Dr. Judy Wood's Book: Where Did The Towers Go?

[dan duchaine]

Originally Posted by denton

No, you're clearly right. Just keep on with the bluster.

Post up the calculation or admit you guessed based on a picture.

[denton]

Originally Posted by dan duchaine

Post up the calculation or admit you guessed based on a picture.

The weak point was where the large steel outer sections were joined together. If you think that's not the case, then I can't help you, but I do doubt the rationale behind any of your other conclusions.

[dan duchaine]

Originally Posted by denton

The weak point was where the large steel outer sections were joined together. If you think that's not the case, then I can't help you, but I do doubt the rationale behind any of your other conclusions.

Ok so you have no idea and are just making stuff up based on picture from the internet.

[rodin]

Originally Posted by theabominablephenomenon

Me too.
That's the problem with these theorists/theories... always want money when the truth should be free!

You have to pay to read university papers. That is as bad as hospitals charging parking fees IMO

[denton]

Originally Posted by dan duchaine

Ok so you have no idea and are just making stuff up based on picture from the internet.

Can you prove me wrong? Thought not son.

[musicmaker]

Originally Posted by denton

Those bottom four images are what the Wood woman claims is 'dustification'. She's either grossly mistaken or willingly misleading. The images show a part of the structure collapsing. The video shows this. There's no mystery, and no dustification. It's a dust-covered structure collapsing in a plume of dust, but it is not being 'dustified', unless that means "collapsing in a cloud of dust".

Should have gone to specsavers dude

[wispy]

Given that DEW is meant to be Judy Wood's main theory, she doesn't sound very convincing in this interview even with the interviewer being stumped momentarily by a photograph purportedly supporting Wood's theory.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...6240694803017#

Her rambling mumbling explanations almost feel as though they've been made up on the spot without much thought even though she's been plugging this theory for a while. No explanation of how it was done, no idea of the energy involved and questions about it are deemed distractions.

[musicmaker]

Originally Posted by wispy

Given that DEW is meant to be Judy Wood's main theory, she doesn't sound very convincing in this interview even with the interviewer being stumped momentarily by a photograph purportedly supporting Wood's theory.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...6240694803017#

Her rambling mumbling explanations almost feel as though they've been made up on the spot without much thought even though she's been plugging this theory for a while. No explanation of how it was done, no idea of the energy involved and questions about it are deemed distractions.

LOL why do you bother posting this crap don't you have anything better to do? Lonely are we?

[wispy]

Originally Posted by musicmaker

LOL why do you bother posting this crap don't you have anything better to do? Lonely are we?

Yup. Judy Woods was crap in her interview

An unconvinicng performance.

All she's done is put forward a DEW theory based on what some selected photo's apparenlty seem to show by her interpretation.

A simple sense check of the evidence and whether DEW is technically feasable or has ever been used in the real world shoots down that theory.

[denton]

Originally Posted by wispy

Yup. Judy Woods was crap in her interview

An unconvinicng performance.

All she's done is put forward a DEW theory based on what some selected photo's apparenlty seem to show by her interpretation.

A simple sense check of the evidence and whether DEW is technically feasable or has ever been used in the real world shoots down that theory.

She's still to back up any of her ridiculous claims. With ny luck she's fading into obscurity, along with her overpriced hardback toilet paper.

[musicmaker]

Originally Posted by denton

She's still to back up any of her ridiculous claims. With ny luck she's fading into obscurity, along with her overpriced hardback toilet paper.

Your comments are tired like the links you post.

[indolering]

.
You can bet your ass Ms Wood will be proven correct in her analyses of the collapse of the towers. Don't bother listening to half-baked losers who claim there's no proof or that Ms Wood is unconvincing. The truth of 9/11 will be known.

How to Disappear Completely - A Short Film About Dustification - YouTube

How to Disappear Completely - A Short Film About Dustification - YouTube

[paolo]

The dustification video is a small masterpiece.It's been obvious for a long time that concrete, steel, flesh and blood were turned to dust, which was not caused by planes, fire or explosives

[denton]

Crazy Wood lady, still flogging that same dead horse. She offers nothing valid, just unscientific speculation, yet people seem so willing to ignore the holes in her 'research'. Why is that?

[noncooperation]

Originally Posted by paolo

The dustification video is a small masterpiece.It's been obvious for a long time that concrete, steel, flesh and blood were turned to dust, which was not caused by planes, fire or explosives

Exactly, it's obvious - all the rest are dust deniers.

[skanny]

Originally Posted by paolo

The dustification video is a small masterpiece.It's been obvious for a long time that concrete, steel, flesh and blood were turned to dust, which was not caused by planes, fire or explosives

flesh and blood turned to dust????

explosives pulverises concrete

explosives used on steel can evaporate steel.

explosives will also evaporate the human body , as well as fragment bones which is usually what happens when humans are caught in strong blast / concussion waves.

if the judy wood weapon was used and turned human bodies to dust like you claim why was there bone fragments found scttered on the rooftops of the deutche bank building for one?

there would have just been dust by your reckoning..... a big flaw in your argument that is easily pointed out.

[wispy]

Originally Posted by skanny

flesh and blood turned to dust????

explosives pulverises concrete

explosives used on steel can evaporate steel.

explosives will also evaporate the human body , as well as fragment bones which is usually what happens when humans are caught in strong blast / concussion waves.

if the judy wood weapon was used and turned human bodies to dust like you claim why was there bone fragments found scttered on the rooftops of the deutche bank building for one?

there would have just been dust by your reckoning..... a big flaw in your argument that is easily pointed out.

I find myself in a position of agreeing with some of what you wrote there.

WTC buildings weren't CD'd though.

[skanny]

Originally Posted by wispy

I find myself in a position of agreeing with some of what you wrote there.

WTC buildings weren't CD'd though.

welcome back to the fold wispy ... it has been kinda quiet here in this thread of late

[labouysse]

Originally Posted by paolo

The dustification video is a small masterpiece.It's been obvious for a long time that concrete, steel, flesh and blood were turned to dust, which was not caused by planes, fire or explosives

So how do explosives turn steel to dust? I've seen steel turned to "dust" by attrition - something like an angle grinder, a lathe, a file, a saw - but never by explosives.

[skanny]

Originally Posted by labouysse

So how do explosives turn steel to dust? I've seen steel turned to "dust" by attrition - something like an angle grinder, a lathe, a file, a saw - but never by explosives.

i have used lathes in the past and i cannot remember a lathe turning metals to dust under any circumstances.

any CNC operators on this forum will be able to tell you the exact same believe it or not.

who said explosives turn metal to dust?