+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 1 7 8 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 145

Thread: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

  1. Link to Post #121
    Avalon Member lucidity's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2014
    Posts
    1,089
    Thanks
    1,029
    Thanked 4,749 times in 956 posts

    Default Re: Dr. Judy Wood IRREFUTABLE(Free Energy Technology on 9/11)

    Quote Posted by viking (here)
    Not sure if this has been posted...excellent video...even the ignorant cannot deny that the official story is a lie...tried to embed but saying video no longer available...

    http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin...cgi?read=66778

    Viking
    A+ Viking.
    Please help spread the news about pizzagate.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to lucidity For This Post:

    viking (17th January 2017)

  3. Link to Post #122
    Avalon Member viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th March 2010
    Posts
    3,691
    Thanks
    6,143
    Thanked 14,434 times in 2,184 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote [LEFT]There are many fascinating details this video doesn't touch - such as the huge number of jumpers (or flyers
    )

    Hey Herve...hope all is well... long time no speak.

    Anyway what's your opinion on why there were so many jumpers...?

    Viking
    Last edited by viking; 17th January 2017 at 15:23.
    You decide...your thoughts..your actions..your reality.
    Choose well.
    http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...are-the-change

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to viking For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (19th January 2017)

  5. Link to Post #123
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,885
    Thanked 94,608 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    I have no idea why would someone prefer to jump out a window rather than staying where they are... the lesser of two evils kind of catch 22...

    Last edited by Hervé; 19th January 2017 at 14:14.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (19th January 2017), Daughter of Time (17th January 2017), Lasuh (27th January 2017), Shannon (17th January 2017), viking (17th January 2017)

  7. Link to Post #124
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,885
    Thanked 94,608 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    For comparison:

    Iran's oldest high-rise collapses after fire

    Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:49AM

    [see video at link]

    Iran's oldest high-rise in southern Tehran collapsed on Thursday morning following a major fire in the building, leaving dozens of people injured.

    The 17-story structure crumbled after the fire engulfed the top floors of the building in downtown Tehran as scores of firefighters battled the blaze.

    [...]




    Now, these are real rubbles from a 17-story building...
    Condolences to the families of the ones who perished in it.


    Full article: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/01...an-fire-Plasco
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (19th January 2017)

  9. Link to Post #125
    Great Britain Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd January 2013
    Age
    69
    Posts
    2,006
    Thanks
    7,723
    Thanked 7,391 times in 1,757 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    I read some place the falling man was removing his clothes as he fell because of burning from the inside sensation this is what happens when people are microwaved.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8QCQudNEtY

  10. Link to Post #126
    Avalon Member Star Tsar's Avatar
    Join Date
    10th December 2011
    Location
    Virgo Supercluster
    Posts
    12,946
    Thanks
    27,846
    Thanked 33,825 times in 11,757 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Andrew Johnson presents on Dr Wood's work

    Quote Posted by Star Tsar (here)
    The Richard Dolan Show

    A ndrew Johnson | 9/11 & The Work Of Dr Judy Wood

    Streamed & Published 8th October 2018

    Richard this week invites Avalon member Andrew Johnson to the show for a interview on 9/11 & In particular Andrew gives a strong presentation on the work of Dr Judy Wood.

    Andrew's website: http://www.checktheevidence.com/
    Dr Wood's website: http://www.drjudywood.com/wp/



    A short documentary based on the work of Dr Wood:

    I for one will join in with anyone, I don't care what color you are as long as you want to change this miserable condition that exists on this Earth - Malcolm X / Tsar Of The Star

  11. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Star Tsar For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (9th October 2018), Deux Corbeaux (9th October 2018), mountain_jim (9th October 2018), onawah (9th October 2018), Valle (12th October 2018)

  12. Link to Post #127
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr. Judy Wood IRREFUTABLE(Free Energy Technology on 9/11)

    What does Judy say was responsible for cutting the plane shaped holes?

  13. Link to Post #128
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    How has Judy Wood confirmed all the floors were built-out as advertised, that the HVAC, electric, plumbing, and the water therein, that she assumes was there, etc., was actually there? How has she confirmed that all 220 concrete floors were, indeed, installed and still there the time of demolition?


