Why are AE911Truth & Wikipedia Censoring Information about Dr. Judy Wood?

originally posted by: pteridine

Think about a ray that would reduce metal to a 'dust.' It would have to have enough energy to break metallic bonds and essentially vaporize the metal after first heating it to its boiling point.

You are sorta getting on the right track, but you are assuming that the weapon would be a KINETIC weapon. But using simple logic we have already unquestionably ruled out any use of a KINETIC weapon (bombs, thermite, jet fuel etc) - because using a KINETIC weapon the result would still be almost the entire weight and mass of the towers crashing to the ground. Seismic signal, tiny rubble pile, and no NYC flooding from Bathtub damage prove that this a KINETIC WEAPON was not used.

But what about a WEAPON which uses an entirely different mechanism - - - WE KNOW THAT MATTER IS ENERGY AND THE SPACE BETWEEN ATOMIC PARTICALS IS VAST! SOLID MATTER APPEARS SOLID BECAUSE OF THE ENERGETIC MOLECULAR BONDS WITHING THE ATOMS. So consider the possibility of a mechanism that could 'reverse' the molecular "glue" that holds matter as solid! This is what we are seeing here... MOLECULAR DISASSOCIATION.

The Hutchison EFFECT which does the same thing, is done by INTERSECTING VARIOUS MICROWAVE BEAMS within a STATIC FIELD. This is not new... it has been known for a long time but kept secret.

originally posted by: pteridine
Converting WTC1 and 2 to dust would take an enormous amount of energy;

Bravo again my friend!

Any good detective simply starts by eliminating the impossible, and then what is left must be the truth - HOWEVER IMPROBABLE!

So we have proven that KINETIC WEAPONS were not used - this is IMPOSSIBLE considering the facts of what happened to the buildings. We know that the towers were turned to dust (HOWEVER IMPROBABLE!!!!! - this still remains a FACT) Logic tells us that 'beams' from somewhere would not have enough energy to DISASSOCIATE most of the molecules in the Towers, therefore the process that was used most have something to do with FREE ENERGY.

This is why Dr. Judy Wood claims that what we saw on 911 is a demonstration/evidence of FREE ENERGY TECHNOLGY... ...a weaponized version of that of course. Tesla, of course discovered this long ago, but was afraid that it would be WEAPONIZED.

originally posted by: pteridine Satellites in low earth orbit have to move, so there is a bit of a targeting problem

BTW, Dr. Judy Wood never claims that Satelites were involved with this Directed Energy Weapon. This is a myth invented by the cover-up.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

Bingo. As demonstrated by the concrete dust all over that end of the city. There was a huge amount of energy involved in "just a collapse" btw.

If that was steel you'd have seen a huge fireball instead.

a reply to: buddha

but it looks like some space weapon shot from above. that would explain why it founded down

Why did the collapse start at the impact floors?

a reply to: epowell

This Hurricane, was hardly mentioned on the NEWS, it started one week before 911, then made a b-line towards NYC, reached it zenith and closest proximity to NYC precisely at the time of the 'attacks', then immediately thereafter made a hairpin turn, went away and dissipated.

You didn't even bother to look at hurricane tracks by year did you.
Look Here
It doesn't even come close to NYC.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: pteridine

Maybe you haven't paid attention to her presentation. Dr. Wood never claimed it was a satellite beam. She just went over how there was a program for such weapons during the Reagan era to demonstrate that such an idea ISN'T unheard of.

Except that program involved kinetic energy weapons and directed EM. Well, PROTEUS too. But magic dustifying beams don't exactly fit physics. I know she'll ask for proof of a negative "prove they don't have something no one knows about" but that's because her conjecture is full of holes and indefensible and she knows it.

Also, she specifically highlighted how the metal couldn't have heated to a super high temperature because other effects from the heat would've been seen. That's why she brings up The Hutchison Effect. It's electromagnetic and causes anomalies in metals. Therefore that idea ISN'T unheard of either.

The Hutchison effect doesn't exist.

Can any of you explain wtf happened to some of these firetrucks that were at the scene?




Just your average vehicle fire right?

Something you'll notice in these photos is that the burned ones were running when the dust cloud came through, they sucked some in and ground the engine up.

a reply to: epowell

Matter is not energy. Intermolecular bonds require energy to break. Molecular iron is pyrophoric and burns violently. Iron dust was not found in huge quantities downwind. And the Hutchison effect is tripe.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: pteridine

Maybe you haven't paid attention to her presentation. Dr. Wood never claimed it was a satellite beam. She just went over how there was a program for such weapons during the Reagan era to demonstrate that such an idea ISN'T unheard of.

