Search:

Judy Wood's research, presented as high quality images in her book, stands, independent of her conclusions from viewing those images.

Look at those images for yourself ... you may well come to...

Or ... if our ordinary conspiracies are starting to get boring, and you'd like to travel on the wild side, take a look at some of Miles Mathis commentary on World War II and the atomic bomb:

The...

Stawman
===





Ignoring the counterevidence
===

An inability for someone to explain why someone else did something does not refute evidence that it was done.


Many have gathered and presented that evidence, including Judy Wood, and this...

My guess is that volcanoes hide the key difference, beneath the ground. Volcanic eruptions start with already liquid (molten) material, and only need to eject it, to let it decompress. The energy...

Judy Wood has spent far more time than most of us looking at the evidence. Perhaps you should study her book and do the same.

Thermite likely was present, as were a variety of mechanisms ... but...

You won't find official public releases of whatever was used as the primary source of energy to destroy the towers.

Dr Joseph P Farrell explains it better than I can (thanks to PurpleLama for making that connection), in his blog post that I linked above: 9/11 Musings.

The dustification was the most immediately...

JPF -- Dr. Joseph P. Farrell, I presume.

===

P.S. -- Yes -- From 9/11 Musings:

Conventional demolition would have left a 20 story high pile of ruble, with bits and pieces of the fragmentary remains of the damage caused by conventional explosives.

... and my key point was...

Paul ... there's a clear motivation for each of 1 through 6 on your list ... what is the motivation for number 7? This one is not clear to me. Why the need to do this? What wouldn't have been...

If someone is trying to make the case that one particular mechanism, be it explosives, thermite, micro-nukes, sub-basement nukes, directed energy or jet fuel, caused all the destruction to the WTC...

It is often true that some specific detail of a larger event, when reduced to a few specifics and a handful of words or images, can apparently be explained in multiple ways.

I challenge those who...

There was no where near enough steel left visible, as steel, anywhere near the WTC, after the towers crashed.

And even the energy required to dustify the concrete that finely was far more energy,...

Yes - there was some such debris - but not nearly enough. The debris pile should be over twice the height of Bldg 6, not a small fraction of its height.


Yes, I've little doubt that various...

Well said :).

Can you tell us what you are seeing in these images?

I think I am following your argument ... to a point.

I am not claiming possibility 2, matter annihilation.

I am claiming possibility 1, the dust cloud.

You observe that the dust clouds seen...

So you're saying that the original cloud, before dispersing even as much as Hervé shows us in Post #49 above, must already have been quite large.

If you're asking for an -instant- big dust cloud,...

Are you referring to this dust cloud:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/pics/browse_c.jpg
Image found on: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/erin6.html