    What does Judy say happened at Shanksville, and the Pentagon?

  14. Link to Post #129
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by yankee451 (here)
    What does Judy say was responsible for cutting the plane shaped holes?
    Quote Posted by yankee451 (here)
    How has Judy Wood confirmed all the floors were built-out as advertised, that the HVAC, electric, plumbing, and the water therein, that she assumes was there, etc., was actually there? How has she confirmed that all 220 concrete floors were, indeed, installed and still there the time of demolition?


    What does Judy say happened at Shanksville, and the Pentagon?
    Why do you ask?

    What does that have to do with the work that Dr. Judy Wood has done analyzing and documenting some of the critical aspects of what happened to the materials (whatever steel and concrete actually was there) of the towers and of the toasted cars elsewhere in lower Manhattan on that fateful day.

    What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis how much concrete was actually used in the towers?

    What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis what happened at Shanksville or the Pentagon?

    What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis how the appearance of the initial plane crashes and plane shaped holes were accomplished?

    The topic of Judy Wood's documentation and analysis, which follows from her area of expertise, is what happened to the various materials in the towers when they did fall, and what happened to other objects such as the toasted cars in lower Manhattan.

    Were you asking your questions in an effort to discredit the work that Judy Woods did do, on the basis that she did not do other work, on other aspects of 9/11? If so, then, in my mind at least, you failed.

  15. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Arcturian108 (12th October 2018), Blacklight43 (12th October 2018), celticwarrior (12th October 2018), DaveToo (4th December 2018), mountain_jim (16th October 2018), RunningDeer (12th October 2018), Satori (13th October 2018), Star Tsar (12th October 2018), Tintin (12th October 2018), Valle (12th October 2018)

  16. Link to Post #130
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Why do you ask?
    I was asking because she bases all of her work on assumptions, while ignoring evidence that discredits those assumptions. I ask because you know what happens when we assume.
    Last edited by Paul; 13th October 2018 at 07:22. Reason: trim quoted material

  17. Link to Post #131
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by yankee451 (here)
    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Why do you ask?
    I was asking because she bases all of her work on assumptions, while ignoring evidence that discredits those assumptions. I ask because you know what happens when we assume.
    So ... if you cannot discredit Judy Wood's work by insinuating that her work is unworthy because she does not cover all aspects of 9/11, then you ignore the substance of my (admittedly rhetorical) questions and try to discredit Judy Wood's work with general slander.

    I've seen you do far better in your other 9/11 posts here.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    celticwarrior (13th October 2018), Tintin (4th December 2018), yankee451 (13th October 2018)

  19. Link to Post #132
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by yankee451 (here)
    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Why do you ask?
    I was asking because she bases all of her work on assumptions, while ignoring evidence that discredits those assumptions. I ask because you know what happens when we assume.
    So ... if you cannot discredit Judy Wood's work by insinuating that her work is unworthy because she does not cover all aspects of 9/11, then you ignore the substance of my (admittedly rhetorical) questions and try to discredit Judy Wood's work with general slander.

    I've seen you do far better in your other 9/11 posts here.
    It isn't slander to ask whether or not she has verified the buildings were completed as advertised, nor how her work relates to the other 9/11 sites. You wrote:

    Quote Why do you ask?

    What does that have to do with the work that Dr. Judy Wood has done analyzing and documenting some of the critical aspects of what happened to the materials (whatever steel and concrete actually was there) of the towers and of the toasted cars elsewhere in lower Manhattan on that fateful day.
    Like I asked, how has she verified that those materials, and the contents, were actually there at the time? Without this critical step, she's doing what any magician would do when performing an illusion; using the power of suggestion to manipulate the audience, which already assumes the towers were "fully occupied cities within the city," with 220 reinforced concrete floors. Verifying that assumption is critical.
    With regards to the "toasted cars," this clip has a good example of what happened to those cars; arson:


    Quote What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis how much concrete was actually used in the towers?
    It makes a huge difference. She bases all her calculations on the ASSUMPTION that the floors were all there, and that they were all built out with all the infrastructure that went with them. That's a huge assumption, considering the history of the complex, and the corruption of the people, agencies, and contractors involved.

