simulacra wrote:
I suppose he appealed for the Arab world to remain united after he stopped being a CIA asset.

simulacra wrote:



in what respect is dr judy woods work not believable? do you not agree the twin towers were dustified? and that the final steel column standing can be seen to turn into dust before your very eyes? why cant you understand evidence like that...what is your problem?

by the way you can get dr judy woods talk on dvd if you search her name on ebay...share with friends,send to politicians ,police officers,army people

and heres more proof of dustification for the retards on this forum...i'm being kind there

Yet it doesn't appear the same from this angle.... the spire twists & falls & sheds a load of dust that's settled on it after the rest of the enormous building has collapsed.
I think this is weak evidence from Dr Wood.

you know what space bandit you are a traitor to the human race...people like you should take a serious look at your selves..

coates wrote:
I would take a long hard look at yourself given he asked a perfectly sensible question without being insulting.

I just don't get your fascination with the topic given the pointlessness of either getting any resolution or result regardless.
Its like discussing JFK...what do you expect to get from it? Given that you can't expect anything from it, how is SB a 'traitor to the human race'?

lol.... Seriously get a grip.

coates wrote:

You're right... I should just believe everything Dr Wood says and not have any opinion or be able to present any evidence to the contrary.
Then I should go around websites banging on and on about it showing people how right she is and asking people why they don't agree.... then call them traitors should they produce anything that doesn't fit in with the theory.

Sadly, here, we actually discuss things & try to get to the bottom of them. Closed mindedness & cognitive dissonance are ...
The fool proclaims himself to be a wise man, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.

Meek and obedient you follow the leaders down well trodden corridors into the valley of steel....

coates wrote:
Are you garreth icke by chance ?

why did you have to put up another judy "the fraud" wood topic up when the other one is still up?

"the towers went poof.. .see"?

she makes no sense with her explanations, she is the pied piper for the stupid amongst us, luring the gullible out to the sea to be lost.

however taking a look at architects and engineers explanations, they explain and demonstrate how buildings and their components react in the physical world, now compare that to judy "the fraud" wood's bullshit waffling, no further comment should be required.

sorry to crash the judy "the fraud" wood's love boat experience by some unwitting fools who follow her mumblings as scientific fact without addressing contradicting evidence which ultmately destroys her argument.




judy's ramblings exposed!!!

Skanny wrote:
You do know that Wood IS an engineer don't you? I'm willing to bet she's got far more letters after her name than you do. Have you actually read her book for yourself?

Its not that her explanations make no sense, its that some people don't have the grey matter to understand them.

Judy got edgy in that interview because her opponent was talking about complete evaporation of steel. Not the same thing Wood has suggested happened and it wouldn't require the same energy. Her opponent is using the stance that just because he doesn't know of a way to do something it can't be done. Its ridiculous.

He also states that the height of the Kingdome after demolition was 12%. This is a lie.

The height of the Kingdome was never published after demolition. It was not fully collapsed in to its footprint so it could not be accurate. IT WAS WTC1 THAT WAS 12% and was published and confirmed. I suppose it doesn't matter that height isn't important anyway, and its energy and absorption that's important.

Don't forget he's putting wood on the spot asking her to confirm figures she hasn't looked at for a while and discuss them. What they're discussing is irrelevant because the figures HE supplied (not wood) are false and she took his word they were correct.

I know this because I have the book in front of me and I have just checked, its under chapter 6 - Seismic Data. pg 76 and pg 80.

His claims about the Kingdome's demolition footprint are also incorrect so that makes further discussion irrelevant. 50%+ of its weight was outside the 6x footprint.

He keeps making false claims, and twisting the evidence Judy has presented, probably because evidence and belief are at odds in his mind, and so his mind refuses to accept what it sees. Or he's disinfo purely to discredit her.

I watched half of that shitty video, and checked every claim he has made so far. He's wrong. Simple as. There is no need for me to watch the rest.

Buy her book and read it. Check BOTH sides of the evidence for yourself.

I kept it playing. The backtracking little shit. Trying to change the subject when she pulled him on his false smoke claim. Bang to rights lying and out of his depth.

Whilst talking about the snowball, she knows full well he's trying to set her up. I would have said that the seismograph data backs up the fact that the falling debris IS NOT of the sizeable weight it is supposed to be.

Oh FFS. He's an idiot. I'm still listening obviously and he can't wrap his head around the size of the building let alone anything else.

Space Bandit wrote:
You're quite correct SB, its even the same here:



What is interesting though, is that it does indeed crumble. It falls pretty much straight down into its own footprint as it were. How could it possibly do that? I don't believe she does herself any favours with her "turned to dust theory" as it doesn't turn to dust. But what does happen, actually supports here anyway. It doesn't topple, it crumbles from the ground up.

Do we have anybody here who is good with resonant frequency calculations?

For those that don't know, apparently Telsa invented an earthquake machine that nearly took a building down in one of his experiments. It was based on principals of resonant frequency.

I've just calculated the resonant frequency of 1,368ft (the height of one of the towers) of steel to be around 32Mhz. What is interesting here is this....

There were loads of reports of various electronic devices jamming. Phones, clocks, cameras, even broadcasting equipment was affect for a very short time in some cases.

32Mhz is the clock cycle of loads of IC's (computer chips). Particularly of those to do with timing.

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 photomechanics, 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.

Dr. Wood received her
•B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),
•M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and
•Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.
Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints. She has taught courses including •Experimental Stress Analysis,
•Engineering Mechanics,
•Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)
•Strength of Materials Testing
Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division.
From 1999 to 2006 Dr. Wood has been an assistant professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina. Before moving to Clemson she spent three years as a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Tech.



One of Dr. Wood's research interests is biomimicry, or applying the mechanical structures of biological materials to engineering design using engineering materials. Other recent research has investigated the deformation behavior of materials and structures with complex geometries and complex material properties, such as fiber-reinforced composite materials and biological materials. Dr. Wood is an expert in the use of moiré interferometry, a full-field optical method that is used in stress analysis, as well as materials characterization and other types of interference. In recent years, Dr. Wood and her students have developed optical systems with various wavelengths and waveguides. Dr. Wood has over 60 technical publications in refereed journals, conference proceedings, and edited monographs and special technical reports
.

I would hazard a guess that she has more experience and is more qualified in this WTC destruction analysis than most of her opponents who refuse to even refer to her as Dr, as they want to discredit her 'position' as they can't discredit her research into the matter.

edit link added www.drjudywood.com/articles/a/bio/Wood_Bio.html

Blue_Tackler wrote:
Exactly mate, academically and intellectually she's on a totally differing level to any of her critics I have seen thus far. Most of them don't have a hope in hell's chance of understanding half of the concepts she is a leading expert in. I'm staggered that she has been able to dumb down her research enough for a simpleton like me to be able to understand it.

Not only that, most people who criticize her are doing so without reading her research first hand, and use incomplete, inaccurate or plain false assertions that others have used when assessing her work. One idiot bouncing off another.

I'm on the fence re the DEW as my mind can't take on the complete ENORMITY of it. The evidence is there to support it though. Even through my own Neanderthal investigations.

I've also learnt that the towers are basically a faraday cage in their own right. We know that we have the tech to direct waves into very specific areas and the towers themselves would contain the 32Mhz needed to knock them down.

How much power could be siphoned off WTC 1 & 2's power supplies to knock them down? Enough I would say.

I think the devices were in the building and it was resonance that crippled the structures, much like the correct tone can shatter a crystal glass.

I'm probably wrong of course, but I like to postulate from time to time

I had sent an email to Andrew Johnson about this matter, I got the email address from his webpage checktheevidence checktheevidence.com/cms/

Because I know he works with Dr Wood at times and helped to construct her website.

He does reply to emails, I wanted to ask him about the 'hurricane' I think it's 'Hurricane Erin' as I did not quite understand the proposal of it's effects.
AJ replied, firstly he stated that it's something to do with the electrical field effects from Hurricane Erin were utilised in the interference system - she makes the analogy that John Hutchison uses a Tesla coil or Van Der Graff generator to provide the electrical component of his field interference, he then referred me to her book.

I'm still not quite sure exactly how the energy from the hurricane is used to produce a WTC attack?

It's like some kind of tool/coil/generator, all quite vague though, I don't know if this vagueness is to permit it to be explained to us dumbasses or because Dr Wood does not know how/what it is herself, for me that's speculation, Idk if she's presenting the hurricane effect as what occurred or what might of occurred, I have seen her plots/maps of hurricane Erin's path, and it does seem to change direction at the right place and time, do we have anything else to show 'Erin' was used as a source of energy?

Ok, is Judy Wood 1-1000, a "scientist" with a pretty unique theory about what happened?

Are there many other scientists in her field who agree with her or do the overwhelming majority support the official explanation?

simulacra wrote:
The general consensus seems to be that, those who understand her work support it, and those with enough professional experience about them (Engineers for 9/11 truth and the like) don't support the official theory.

Blue_Tackler wrote:
I'm gonna read over the hurricane stuff again, I'll get back to you shortly....