Dr. Judy Wood Ph.D, Materials Science, 9/11, & Directed Energy Weapons

DGM said:
I take it you have not watched the whole thing. (all 5 parts).

BTW This is not a "No-plane" thread. We all know you can derive "no-plane" out of every conceivable phrase. We got that!
Click to expand...

Look, DGM, this is becoming a little bit like pulling teeth. You posted a link to a video; now you say you meant 5 parts. But, you still do not say what on earth the video stands for, proves or claims, as you see it.

Come on, please be forthcoming in connection with the claim you are making.

For those using 40post/page format, we're on a new page. It will help, I think, to post this little summary of the portion of the DGM video that pertains to the relationship of WTC 3 to the Twin Towers and that serves to confirm there was no mere collapse of those buildings; rather, they were dustified as proven by Dr. Judy Wood:

wtc3vidcompile.jpg


all the best
 
Last edited:
You know, jamm, there comes a time when arguing with crazy people totally in their own little world when you just have to say, "believe what you want to believe exists in your universe, the rest of us will continue to see reality for what it is" and be done with it.

You can't debate crazy people. Period.
 
jammonius said:
Look, DGM, this is becoming a little bit like pulling teeth. You posted a link to a video; now you say you meant 5 parts. But, you still do not say what on earth the video stands for, proves or claims, as you see it.

Come on, please be forthcoming in connection with the claim you are making.

all the best
Click to expand...
Did you not say:

added to that must be the additional height of the 22 story Marriott Hotel, WTC 3, that likewise disappeared from the face of the earth, to such an extreme degree that it, a 22 story building, is almost never mentioned,
Click to expand...

Watch the video, are these people lying? Simple really.
I also said in my post that the video is #1 of 5.
 
DGM said:
Did you not say:



Watch the video, are these people lying? Simple really.
I also said in my post that the video is #1 of 5.
Click to expand...

You are still not being forthcoming. You know, or should, that those people were simply guests at the hotel. They do not have anything to say about the disappearance of the building. Further, you know, or should, that I am mostly referencing the absence of any investigative finding about what happened to a 22 story building.

I have previously posted that the 298 page NCSTAR 1 Report mentions it a mere 4 times, and not at all in terms of its destruction.
 
jammonius said:
You are still not being forthcoming. You know, or should, that those people were simply guests at the hotel. They do not have anything to say about the disappearance of the building. Further, you know, or should, that I am mostly referencing the absence of any investigative finding about what happened to a 22 story building.

I have previously posted that the 298 page NCSTAR 1 Report mentions it a mere 4 times, and not at all in terms of its destruction.
Click to expand...
Do I need to post "screen grabs" (although I'm not sure I know how to do this) from the video after the collapse of tower #1 and again after #2? Are you afraid to watch it because it has street level video of the piles created? Do you want to know where INSIDE the hotel some of these people survived?
 
Last edited:
After reviewing all necessary evidence, I hereby claim that the DEW theory is not a viable option when regarding the destruction of the WTC complex. The theory is unsupported, scientifically, as well as logistically. Ground Zero was not flat by any means, photographic evidence shows this to be true, the steel was not dustified, and there has been zero evidence to support this claim as well. If the stel was dustified, and Ground Zero was flat, the clean up would not have taken anywhere near as long as it did.

What I do find absolutely hilarious is the fact that Jammonious claims that no proper investigation was done into what caused the destruction of the towers, yet wants to use FEMA, and NIST to support these ridiculous theories.

Until you answer these questions which correlate to YOUR claim, you and Judy Wood remain two trolls, period.

Where was the energy weapon deployed from?

What was the type of energy used?

If you are not going to answer the questions, don't bother responding, there is no sense going circular with this. Understand that until you define these items about your claim, support it. You are making the claim, not me.
 
twinstead said:
You know, jamm, there comes a time when arguing with crazy people totally in their own little world when you just have to say, "believe what you want to believe exists in your universe, the rest of us will continue to see reality for what it is" and be done with it.

You can't debate crazy people. Period.
Click to expand...

Do you still not grasp that I do not post on, let alone question people's beliefs?

Your post echoes something I frequently post, Twinstead. I post:

You can continue to believe the common storyline of 9/11 for as long as you can.

If you search that prase in this forum, I think you'll find I've posted it dozens of times.

My posts are not matters of belief. Rather, they are matters of fact, supported by sources. Note, too, that facts simply refer to something or some proposition for which there exists a posteriori information that tends to validate the claim.

There has not ever been a full or reliable, publicly funded determination of what happened on 9/11. From the very first, when then Sec.State, Colin Powell, promised the world community a diplomatic "White Paper" confirming Osama binLaden did 9/11 and proving what happened, something the US State Dept never produced, through the incomplete and inadequately funded FEMA report, through the congressional hearings on 9/11, through the 9/11 Commission Report, through to the NIST report, there has not ever been a valid determination of what happened on 9/11.