    Furthermore, there is evidence that the dust was already in dust form prior to the first impacts:
    Dust and paper boiling in the shock and awe explosion:


    Dust and paper all around the ground after the explosions, but long before the demolition sequences:


    And of course, dust and paper pouring out of a wall column. At this point the only damage was allegedly due to a plane impact, and kerosene fire, neither of which will "dustify" concrete. This is a damning video, but one that Judy's followers (and the mini-nuke crowd)", don 't have an answer for:



    Quote What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis what happened at Shanksville or the Pentagon?
    Because it was all the same operation. Why would they use missiles and explosives at Shanksville, and at the Pentagon, but resort to top-secret directed energy weapons for the WTC? How is the damage at the WTC consistent with their use, and not consistent with the means apparently used at Shanksville and the Pentagon?

    Quote What would it matter to Judy Wood's analysis how the appearance of the initial plane crashes and plane shaped holes were accomplished?
    It is the first step of any criminal investigation, Paul; to examine the evidence at the scene of the crime. She describes herself as a forensic scientist, so why WOULDN'T it matter? Why would any investigator, forensic scientist or not, think the evidence at the crime scene is unimportant? According to the association for Crime Scene Reconstruction, the definition of "Crime Scene Reconstruction," is:


    “the use of scientific methods, physical evidence, deductive reasoning and their interrelationships to gain explicit knowledge of the series of events that surround the commission of a crime”.

    In other words, to discover how a crime was committed, the investigators will collect all the information they can gather from the scene, and with what is learned from that evidence formulate a theory as to what happened. Physics plays an important role with identifying directions in splattered blood, bullet trajectories, vehicle crashes, fires, and building collapses.

    Newton’s third law of motion states, “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

    This means that in a collision between two objects, both objects experience forces that are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. If you hit a wall with your hand the wall hits your hand just as hard. It’s not rocket science.



    Any kid who has ever run a stick against a picket fence can attest that whatever hit these columns struck from the side as well, you don’t need a physicist to explain it.


    The dimensions of the towers were well documented therefore one can accurately estimate the size of the projectile. The columns were steel boxes shaped like this, with the sides of the box protruding past the face like laterally-braced steel knives:


    It is these protruding sides that can be seen sharply bent to the right in the image below with the face flattened between them. The direction of the bends is an indication of the direction of travel of the object that struck them. Equal and opposite, and all that.


    Obviously the evidence is not consistent with the head-on impact of a plane. Something struck the columns from the side, and both towers show the same pattern; eight progressively worse-damaged columns, followed by an inward-blasting hole, which was nowhere near where the alleged jet's engine impacted:


    The factions of the truth movement that insist exotic means such as "DEW" or "Nukes" were used never explain how the impact evidence is consistent with whatever it is they believer happened. Both camps tend to lean towards the use of "holograms," when it comes to the footage of the "plane" crashes, which relies on the use of planted explosives for the impact holes. I've heard some diehard DEW followers insist the impact holes were caused by some sort of top-secret directed energy weapon (that they can't describe, and can't prove exists), but to me neither explanation makes any sense at all. Why would the perpetrators use directed energy weapons, or planted explosives, to mimic the lateral impact of small projectiles? If they could create any damage they wanted with their fancy weapons, and super explosives, why not mimic what they were showing on the television, namely the head-on impact of a large jet?


    Quote The topic of Judy Wood's documentation and analysis, which follows from her area of expertise, is what happened to the various materials in the towers when they did fall, and what happened to other objects such as the toasted cars in lower Manhattan.
    Her area of expertise? Does that mean she's more likely to think inside the box she was trained into, or does that mean she's more likely to think outside of it? Judy Wood is an establishment-trained, establishment-published scientist who wields her establishment-credentials like a bludgeon, and turns to the establishment court-system (the same system that put Bush in office), for redress. Her work gives the establishment's military godlike prowess, something military propagandists have been doing since before Hammurabi. Corruption is the name of the game, and of course the cover-up would be more important than the actual event, so why doesn't Judy's flock ever consider that the best way to control the opposition is by leading it? Why is it never considered that she was deployed as one of those leaders? As mentioned before, the "toasted cars," were set-fire by arson. They were an important piece in the plan, and were designed to:
    1. Block access to the complex
    2. Give Manhattan that "war zone" look.
    3. Give their controlled truth movement something to to talk about, which gives truthers something to be baffled about

    Debunking links here, for anyone who cares enough to challenge their own convictions:
    https://www.facebook.com/Alienscient...53690764689701

    Quote Were you asking your questions in an effort to discredit the work that Judy Woods did do, on the basis that she did not do other work, on other aspects of 9/11? If so, then, in my mind at least, you failed.
    I was asking questions that I know from experience will go ignored by Judy's followers.
    Last edited by yankee451; 13th October 2018 at 15:08.

  20. Link to Post #133
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    593
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked 2,678 times in 500 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Yankee,

    What i like about Judy Woods proposal is that her theory covers the major key points that I have questions about. How did half a million tons of steel aluminum and concrete go away in about 10 seconds?

    Arguing about what made the hole in the building is ultimately of little to no consequence. There were two buildings that through some unknown and clearly exotic process no longer exist and did so in a time frame that is quite frankly mind boggling. I personally think planes probably did hit them. It might have been remote control. Seems plausible but ultimately DOESNT MATTER. Two buildings went away. In ten seconds.

    Furthermore, Her theory fits in with larger non mechanical considerations of geo politics from the Joseph Farrel point of view on Level 1 2 and 3, with Dick and Bush being merely level 2 and un aware of level three.

    This explains why dick was in the bunker and why Bush had to physically go take command in Iowa, if indeed that is really where he went.

    The device that was used to remove those buildings was not under the control of the president or VP.


    WHy do you think that Bush said on tv the obvious lie that there was no one in his government or the previous government that could have envisioned an attack of that nature while knowing that the military was running drills on precisely that on that day and in the years running up to it? Really stop and think about this point.


    Quite frankly I feel your job is to hold progress instead of offering a clearer hypothesis that fits not only the mechanics of the building disappearing but also the political realities outside the event itself. Honestly, the mechanics of the building are pretty irrelevant to me in terms of what needs to happen with society because the Patriot act and foreign policy that has been accelerated since that event are all the evidence you need for 9-11 being not what the commission reported and what news tells us. YOu want us to quibble about nitty gritty details that will ultimately prove a waste of time if the large operation becomes apparent to the masses.

    You are aware that the plane that was shot down over Shanksville was not ordered by the VP or POTUS right?

    Where was that plane going? What do you know about COG operations? Level2 wasnt completely successful. But what equilibrium developed between Level 2 and Level 3?


    You are talking about what a particular ant is doing while we are trying to discuss the hive.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Praxis For This Post:

    yankee451 (13th October 2018)

  22. Link to Post #134
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote How did half a million tons of steel aluminum and concrete go away in about 10 seconds?
    My point exactly. You're starting with the same assumption, however the evidence I've seen (and which Judy and her fan club steadfastly refuse to discuss), indicates all of the steel and concrete that was there at the time didn't go anywhere except into the debris field. There is no evidence of half "dustified" steel anywhere , but there is a plethora of evidence that strategic bolts and non load-bearing walls and floors were removed (as they always are with controlled demolitions.)

    Quote Arguing about what made the hole in the building is ultimately of little to no consequence.
    How do you figure? This is the first step in the investigation, and should be used as the basis for the formulation of a theory as to what series of events occurred, that created the evidence as found. It is like a police detective not being concerned with identifying what caliber weapon was used in a shooting, or not being concerned with the trajectory of the bullet and the location of the shooter. It is of utmost importance to the investigation, and I submit the only reason you think it to be inconsequential, is because, Judy wood thinks so.

