New Astounding Information re 9/11!

[quicknthedead]

Today is a breakthrough day…please look at this…and when you’re done, you may want to pass this on to others ASAP.

Steel being pulverized into dust via new weaponry (energy-directed).
Here you can watch the video:


Here is Dr. Judy Wood's and Morgan Reynold's new website:
http://seattle911visibilityproject.org/t_past_events.htm
And Dr. Wood's paper:
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html
especially this page, about a quarter of the way down (steel to dust)
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam3.html

This can be better understood by:
Listening to the two hours of Professor James Fetzer’s Non-Random Thought Show for yesterday, 11/11/06; his guest is Dr. Wood:
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Fetzer06.html

(Arabs with box cutters don’t have this technology just yet!)

[quicknthedead]

1. Steel disintegrating into dust.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam3.html

and here:

[reorg]

2. old news

That the steel "disintegrates" was a pet theory of plaguepuppy's a few years back when he was posting here.

At one point he admitted that he doesn't have striking proof (including your animated gif) and that it was more a hunch of his, what he called "holistic viewing" rather than what is actually to be seen in the various images.

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/spire/The%20Strang...



Part of the core structure obviously remains standing for about ten seconds and then falls down.

See here, e. g.:

http://one.revver.com/find/video/what+we+saw
(between 19:50 and 20.08)

It should probably be expected that some dust settled on this structure in the seconds it remained standing, don't you think? Wouldn't this dust remain airborne for a while like you can see in this animated gif?

[canetoad]

5. Having watched dustspire.gif

until my brain ached, I came to the same conclusion as you; the dust had settled on the remaining standing core column and remained briefly suspended when the column fell.

What I think needs a closer look is the manner in which the column fell. If you look at the roundish blob about halfway up the right hand standing column, it moves downward until it can't be seen. This seems to indicate that the column fails from the bottom whereas I would have it expected it to topple over from lack of support.

[reorg]

10. Yes, that is my impression, too

From all angles I have seen it - the remaining core disintegrates from the bottom, it doesn't topple over. Another close-up where you can see the structure swaying a little and going down:

http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc1dem6/911.wtc.1.spire.close.up.avi

[rman]

8. "striking proof" - high resolution pictures:

[DrDebug]

3. So that's what you meant with Star Wars

So I'm kinda sorry but I thought on another thread a couple of days ago that somebody meant the relationship between 9/11 and the Star Wars program and there is a weak relation between the two (
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=124528&mesg_id=124570 ) But I hadn't heard about this story.

Very interesting story you have there. The weak point is that you don't prove anything so the OCTers will have a field day ridiculing you and keeping you entertained with "Fetch boy! Good dog! Go fetch!" questions.

I agree that the dustification of the towers is very strange and especially that it affected cars around the towers as well who seemed to spontaneous combust ( http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam5.html )

I wonder whether there any Audis at Ground Zero. The chance is very small since it's not a really popular car. What sets their new cars it apart from other cars is that they are made of aluminum instead of steel. So if Audis didn't melt at Ground Zero, could it have been the result of the microwaving steel:

Microwave Steel: Faster, Cleaner, Cheaper
Source: Michigan Technological University
Date: January 26, 2004

You shouldn't try it at home, however, since it involves heating the raw materials up to 1,000 degrees Celsius, about the same temperature as molten lava.

The feat was accomplished by Michigan Tech researcher Jiann-Yang (Jim) Hwang, who wired together the magnetrons from six garden-variety microwaves into one super- heavy-duty oven and added an electric arc furnace. He then put iron oxide and coal inside. In a matter of minutes, the microwave energy reduced the iron ore to iron, and the electric arc furnace smelted the iron and coal into steel.

(...)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/01/040126073254.htm

The weak point of this whole theory is that you need to show that the technology exists which is able to turn to steel into dust and can be used as some sort of weapon. That is the part which is missing from the website. If such technology exists then indeed it would probably target a small range of materials like steel. The next problem is how was WTC targeted with such a weapon, because the gif animation shows that the dustification continued after parts had already collapsed, so it couldn't have been inside the building and because it was more or less focused on a limited area the weapon would have most likely have been high up in the air (NRO's unidentified "national security" satelite of Sept 8, 2001?). Maybe the hole in WTC6 is the result of a the same weapon as well, ie. the result of just missing WTC1 or WTC2.



