Skeptic Project

When did I say that I think the nose cone came out the other side of the building? I never said such a thing! Another major inaccuracy on your part...

You did say it !

Youre inability to know your own claims and bare face lie is extraordinary.

Please explain how the Twin Towers were turned to dust so fine, that the dust floated high up into our atmosphere.

Please explain how come steel and concrete were turned to dust, while aluminum was only bent or burnt, while paper was unharmed.

Please explain how 1,400+ cars were toasted / melted, yet the people in the streets next to those cars were not burnt by the debris that fell on them.

Please explain to me how steel beams were found shrivelled up in such a dramatic way that has only been observed during The Hutchison Effect experiments.

Please explain how cars were found flipped upside all around the ground zero area, next to trees that were not missing ANY of their leaves. What flipped those cars but did not blow the leaves off the tree?

I can explain all of these things.

The WTC towers were hit by planes. The plane strikes stripped insulation from support columns. They also set wood, glass, carpet, plastic and many other materials on fire. The damage from the plane strikes, combined with structural weakening from the resulting fires, caused the towers to collapse.

All of the events you mention were caused by the shock waves of the towers collapsing.

There. We're done. Judy Wood is disproved. What do I win?

Dr. Judy Kooky Beams Wood*

Edward,

I did not make that video. I just found some of the information in it to be useful, so I used a free program called 'YouTube Downloader' to save a copy of it to my computer, then uploaded it to my YouTube channel to help spread the evidence. I did not make that video nor any of the videos on my YouTube channel, so sorry if that confused you. I simply upload the videos of others to my YouTube channel, if they are good, to help spread the information.

-------------------------

Muertos,

You did not explain all the evidence I mentioned, let alone the hundreds upon hundreds of pieces of evidence that I did not mention which are also found at www.drjudywood.com.

I will repeat SOME of the key points of evidence, since you did not explain them.

from Hurricane Erin being closest to NYC on the morning of September 11th, to the 5 Alaskan Magnometer stations all which detected an enormous deviation in our magnetosphere just as the attacks commenced, to the fact that there was virtually no rubble pile left by the Twin Towers.

Please explain how the Twin Towers were turned to dust so fine, that the dust floated high up into our atmosphere. Building collapses produce dust of course, but not dust so fine that it floats into the upper regions of our atmosphere, which can be clearly viewed from space. (photos at her website)

Please explain how come steel and concrete were turned to dust, while aluminum was only bent or burnt, while paper was unharmed. You said fire destroyed most things, but how come thousands upon thousands of sheets of paper were unharmed? How come people coated in dust and debris in the streets were not also burnt by this extreme heat?

Please explain how 1,400+ cars were toasted / melted, yet the people in the streets next to those cars were not burnt by the debris that fell on them. Some of these cars were up to 1/4 a mile away from ground zero, so how did this happen? Please explain.

Please explain to me how steel beams were found shrivelled up in such a dramatic way that has only been observed during The Hutchison Effect experiments. Please explain.

Please explain how cars were found flipped upside all around the ground zero area, next to trees that were not missing ANY of their leaves. What flipped those cars but did not blow the leaves off the tree? Shockwaves do not explain this, but go ahead and keep on trying...

Please explain how circular holes were observed in the windows of virtually all the buildings around ground zero, when holes like these are known to be caused by longitudinal waves of energy? If debris smashed the windows, they would have shattered in a specific way, so how come they did not shatter, and instead, developed circular holes characteristic of the effect of longitudinal waves of energy on glass?

Please explain how the bathtub, the area beneath the Twin Towers, was completely unharmed? Tons of falling debris, jet fuel, and fire, should have also damaged the bathtub which the twin towers were built on top of, so please explain how the bathtub was unharmed. Furthermore, the Looney Toons gift shop in the basement of the WTC buildings were completely unharmed as well, so much so that Bugs Bunny and other figures were not even scratched! How could falling debris leave the Bath Tub and the Basement gift shops unharmed? What about the unharmed PATH Train that was beneath the WTC buildings? Shouldnt falling debris have crushed that train? You would know this if you would just spend some time looking through the evidence at www.drjudywood.com

ALL these bits of evidence, and more, MUST be explained by any successful conclusion, and the only conclusion which explains ALL the evidence, is that of Dr. Wood.

ALL the evidence that must be explained, thousands of photos, graphs, videos, and documents, can be found at www.drjudywood.com

Good night folks,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

Edward,

Thank you for your scientific explanations.

Have a good night,

-Abe

He also needs to add:

N o P l a n e r

I emailed this guy. All he did was refer me to Judy Wood's website. I doubt he'll be replying here again.

I replied to Muertos's email with many of the same questions and points of evidence I asked the people of this forum to explain. Muertos failed to do so, which is why our email conversation ended. Again...