    Quote There were two buildings that through some unknown and clearly exotic process no longer exist and did so in a time frame that is quite frankly mind boggling.
    Not so mind boggling when you examine all the evidence, instead of only the evidence the magician wants you to see.

    Quote I personally think planes probably did hit them.
    Easy for you to say, because you think the evidence that proves planes couldn't possibly have been responsible for it, is inconsequential and unworthy of investigation.

    Quote It might have been remote control. Seems plausible but ultimately DOESNT MATTER. Two buildings went away. In ten seconds.
    Circular logic, because as the evidence shows, everything that was there at the time of demolition, was still there after demolition.

    Quote Furthermore, Her theory fits in with larger non mechanical considerations of geo politics from the Joseph Farrel point of view on Level 1 2 and 3, with Dick and Bush being merely level 2 and un aware of level three.

    This explains why dick was in the bunker and why Bush had to physically go take command in Iowa, if indeed that is really where he went.

    The device that was used to remove those buildings was not under the control of the president or VP.

    WHy do you think that Bush said on tv the obvious lie that there was no one in his government or the previous government that could have envisioned an attack of that nature while knowing that the military was running drills on precisely that on that day and in the years running up to it? Really stop and think about this point.
    The evidence that you deem to be inconsequential, is evidence of missile impacts, evidence that was surely instantly recognizable as such, by the military of all of the worlds' nations; especially the enemy nations, that allegedly have every reason to expose the fraud. To think 9/11 is limited to the leaders of America, is naive, and surely an intended assumption; one that only helps the perpetrators.

    Quote Quite frankly I feel your job is to hold progress instead of offering a clearer hypothesis that fits not only the mechanics of the building disappearing but also the political realities outside the event itself.
    Please. I have a real job, real name, a real life, a real address, a real social security number, and I'm in the book, and unlike the leaders of the truth movement, I'm not selling anything, and you won't even find a donate button on my websites. I am not a leader of the opposition by any means, so you tell me how I am slowing down 17 years of non-progress provided by the leaders of the misnamed movement.

    Quote Honestly, the mechanics of the building are pretty irrelevant to me in terms of what needs to happen with society because the Patriot act and foreign policy that has been accelerated since that event are all the evidence you need for 9-11 being not what the commission reported and what news tells us. YOu want us to quibble about nitty gritty details that will ultimately prove a waste of time if the large operation becomes apparent to the masses.
    There is quite a bit that you find irrelevant, I guess, an activity known as cherry picking, not truth seeking. The devil is in the details, but these are details that the so called truth movement hasn't touched as it has spent the last 17 years wasting our time with explanations that may sound sexy to those of us who were weaned on Star Trek, but they are critically important to those of us who what to expose the truth, however not sexy it may be.

    Quote You are aware that the plane that was shot down over Shanksville was not ordered by the VP or POTUS right?
    I am aware that the Shanksville crater is best explained by the impact of two projectiles from opposite directions at trajectories of less than ten degrees from horizontal, and the detonation of an explosive that weighed around 200 lbs. Cruise missiles, in other words. I am also aware that the use of cruise missiles in American airspace, makes the most likely suspects the US Military/government. These people, who launched a couple missiles into the ground, and called it a plane crash, also provided all the rest of the information (and disinformation), about all the planes, from the flight paths, to the passengers, to the alleged hijackers, and alleged conversations in the bunker. It is called the "big lie" for a reason, but for some reason I just can't understand, truthers think they would recognize controlled opposition when they see it.

    Quote You are talking about what a particular ant is doing while we are trying to discuss the hive.
    I am doing my own thinking, and by examining all the details, not just the details that already suit me, I have arrived at a completely different conclusion than all of the leaders of the so called truth movement. But rather than question where those leaders have been taking you, for the last decade and a half, you turn on me, the new guy, as being disinformation, and too detail oriented. Sounds like conditioning to me.
    Last edited by yankee451; 13th October 2018 at 17:14.