Did the paint get peeled off the car, because the steel underneath was microwaved? And did the microwave energy come from the sky, because most damage was done to the top of the car and not the sides...



Is this car partially burned because the backside was underneath the fly over and thus was not microwaved unlike the front of the car which was exposed?

Anyway the OCTers are going to love this stuff, because it is highly speculative and thus leads to enormous ridicule, so I'm so going to ignore all replies ;)

[piobair]

4. typical burn pattern

Your last picture showing a half burned patrol car depicts the typical burn pattern of a fire that started in the engine compartment and moved to the passenger compartment. The reason there is no paint on the outside of the car is that the heat from the burning interior conducts through the steel and burns the paint off from the inside. The reason that the back of the car is unaffected is the cage that seperates the cops from the criminals kept the fire from spreading to the back. If some strange new weapon was used, wouldn't the steel roadway overhead have been damaged? Your decision to ignore all replys is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling nanananana to drown out anything that might interfere with your agenda. Way to be open minded.

[quicknthedead]

6. Sorry, people, I was wrong. Tonight I looked at it a dozen times...

from all the videos available, and I finally found one that changed my mind and disproved this "steel to dust" theory to my satisfaction.

I got the video to the right spot and then worked the slider on windows media player back and forth until I saw the momentum forces turning the spire while at the same time it gave way completely.

Here's the video I'm referring to:
http://physics911.ca/video/2001/wtc1_dust_afterglow_medium.mov

The "steel to dust image" is simply an optical illusion when viewed a certain way.
No magic here. Dr. Judy Wood should study it closer too.

[KJF]

7. Well done

I agree entirely. Don't worry about it - we all go up a blind alley from time to time.

[rman]

9. how is this an illusion:

?

[reorg]

11. it isn't

first: this line-up is a little deceptive. Change the position of the individual frames so that the water tower is at about the same height in all of them. Then you will see:

image 1: spire standing upright
image 2: spire swaying to the left
image 3: spire down by almost its entire length (90%)
image 4: spire completely out of sight (fallen down)

By "spire" I mean the top part of the structure which appears to be one single beam with some stuff still clinging to it, and a rugged outline.

The top of the dust cloud in the two frames to the right is at about the same height as the middle of the spire is in the frames to the left (not higher, as the deceptive line-up suggests).

The dust cloud probably consists of sand/dust from places at the spire where sand/dust could settle.

[rman]

12. i'm not so sure your conclusion is correct. nt

[William Seger]

13. Yup

Nailed it. It's pretty obvious what's happening even in the OP video. It won't matter though; that vido and the "disintegrating steel" nonsense will be around forever now.

[quicknthedead]

14. You're not just trying to make me feel better are you?

Just kidding. :)

I believe it is an optical illusion because we can't see what really happened between the third and fourth frames; i.e., if we had an extremely, fast camera that took many frames per second, it would show that the core not only dropped very quickly but also did so in a rotational manner. I believe this because of what I did (as described in my last post).

Try what helped me. Use the same video, find the spot, and then use your slider back and forth many, many times until you see the forces that were at work in all of the dust cloud surrounding the spire. You can actually see the rotational forces at play in the cloud, which were also having dominant play with the sprire.

And if you're then unconvinced, that's OK.
But I believe now it is only an optical illusion, and I am glad for that.

I know one thing. We must have hard evidence in all of this 9/11 mystery, because this is a hunt for the killers.

Weak evidence will not get the job done. This "steel to dust" is certainly in the area of opinion...and it's not hard at all.

However, the entire subject matter that Dr. Wood presents does touch on many anomalies that she believes ties the loose ends of 9/11 together.

BTW, Wood's belief is that the directed-energy beams came from space, from a fixed, geosynchronous orbiting satellite. How's that for star wars? And I am not saying she's wrong (or right). Just because the OCT's have a laugh party on this business does not mean they are right and she is wrong.

Who knows? I don't (at least not yet...and I'm not laughing either...not when it involves the deaths of nearly 3000 people; ain't nothin' funny about that).

We've got to have hard, indisputable facts, ones the OCT's can't lay a glove on (without being intellectually dishonest). Dr. Wood is behind the eight-ball trying to pass off this "steel to dust" based upon only one video that is open to more than one interpretation.

Instead, we must split the arrow.

[spooked]

15. Ok, but what are all the little flashes going off during the collapse

in that video?! Just before that inner core tumbles...