Here is a small fraction of the evidence which must be explained:

• How come most of the Twin Towers’ steel and concrete was transformed into a fine dust, while large quantities of aluminum exhibited strange electrical burns, yet paper was unharmed? Extreme heat from jet fuel (or explosives) does not selectively damage certain materials, so how come some materials turned to dust, while other materials were bent or burnt, and yet other materials were completely unharmed?
• Why was Hurricane Erin at its closest point to NYC on the morning of September 11th, yet it was not reported on by the major corporate media stations?
• How come there were statistically significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks? Why were the 6 Alaskan magnetomer stations detecting normal readings until the 9/11 attacks commenced, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?
• How come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero just as the attacks commenced?
• How were the Twin Towers turned to dust so fine, that the dust floated high up into our atmosphere. The satellite photos show a clear distinction between the black smoke and the whitish-grey dust, so what turned such a large portion of these buildings to dust so fine that it floated high into our atmosphere?
• How come 1,400+ vehicles located several blocks away (some up to ¼ a mile away) from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks? If you think the building debris caused these things, then how come that same debris did not burn the clothing or skin of the nearby pedestrians it covered?
• How come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side, next to trees which still had all of their leaves on them?
• How come several steel beams were observed to be bent and/or shriveled up in very unusual ways, ways which have only been observed during The Hutchison Effect experiments?
• How come spontaneous rusting of materials occurred all around ground zero? In some instances, entire front-halves of cars were rusted, while the back-halves appeared to be virtually untouched?
• How come various debris at ground zero was still observed to be fuming and being hosed down well into 2008, as video evidence clearly shows? Do fires last for 7+ years? Do debris from fires need to be hosed down 7 years later?
• How come circular holes were observed in the windows of virtually all the buildings near ground zero, when holes like these are known only to be caused by longitudinal waves of energy? If building debris smashed the windows, they would have shattered in a predictable way, so how come these countless windows did not shatter, but instead, developed circular holes characteristic of the effect of longitudinal waves of energy on glass?
• How was the ‘bathtub’, the area directly beneath the Twin Towers, left virtually unharmed? How could thousands of tons of falling building debris not damage the ‘bathtub’ beneath the WTC buildings?
• How was the ‘Looney Toons’ gift shop in the basement of the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed, so dramatically that the ‘Bugs Bunny’ statue and other statues were not even scratched or dented? How could these figurines survive thousands of tons of falling building debris?
• How was the unharmed PATH Train beneath the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t falling building debris have crushed that train, or at the very least, knocked it off the tracks?
• How could thousands of tons of rapidly falling steel and concrete building debris leave the ‘Bath Tub’, the basement gift shops, and the PATH train, virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t thousands of tons of falling steel and concrete cause significant damage to at least one of these?
• How come Dr. Wood has already filed evidence-based legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies based on their conflict-of-interest relationship with N.I.S.T., yet other 9/11 “truth” researchers have not? How come Dr. Steven Jones has not officially filed his scientific ‘peer-reviewed’ nano-thermite evidence with Congress or the U.S. Courts?
• Why are groups like AE911Truth and PilotsFor911Truth just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which was successfully appealed to the level of the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2009?
• Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group long ago, just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers? Shouldn’t Dr. Jones and his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if he does not agree with her conclusions?
• Why was I silently removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) petition simply for asking Richard Gage if he would examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood? Why didn’t AE911Truth just reply to my email question, but instead, silently removed me from their petition? I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for asking Richard Gage about Dr. Judy Wood? Why was I later contacted by AE911Truth when they discovered I was telling people about what they did to me? They could contact me to offer me a refund to stop telling people about how I was silently removed from their petition, but they couldn’t have just response to my email which asked Richard Gage if he had heard of Dr. Judy Wood?
• Why did United States Army Major Doug Rokke (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that explosives were the only things used on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any proof to back up his negative accusations against her?
• Why did Soviet Nuclear Intelligent Officer Dimitri Khalezov (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that underground nuclear explosives were what turned the buildings to fine particles of dust on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any significant proof to back up his negative accusations against her?
• Why did these high-ranking retired military officials randomly contact me, an insignificant medical student, when they should be contacting members of the U.S. Congress, and other high-ranking members of our government, with their concerns and the “evidence” they claim to have?

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

How was the ‘Looney Toons’ gift shop in the basement of the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed, so dramatically that the ‘Bugs Bunny’ statue and other statues were not even scratched or dented? How could these figurines survive thousands of tons of falling building debris?

What is this supposed to prove?
The towers didn't really collapse?
Looney Toons are part of the NWO?

>> How come most of the Twin Towers’ steel and concrete was transformed into a fine dust, while large quantities of aluminum exhibited strange electrical burns, yet paper was unharmed?

The only people making "fine dust" claims are CTs, it's simply not true. And what would electrical burns prove, even if they were real? Thermite isn't electrical if that's what you're driving at.

>> Why was Hurricane Erin at its closest point to NYC on the morning of September 11th, yet it was not reported on by the major corporate media stations?

Probably because the biggest terrorist attack in history happened? What does this have to do with 9/11? Why wasn't East Timor widely reported? Does that mean the East Timorese actually invaded themselves?

>> How come there were statistically significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks?

[citation needed], but by the way, Alaska's edge is right in the ring of fire.

>> Why were the 6 Alaskan magnetomer stations detecting normal readings until the 9/11 attacks commenced, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?

[citation needed]

>> How come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero just as the attacks commenced?

At the same time or later? In any case [citation needed]

>> How were the Twin Towers turned to dust so fine, that the dust floated high up into our atmosphere.

I've seen plenty of pictures of the rubble, and it wasn't a sand dune. Maybe you're forgetting the 22 million square feet of dry wall?

>> How come 1,400+ vehicles located several blocks away (some up to ¼ a mile away) from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks?

I think this was already talked about here, are you just copy and pasting things?

>> How come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side, next to trees which still had all of their leaves on them?

[citation needed] and besides force can go through trees easily, which is why after even tornados, many trees still have a lot of leaves.

>> How come several steel beams were observed to be bent and/or shriveled up in very unusual ways, ways which have only been observed during The Hutchison Effect experiments?

lol, [citation needed]

>> How come spontaneous rusting of materials occurred all around ground zero? In some instances, entire front-halves of cars were rusted, while the back-halves appeared to be virtually untouched?

[citation needed]

>> How come various debris at ground zero was still observed to be fuming and being hosed down well into 2008, as video evidence clearly shows? Do fires last for 7+ years? Do debris from fires need to be hosed down 7 years later?

Do magic space lasers make things stay on fire for years?

>> How come circular holes were observed in the windows of virtually all the buildings near ground zero, when holes like these are known only to be caused by longitudinal waves of energy? If building debris smashed the windows, they would have shattered in a predictable way, so how come these countless windows did not shatter, but instead, developed circular holes characteristic of the effect of longitudinal waves of energy on glass?

hahahahahaha

>> How was the ‘bathtub’, the area directly beneath the Twin Towers, left virtually unharmed? How could thousands of tons of falling building debris not damage the ‘bathtub’ beneath the WTC buildings?

Well, this isn't not even remotely close to being true. The bathtub was held up primarily by all of the debris that collapsed into it. They drilled in hundreds of support rods to keep the walls up. This is just a blatant lie.

>> How was the ‘Looney Toons’ gift shop in the basement of the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed, so dramatically that the ‘Bugs Bunny’ statue and other statues were not even scratched or dented? How could these figurines survive thousands of tons of falling building debris?

[citation needed]

>> How was the unharmed PATH Train beneath the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t falling building debris have crushed that train, or at the very least, knocked it off the tracks?

[citation needed]

>> How could thousands of tons of rapidly falling steel and concrete building debris leave the ‘Bath Tub’, the basement gift shops, and the PATH train, virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t thousands of tons of falling steel and concrete cause significant damage to at least one of these?

They didn't, again, a blatant lie.

>> How come Dr. Wood has already filed evidence-based legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies based on their conflict-of-interest relationship with N.I.S.T., yet other 9/11 “truth” researchers have not? How come Dr. Steven Jones has not officially filed his scientific ‘peer-reviewed’ nano-thermite evidence with Congress or the U.S. Courts?

LOL! The thermite evidence wasn't peer reviewed, it was paint chips, total bullshit.

>> Why are groups like AE911Truth and PilotsFor911Truth just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which was successfully appealed to the level of the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2009?

Who gives a shit? So you're saying she jumped the crazy shark before they did? Congratulations, what an achievement.

>> Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group long ago, just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers? Shouldn’t Dr. Jones and his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if he does not agree with her conclusions?

Because she's even crazier than he is.

>> Why was I silently removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) petition simply for asking Richard Gage if he would examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood?

Because you're crazier than he is.

>> Why did United States Army Major Doug Rokke (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that explosives were the only things used on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any proof to back up his negative accusations against her?

lol, why do conspiracy theorists automatically assume you'll believe they talked to anyone? Say, why did United States President Ford spontaneously contact me and ask me to go to a strip club? My proof is equal to yours.

>> Why did Soviet Nuclear Intelligent Officer Dimitri Khalezov (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that underground nuclear explosives were what turned the buildings to fine particles of dust on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any significant proof to back up his negative accusations against her?

Need I use another president and strip club analogy?

>> Why did these high-ranking retired military officials randomly contact me, an insignificant medical student, when they should be contacting members of the U.S. Congress, and other high-ranking members of our government, with their concerns and the “evidence” they claim to have?

Strip club...

--

So what you're suggesting is, magical space lasers caused the buildings to turn into dust with some sort of electromagnetic storm that can melt steel, but not destroy bugs bunny, and also leave evidence of thermite. Hey, maybe the photons from the laser were made of thermite that avoided Warner Brothers characters?

Since I'm not an expert on 911, I can't address the validity of these claims. However, let's say all of your claims are true.

How come most of the Twin Towers’ steel and concrete was transformed into a fine dust, while large quantities of aluminum exhibited strange electrical burns, yet paper was unharmed? Extreme heat from jet fuel (or explosives) does not selectively damage certain materials, so how come some materials turned to dust, while other materials were bent or burnt, and yet other materials were completely unharmed?

Say some paper survived - what are you suggesting happened? Does the survival of paper mean planes alone couldn't have brought down the buildings?

Why was Hurricane Erin at its closest point to NYC on the morning of September 11th, yet it was not reported on by the major corporate media stations?

Because a hurricane wasn't as important as two planes hitting two towers that ultimately killed a lot of people.

How come there were statistically significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks? Why were the 6 Alaskan magnetomer stations detecting normal readings until the 9/11 attacks commenced, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?

In what situations do these surges occur? Are they random, or are they caused by certain types of events?

How come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero just as the attacks commenced?

Were the number of reports unusually high, or was it a typical number of outages for a place like New York?

How were the Twin Towers turned to dust so fine, that the dust floated high up into our atmosphere. The satellite photos show a clear distinction between the black smoke and the whitish-grey dust, so what turned such a large portion of these buildings to dust so fine that it floated high into our atmosphere?

Ignoring the fact that the towers didn't turn to fine dust... since when does dust float upwards into the atmosphere? If dust rises, then why is there a pile of ash on the ground after a fire? Shouldn't the fine ash have risen to the sky?

How come 1,400+ vehicles located several blocks away (some up to ¼ a mile away) from ground zero experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks? If you think the building debris caused these things, then how come that same debris did not burn the clothing or skin of the nearby pedestrians it covered?

Metal warping would occur from an impact of falling debris. Electricity-like burns and holes can occur from electrical equipment exploding from impact from debris. Pedestrians that were not burned were never hit with falling debris that had enough of an impact to harm them. You claim the buildings turned to fine dust, but you also said that some of the debris remained in solid form, whether it was bent, burned, or unharmed. Perhaps the fine dust hit the people, which wouldn't have enough force to hurt them; while the solid materials hit the objects you say were warped and electrically burned.

How come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero were flipped upside down or on their side, next to trees which still had all of their leaves on them?

Accidents due to falling debris, smoke blocking their view, and panic in the streets affected the cars. The trees still stood with their leaves because no debris strong enough to knock them down directly hit them.

How come several steel beams were observed to be bent and/or shriveled up in very unusual ways, ways which have only been observed during The Hutchison Effect experiments?

If your claim is true, The Hutchison Effect may not be your answer. From Wikipedia: "Researchers at NASA and the Max Planck Institute have attempted to reproduce some of Hutchison's experiments, but that so far none has succeeded.[citation needed] Indeed, NASA's Marc Millis remarks that Hutchison himself appears unable to reproduce his own experiments." Why can't his experiments be replicated?

How come spontaneous rusting of materials occurred all around ground zero? In some instances, entire front-halves of cars were rusted, while the back-halves appeared to be virtually untouched?

Spontaneous rusting means that no external force or reaction was needed to drive it. A steel nail rusting is an example. Because spontaneous rusting of materials around ground zero could not have been caused by any external force, the falling towers or any energy hypothesis couldn't be the cause.

How come various debris at ground zero was still observed to be fuming and being hosed down well into 2008, as video evidence clearly shows? Do fires last for 7+ years? Do debris from fires need to be hosed down 7 years later?

I've read that the temperatures below the surface debris were still very hot several years later. Perhaps as they removed more debris, more fumes were given the chance to rise into the air?

How come circular holes were observed in the windows of virtually all the buildings near ground zero, when holes like these are known only to be caused by longitudinal waves of energy? If building debris smashed the windows, they would have shattered in a predictable way, so how come these countless windows did not shatter, but instead, developed circular holes characteristic of the effect of longitudinal waves of energy on glass?

Perhaps a few windows in virtually all buildings near ground zero already had circular holes prior to 911? Did your sources verify that the circles were not there before 911?

How was the ‘bathtub’, the area directly beneath the Twin Towers, left virtually unharmed? How could thousands of tons of falling building debris not damage the ‘bathtub’ beneath the WTC buildings?

Which tower was it below? Was it between the two towers? How far below the ground was it? Was anything else in the bathroom damaged? It seems strange you would ask about one object in a room, when mentioning that the entire room survived unscathed would be an even more interesting bit of information. And of course, if the bath tub survived, the rest of the room must have survived, right? If the rest of the bathroom was ultimately destroyed, then perhaps the bathtub was made of a material strong to survive?

How was the ‘Looney Toons’ gift shop in the basement of the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed, so dramatically that the ‘Bugs Bunny’ statue and other statues were not even scratched or dented? How could these figurines survive thousands of tons of falling building debris?

