Star Wars Beam Weapon and the WTC Bathtub

TruthSeeker1234

Banned
T
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
1,756
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

Drs. Wood and Reynolds complete their thesis in public view. They note that the Kingdome demolition created a 2.3 richter earthquake, and point out that WTC had many times the PE, and should have caused a much larger earthquake than the 2.3, and 2.1 quakes that were actually measured.

The foundation of the WTC (the "bathtub") was not damaged.

This is strong evidence for the near total disintegration of the towers before they hit the ground. They caclulate how much dust should be produced, and present lots of photographic evidence of disintegration.

Also shown are many difficult-to-explain phenomena, such as the toasted cars, and blown out windows.

I eagerly await any "debunking".
 
Last edited:
TruthSeeker1234 said:
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

Drs. Wood and Reynolds complete their thesis in public view. They note that the Kingdome demolition created a 2.3 richter earthquake, and point out that WTC had many times the PE, and should have caused a much larger earthquake than the 2.3, and 2.1 quakes that were actually measured.

The foundation of the WTC (the "bathtub") was not damaged.

This is strong evidence for the near total disintegration of the towers before they hit the ground. They caclulate how much dust should be produced, and present lots of photographic evidence of disintegration.

Also shown are many difficult-to-explain phenomena, such as the toasted cars.

I eagerly await any "debunking".
Click to expand...

You know, it's pretty bloody impossible for them to hit the ground intact....unless you imagine them being lifted by some incredible lifting ray traction beam thingy and then dropped from a great height.

Still, there is always the possibility that jesus walked amongst the mayans.
 
So it was a controlled thermite demolition AND a beam weapon attack? And there were no planes and all of the videos were fakes?
 
I'll let more knowledgeable and dedicated skeptics tackle the rest of this nonsense, but this one bit I have to comment on.

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Also shown are many difficult-to-explain phenomena, such as the toasted cars, and blown out windows.
Click to expand...

Two flaming 110 storey tall buildings fall and you think fire damaged cars constitute a mystery?
 
Anyone else besides me think that Dr. Wood is one sexy momma?

Isn't Morgan Reynolds a "no planer"?
 
just some random questions:

Would the geology of the areas impacted affect the richter reading? Is this analyzed at all?

Richter is a peak reading, if it the peak were held longer during the WTC collapse would the same amount of energy be dissipated as a higher peak in a shorter time?

Did they calculate the loss of energy that went into destroying the building instead of the ground? In a CD (i.e. the King Dome) more energy goes into the ground because not as much is needed to destroy the building itself.
 
Ok, I really don't have the time or desire to wade through the entire bloody thing. But a few things that immediately jump out at me:

Figure 14 and 15. WTC station and platform before the event, and on 11/23/03. What is this supposed to show? It took a couple years and probably quite a few million dollars to get the stations open again.

Figure 13: WTC Station Platform after the event; this PATH train wasn't crushed. Again, so what?

Figure 22: Warner Bros. Store in the mall under where WTC2 "fell"
That's not a photo of the store, it's a storage room where much of what remained after the collapse is stored. An error at best, deliberately misleading at worst.

Figure 23: Roadrunner survived! See above. And so? Do they really think that every single object was turned to dust?

God, I can't even go further, much less look at the Satr Wars beam crap. My head hurts looking at so much stupid.
 
Last edited:
I love the fact that there is nothing under the subheading of "Conclusions." It speaks volumes...

I noticed the infamous "billiard ball" page was linked to. Was this tripe written by the same person who didn't understand the difference between elastic and inelastic collisions in momentum equations?
 
Last edited:
Blutarsky said:
I love the fact that there is nothing under the subheading of "Conclusions." It speaks volumes...

I noticed the infamous "billiard ball" page was linked to. Was this tripe written by the same person who didn't understand the difference between elastic and inelastic collisions in momentum equations?
Click to expand...

Well, that's it for me then. I'm not gonna read all this drivel, and thought of only reading the conclusion. Well, appearantly, there is nothing to conclude from all this. :rolleyes:
 
If this is the same person who drafted the "billiard ball" website I have no need to read on, just as if someone created a site that purported to have evidence that the Amish were behind 9/11.
 
Dr. Wood's area of expertise is moire interferometry, an optical method of measuring surface strains. She is so far out of her field as to be laughable. Dr. Reynolds is an economist! His ability to speak intelligently or coherently on building collapse and the mechanics involved is on a par with the fellow who set fire to his rabbit cage.

The only event this paper is evidence of is academics straying way WAY out of their lane and appealing to their PhD (in entirely unrelated fields) to lend weight to their mindless blatherings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom