Bizarre 9/11 Theory for 'directed energy'

I recently had an amusing thought..... I dont believe fires knocked down the world trade center. I dont know what it was, but i think it was man made. I dont see how 'intelligent design' could manifest itself otherwise.

Controlled demolition can take many forms. High explosives alone may not account for everything that we see.

I think there is a lot of room for unconventional technology that we cant even consider.

Now, i am NO fan of the space based weapons platforms firing 3rd generation xenon flux directed energy lasers that refract off the ionosphere and amplify the sound barrier maximum!

Instead of space based weapons, what about building based? Could somebody use the fact that the entire structure was steel to conduct massive currents through the steel?

Modern steel furnaces uses massive electrical arks on the process of melting the iron.

What about localized microwave devices creating standing waves inside of the columns?

What about a more lethal version of the active denial system?

Im just puttin it out there...

Perhaps the towers were brought down by a group of spoon benders trained by the CIA. Well, not really, of course. But I do think we have to think outside the box in order to get the whole truth about what pulverised most of the two towers into dust. The problem with that, however, is that few want to take you seriously if you try. Witness the cold-shouldering by most in the 9/11 truth movement of Dr Judy Wood, despite Jim Fetzer's strong support for her. What if those behind 9/11 really did use exotic, military weapons unknown to anyone outside the clique of classified weapons scientists that built them? What if they are relying upon no investigator in the 9/11 truth movement proposing their use being believed in order to maintain the cover-up? For this reason, it is potentially self-defeating to dismiss out of hand, as Prof Jones has done, the possibility of directed, high-energy weapons being used on 9/11.

I feel ambivalent towards the subject. I know we dont have all the answers, and i try to avoid relying on assumptions, like NIST does.

I think the reason why people are turned off by judy wood is because of her style of presenting the evidence. I think she does a good job of raising some questions, then she just flatly asserts the theory of space based energy beams, which is another assumption.

I feel that the subject deserves scrutiny and debate. Both sides of the issue need to be willing to compromise.

Another problem is, however, most people that are 'out-of-the-loop' on 9/11 are totally turned off by 'energy beams' etcetera...

I can definitely see why people would want to avoid this. I certainly agree that it would be a mistake to just dismiss it outright, with no real research, discussion, or debate.

I, for one, and willing to consider some sort of directed energy device inside the building capable of generating huge temperature variations. We know that they have a 'less-than-lethal' Active Denial System, which with a few modifications could feasibly generate that type of heat. We also know that the military has been working on very powerful lasers for use in Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense.

I think people outside the loop will be turned off by almost any dig. diff. theory from their own. But I agree, we may as well look beyond standard and even know technologies. If "they" had any strange tech waiting to be used, 9/11 would be the day to bring it out. How to prove any such method is another story. Still a skeptic myself on the WTC collapses. It don't look right,but I don't know much and don't trust many theorists.

They're kind of big. And I don't think the one in the picture could get anywhere near melting or substantially weakening steel.

hey, spoon. i've been thinking along the same lines for quite a while.

they don't even have to be microwaves. sonic waves could do the same thing. as long as it is a resonant frequency of sufficient intensity.

check out this old bridge footage(which is pretty famous, so many people have already seen it. still freaky...) tacoma narrows bridge, 1940

[edit on 15-4-2007 by billybob]

Indeed, the resonant frequency of a structure is an important design criteria. Skyscrapers are built to sway in the wind.

Buildings are usually designed with a frequency that is out of the typical range seen during hurricanes and earthquakes.

However, if you have a means of transferring large amounts of energy in phase with the resonant frequency, bad things happen. The material deforms elastically and stores energy. And like a rubber band, if you stretch it to far it snaps.

In its modified form, this is probably what you're looking for:

en.wikipedia.org...

Pulsed Energy "RgX"Projectile or PEP (colloquially referred to as a pain beam) is a technology of non-lethal weaponry currently under development by the U.S. military. It involves the emission of an invisible laser pulse which, upon contact with the target, evaporates the surface and creates a small amount of exploding plasma; this results in a sound and shock wave that stuns the target as well as in electromagnetic radiation that affects nerve cells and causes a painful sensation. The technology can also be used as a lethal weapon, and indeed an early name was Pulsed Impulsive Kill Laser (PIKL).

