Dr Wood's claim that 80% of the steel from the towers was turned to dust.

1. Isn't the science the point of the book? If he has no understanding what does that say about the effectiveness of the book?

2. Selling a conspiracy book in a forum thread with 14 confirmed unique views is like trying to sell used cars in the bathroom of a preschool for the blind. What's the point?

 

Give it a rest.

 

Before eating my high protein breakfast, showering, applying my Testim®, and working out on the weight machines for 3 hours at the gym, I would like to take the time to bring this video to the attention of all the pleasant people who post on this forum thread. After reading WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Charlie Pound of the U. K. produced the song WAKE UP THIS IS YOUR ALARM !

WAKE UP THIS IS YOUR ALARM !
music, lyrics, and vocals by Charlie Pound © 2012

[video=youtube_share;H2dI-yRkFXY]http://youtu.be/H2dI-yRkFXY[/video]​

Verse 1:
Where did the towers go? Away with the breeze that blows.
And how much steel did they find? Could it be shipped in time?

I don’t know I haven’t seen the receipt, but it doesn’t make sense to me!
All those cars in a line, door handles and engines gone.

I’d tell you if I could, but you need to ask Judy Wood.
Before you accuse someone, you better make dam (n) sure you know what was done!

Chorus:
Wake up! this is your alarm!
Wake up!

Verse 2:
So while you're sitting on the fence, why don’t you check the evidence?
I’ll tell you something that you’ll learn, World Trade Center paper doesn’t burn.

And how could those buildings fall, with a seismic impact so small?
I know that something’s wrong, eight seconds the north tower's gone.

I’d tell you if I could, but you need to ask Judy Wood.
Before you accuse someone you better make sure you know how it was done!

Chorus:
Wake up! this is your alarm!
Wake up!

Middle eight:
You know it was 2001,
here we are and we're still arguing!

Chorus:
Wake up! this is your alarm!
Wake up! this is your alarm!
Wake up!
Wake up!
Wake up!

“The towers didn’t burn up, nor did they slam to the ground. They turned into dust in mid air.”

I'm Emmanuel Goldstein and I approve this message.

​

 

Yet another post in which you fail to address the question posed in the OP. What does your personal life have to do with this thread, anyway?

 

I'm not inerested in your fanasy life,or amateur songwriters,you NEED to answer the questions people ask you,and quit trying to hawk crazy judy's book...

 

Note to Chuck: Don't quit your day job.

 

Somehow I managed to NOT become overwhelmed with curiosity and click the video link, thus saving 3.5 mins of my life.

 

​

Rather than dogmatically and rudely pester or degrade people about the evidence, why not simply read it for yourself? After all, this type of psyop doesn't make the evidence go away!

Below is a list of some of the principal data involved with the destruction of the World Trade Center complex that must be explained. What I find intriguing is point 39, Hurricane Erin.

1 The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain by a free fall speed "collapse."

2 They underwent mid-air pulverization (dustification) and were turned to dust before they hit the ground.

3 The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.

4 The rail lines, the tunnels and most of the rail cars had only light damage, if any.

5 The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Bros. Road Runner and friends. There were reports that "The Gap" was looted.

6 The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.

7 The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up.

8 The demolition of WTC7 was whisper quiet and the seismic signal was not significantly greater than background noise.

9 The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

10 The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.

11 One file cabinet with folder dividers survived.

12 No toilets survived or even recognizable portions of one.

13 Windows of nearby buildings had circular and other odd-shaped holes in them.

14 In addition to the odd window damage, the marble facade was completely missing from around WFC1 and WFC2 entry, with no other apparent structural damage.

15 Fuzzballs, evidence that the dust continued to break down and become finer and finer.

16 Truckloads of dirt were hauled in and hauled out of the WTC site, a pattern that continues to this day.

17 Fuming of the dirt pile. Fuming decreased when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat.

18 Fuzzyblobs, a hazy cloud that appeared to be around material being destroyed.

19 The Swiss-Cheese appearance of steel beams and glass.

20 Evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation, as demonstrated by the near-instant rusting of affected steel.

21 Weird fires. The appearance of fire, but without evidence of heating.

22 Lack of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. No evidence of burned bodies.

23 Columns were curled around a vertical axis like rolled-up carpets, where overloaded buckled beams should be bent around the horizontal axis.

24 Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side cars that appeared to be burning.

25 Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, and into Liberty street in front of Bankers Trust, and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6, plus a cylindrical arc was cut into Bankers Trust.

26 All planes except top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes (120 seconds) after WTC 1 had been destroyed.

27 Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways, during the destruction of the Twin Towers.

28 The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings.

29 More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it.

30 Twin Tower control without damaging neighboring buildings, in fact all seriously damaged and destroyed buildings had a WTC prefix.

31 The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared.

32 For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume.

33 The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings.

34 The WTC7 rubble pile was too small for the total mass of the building and consisted of a lot of mud.

35 Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars, instant disappearance of people by "unexplained" waves, a plane turning into a mid-air fireball, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions.

36 Eyewitness testimony of Scott-pack explosions in fire trucks and fire trucks exploding that were parked near the WTC.

37 There were many flipped cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex near trees with full foliage.

38 Magnetometer readings in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the earth's magnetic field with each of the events at the WTC on 9/11.

39 Hurricane Erin, located just off Long Island on 9/11/01, went virtually unreported in the days leading up to 9/11, including omission of this Hurricane on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean was shown on the map.

40 Sillystring, the appearance of curious cork-screw trails.

41 Uncanny similarities with the Hutchison Effect, where the Hutchison Effect exhibits all of the same phenomena listed above.

Hurricane Erin is covered in Chapter 18 (pages 395-412) of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood.