Why would you separate this question and the above one about the bathtub? Was the rest of the basement left unharmed, or were the 'Looney Toons' shop and the bathtub in a bathroom the lone survivors? Also, where was the bathtub? Was it in the 'Looney Toons' bathroom? If the rest of the basement survived unscathed, why aren't you bringing that up, as it would be a more significant point?

How was the unharmed PATH Train beneath the WTC buildings left virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t falling building debris have crushed that train, or at the very least, knocked it off the tracks?

Why are you separating these questions about the basement? Was anything in the basement damaged, or was the entire basement left unscathed? Certainly, if a bathtub or some statues could survive, wouldn't a structure with high integrity, such as a train, survive as well? Why would you ask about the bathtub and statues and then use the train as a further way to make your point? It doesn't add to your argument since it's stronger than the other objects.

How could thousands of tons of rapidly falling steel and concrete building debris leave the ‘Bath Tub’, the basement gift shops, and the PATH train, virtually unharmed? Shouldn’t thousands of tons of falling steel and concrete cause significant damage to at least one of these?

You only mentioned one gift shop earlier. Were others unharmed? How much of the basement was damaged compared to that which wasn't?

How come Dr. Wood has already filed evidence-based legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies based on their conflict-of-interest relationship with N.I.S.T., yet other 9/11 “truth” researchers have not? How come Dr. Steven Jones has not officially filed his scientific ‘peer-reviewed’ nano-thermite evidence with Congress or the U.S. Courts?

Don't these points hurt your case? Why has only one truther filed lawsuits, while the others have avoided it? What are they afraid of? Do they not have enough evidence to file legal cases? Why wouldn't a prominent scientist in the truth movement not file his evidence with Congress or U.S. Courts? Is it because he's afraid of it being rejected? You would think a confident scientist would report such important evidence to Congress or the courts. Does scientific evidence even get filed by Congress or the courts?

Why are groups like AE911Truth and PilotsFor911Truth just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which was successfully appealed to the level of the U.S. Supreme Court in October 2009?

How would one person filing cases before other groups help your argument?

Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group long ago, just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers? Shouldn’t Dr. Jones and his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if he does not agree with her conclusions?

Since you're claiming that Jones inappropriately banned Wood from his group, there are many options to consider. Maybe he doesn't like her? Maybe her different conclusions made his conclusions look bad? Maybe having her in his group only made him look worse? Maybe she didn't give him quality head? There are a million possibilities.

Why was I silently removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth) petition simply for asking Richard Gage if he would examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood? Why didn’t AE911Truth just reply to my email question, but instead, silently removed me from their petition? I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for asking Richard Gage about Dr. Judy Wood? Why was I later contacted by AE911Truth when they discovered I was telling people about what they did to me? They could contact me to offer me a refund to stop telling people about how I was silently removed from their petition, but they couldn’t have just response to my email which asked Richard Gage if he had heard of Dr. Judy Wood?

Perhaps Gage didn't want to examine Wood's research or acknowledge her because it would make him look bad? Could there be other reasons why you were removed? Did you send any derogatory emails or do anything other than making a request that could have made them want to remove you? Perhaps they offered you money to keep quiet because you were making them look bad?

Why did United States Army Major Doug Rokke (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that explosives were the only things used on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any proof to back up his negative accusations against her?

Perhaps Rokke didn't provide any proof because he expected you to already know about it all, much like what you did in this post? Why didn't you provide proof of your claims? Did you expect all of us to know a bathtub survived the damage? Maybe Rokke expected you to know why he thinks Wood is bad.

Why did Soviet Nuclear Intelligent Officer Dimitri Khalezov (retired) spontaneously contact me to try and convince me that underground nuclear explosives were what turned the buildings to fine particles of dust on 9/11, and to convince me to stop talking about Dr. Judy Wood, yet he never provided any significant proof to back up his negative accusations against her?

How did Khalezov know about you? Maybe he left out his proof for negative accusations because he thought you already knew them, just like you did with us here? Where is your proof that he messaged you? Perhaps you can at least empathize with him for refusing to provide his proof.

Why did these high-ranking retired military officials randomly contact me, an insignificant medical student, when they should be contacting members of the U.S. Congress, and other high-ranking members of our government, with their concerns and the “evidence” they claim to have?

It's a great question. I'd love to talk more about it with you, provided that you show us proof that these men actually emailed you.

In summary, I can't believe I just typed all of this.

Aaron M Hatch
Ed.S School Psychology
B.S. Psychology

I see you did answer the questions I asked in the forum, so thanks for doing so. I have to get back to studying now, M2 year is extremely hard. (the hardest of the 4)

As long as you are examining ALL the evidence and drawing one cohesive conclusion to explain that evidence, you can disagree with me all you want. But please keep in mind that all of these data points are related, and therefore, must be explained by one cohesive theory. Not individual explanations, just one, cohesive, scientific explanation, which so far, no one has done but Dr. Wood.

So, thanks for looking at all the evidence if you do, and thanks for expressing your view even though I do not agree with it.

I respectfully disagree Muertos, but thanks for discussing this with me. Please make sure to accurately represent my response this time, as last time you lied to the forum and said that I simply “referred you to Dr. Wood’s website”, which is not the truth.

Best wishes,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

From: Los Muertos [mailto:muertos@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 4:27 PM
To: Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
Subject: Fwd: Questions--on referral.

I saw your post on Conspiracy Science today. I thought you might be interested to know that I took you up on your suggestion to email Dr. Judy Wood personally. Attached you will find what I sent her, indicating just a few of my concerns with her theory. To date, she has not responded.

I've been through her web site extensively and found nothing that addresses these points. In your CS post, you pointed to certain alleged "discrepancies" involving 9/11. These discrepancies, whether answered or not, are not and cannot be conclusive. In any event Edward answered them pretty well on the forum. More important is the mountain of eyewitness and documentary evidence of plane strikes, terrorist responsibility and collapse of the towers from the impacts and resulting fires. In my email I attempted to get Dr. Wood to address these matters. It seems that she is unable to, or unwilling to. So, I'm offering you a chance to address them yourself, since it seems she won't. If you and other believers in DEW want to try to convince others that your theory is correct, it seems that you should address these points at a bare minimum, since it is these points--and not those that you brought up in your post today--that are the main things that convince people what happened on 9/11.

I look forward to your response.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Los Muertos <muertos@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:57 PM
Subject: Questions--on referral.
To: lisajudy@nctv.com

Dear Dr. Wood:

I was referred to you by someone named Abraham Rodriguez, who in my correspondence with him told me that he is a medical student who has had discussions with you regarding your website and your research regarding the 9/11 attacks. He was not able to answer a couple of questions that I had regarding your conclusions, and suggested that I contact you directly, so I thought I would. He indicated you were open to speaking with people who just email "over the transom," so to speak.

My questions do not regard the science of the DEW theory, which you've covered on your website, but rather, the logic. Mr. Rodriguez could not answer my questions regarding the presence and use of aircraft in the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks--specifically, regarding the considerable evidence that aircraft were in fact present, such as eyewitness testimony of seeing the wrecks, plane wreckage, documentary evidence, recovered human remains of both passengers and hijackers, personal effects that were found on the planes, etc. He told me that the DEW research on your website addresses all of the facts and evidence regarding the September 11 attacks and doesn't leave anything out. However, having been through your website, I'm not able to find a specific claim regarding the physical and eyewitness evidence of aircraft. Could you clarify your position on this for me? If it's on the site and I missed it, I apologize, but it's a bit difficult for me to find.

I believe the issue of the planes is crucial from a standpoint, not of science, but of logic. The use of planes plus DEW is not logical to me, for two reasons. First, it does not make sense that the perpetrators would have used aircraft when they had DEW at their disposal, because coordinating the planes would have been a needless complication and that much more that could have gone wrong. Second, planes are not necessary for the cover story either. Wouldn't a cover story regarding truck bombs in the basement have been much easier to pull off? After all, a truck bomb nearly worked in the 1993 attack. One would not need to resort to aircraft as an integral part of the cover story. Therefore, the presence of planes, logically, indicates at the very least that the crashing of planes into the towers was an indispensable part of the perpetrators' plan, which would tend to make the use of a DEW less likely.

My second question regards the confessions of Osama bin Laden and the other alleged perpetrators. Your work regarding DEW does not address why there is considerable evidence of personal responsibility by Al Qaeda members including Osama bin Laden. Once again, Mr. Rodriguez directed me to the website on this point, but I can't find it there. This is again a logic, opposed to a scientific, point. Excluding the phenomenon of "habitual confessors," which I think everyone agrees the Al Qaeda people are not, it's not logical why someone would confess to a crime they didn't commit. Since I can't find a specific point on your website addressing this, I thought I would ask you.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Sean Munger

Muertos,

I felt like the text of my past email reply clearly explained why I was mentioning her website and encouraging you to explain the evidence there. Discussing hearsay evidence, rumors, and other things, is not a productive nor scientific discussion. That is why I wanted you to look at the evidence on her site. I did not simply refer you to her site, I explained why I wanted you to check it out, because evidence is all that matters. Also because hearsay evidence is the weakest form of evidence, so I wanted you to consider the pictures, videos, graphs, and data found at her site. I have limited time and only can limit my discussion to the evidence, so I will try to address some key points which have influenced my beliefs. Ok, here goes:

You bring up some good responses to the questions, but many of your questions could be answered if you reviewed the photos, videos, and graphs at Dr. Wood’s website.