The only publicly filed, at a governmental website, validly performed forensic evaluation proving what happened to the WTC complex (destruction by DEW), is that done by Dr. Judy Wood.

All else is mere debunker claims, sourced, by and large, to stupid newspapers or out and out propaganda sources, or simply made up.

We are all hampered by the sheer extent of the PSYOP done to us.

If you've decided to stop posting and/or lurking, I want you to know that I wish you,

all the best
 
Last edited:


Jammy: Want to guess how tall this is? You know people survived your "death ray" here.


Note, After being uncovered!
 
Last edited:
djlunacee said:
After reviewing all necessary evidence, I hereby claim that the DEW theory is not a viable option when regarding the destruction of the WTC complex. The theory is unsupported, scientifically, as well as logistically. Ground Zero was not flat by any means, photographic evidence shows this to be true, the steel was not dustified, and there has been zero evidence to support this claim as well. If the stel was dustified, and Ground Zero was flat, the clean up would not have taken anywhere near as long as it did.

What I do find absolutely hilarious is the fact that Jammonious claims that no proper investigation was done into what caused the destruction of the towers, yet wants to use FEMA, and NIST to support these ridiculous theories.

Until you answer these questions which correlate to YOUR claim, you and Judy Wood remain two trolls, period.

Where was the energy weapon deployed from?

What was the type of energy used?

If you are not going to answer the questions, don't bother responding, there is no sense going circular with this. Understand that until you define these items about your claim, support it. You are making the claim, not me.
Click to expand...

Calling all fallacy vigilantes. The above is atrociously fallacious and adds nothing of substance to this thread, I am afraid.

That said, maybe it is time to leave well enough alone. I am unwilling to go around and around in circles.

I note, however, that there has not been any attempt to refute the claims concerning building mass, lack of height of the remnant debris, let alone the stunningly effective visual proof of just how massive and close together were WTC 1,2,3.

See the evidence: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6391178&postcount=481

It's all here for those who wish to see, to do so.
 
jammonius said:
Calling all fallacy vigilantes. The above is atrociously fallacious and adds nothing of substance to this thread, I am afraid.

That said, maybe it is time to leave well enough alone. I am unwilling to go around and around in circles.

I note, however, that there has not been any attempt to refute the claims concerning building mass, lack of height of the remnant debris, let alone the stunningly effective visual proof of just how massive and close together were WTC 1,2,3.

See the evidence: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6391178&postcount=481

It's all here for those who wish to see, to do so.
Click to expand...



I'm guessing you missed (ie: ignored) my post #478:

sabretooth47 said:
Question Jammy...

You wanna believe this "Orbital Space Beam DEW" crap...consider this:

Firstly, this "orbital" unit cannot be in a geostationary orbit, as this is only achievable with satellites cruising the equator:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit

wikipedia said:
A geostationary orbit can only be achieved at an altitude very close to 35,786 km (22,236 mi), and directly above the equator.
Click to expand...

Seeing that Judy’s Death Ray is effective only if directly over the WTC, and the fact that NYC is nowhere near the equator, this alone vaporizes Judy’s theory.

But let’s dig a little further anyway, shall we? This means the only other available orbital option is a standard variable orbit. One of which has satellites cruising between 17,000 and 22,000 mph. Let’s take the low end for S&G’s.

Let’s pretend for a second that the WTC complex was one square mile…nowhere near that, I know, but it makes the math a bit easier. At 17,000 mph, a satellite is cruising at about 283 miles per minute, or 4.7 miles per second. So, in other words, it covers one mile of surface area in an (very generous) approximation of 1/5th of a second. 1/5th of a second! That’s faster than most people can click start and then immediately stop a stopwatch...or double-click a mouse.

So you’re telling me that some beam weapon, from space, could “dustify” two steel buildings in (again, a very generous) 1/5th of a second? Two buildings that collapsed 29 minutes apart? Two buildings that collapsed for 18 seconds and 22 seconds?

Orbital Space Beam = Fantasy. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
Do I need to post "screen grabs" (although I'm not sure I know how to do this) from the video after the collapse of tower #1 and again after #2? Are you afraid to watch it because it has street level video of the piles created? Do you want to know where INSIDE the hotel some of these people survived?
Click to expand...

Yes, screen grabs would be useful. Please post visual proof if and when you rely on them to make claims. You have to upload your jpgs to some sort of hosting site, like photobucket, otherwise you get nailed for 'hot linking.' Once you upload to a free host site, you can then post your images here using the "Insert image" button.

I look forward to your visual posting.
 
jammonius said:
Would you please stop posting misleading rhetoric. If you want to make a height related claim, please make it. You have not said anything of substance and your photo is too small to make any interpretative statements about it.

Thank you
Click to expand...
You can make it larger and easily make a determination.
I want you to do this yourself. It's called learning.

Your welcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom