"If you want something talked about, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman."
The reason for the vociferous discrediting of Dr. Judy Wood is sadly far more simple and apparent than her being some complex disinfo plant, or your
own comforting nutcase. How easy it is to dismiss her so disrespectfully. However, it is very plain that yet another "good ol' boys club" has egg
on their faces, and Dr. Wood has the goods. She is so un-slick and unglamorous that these popular guys ranting their very comforting positions are
running scared by her very threatening non-threat, which is based on truth-reality. No explosives, guys. No thermite. No molten high heat. No
demolition. Dr. Wood knocks 'em all down, and the boys club fails to really take the time for reality: They'd rather win the pageant! But Dr. Wood
knows truth is no popularity contest.
"WHERE did the Towers go?" It's just that simple. Thanks to Dr. Judy Wood! YUP, there is true beauty in simplicity, and Dr. Wood's objectivity
is staggering--in her authenticity, integrity, and attractive reason. No outerspace rays or beams here, dears. (Why must you think directed energy
is a ray, or a beam? Are you stumbling over the word "directed"?) Dr. Wood has never made such claims when she describes the possibility of energy
fields & interference, gentlemen. There is a difference.
When you allow the evidence to speak to you, when you take the time to contemplate and really look for yourself, you can rediscover what you
subconsciously asked yourself on that dreadful day but couldn't clearly articulate, until Dr. Wood came along: "Where did the Towers go?
Shouldn't that pile be much bigger?"
It took a woman.
Cheers!
joeymooreyogi
Ex Boston-based United Airlines flight attendant,
who worked out of Logan one hour prior to Flt 175 on 9/11.
Why are AE911Truth & Wikipedia Censoring Information about Dr. Judy Wood?, page 6
privacy
reply posted on 20-9-2010 @ 05:24 AM by splint
reply to post by joeymooreyogi
Ill be looking at all of this evidence tomorrow. It all seems possible. However, some phrases and words caught my eye.
"fantasy" implying that it shouldn't even be looked at
"no physical basis "
"People call her wacky" Trying to imply that -everyone- says this , so it must be true
"away with the fairies. "
"disinfo agent"
"nobody is interested or cares" Again, saying that -everyone- agrees that she is wrong. So -you- should too.
"spamming." completely misguiding the thread
"fake "Dr." Again, implying she is fake and should be ignored. Even though there is proof she is not.
"is she suffering from a mental disease" Implying that she should NOT be trusted in anything she says.
"She is a quack" See above
"There's no physical mechanism to do it" HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS?
"no way to test for such ludicrous technology" Calling it 'ludicrous' implying its completely impossible. No way to test? It can be tested underground, like everything else is.
"made-up fairytale BS" See above
"Game over." Trying to end the topic and discussion
"Lab samples" You know VERY WELL that she cant get any at this point.
"fake space beam weapons" Using the word 'fake' even though there are many theories on this website about them.
"All this DEW garbage"
"DEW fantasy "
"debunked disinformation"
"government plant."
"fake engineering degree"
"This woman is a disgrace"
"the fool that she is. "
"trying to push disinfo"
"has since moved on" Trying to get people to 'move on' and forget about her.
This is pretty much what the media is doing to ANY 9/11 truther. These guys are doing it right here in this very thread. Calling her a crack job, etc.
Ill be looking at all of this evidence tomorrow. It all seems possible. However, some phrases and words caught my eye.
"fantasy" implying that it shouldn't even be looked at
"no physical basis "
"People call her wacky" Trying to imply that -everyone- says this , so it must be true
"away with the fairies. "
"disinfo agent"
"nobody is interested or cares" Again, saying that -everyone- agrees that she is wrong. So -you- should too.
"spamming." completely misguiding the thread
"fake "Dr." Again, implying she is fake and should be ignored. Even though there is proof she is not.
"is she suffering from a mental disease" Implying that she should NOT be trusted in anything she says.
"She is a quack" See above
"There's no physical mechanism to do it" HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS?
"no way to test for such ludicrous technology" Calling it 'ludicrous' implying its completely impossible. No way to test? It can be tested underground, like everything else is.
"made-up fairytale BS" See above
"Game over." Trying to end the topic and discussion
"Lab samples" You know VERY WELL that she cant get any at this point.
"fake space beam weapons" Using the word 'fake' even though there are many theories on this website about them.
"All this DEW garbage"
"DEW fantasy "
"debunked disinformation"
"government plant."
"fake engineering degree"
"This woman is a disgrace"
"the fool that she is. "
"trying to push disinfo"
"has since moved on" Trying to get people to 'move on' and forget about her.
This is pretty much what the media is doing to ANY 9/11 truther. These guys are doing it right here in this very thread. Calling her a crack job, etc.
reply posted on 18-9-2011 @ 12:45 AM by CatJockey
reply to post by exponent
SOME finer dust? There was a whole, whole bunch of that finer dust. I do not know, but if somebody does, please point me to what the beam sections of just the outside skeleton were (not even the core) and how many were used in one tower and I can easily tell you how big a pile there should be, if one were to stack them as neatly as possible, let alone the haphazard pile that would exist from a controlled demolition, which would be larger. I concur with Dr. Woods as there certainly seems to be an absence of steel from the wreakage.
Again, the beam section (width, height) and how many were in the outer skeleton and we can begin to figure out if there is less debris than would be expected.
Pure speculation on your part. Weather modification is a reality. Vail ski resort has been doing it in Colorado to increase snowfall for years. Do you think major governments of the world know less than a ski resort about weather modification? And, again, unprovable speculation on your part. Maybe you are right. But, you do not know with certainty if you are ...
I speak only for myself, but I suspect his inference is HARRP.
Sure, in the WTC towers. Suppose your neighbor severs wiring and blows circuits in his/her house. Will you loose power too? No. All of that is protected at each building. Pretty hard for an electrical issue to backfeed into the system these days. Power distribution is pretty well protected and understood so that an end user cannot blow up other end users stuff.
What do you propose happened? How did an issue in the WTC create this? Doesn't matter if it was a plane or a knucklehead jamming a paperclip into an outlet - no doubt whatever utility runs power in NYC isolates stuff at each building to prevent such occurences. So the planes and fires and explosions severed electrical circuits caused shorts, overloads, etc. in WTC 1&2. How I ask you ...
I guess pooktzA, Dr. Woods, Jesse Ventura and I watched something else than. Lotta damn gypsum and fire products in those buildings, eh?
Can you point me to a video showing this flaming debris during the collapse? 'Cause every video I see shows only your gypsum and other fire produsts dust falling. No flames and nothing on fire to be seen in the collapses. What is the source of high heat you speak of? I ain't no fire expert, but I fail to see how curtains, carpet, office furniture and paper would continue to burn and NOT be extinguished by the fine dust and winds during collapse. How do you explain pictures of half burned cars? Do you have a link to the injury reports of people injured by flamming debris? Do you have an pictoral or video evidence to share?
According to you, it was chuncks of steel and large slabs of concrete. Those would kill you, not set you on fire. I think this would be the first case in history where somebody was set on fire by a falling piece of flamming paper. Watch out for a piece of paper - it ain't just paper cuts anymore, apparently one can recieve 3rd degree burns? Maybe a 10'X20' section of flamming carpet fell over them?
How 'bout a pic?
www.drjudywood.com...
How do you discredit the fireman with Diane Swayer at the top of the page? Admittedly not upside down, but ... wierd. Upside down is a minor issue in my book. Is figure toast2a a depiction of what you call some fine dust? Why is there unburnt paper all around the burnt cars? The paper got there before the fires went out, yet I fail to see your flaming debris or heat source anywhere? Could you point them out to me?
This did not happen. Steel was not turned into dust, concrete was turned into relatively large chunks and some finer dust as would be expected. Paper was burned, aluminium was oxidised. There's never been any evidence of this other than Judy Wood posting pictures and claiming that this occured.
SOME finer dust? There was a whole, whole bunch of that finer dust. I do not know, but if somebody does, please point me to what the beam sections of just the outside skeleton were (not even the core) and how many were used in one tower and I can easily tell you how big a pile there should be, if one were to stack them as neatly as possible, let alone the haphazard pile that would exist from a controlled demolition, which would be larger. I concur with Dr. Woods as there certainly seems to be an absence of steel from the wreakage.
Again, the beam section (width, height) and how many were in the outer skeleton and we can begin to figure out if there is less debris than would be expected.
Erin's position was a coincidence, and it was not reported as there were more important things to report on.
Pure speculation on your part. Weather modification is a reality. Vail ski resort has been doing it in Colorado to increase snowfall for years. Do you think major governments of the world know less than a ski resort about weather modification? And, again, unprovable speculation on your part. Maybe you are right. But, you do not know with certainty if you are ...
I am not aware of the evidence for this, or even what it is supposed to be implying. Could you elaborate?
I speak only for myself, but I suspect his inference is HARRP.
There were giant planes flown into the towers? I think that may cause some minor electrical issues
Sure, in the WTC towers. Suppose your neighbor severs wiring and blows circuits in his/her house. Will you loose power too? No. All of that is protected at each building. Pretty hard for an electrical issue to backfeed into the system these days. Power distribution is pretty well protected and understood so that an end user cannot blow up other end users stuff.