Except that program involved kinetic energy weapons and directed EM. Well, PROTEUS too. But magic dustifying beams don't exactly fit physics. I know she'll ask for proof of a negative "prove they don't have something no one knows about" but that's because her conjecture is full of holes and indefensible and she knows it.

Also, she specifically highlighted how the metal couldn't have heated to a super high temperature because other effects from the heat would've been seen. That's why she brings up The Hutchison Effect. It's electromagnetic and causes anomalies in metals. Therefore that idea ISN'T unheard of either.

The Hutchison effect doesn't exist.

Can any of you explain wtf happened to some of these firetrucks that were at the scene?




Just your average vehicle fire right?

Something you'll notice in these photos is that the burned ones were running when the dust cloud came through, they sucked some in and ground the engine up.

Sucked some dust in and MELTED and DISFIGURED the engine.

Yet if it was thermite or anything kinetic all of the people that were engulfed in the dust would've surely been killed instantly.

Thank you proving my point so eloquently.

originally posted by: Bedlam
Something you'll notice in these photos is that the burned ones were running when the dust cloud came through, they sucked some in and ground the engine up.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
Sucked some dust in and MELTED and DISFIGURED the engine.

Yet if it was thermite or anything kinetic all of the people that were engulfed in the dust would've surely been killed instantly.

Thank you proving my point so eloquently.

Yes Bravo Bedlam is thinking well... that is something I had not thought of WHY SOME OF THE "TOASTED CARS'" ENGINE BLOCKS WERE MISSING AND SOME NOT... yes possibly they were running at the time when the dust cloud came thru and they sucked in dust which was still "activated".

...and on the topic of "activated" dust and other stuff - it is clear that once the 'activation' starts, something like a 'domino effect' begins [this also perhaps might explain the 'free energy' aspect, the way the 'energy' of one molecule is released, causing the next to release and so on... perhaps a molecule of steel is in fact something like a packet of stored energy? So perhaps 'free energy' is somehow a way of releasing the inherent 'stored energy' in a material? Afterall, this is what fire is - it is a release, a transformation of the stored energy in a material --- but fire is a different type of process, kinetic rather than molecular].

This explains why after 911, for years, they kept on bringing in truckload after truckload of fresh soil to Ground Zero... bringing in fresh soil, and hauling out the previous loads of soil (now 'soaked' with activated stuff). It is well known that soil has the effect of QUENCHING such reactive molecular activation.

originally posted by: epowell
...and on the topic of "activated" dust and other stuff - it is clear that once the 'activation' starts, something like a 'domino effect' begins [this also perhaps might explain the 'free energy' aspect, the way the 'energy' of one molecule is released, causing the next to release and so on... perhaps a molecule of steel is in fact something like a packet of stored energy? So perhaps 'free energy' is somehow a way of releasing the inherent 'stored energy' in a material?

I suggest studying some physics, that is just garbage.

This explains why after 911, for years, they kept on bringing in truckload after truckload of fresh soil to Ground Zero...

Your source for that is what exactly?

It is well known that soil has the effect of QUENCHING such reactive molecular activation.

So as it is well known you will have no trouble showing a valid source for that claim....

originally posted by: epowell
WHY SOME OF THE "TOASTED CARS'" ENGINE BLOCKS WERE MISSING

Any evidence any car blocks were missing? Anything at all?

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
Sucked some dust in and MELTED and DISFIGURED the engine.

Yet if it was thermite or anything kinetic all of the people that were engulfed in the dust would've surely been killed instantly.

Thank you proving my point so eloquently.

"Kinetic" means that the energy is delivered by an extremely fast or extremely massive (or both) projectile. Like a rail gun, or a Thor rod. It would be meaningless in this context. Your bystanders couldn't have been "engulfed" in a kinetic weapon.

Thermite is a very specific sort of redox reaction. It's very energetic, but slow and sloppy. Although there are very specialized explosives and flares that you could, if you stretched a bit, call a thermite (there are many). In the context of 'what happened to the vehicles', that also is meaningless. Unless you're positing some sort of thermite cannon, and that won't work - it has to be in a lump to go.

What DID happen is that the vehicles sucked in very fine abrasive concrete and gypsum dust whilst running. It would also have plugged the radiator. All you need to do is get the engine space hot enough between the two of them to melt a rubber fuel line, and they will burn right up. This is why you see parallel parked cars not burn, but the emergency vehicles and cars at stop lights did.

originally posted by: epowell
Yes Bravo Bedlam is thinking well... that is something I had not thought of WHY SOME OF THE "TOASTED CARS'" ENGINE BLOCKS WERE MISSING AND SOME NOT... yes possibly they were running at the time when the dust cloud came thru and they sucked in dust which was still "activated".