For example, you claim that the buildings did not turn to dust, but they clearly did. Dr. Wood has provided many photos showing that a vast majority of the building turned to dust. A good video which demonstrates this can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGXDmNZCeKo , and there are many many pictures at Dr. Wood’s website which shows photos immediately after the “collapse”, showing the amazingly small rubble pile. Some of the photos even show cars which were parked on the street in relation to the rubble piles, and they are definitely amazingly small. Even controlled demolitions of rather hollow buildings (such as the King Dome) have showed us rubble piles much larger than the WTC “collapses” showed. Considering that you are claiming that these buildings collapsed and weren’t demolished, where did all the materials go? Why was the rubble pile less than 2-3 stories tall, when it should have been much larger? Even the hollow king dome gave a rubble pile roughly 12% of its original height, so how did the WTC towers “collapse” into rubble piles significantly smaller than 12% of their height? The piles were many stories smaller than was expected. That video shows a good over view of this concept, and the countless photos at Dr. Woods site shows all this dust from so many angles it is quite amazing in my opinion.

As for the few number of eye witnesses which claim to have heard a plane, you must not be considering the fact that whoever planned these attacks most certainly had planned a cover up as well. That cover up, is the “9/11 Truth Movement”, led by AE911Truth, PilotsFor911Truth, and a few other groups. The people who planned 9/11 most likely also had planted “eye witnesses” to get the airliner story going, same thing with the “molten metal” which doesn’t really appear in more than 1 or 2 photos. This video does an excellent job of showing the media fakery that was used on 9/11. In this video, you will see many of the live images we saw that day. As most of us know, most of the live images were of the 2nd impact, because the 1st impact was recorded by only 1 or 2 people. So, viewing the live images of the second impact, we see HUGE discrepancies and inconsistencies in the flight path. For example, how can the 2nd airliner be rapidly descending from the top of the screen from the front-on view, yet from a side view, the very same plane appears flying perfectly horizontally into the building? Please view this video to see what I mean in more accuracy, because words do a poor job of explaining this. Secondly, how come all these “live” images were so similar, and how come CNN was borrowing ABC’s live feed for the day, instead of using their own feed? Despite this fact, the few stations showing the “live” images of the second impact show major inconsistencies in appearance. In some, the sky is blue. In others, the sky is green. In others yet, the sky is yellowish. What is going on? Why does the sky look so drastically different? Again, this video does a great job of showing some of the obvious editing of the film that was put on the air as “live”. Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGXDmNZCeKo

I hope you agree that whoever planned this had to have planned a cover up. Why would they plan such attacks, which surely required major breaches of our national security, without planning a cover up to help disguise who really did this? What better way to cover it up than to blame someone else, perhaps an enemy? As for your claim that Osama admitted to 9/11, here are a few things you should consider. First of all, Osama Bin Laden is not listed as ‘wanted for 9/11’ on the FBIs official website. Why is this? He is clearly listed as wanted for a previous crime of 1998, so why is he not also listed as wanted for 9/11? Look: http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm Secondly, at the following link, you will get to see an official CIA transcript of Osama Bin Laden’s communications over the last several years. Notice the things he says, and how they have changed. Look: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/07/10/gordon-duff-classified-cia-transcript-counters-bin-laden-terror-role/ These things concern me.

Lastly, something I hope you have considered is the fact that Dr. Judy Wood is one of the few 9/11 researchers who does not suggest that our government did this. She doesn’t play the blame game. However, other people do. Related to this topic, is the incident of the ‘dancing Israelis’, who were arrested by the FBI on 9/11. Upon the commencement of the 9/11 attacks, a lady looked out her window, and saw several middle-eastern looking folks who were on top of their van, filming the attacks, as if they knew they were going to happen. Why else would they be celebrating after filming the planes hit the towers? So, she called the cops, and these ‘dancing israelis’ were arrested. They were released two weeks later back to Israel without any major media coverage. How did these Israelis know to set up a camera and tripod, or were they just filming the WTC buildings totally oblivious of the upcoming attacks they filmed? Were they just in the right place at the right time? If so, why were they jumping up and down celebrating the successful attacks? They later admitted to being in America to “document the event” of 9/11, on an Israeli talk show once they were back home. Very few people know about this. You can see a clip of the talk show somewhere in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uVGdnOFfRY

Are you familiar with Dr. Alan Sabrosky of the U.S. Army War College? Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is a writer and consultant specializing in national and international security affairs. In December 1988, he received the Superior Civilian Service Award after more than five years of service at the U.S. Army War College as Director of Studies, Strategic Studies Institute, and holder of the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research. He is listed in WHO'S WHO IN THE EAST (23rd ed.). A Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and a 1986 graduate of the U.S. Army War College, Dr. Sabrosky's teaching and research appointments have included the United States Military Academy, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Middlebury College and Catholic University; while in government service, he held concurrent adjunct professorships at Georgetown University and the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Dr. Sabrosky has lectured widely on defense and foreign affairs in the United States and abroad. Dr. Sabrosky has concluded that Israeli’s Mossad did 9/11, to send us to war against their enemies in the middle east. Read more about his conclusions here: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/03/19/22329/

So, I need to get back to studying, but I hope I at least answered some of your questions. I am not trying to convince you of my beliefs, because they are my beliefs are not yours. Only you can decide what you believe, so please consider the evidence I have shared with you and let them influence your opinion. If you still disagree with me, that is fine, but at least you will have considered the evidence. Please understand I am merely defending my beliefs to you, not trying to convince you of anything, otherwise I would have answered each and every one of your questions. Alas, school is far more important than defending myself to others, because I need to study hard now in order to successfully save the lives of my future patients. M2 year is the hardest of all 4 medical school years, so I really need to stay focused on the books, so I hope you will understand.