What do you propose happened? How did an issue in the WTC create this? Doesn't matter if it was a plane or a knucklehead jamming a paperclip into an outlet - no doubt whatever utility runs power in NYC isolates stuff at each building to prevent such occurences. So the planes and fires and explosions severed electrical circuits caused shorts, overloads, etc. in WTC 1&2. How I ask you ...
This didn't happen, the finer dust was from lighter and less solid materials such as gypsum and various fire products.
I guess pooktzA, Dr. Woods, Jesse Ventura and I watched something else than. Lotta damn gypsum and fire products in those buildings, eh?
The vehicles were on fire, or close to a source of high heat. Many were towed away from the WTC as part of the recovery and rescue efforts. Many people were injured by debris, both on fire and not.
Can you point me to a video showing this flaming debris during the collapse? 'Cause every video I see shows only your gypsum and other fire produsts dust falling. No flames and nothing on fire to be seen in the collapses. What is the source of high heat you speak of? I ain't no fire expert, but I fail to see how curtains, carpet, office furniture and paper would continue to burn and NOT be extinguished by the fine dust and winds during collapse. How do you explain pictures of half burned cars? Do you have a link to the injury reports of people injured by flamming debris? Do you have an pictoral or video evidence to share?
According to you, it was chuncks of steel and large slabs of concrete. Those would kill you, not set you on fire. I think this would be the first case in history where somebody was set on fire by a falling piece of flamming paper. Watch out for a piece of paper - it ain't just paper cuts anymore, apparently one can recieve 3rd degree burns? Maybe a 10'X20' section of flamming carpet fell over them?
I am not aware of this happening, could you provide a citation?
How 'bout a pic?
www.drjudywood.com...
How do you discredit the fireman with Diane Swayer at the top of the page? Admittedly not upside down, but ... wierd. Upside down is a minor issue in my book. Is figure toast2a a depiction of what you call some fine dust? Why is there unburnt paper all around the burnt cars? The paper got there before the fires went out, yet I fail to see your flaming debris or heat source anywhere? Could you point them out to me?
edit
on 18-9-2011 by CatJockey because: fixed [/quotey] stuff
reply posted on 18-9-2011 @ 01:15 AM by CatJockey
reply to post by exponent
It ain't the fact that they were bent, it is how there are bent. Not natural. No buckiling, stress cracks, etc.
Why only half? And so discretely? And why the sudden oxidation. Nothing but suspicion aroused in my book. Can you show us examples of the same thing happening in other car fires? Please share ...
What about reports of buried molten steel, workers boots melting, etc. Remember, only a small, small fraction of the steel in those buildings was exposed to fire. What dust? I thought there was only a small amount of dust amidst large chuncks of unflammable concrete? You told us some dust. And big chuncks of concrete and steel. Yet they needed to hose it down? YET WORKERS ON SCENE ARE NOW DYING FROM INHALING THAT DUST.
We cannot do all of your research for you, only point you in the right direction. Forget the windows, how about the large circular holes in buildings? www.drjudywood.com... There are also thermal images on that page showing the heat left days later. Heat from an apparently isolated fire covering a very, very, very small portion of the building.
You and I have different views of the meaning of the word extensive. Those walls hold back the river. Extensive, to me, would accompany some flooding.
Well, according to you, it was only some dust accompanied by 500,000 tons of flamming debris. Them looney tunes folks should have been crushed and burned according to your theory of events ...
Me too...
Because it was at the bottom. It should have suffered the most as it had, according to you, the most weight fall upon it at the greatest velocity.
Nice personal attack that does nothing to support your arguments ...
Ummm ... okay. Never acept new evidence and ideas huh? No thank you.
I don't know why people write her off. I find her ideas the most credible and her questions very valid. What is so difficult to conceive about a DEW? Technology is exponential, not linear. Check out the Red Baron's sweet plane. Than look at the SR71 Blacbird that came around 50 years later. Considering it is all 'classified', none of us have clue as to the advances of the military industrial complex are and a DEW is anything but inconcievable, and, like Dr. Woods and PooktzA, I think it the most logical explanation of events on 9/11 ...
They were involved in the largest building collapse in history and then exposed to significant fires.
It ain't the fact that they were bent, it is how there are bent. Not natural. No buckiling, stress cracks, etc.
What is so suspicious about this? If the front of a car is on fire, then it's not going to look the same as the back
Why only half? And so discretely? And why the sudden oxidation. Nothing but suspicion aroused in my book. Can you show us examples of the same thing happening in other car fires? Please share ...
Fires do not last for 7 years, and debris from fires does not need to be hosed down. However, hoses are used for cleaning and for settling dust caused by things such as pile driving which was very evident in the video I saw
What about reports of buried molten steel, workers boots melting, etc. Remember, only a small, small fraction of the steel in those buildings was exposed to fire. What dust? I thought there was only a small amount of dust amidst large chuncks of unflammable concrete? You told us some dust. And big chuncks of concrete and steel. Yet they needed to hose it down? YET WORKERS ON SCENE ARE NOW DYING FROM INHALING THAT DUST.
Citation again please, I have never seen any evidence of a perfectly circular hole in any glass near the WTC
We cannot do all of your research for you, only point you in the right direction. Forget the windows, how about the large circular holes in buildings? www.drjudywood.com... There are also thermal images on that page showing the heat left days later. Heat from an apparently isolated fire covering a very, very, very small portion of the building.
As far as I am aware, the bathtub suffered extensive damage, which is why it took so long to prepare the site for building the new tower
You and I have different views of the meaning of the word extensive. Those walls hold back the river. Extensive, to me, would accompany some flooding.
What sort of question is this? How could the survival of a specific store in the basement favour any sort of conspiracy theory?
Well, according to you, it was only some dust accompanied by 500,000 tons of flamming debris. Them looney tunes folks should have been crushed and burned according to your theory of events ...
Same answer as above
Me too...
Same as above once again, why are you surprised that not everything was entirely destroyed?
Because it was at the bottom. It should have suffered the most as it had, according to you, the most weight fall upon it at the greatest velocity.
Because Judy Wood is likely mentally ill.
Nice personal attack that does nothing to support your arguments ...
The call for a new investigation has been going on since before Judy Wood existed on the scene, as far back as before the NIST reports were even published
Ummm ... okay. Never acept new evidence and ideas huh? No thank you.
I don't know why people write her off. I find her ideas the most credible and her questions very valid. What is so difficult to conceive about a DEW? Technology is exponential, not linear. Check out the Red Baron's sweet plane. Than look at the SR71 Blacbird that came around 50 years later. Considering it is all 'classified', none of us have clue as to the advances of the military industrial complex are and a DEW is anything but inconcievable, and, like Dr. Woods and PooktzA, I think it the most logical explanation of events on 9/11 ...
edit on 18-9-2011 by CatJockey
because: fixed [/b,/i] stuff
reply posted on 18-9-2011 @ 10:23 PM by CatJockey
I understand that very intelligent people can have some unusual qurks in their personallities.
But she's far beyond that. I can't understand how she is able to instruct students.
I'm picking up what she is laying down with no problems. I find her thought process lucid and coherent. Not much of an orator to be sure, but I don't know how you extrapolate such about her personality from viewing 34 minutes of her. Sounds more like a personal attack to me ...
Some one from the staff needs to audit her class.
I think she was denied tenure and fired because of what she is saying. Which, to me, doesn't mean all that much on the surface as I have been less than impressed with some profs I have been around who have received tenure...
She just doesn't see what the rest of the world sees.
Correction. The rest of the world minus Cat Jockey, PatzookA, Jesse Ventura and others.
Her view point is that the entire building turned to dust and rose straight up into the sky.
Kind of like this?:
WTC7, the smoking gun that just will not go away until the traitors are rounded up
Posted 4 days ago with 39 member flags
Posted 4 days ago with 39 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
German elite are discussing various scenarios involving the use of force to ensure control over Gree
Global Meltdown: 34 minutes ago
Global Meltdown: 34 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Code Name** Stellar Wind. Objective** Infiltrate All. Chances For Sucess** High.
General Conspiracies: 13 hours ago, 19 flags
General Conspiracies: 13 hours ago, 19 flags
"CIA are drug smugglers." - Federal Judge Bonner, head of DEA- You don't get better proof than th
General Conspiracies: 7 hours ago, 14 flags
General Conspiracies: 7 hours ago, 14 flags
As Commandos Raid Tampa, US State Dept Demands Power to Declare War?
New World Order: 15 hours ago, 12 flags
New World Order: 15 hours ago, 12 flags
Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets
Breaking Alternative News: 9 hours ago, 12 flags
Breaking Alternative News: 9 hours ago, 12 flags
Synchonicity of generations, had my mind blown away tonight by grandson.
The Gray Area: 7 hours ago, 9 flags
The Gray Area: 7 hours ago, 9 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Porn stars explain how they ended up with Bill Clinton in pictures Hillary eat your hear out!! W/pic
Politicians & People: 13 hours ago, 44 replies
Politicians & People: 13 hours ago, 44 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.315 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.315 seconds
