

1. No one said anything about "space lasers" or "Space beams". Not once in ALL of Dr. Judy Wood's presentations, nor on any portion of her website, will you see the term "space beam" or "space laser" used. This is disinfo, and an attempt to smear her very credible reseaerch.

2. Dr. Wood does not have "theories", she has an evidence-based conclusion and that is all. She doesn't theorize about who did it or why, she simply looks at evidence and facts, and draws the only possible conclusion that accounts for ALL the evidence. She has hundreds and hundreds of photos showing anomalies at ground zero, and from this evidence, she draws the only possible conclusion that could possibly explain all of the evidence. This is not a theory, this is a conclusion, and a strong, evidence-based one. Agree or Disagree, the choice is yours, but trying to discredit her by saying things like "space lasers" just demonstrates how closed-minded several people are within the 9/11 Truth Movement.

3. If anyone doubts that we have Directed Energy Weapon technology, then please examine the information here: drjudywood.com...

4. 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:


I respectfully disagree with you, but Thanks anyway for sharing your opinion.

Peace,

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

reply to post by PookztA


your link led me to a Military weapon site.

Maybe you can explain to me,

Where was this weapon located ?

How was it powered?

How was it removed after 911?

How did it Enable the Buildings to fall through Resistance.

That should be enough for now sir.

Thank you for YOUR Answers in advance.

EDIT TO ADD I see you had to log off , no problem.

If you could answer these questions, I will check this thread for them.

Take Care , look forward to your answers.

[edit on 14-3-2010 by Sean48]

You said you have been privileged to evidence-based thinking.

That's great.

So what I'm wonder, and I've asked you this 3 or 4 times now at least, is how exactly these energy beams Dr. Wood is talking about destroy the steel. I'm an electronics engineering major myself so I am familiar with various properties of EM waves and I was wondering if you could explain how what she is talking about happening would work exactly.

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by PookztA

Maybe you can explain to me,

1. Where was this weapon located ?

2. How was it powered?

3. How was it removed after 911?

4. How did it Enable the Buildings to fall through Resistance?

The following answers are my OPINION only. I do not speak for Dr. Wood, nor do I speak for her research. These are just my opinions.

1. Weapon was most likely located over head, based on the symmetry of the collapse, and the holes that were observed in the ground, viewed from sky shots, of ground zero. Many holes were observed in buildings and debris, suggesting that the Directed Energy came from an overhead source. Check out numerous photos of these holes, here: drjudywood.com...

2. The Directed Energy Weapon was most likely powered through Free Energy technology, because it would require a large amount of energy to cause the molecular dissocation of the steel and concrete of the WTC towers. It would require a lot of energy, but no more energy than nano-thermite would require. Both require similar large amounts of energy in order to destroy the WTC towers.

3. In MY OPINION, The weapon is most likely in orbit, or perhaps it was bounced off of an orbiting satellite. You are asking me to theorize beyond the general conclusions Dr. Wood's draws, so in a sense, you are asking me to wander into unknown territory. None of these questions or answers are required to come to the conclusion that an Energy Weapon of some kind was used to cause the molecular dissocation of the steel and concrete of the buildings. That is the only conclusion that matters. Asking "where was the weapon" is just a trivial detail.

4. By causing the molecular dissocation of the core components of the building, i.e. steel and concrete, this caused the building to explode into dust as the molecular structure was disrupted. This releases quite a bit of energy, as observed in The Hutchinson Effect, and its repeated experiments. This explains why 90% of the steel and concrete was turned to dust, and this also explains why that dust was not hot enough to burn the people it coated nor the buildings it landed on.

Please keep in mind it is just my opinion, I do not speak for Dr. Wood, nor do I speak on behalf of her work. I simply am giving you my opinion based on the basic understanding that I have generated.


Extra Information related to your questions:

1. Does such focused electromagnetic weaponry exist? Check it out: drjudywood.com...

2. The Hutchinson Effect compared to several pieces of evidence observed at Ground Zero: drjudywood.com...

3. Cliff Notes / Brief Intro to Dr. Judy Wood's research and findings: drjudywood.com...

4. Key Findings from Dr. Wood's research: drjudywood.com...

5. (MOST IMPORTANT)

Dr. Judy Wood, Ph.D - 'The New Hiroshima' Presentation (Part 1): www.youtube.com...

