Where Did the Towers Go?

A reply to: Silicis n Volvo

I believe if the truth were revealed to you concerning the subject matter, you would do nothing... Lol!

to be honest, i think she's asking the questions that need to be asked. so many people are burned out on the 9/11 topic but, she has some very good points of interest.

mainly the toasted cars all over new york. melted cars next to objects not touched by any heat or debris. cars with the front half completely melted and the rear half in near perfect condition. toasted cars as far as the FDR on the opposite side of Manhattan island!?? she's made something clear, and that is the fact that this was not the result of a plane crash and a building collapse.

a reply to: OFFTHEGRID

Look forward to seeing this episode & checking out what else you've done in "Off The Grid".

When can we expect it?

A quick check seems to show this episode hasn't posted yet - latest one seems to be the GM Bailout episode...

Watch the collapse with OPEN eyes and mind, and you see a long series of explosions.
No need for more talk, but more need for names in court being charged with murder!

a reply to: AfterInfinity

I dont think your addressing Mr. Ventura...but a rep-staff member responsible for the OTG membership

a reply to: OFFTHEGRID

If anyone really wants to know the truth about Judy Wood, they won't have to look very far.

Her credibility goes completely out the door once one takes a few minutes to watch the following video where she's interviewed by Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins, Ph.D. Physics. While watching her throughout the video, she appears unable to recall her own calculations, figures, or even the basics of her own "work":




Following are some papers written by Dr. Jenkins concerning Judy Woods' "theories" where he leaves nothing of her theories left to even ponder:


Solving The Great Steel Caper: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence

Supplemental: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence

The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center



As far as her "theories" being accepted by other scientists, scholars, engineers, etc. in the 9/11 truth movement, some of the 9/11 research organizations have made public statements regarding Judy Wood and her "DEW" theories:

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:

We do not support the DEW hypothesis because it is not supported by the available evidence. ...In addition, we believe the DEW theory raises far more questions than it answers, such as the energy requirements and other issues outlined in the suggested references listed below.

9/11 Blogger:

There are many problems with the DEW idea... it shouldn't actually be called a scientific hypothesis or theory. You have to be able to TEST a scientific hypothesis or theory, but you cannot test a system that you cannot even properly identify.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice:

STJ does not support theories of exotic weaponry or similar (DEW, nukes, TV Fakery, no planes at the WTC) and will remove from it's membership any who make public assertions about such theories. That is not a personal decision but a scientific, strategic and common sense one -- those theories have no scientific evidence to support them and serve to undermine what our own published researchers are moving forward with by making us appear nonsensical, and cannot be supported by STJ.

These are just a few of the many 9/11 research organizations where her "work" is not accepted by scientists, scholars, or engineers. Her "work" is only accepted by the few in the fringe.

Consequently, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice broke off from Scholars for 9/11 Truth and became their own entity due to the fact that those who make up Scholars for 9/11 Truth would not let go of the fringe theories like "DEW" or "no planes hit the towers" and simply focus on real science.


I hope people take the time to explore the plethora of information that I've provided before blindly accepting her word as law.

So are these new OTG peeps going to give responses, or just set up threads for us to discuss amongst ourselves?
Will it be Jesse or someone else leading the OTG threads? I know he has his own account too, so maybe he can use that so we know it is him we are talking to, and otherwise assume it is a staff member of OTG.
I am glad to see this collaboration, just unsure how it will play out.

a reply to: _BoneZ_

Yours is the kind of post that hopefully will be answered by the OP and will then elicit a discussion on the topic. I've seen similar data about Wood and her theories, but there are some interesting phenomena involved in the melting of the cars and buses which, although very likely not caused by some sort of exotic energy beam, still leave some questions unanswered. Nice post, thanks.

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
toasted cars as far as the FDR on the opposite side of Manhattan island!??

Good grief - just by looking at pictures of them it is obvious they were moved there - truthers are really getting desperate now if they believe Judy Wood!

a reply to: hellobruce

Wouldn't say that all truthers believe in Judy woods, as shown above by bonez

Nothing she says holds water, as Dad would have said. Or, as I would say, there is no "dustify" on the state diagram for steel, and once more I ask her the question - Where is the eye-blinding flash? There isn't any. And monatomic steel is viciously pyrophoric. You wouldn't get dust, you'd get "bang".

Besides, everyone knows it was SFOD-E's graduation exercise. Wait until you see what this year's class does.

a reply to: Bedlam

SFOD-E's
Special
Forces
Ordnance
Demolition
-
Experts?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Bedlam

SFOD-E's
Special
Forces
Ordnance
Demolition
-
Experts?

Special Forces Operational Detachment - Echo. One letter beyond SFOD-D.

eta: The easy way to say 'special forces ordnance and demolition experts' is 'charlie'.

Thermite or somthing similar must have been used, steel simply doesnt melt with jet fuel.

Now as to he matter of arguing about it, rather pointless the real facts will never be known the only thing to be agreed upon is the fact those building were designed to take a plane hit and not come down. and they did.

originally posted by: Biigs
Thermite or somthing similar must have been used, steel simply doesnt melt with jet fuel.

Doesn't need to melt. Just soften. It loses most of its strength at the temperature of burning jet fuel.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Biigs
Thermite or somthing similar must have been used, steel simply doesnt melt with jet fuel.

Doesn't need to melt. Just soften. It loses most of its strength at the temperature of burning jet fuel.

and the buildings didnt just "soften" to dust they didnt wilt, that mass of tonnes of steel came down in a crashing pile after a fire half way up the building using fuel that cant touch building grade steel.

originally posted by: Biigs
and the buildings didnt just "soften" to dust

Didn't "turn to dust" either. The dust was from the concrete.

they didnt wilt, that mass of tonnes of steel came down in a crashing pile after a fire half way up the building using fuel that cant touch building grade steel.

Sure it can touch it. Go look at a tensile strength vs temperature diagram for the grade steel that was used in the building. Now, go look at how the floors are designed, and what happens when the supports let go of the floor when they're softened.

It's easy when you try. No sci fi needed.

a reply to: Bedlam

even if that were accurate, why did the whole building come down and not just the middle section where the plane hit?

Are you saying that the jet fuel dripped down to the basement before lighting itself?

originally posted by: Biigs
a reply to: Bedlam

even if that were accurate, why did the whole building come down and not just the middle section where the plane hit?

Are you saying that the jet fuel dripped down to the basement before lighting itself?

Nope. Do you actually think that the internal design was up to the contents of the floors falling on it from above, where they WERE weakened and failed? You get the first floor letting go and falling where the plane was, it falls on the next two or three that were also damaged, now you've got floors falling inside the building like horizontal dominoes. They won't hold up to the weight of the floors above falling onto them.

eta: Every floor in the building doesn't have to fail. All you need is the first two or three under the impact to come down pretty flat, and that's what you get.

etaa: and it is accurate. You want, you can easily go google "yield strength vs temperature steel" and find dozens of graphs. About 700 degrees, you've lost half the tensile strength.

originally posted by: Biigs
Are you saying that the jet fuel dripped down to the basement before lighting itself?

Anyways, what REALLY happened was that SFOD-E drilled the box columns and filled them with some of the same goop they use in a SMAW-NE, with a tiny dispersal charge at the bottom of the box and a nano-aluminum powder charge at the top to trigger it. It's a mini thermobaric explosive in the box girder. Sort of like a firecracker in a coke bottle. Shatters them all to hell.

You don't need access to every room like the thermite conjecture. Just one at the top of each box member. Drill a hole, pump it in. Voila.