Not sure if your theory is valid, but the technology exists.

"Watch the skies...things might get to shakin'".

In its modified form, this is probably what you're looking for:

en.wikipedia.org...

Pulsed Energy "RgX"Projectile or PEP (colloquially referred to as a pain beam) is a technology of non-lethal weaponry currently under development by the U.S. military. It involves the emission of an invisible laser pulse which, upon contact with the target, evaporates the surface and creates a small amount of exploding plasma; this results in a sound and shock wave that stuns the target as well as in electromagnetic radiation that affects nerve cells and causes a painful sensation. The technology can also be used as a lethal weapon, and indeed an early name was Pulsed Impulsive Kill Laser (PIKL).

Not sure if your theory is valid, but the technology exist.

"Watch the skies...things might get to shakin'".

here is a you tube video link. Maybe the energy that is flowing out
and pulsating is causing sink holes.

www.youtube.com...

Please note the hazy waves are not graphic. If you pause the video anywhere you can see that the haze is not due to poor quality and
you can see where paused very clear picture.

The person who took video was inexperinced so the camera moves around a lot trying to keep in the lens the best place to catch the
pulsating radiating zzzzzzzzzzzz energy pulsating up around the flag pole,
up along the wood fence, and pulsating on the metal gates.

One of the architects who designed WTC2 said in an interview on January 21, 2007 with Mike Hagan at Radio Orbit that the two towers were designed for controlled demolition and were actually destroyed this way! He also said that Saudi Arabian engineers from the Bin Laden Construction Company, one of the biggest civil engineering companies in the world, were consulting with Emory Roth & Sons, the architectural company that employed him, at the time the towers were designed. The interview is at:

www.mikehagan.com...

Comments by a blogger on this interview at:

kentroversypapers.blogspot.com...

Most of the interview is about Paul Laffoley's work as a visionary artist and futurist. His remarks about his days working as an architect on the WTC project occur about 30-40 minutes into the interview. They are REVEALING.

HAARP energy oozing from the ground?
you can actually see the flag waving at the top of the flag pole.
it's a flag pole. the 'haze' is probably just overexposure.
worst hoax ever.

start a thread on that video, and see how quickly the debunkers say the exact same thing.

I am not a big fan of energy beams. If you have something worthwhile or noteworthy, by all means bring it to my attention.

It is my intention that this thread should serve as some sort of capitulation. Id love to see the various divisions of 'the movement' find some common ground.

If you want to build interest in this theory, start with the basics. Build upon it one block at a time. Don't pull a Judy Woods running around pulling at your hair screaming, "ENERGY BEAMS! SPACE WEAPONS! ITS SO OBVIOUS! AARRRRGGGHHHHHH!!"

Personally, id like it if one of the energy beam proponents could build upon some of the groundwork laid in this thread. I know that directed energy is real, but i dont know of anything that could pull off what is claimed to have happened on 9/11.

Bring me more information of directed energy research. I dont want wild assertions or crazy claims about how people that dont believe in directed energy are all reptilian psyops agents spreading disinfo.

And, to the opponents of energy beams; if you can prove that this is disinfo being fed into the movement, please present your evidence.

NIST get pwned by anonymous engineer's fine element analysis computer model

man, if this thing ever blows over, there are some real super heroes out there who need for me to buy them as beer.

wecomeinpeace, bsbray, gordon ross, rosie, charlie, labtop, paul laffoley, dylan avery and crew, judy woods, stephen jones(lemonade for mormons), david ray griffin, rick siegel...and a host of stars....

they can't be all correct about what happened, as the theories conflict, but all of 'us' KNOW what didn't happen, and that is enogh to know that WE ARE BEING LIED TO by a massive uber-octopus.

i think if the truth movement wants to focus together, it should focus on what couldn't have happened, firstly, and not what did happen.

what couldn't have happened is knowable beyond a shadow of a doubt.