Hope this helps Sean, thanks for asking.

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

Originally posted by bsbray11

So what I'm wonder, and I've asked you this 3 or 4 times now at least, is how exactly these energy beams Dr. Wood is talking about destroy the steel.

Hey BsBray,

Sorry I missed your questions before.

Briefly, electromagnetic energy can be fine tuned so that it only resonates with the bonds of certain atoms and molecules. A good example of this is the Microwave, developed way back in the 1950's, which produces electromagnetic energy of a specific frequency and wavelength which primarily affects the bonds of Water Molecules. For this reason, it energizes and heats anything with water in it. At the same time, your microwave does not heat up your paper towel or napkin that might be underneath your bowl / plate of food. This is a great example of how electromagnetic energy can be fine tuned to energize certain atoms and molecules, while not interacting with others very much. This explains why steel and concrete were pulverized into dust particles that were so small and light that they actually were carried up and away from ground zero, while things like aluminum were only burned, while things like paper were unharmed.

If the atoms or molecules of a substance are energized enough, they will be so energized that they can overcome the intermolecular bonds that holds the molecules and atoms together, causing dissociation of the compounds structure. A good example of this, is excessively heating up an Egg or a Hot Dog using a microwave. They explode.

This is just my basic understanding of the concept. To observe how Electromagnetic Energy can be tuned and focused to affect substances like Metals and Concrete, please thoroughly research The Hutchinson Effect. A good place to start is here, where Dr. Wood contrasts anomalies observed at Ground Zero to those seen during The Hutchinson Effect. Also, near the bottom of the page, there are great videos which document the various effects of focused electromagnetic energy on metals and such, as seen in John Hutchinson's experiments.

Please check out The Hutchinson Effect here: drjudywood.com...

and here: www.hutchisoneffect.ca...

Hope this helps!

Thanks for asking,

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

Originally posted by PookztA
Briefly, electromagnetic energy can be fine tuned so that it only resonates with the bonds of certain atoms and molecules. A good example of this is the Microwave, developed way back in the 1950's, which produces electromagnetic energy of a specific frequency and wavelength which primarily affects the bonds of Water Molecules. For this reason, it energizes and heats anything with water in it. At the same time, your microwave does not heat up your paper towel or napkin that might be underneath your bowl / plate of food.

Right, but it heats up ALL water molecules as well as certain other kinds of molecules. So in other words there is no way of selecting which water molecules to heat up and which not to, it's just whatever molecules are struck by the energy are heated up.

Now apply that the WTC Towers. First of all the collapse started from the impact points on the exterior, before the roof or anything above had vaporized or whatever you want to call it. So how would this energy selectively go through so much of the steel structure to affect steel first in a specific location?

BsBray,

I am not an expert on understanding these things, so please work with me here.

From what I understand, the wavelength and frequency of the energy will determine which intramolecular and intermolecular bonds it will resonate with and 'energize'.

For this reason, it is possible for certain wavelengths / frequencies of electromagnetic energy to have different effects on different substances, depending on their properties.

In my honest opinion, it is very possible that field effects and electromagnetic energy could be used to cause the molecular dissociation of certain substances, while affecting other substances in a different way. This would explain why Steel and Concrete were affected differently than Aluminum, and why all three of those were affected differently than paper. This is just my opinion and my basic understanding of Dr. Wood's research, so perhaps to better understand her concusions you could email her your questions? I know she is very busy but she does respond to emails somewhat well...

Hope this helps, and please keep in mind it is just my opinion, I do not speak for Dr. Wood, nor do I speak on behalf of her work. I simply am giving you my opinion based on the basic understanding that I have generated.

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

Originally posted by PookztA
From what I understand, the wavelength and frequency of the energy will determine which intramolecular and intermolecular bonds it will resonate with and 'energize'.

For this reason, it is possible for certain wavelengths / frequencies of electromagnetic energy to have different effects on different substances, depending on their properties.

Right but we are talking about vaporizing steel right?

How do you think an energy beam can make the intelligent discrimination between this piece of steel in the roof, or on the 100th floor, etc., versus the first steel to fail around the impact areas? As far as I can see, it would NOT be possible to direct an EM energy beam that could intelligently pick which piece of steel to destroy first and where.

If an EM beam were sent down and hit the roof first, then the roof and then all the floors in between would vaporize first. Not columns around the impact area first. How could an EM beam target specific pieces of steel inside the building and bypass other steel made of the exact same elements, without vaporizing it too?


And aside from this, how much steel are you talking about dissociating on the molecular level and do you realize how much energy this would require, not even taking into account attenuation, and what kind of energy source we would be talking about here?


I agree these were not typical demolitions and new strategies/technologies were utilized because they were not conventional. But if anyone is spreading vague theories and disinformation I think you are barking up the wrong tree by attacking Dr. Jones. Dr. Wood doesn't have a workable theory at all, not even theoretically, because of problems like this that remain unaddressed. We might as well say advanced pure fusion bombs did it, because that is infinitely more likely to me yet we have no concrete evidence of that either and we can't even prove that these things even exist. It's just distracting from trying to attract more credible people to the movement to get the most obvious methods investigated first before moving on to looking at these vaguer and more speculative theories.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Dr. Wood doesn't have a workable theory at all, not even theoretically, because of problems like this that remain unaddressed. We might as well say advanced pure fusion bombs did it, because that is infinitely more likely to me yet we have no concrete evidence of that either and we can't even prove that these things even exist.

BsBray,

Well first of all, vaporization requires heat, so this is not vaporization, that is why Dr. Wood has coined the term 'dustification' to describe this process. Also, I wanted to state that I do not think only one method was used to bring down the buildings. I think it is very likely that there were a few explosives within the towers, perhaps to get the first segment to start collapsing so that it looked more like a controlled demolition? This is just my opinion of course.

Secondly, as for Dr. Wood's conclusions, you should probably look more into them for yourself. She doesnt simply conclude that a single energy beam of some kind was used to destroy the towers. She concludes that Field Effects combined with an Energy Weapon was used.

Again, from what I understand, she concludes that field effects, in combination with a directed energy weapon, was what brought the buildings down. Please understand that I am not knowledgeable enough about her conclusion and research to answer your questions fully, in fact, you should direct them to her. Her email is listed on her website.

Are you familiar with Hurricane Erin and how close it was to New York City on 9/11? Are you familiar with the huge change in Magnetosphere readings observed in Alaska just as the 9/11 attacks commenced? Are you fully familiar with the vide variety of anomalies observed by The Hutchinson Effect, many of which were also observed at ground zero?

Honestly, I believed in the nano-thermite theory for sooooo long, but then I encountered Dr. Wood's research and saw that there were tons and tons of evidence that the nano-thermite cannot explain, but could be explained by an energy weapon of some kind. Her conclusions and research are the only ones that have been able to account for ALL the evidence, so that is why I support her so much.

The best way to learn about her research is to watch her presentation. Please watch it if you really want to become familiar with her research:

Dr. Judy Wood, Ph.D - 'The New Hiroshima' Presentation (Part 1): www.youtube.com...

Thanks,

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

Originally posted by PookztA
Secondly, as for Dr. Wood's conclusions, you should probably look more into them for yourself.

I have before, and I could find nothing coherent enough to be compelling to me personally.

Again, from what I understand, she concludes that field effects, in combination with a directed energy weapon, was what brought the buildings down.

That's fine but until she comes up with a technical article that explains how this would work I'm going to be lost when it comes to what she's claiming. I'm one of those people that has to be shown something before they will take it for granted. I've seen the "Hutchinson effect" stuff too but until it's reliably repeatable (by anyone with the right equipment) and predictable it's in the same boat.