One last thing I wanted to ask you, is, “What would the cover up of the 9/11 attacks look like?” Would it be packaged in the form of an organization selling $20 DVDs and just now pushing for a new investigation while completely ignoring Dr. Judy Wood’s court case she filed against suspected weapons companies which might have played a hand in 9/11? The same companies which hired NIST to do the investigation? This is a conflict of interest, because the very people involved in Energy Weapons research and production were the same companies which hired NIST do to the investigating for our government. Conflicts of interest like these must be investigated, and that is why Dr. Wood filed a case against them. So, why are people like Dr. Jones claiming our government did this, without proof? Why has Dr. Jones not filed his scientific ‘peer-reviewed’ paper with a court of law, if he is confident about it? What is he waiting for, and is he really seeking the “truth”?

In my honest opinion, the first layer of the cover up is the manipulation of public opinion by the mainstream media, and the second layer of the cover up is AE911Truth’s and Dr. Jones’s role in the 9/11 “Truth” movement. They claim our government planned it, that muslims executed the plan, and that we should all be very afraid of a future 9/11. They are conspiracy theorists, pointing fingers at our government without sufficient proof, suggesting that explosives-only were used on 9/11 even though explosives do not explain ALL of the evidence, not even close. So, I strongly encourage you to consider the fact that Dr. Steven Jones and AE911Truth may very well be the second layer of the cover up to help blame 9/11 on our government and on Osama, when in fact, it was neither of them.

These are just my opinions, and I do not claim them as a fact. So, I hope you see more accurately where I am coming from.

Now I must return to studying (Friday night studying, fun, I know…), so thanks for understanding why I must stop now. I have typed way more than I intended to, but this time I feel like you have approached me with more of a curiosity to see where I am coming from, rather than a “I am going to debunk your ass” attitude. This I appreciate, because having discussions and sharing my opinion is fun to do, especially when the person I am sharing it with is a respectful individual such as yourself.

Thanks for being respectful and for asking the questions you did, I hope the information I shared with you helps shed some light on what I believe and why. Again, please do not feel like I am trying to convince you of anything, for I am just sharing some information which I consider to be important, in hopes that you will consider it and think about it before dismissing it.

Thanks for all the questions.

Good night,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

Reading Abe's copypasta posts, it seems a lot of it was originally written for other truthers and not skeptics.

Sabrosky has been calling for a new 9/11 investigation for some time. What makes him unique is that we have a Jew who can hardly be called “self-hating” or “anti-Semitic” or against Israel. He is consistent in everything he says. His point is that you are an American or you are an Israeli but you can’t be both, especially now with Zionism turning Israeli foreign policy into a “runaway train.” 9/11, as Sabrosky sees it was the watershed in a relationship between America and Israel that has gone from bad to unsurviveable, especially for America. He contents that AIPAC exercises near total control over the electoral process in America through the ability to outspend any other group and destroy anyone who stands against them.

This Gordon guy sounds like a 15 year old. No journalist or experienced writer would start an essay with such poorly worded sentences.

"Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic officer of UN humanitarian groups. Gordon Duff's articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is a regularly on radio and tv."

Are you serious? The guy is both wrong and stupid.

Sabrosky also makes a point involving media coverage of 9/11:
"Finally, we need to take a hard look at why the mainstream media (MSM) have paid more attention to Sarah Palin’s wardrobe than they have to dissecting blatant falsehoods, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the US Government’s treatment of 9/11 and its aftermath."

Here's a hard look: Palin didn't become important to mainstream media until at least six years after 9/11. She was not directly stealing time from discussion of 911. Secondly, the media didn't discuss "blatant falsehoods, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the US Government’s treatment of 9/11 and its aftermath" because there were none.

In the interview, Sabrosky says Rahm Emanuel committed treason by serving in the Israeli Defense Forces in the Gulf War. I don't know much about that war, but Wikipedia says: "In the first Gulf War, Emanuel served with the Israel Defense Forces as a civilian volunteer helping to maintain equipment." Aside from the fact that Israel was basically an ally of the US in that war, it doesn't seem like he ditched the US to help Israel. Had he not been directly involved in the war at all, would he still have been looked down upon by Sabrosky?