This is the introduction to the chapter:

"It was a beautiful early-autumn morning in New York City. September 11, 2001, started out calm, with pleasant temperatures and crystalline blue skies. Some had taken time to do early morning errands. But very few of those people, in fact very few among the entire population of New York City, knew that a massive hurricane was located at that very same time just off the shore of Long Island. That storm was Hurricane Erin, as seen in Figure 411:"

Why was Hurricane Erin traveling straight for NYC from September 3rd-11th 2001, yet it was not reported on by any major media broadcast in that area? Most people are totally unaware that Hurricane Erin came closest to New York City and reached its largest size on 9/11. Hurricane Erin was slightly larger than Hurricane Katrina (i.e. Kinetic Energy as measured by Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index*), and hurricanes rarely head straight for NYC, so why wasn't it reported on by any major corporate media station? Furthermore, why was Hurricane Erin still not reported on when it reached its closest point to NYC on the morning of September 11th, just before it diverted from its straight-line trajectory by suddenly turning and heading out to sea? How were meteorologists absolutely certain that this hurricane would make a sharp right-hand turn away from New York City? Not only is New York City near sea level, but so is most of Long Island. Evacuation from those areas would be a mammoth undertaking and could not be organized at a moment's notice and yet the public remained uninformed. The data shows that Erin slowed down as it approached New York City and then remained almost stationary during the morning of 9/11. Immediately after the World Trade Center complex was attacked, Erin began to move away from New York City. Coincidentally, Hurricane Erin was studied more than any other hurricane had been studied before, and more was learned from it than had been learned from any hurricane before it.

NASA Makes A Heated 3-D Look Into Hurricane Erin's Eye
Hurricane Erin raced across the North Atlantic and along the eastern seaboard in September 2001. She was used as an experiment for a study to improve hurricane tracking and intensity predictions, allowing meteorologists to provide more accurate and timely warnings to the public.

The mission originated from the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville, Fla. The mission united researchers from 10 universities, five NASA centers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. CAMEX-4 is a series of field research investigations to study tropical cyclones — storms commonly known as hurricanes.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051007090048.htm

Mission Summary - Hurricane Erin
http://web.archive.org/web/20040116023331/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/HFP2001/Mission_Sum_010910H.pdf

9/11 Morning Weather Reports | NYC Not Warned of Approaching Hurricane Erin​

[video=youtube_share;1xWjdYnpxUg]http://youtu.be/1xWjdYnpxUg[/video]​

*The accumulated cyclone energy index (ACE) for Hurricane Erin was HIGHER than the ACE index for Hurricane Katrina. This subject is covered in Chapter 18, section E, page 405 of WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?

Accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) is a measure used by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to express the activity of individual tropical cyclones and entire tropical cyclone seasons, particularly the North Atlantic hurricane season. It uses an approximation of the energy used by a tropical system over its lifetime and is calculated every six-hour period. Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity, and by adding together the energy per some interval of time, the accumulated energy is found. As the duration of a storm increases, more values are summed and the ACE also increases such that longer-duration storms may accumulate a larger ACE than more-powerful storms of lesser duration.

I'm Emmanuel Goldstein and I approve this message.
​

 

Yet another post in which you fail to address the question posed in the OP. If you have read the book, and the book contains the answer, then why don't you answer?

 

At least you've stopped linking to the Amanda Reconwith account, though we'll probably discover the account you are linking to(Jeff Folkman) has a weird connection to the same clowns you say are "attacking" Wood..


Like Fangbeer has said, none of this wall of text addresses OP...

 

​

"You can never really prove a lie, only a truth" ​

Keep in mind that there is no such thing as "9/11Truth". This is designed and controlled by the perpetrators of 9/11 to hide the truth. This is why Dr. Judy Wood is not supported and even demonized by any group with the word "truth" in it. You won't find truth in a club or by letting other people do the thinking for you. Agents provocateurs can't attack the evidence because it is too overwhelming, conclusive, and indisputable, (even academics & scientists have embarrassed themselves trying) so those that deny the evidence will simply attack you with insults, mindless negative comments, and silly unrelated questions. Think of them as junkyard dogs protecting their junkyard status quo so all they are able to do is bark, bite, and mark their territory.

The Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave, S.E.
Washington, DC 20540
http://www.loc.gov/z39voy?operation=searchRetrieve&version=1.1&recordSchema=marcxml&startRecord=1&maximumRecords=10&stylesheet=http://www.loc.gov/z3950/owcbrief.xsl&query=bath.standardIdentifier=^0615412564

I'm Emmanuel Goldstein and I approve this message.
​

 

Still manny doesn't answer....

 

Dr Woods? Who? Never heard of her.

 

Consider yourself fortunate...might want to look her up for a laugh,though...

 

Impressive.


"Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photo-mechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry in forensic science. She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers and journal publications in her areas of expertise."

 

She reads well.

 

Now read her 'theories' about what happened to the WTC towers on 9/11,the directed energy weapons,the turning of steel to 'dust'....

 

You left out the part about her being in a coma and awaking with brain damage.

 

As crazy as her's may sound, have you heard the official Version? Whooooowa.....

 

So. Are you willing to actually commit to what you think really did happen on 9/11? Or do you bounce from theory to theory as your theories are proven bull(*)(*)(*)(*)?

And, of course, I'm still waiting for a single shred of real evidence that the official version is in any way fundamentally wrong or that your theory, if you are actually willing to commit to one, is true.

 

I have. All evidence supports it.

 

Then you aren't looking at all the evidence.

 

SO POST THE EVIDENCE ALREADY! Geeze. Is it REALLY that hard to come up with actual evidence? If so, why do you sit there and whine that we aren't looking at all the evidence?

 

I'm sorry, what?