Originally posted by bsbray11

That's fine but until she comes up with a technical article that explains how this would work I'm going to be lost when it comes to what she's claiming. I'm one of those people that has to be shown something before they will take it for granted. I've seen the "Hutchinson effect" stuff too but until it's reliably repeatable (by anyone with the right equipment) and predictable it's in the same boat.

Wow so you don't believe in the Hutchinson Effect? even though he has demonstrated it and video taped it repeatedly in the presence of witnesses? Do you realize that the military, NASA, and Los Alamos laboratories found his research so important that they heavily researched his findings?

The Hutchinson Effect is integral to Dr. Wood's conclusions...

Anyway, it is understandable that you want more technical information, it is something I would like too, but I am also very much aware of the fact that our government and military lies to us, and would definitely not reveal technologies about such a weapon, making technical information about how it works impossible for us to acquire.

The basic reason I support Dr. Wood's research and conclusions so vigorously is because NOTHING ELSE but an energy weapon can account for all of the anomalies observed at ground zero. Not trying to sound like a parrot or anything, but seeing electrical burns in cars like this one is just one small example of an anomalie that is not explained by nano-thermite, but is explained by energy.

Here are a few pics that show the electrical burns that could not have been caused by thermite:

Example of electrical burn from the Hutchinson Effect
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/32ee79d4901f.jpg[/atsimg]

Electrical burns and interior damage observed near ground zero (why is the outside not nearly as damaged as the inside?)
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e6bd0804ca96.jpg[/atsimg]

More electrical burns seen on vehicles near ground zero
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f0004107ec5c.jpg[/atsimg]


and these are just a few... there are sooo many, it is unbelievable.

If you honestly have any technical questions, please email Dr. Wood, and perhaps she can answer them. Here email is lisajudy [at] nctv.com (taken from the front page of her website).

Thanks,

-Abe


[edit on 14-3-2010 by PookztA]

So, as many of you know, I was recently removed from the AE911Truth.org petition in silence, simply for asking Richard Gage if he had heard about Dr. Wood in a private email. I was hoping to help Richard Gage by mentioning Dr. Wood because I had just recently heard about her and wanted to makes sure he knew about her research too, but instead of replying to me or even just ignoring my email, I was silently removed from the petition, and I never received a reply.

After a week went by, I received my first email ever from AE911Truth, an email from Mark Graham of AE911Truth who had found out I was telling people about the incident, and wanted to talk to me about it.

Here is my recent email back to him:

Dear Mr. Graham & AE911Truth,

The reason you did not see many web results of me discussing Dr. Judy Wood while I was still on the petition, is because I simply had not made many posts about her until AFTER I was removed from your petition. My posting is a direct result of your removing me from the Petition, so I hate to say it, but you brought it on yourself to some degree.

Normally, when a member asks your organization a question in a private email, I would expect that your organization would answer that member’s private question, not silently remove them from the petition (especially considering how much verbal and financial support I have provided AE911Truth). Instead, I received NO REPLY, and was silently removed from the petition simply for asking what I thought was a helpful question. Very strange how AE911Truth treats its supporters…

Furthermore, I was not contacted by any of you at AE911Truth until AFTER you found out I was posting information about the occurrence, which is very telling to me as to what the “scope of focus” is for your organization. If the “scope of focus” was to find out what really happened on 9/11 and to bring those criminals to justice, one would think that AE911Truth would encourage supporters to email them tips and helpful questions, not silently ban them from the petition for doing so. If the tip or question was unhelpful, it could be ignored, or a reply could be given stating why the tip was not helpful, but instead, you just removed me from your petition in silence. You couldn’t send me a message in reply to my email question, but you could send me a message once you saw me telling others what happened? Very strange.

Why did you email me after you removed me from the petition, but not before? You can email me after you remove me from the petition, but not while I was still a petition signer and financial supporter? Very strange.

You can email me after you find out I am telling people about what happened, but you can’t email me back an answer to the simple question I asked in a private email? Very strange.

Is your “scope of focus” to disrespect the very people who are trying to help you with tips and financial donations? Very strange.

I didn’t find out about Dr. Judy Wood until just a few days before I sent that email to Richard Gage, and that is why I sent it, because I wanted to make sure he knew about her as well, and maybe would consider looking into her research. I was trying to HELP. Instead of doing the professional thing and writing back to me to let me know if my email was helpful or not, I was silently removed from your petition. Not only was this move disrespectful, but it was unprofessional and immature. Again, very strange.

The rudeness and the suppression of Dr. Judy Wood’s research is extremely telling to me, and to my surprise, your organization is just as much a part of the suppression of Dr. Wood’s research as any other organization out there.

The truth shall set us free, so I strongly encourage you, for the sake of your country, to keep an OPEN-MIND, to consider ALL evidence and ALL research, and to abstain from suppressing any one’s efforts to bring about 9/11 Truth. If anything, you should be supporting those efforts and collaborating with Dr. Wood, unless of course, your goal is to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement away from the truth about 9/11, a truth that involves suppressed Free Energy technology that was used, in great part, to destroy the buildings on that day.

Sure nano-thermite could have been used, but nano-thermite alone does not explain all of the evidence, such as electrical burns in cars blocks away, power outages which occurred all around ground zero, flipped cars blocks away, severely bent and distorted steel and metal showing extreme similarities to the results observed in The Hutchinson Effect electromagnetic energy experiments, and much, much more.

...continued on next page...

[edit on 15-3-2010 by PookztA]

...continued from above...

Only by keeping an open-mind and considering all the evidence and all possible explanations of that evidence, will we be able to restore justice to our country. Please consider doing so.

If you love your country as much as I do, then I suggest you stop suppressing the work of Dr. Wood and start considering it as valid. She has done more for this country than most people have, especially with her legal efforts, one case which made it all the way to the Supreme Court before being unlawfully dismissed.

Suppressing the patriotic efforts of people like Dr. Judy Wood and myself will not lead you to the truth, Mr. Graham, so please consider reevaluating what you are trying to accomplish with AE911Truth.

Thank you for more clearly defining AE911Truth’s “scope of focus” to me.

Have a great afternoon,

-Abe

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

reply to post by bsbray11


The problem is, showing evidence other than video and photo's is impossible until a completely unhindered investigation is allowed. Its a loaded case to begin with because as soon as data and anomaly's are shown in which conventional methods could not have been used, you enter the realm of secret weapons and other facts that can not be verified.



[edit on 15-3-2010 by SmokeandShadow]

[edit on 15-3-2010 by SmokeandShadow]

As an example of Dr Wood's poor research, she claims on her website that the terrestrial magnetic field (as measured by various geophysics sites in Alaska) fluctuated considerably about the time Flight 17 hit the North Tower and then continued to vary wildly throughout the day on 9/11. What she doesn't tell you because it destroys the significance of what she is implying (namely, that some exotic weapon was used to turn the towers mostly into dust) is that, if one looks back at the archived recordings of magnetic field variations during the previous days, weeks and months, one finds many similar fluctuations from a steady background level, many of which were more violent than the very average variations recorded for that terrible day! In other words, she interprets what was merely an average fluctuation in the Earth's magnetic field (something which happens much of the time) as some kind of smoking gun that an exotic weapon affecting the Earth's magnetic field in North America was used to destroy the WTC. This ignoring the statistics of magnetic field fluctuations is unforgivably poor science. It strips all scientific credibility from her work. It amounts to cherry-picking the data (focusing on the data that supports your hypothesis and ignoring that which contradicts it).

Originally posted by micpsi
What she doesn't tell you because it destroys the significance of what she is implying (namely, that some exotic weapon was used to turn the towers mostly into dust) is that, if one looks back at the archived recordings of magnetic field variations during the previous days, weeks and months, one finds many similar fluctuations from a steady background level, many of which were more violent than the very average variations recorded for that terrible day!

can you provide proof that the fluctuation observed right as the 9/11 attacks occurred was actually a normal fluctuation, and not a significant one?

can you provide proof that the precise timing of this fluctuation, starting just as the 9/11 attacks occurred and ending shortly after they ended, was indeed just a coincidence and nothing more?