If by 'activated' you mean fine, abrasive and insulating, then, yes, that's what happened. But if you look at photos of burned vehicles downtown, what you see is -

1) they are emergency vehicles
2) or, they are at traffic lights
3) or, they're at a place you'd leave a car running, like in front of a hotel

I looked at many a photo right after they started coming out, and I didn't find any that weren't obviously in a place you'd expect them to be running. After they towed them to a lot to get them out of the way, of course, all bets were off. But when still on the street, that seems to be the theme.

originally posted by: epowell
perhaps a molecule of steel is in fact something like a packet of stored energy?

Actually, it has the lowest energy of any element, neither fissioning nor fusing with any net gain.

So perhaps 'free energy' is somehow a way of releasing the inherent 'stored energy' in a material? Afterall, this is what fire is - it is a release, a transformation of the stored energy in a material --- but fire is a different type of process, kinetic rather than molecular].

There is no 'free energy'. Mass can convert to energy in some cases. Note I said mass, not matter.

Fire is a chemical reaction. It is not kinetic. It IS molecular.

It is well known that soil has the effect of QUENCHING such reactive molecular activation.

Pardon...I thought Judy and all her believers deny knowing the mechanism of the 'death beam'? If that is true, then you cannot posit 'well known' attributes of it. Because you have denied knowing what it was.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: epowell
WHY SOME OF THE "TOASTED CARS'" ENGINE BLOCKS WERE MISSING

Any evidence any car blocks were missing? Anything at all?

Never saw that one. Saw some meltdowns where the engine had very thoroughly burned.

Next we can say a few things about HURRICANE ERIN.

Please have a peek at this clip - 3:45, and 6:35, and 8:45 are the highlights.
www.youtube.com...

Very interesting what she explains at 8:45 about Erin moving northwest and a high pressure system moving east it just so happened that these two systems INTERSECTED (counter rotational intersection) precisely above NYC at precisely the morning of 911!

Just a coincidence, right?

So what will this INTERSECTION of counter rotating weather systems produce?? You guessed it, A STATIC FIELD!

Now let's have another peek at how John Hutchison gets his effects on material (which parallel the effects seen on 911). Hutchision does two things:
1) starts with a STATIC FIELD
2) then WITHIN THAT STATIC FIELD, he insects microwave beams at various frequencies.

So assuming that the Hutchison Effect is what was used on 911, then there had to have been a STATIC FIELD in NYC... well, the intersection of Erin and the high pressure system produced that, BINGO --- now all you need is some way to direct MICROWAVE BEAMS to the target areas.

Oh my oh my....

originally posted by: epowell
that these two systems INTERSECTED (counter rotational intersection) precisely above NYC at precisely the morning of 911!

Erin was 800km away from New York, so why claim it was on top of it?

Just a coincidence, right?

No, just a silly made up story.

So what will this INTERSECTION of counter rotating weather systems produce?? You guessed it, A STATIC FIELD!

Your valid source for that silly claim is what? Remember, Erin was 800km away....

Now let's have another peek at how John Hutchison gets his effects on material

He fakes it, as he is just a fraud!

So assuming that the Hutchison Effect

Which does not exist....

is what was used on 911,

So the non existent Hutchison Effect was not used on 9/11....

well, the intersection of Erin and the high pressure system produced that,

Except there was no intersection....

Oh my oh my....

Yes, you really can make crap up!

a reply to: hellobruce

Yes, you really can make crap up!

That summarizes the entire 911 conspiracy theory.

THE BIGGEST SMOKING GUN!

Remember our THREE QUESTIONS? ...forgotten already? [if yes, then go back a few pages > I have posted them repeatedly LOL]

While it is very tempting to go off into discussions about FREE ENERGY, this will be completely lost and over the heads of those who have not come to grips with THE BIGGEST SMOKING GUN on 911. This clips starts out with (believe it or not, RICHARD GAGE, making brilliant points to introduce this SMOKING GUN] - If you can get thru the first 2 minutes of this clip, and contemplate the true meaning of what is presented to you here - you are doing well! [but watch the WHOLE VIDEO, you will be doing EVEN BETTER lol ]

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: epowell
RICHARD GAGE, making brilliant points

This is the quality of Gage's "research"!



Also some very accurate comments from your video....

Richard Caged-in his theory, is making money so why change what's not broken?? He doesn't care about the truth, he cares about his business endeavors!! I'm so glad to see /hear people in the audience asking him questions in which he nervously has to stutter. My other thought is that he is controlled opposition. Way to go Field Interference,

did he ever explain anything!??? lol haha ... the way he "avoided" the question by staring at his feet/floor ... haha ha. and then ... "next question??" guy is a joke.