  23. Link to Post #135
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,155 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    If there was what I thought was a currently healthy discussion of Judy Wood's research into what happened to (how they collapsed/were demolished/blew up/dustified/...) the buildings on 9/11 going on here, on this thread, then I'd worry that the last few posts between Praxis, yankee451 and myself were disrupting that discussion, and I'd probably work with the other forum moderators to find a way to protect that healthy discussion, using such tools as thread splitting, blocking specific members from posting on specific threads, or counseling members on the side via PM's. However, in the absence (from my perspective) of such a healthy discussion, I see nothing needing protection from disruption.

    I do recommend Judy Wood's work on toasted cars and dustified towers, as most recently discussed in Star Tsar's reposting of Richard's interview with Andrew Johnson, discussing Judy Wood's work, in Post #126, above.

    I'll repost that video once again, here, and then probably not engage further in the above "debate" between Praxis and yankee451.

    Last edited by Paul; 13th October 2018 at 19:03.

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Elixir (13th October 2018), Satori (13th October 2018), Star Tsar (14th October 2018)

  25. Link to Post #136
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote I do recommend Judy Wood's work on toasted cars and dustified towers, as most recently discussed in Star Tsar's reposting of Richard's interview with Andrew Johnson, discussing Judy Wood's work, in Post #126, above.

    I'll repost that video once again, here, and then probably not engage further in the above "debate" between Praxis and yankee451.
    You don't have to comment on the discussion Praxis and I are engaged in, but I did respond to you directly, and in detail. I agree, I recommend everyone investigates every claim about 9/11, but to do so with the understanding that not every claim can be right. Only one explanation is correct, and you can be sure that it will address all the evidence.
    Last edited by yankee451; 13th October 2018 at 23:18.

  26. Link to Post #137
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    As predicted, the evidence that discredits Judy Wood's "work," is ignored by her followers. If the truth is the goal, then it should be a threat to no one. If truthers truly believe what they say, then they would be happy to discuss how every clue fits their conclusions. The fact that they won't even discuss some evidence (probably because it threatens their beliefs) is a testament to the efficacy of propaganda. I wrote the below article for people with stars (and DEW) in their eyes.

    Quote The fact of the matter is what we know as perception management, controlled opposition, and false flags are the rules in our world, not the exceptions. Governments and people in power have been manipulating opinions like this since the dawn of so called civilization, so it is hopelessly naïve to believe the truth movement wasn’t included in the very first planning stages of 9/11. With that in mind, I set out to conduct my own independent investigation, with special focus on those clues that the truth movement won’t touch with a ten-foot pole, clues like planted dust, missing windows, hollow towers and the evidence at the scene of the crime; the impact holes.
    Taboo Truths: Clues Avoided by the 9/11 Truth Movement
    http://yankee451.com/?p=4008

  27. Link to Post #138
    Avalon Member
    Join Date
    21st July 2010
    Age
    33
    Posts
    593
    Thanks
    284
    Thanked 2,678 times in 500 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    No Paul was correct, even if it was couched in a holier than thou attitude. I definitely did not approach you from a kind place.

    You seem like you have atheory you really want others to believe or be aware of.

    So what do you think brought down the towers?

  28. Link to Post #139
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    25th October 2017
    Age
    59
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked 179 times in 49 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Praxis (here)
    So what do you think brought down the towers?
    I spelled it out in the article I linked to. The evidence indicates they were dismantled and planted with explosives, just as all controlled demolitions are.

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to yankee451 For This Post:

    Valerie Villars (16th October 2018)

  30. Link to Post #140
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    122
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked 416 times in 116 posts

    Default Re: Dr Judy Wood: Most comprehensive research on what happened to the buildings on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    But, I also agree with Judy Wood that the key source of the truly staggering amount of energy required to dustify each of those two massive towers in 10 or 15 seconds each, and required to create a myriad of other strange effects in and around the World Trade Center complex, must have come from a highly exotic, highly unconventional, source.
    Correct, but just not the "highly exotic, highly unconventional, source" that Judy Wood promotes.
    Last edited by Paul; 4th December 2018 at 01:19. Reason: fix quoting

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (4th December 2018), Paul (4th December 2018), Tintin (4th December 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 1 7 8 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts