In Judy Wood’s book, Where Did The Towers Go?, a ground-level empirical examination of surrounding structures and objects, brings further validity to the theory of the use of Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) in the events of 9/11. Upon examination, there has been much suppression and overt concealment of this sufficient and extremely powerful evidence, which must be released in order for the individual to attain to the capacity for robust, wide-ranging and in-depth analysis of the events of 9/11.
Lack of Seismic Impact
When two massive skyscrapers are said to have collapsed to the ground by gravity, each weighing approximately 500,000 U.S. tons, it would be expected that a significant seismic event would have occurred, however the evidence speaks otherwise. The seismic signals of two 110-storey buildings supposedly “slamming to the ground” was said by a member of the National Construction Safety Team, to be ‘not of any magnitude that was seismically significant from an earthquake design standpoint’. [1] One eyewitness testimony makes the following comment that ‘If the building is hitting the ground that hard, how do I not remember the sound of it?’.
Wood follows, ‘This is a significant statement. Each of the WTC towers was 500,000 tons, or the equivalent of 50,000 full ten-ton dump trucks. If 50,000 full dump trucks crashed to the ground, some dropping from over 1/4-mile above the earth, certainly there would be a very loud crashing sound that would shake the ground.’ [2]
To compare the seismic impact of the controlled demolition of the “Seattle Kingdome” with the destruction of the WTC towers, both events, according to the data available, show similar Richter readings of around 2.3. The “Kingdome” weighed approximately 130,000 U.S. tons with the controlled demolition creating ‘the equivalent of a magnitude 2.3 earthquake.’ Both of the WTC towers stood at ‘about 30.41 times’ the ‘pounds per square foot in ground pressure’ of the Kingdome, and yet the peak Richter reading for both towers was around the same value, of 2.3 for WTC1 and 2.1 for WTC2. [3] Additionally, because the Kingdome was not anchored directly into bedrock, but was ‘built on a soft soil basin’, [4] the ‘energy released by its demolition is dissipated via the earth’s “cushioning” materials.’ In contrast, the WTC towers were anchored directly into bedrock, meaning that ‘the released energy directly impacts that rock, “pinging” the earth directly without any dampening, thus allowing the signal to carry more efficiently to recording stations.’
Wood summarises, ‘if the Kingdome Richter value was a 2.3 reading transferred through soft material, a building with 30 times the potential energy anchored directly in bedrock should have transferred a much higher signal. . .Amazingly, however, the south tower reading of 2.1 was lower than the Kingdome’s 2.3 despite the tower having 30 times the potential energy and being anchored in bedrock. . .To put it succinctly, once again the physical evidence, in this case seismic evidence, is inconsistent with the official explanation of a pancaking building of approximately 500,000 tons slamming into the ground, and, similarly, it is inconsistent with any theory of a controlled demolition.’ [5]
More can be read here.
‘Toasted’ Cars
When Judy Wood describes the evidence for DEW she makes mention of the extremely strange and compelling phenomena of, as she terms it, “toasted cars”. In this term, she refers to the ‘condition, rather than cause, and is derived from the casual phrase. “It’s history, it’s toast,” meaning it is unsalvageable.’ [6]
She further describes what is observed in photographic evidence of these cars:
‘Although some of the cars did appear to have burned, paper right next to them did not. Some appeared to have wilted, as if subjected to high heat, while their plastic trim remained unaffected. Some vehicles appeared to have burned on the inside but not on the outside. Vehicles were reported to have exploded and burst into flames by spontaneous combustion, and others were described as “half there and half disintegrated”. Some vehicles were flipped upside down yet appeared relatively undamaged.’ [7]
As part of this analysis of the “toasted” cars phenomenon, one mentionable observation are the “toasted” cars occurring well outside the World Trade Center (WTC) vicinity, particularly on FDR Drive, ‘about seven blocks from the WTC, along the East River’ which is showcased in the following figure taken from page 216:
Wood lists some of the anomalies with the “toasted” cars that do not fit features consistent with “regular” fires, namely, ‘cars with front ends burnt but not the back ends, door handles disintegrated but upholstery intact, interiors of vehicles burnt but the exterior paint intact, vehicles burning near large amounts of loose paper that is not burning—all these phenomena are more in line with a force of some kind that is “cooking” things from the inside out.’ [8]
‘Weird Fires’
Wood examines some of the evidence regarding anomalous “fire” behaviour that occurred in the close and wider vicinity of the WTC, such as cars spontaneously “lighting up”, “hot spots” at ground zero that persisted for months which had no effect on the workers directly in those areas, “fires” that exceeded well beyond the WTC complex causing damage to vehicles, so-called “molten metal” which had no effect on the hydraulic equipment which was lifting it up from the rubble, the vast quantities of unburned paper located right next to “fires” and green trees that remained utterly unscathed by any of the surrounding “fires”. This is found extensively in this chapter.
In Wood’s discussion regarding these anomalous “fires”, she notes that a lot of these behaviours are ‘similar to the types of effects… in an energy field, such as a microwave field. That said, we may now make some additional observations. If there was a large microwave field in use on that day, it would explain why so much paper was not catching fire in the close vicinity of other burning debris, for that debris is literally – like the chicken on the paper plate in your microwave oven – being cooked from the inside out.’ [9] Wood concludes, ‘All these phenomena are in line with the deployment of an exotic directed energy technology, and a very sophisticated one at that.’ [10]
In response to the “official narrative” regarding airplane fuel funneling down the elevator shafts of both WTC towers, Wood writes that, ‘If this is the “explanation”, then it must have been the same airplane fuel that came down the elevator shafts that also managed to make its way over to the FDR Drive where it ignited and burnt the front ends of cars while not burning the back ends, melted door handles while leaving the upholstery, burned the insides of ambulances while leaving the external paint intact, and so on. . .On the other hand, there is a mechanism that can explain all these examples of anomalous damage and burning. It is familiar to all of us who have used a microwave oven to cook food – that is, directed energy.’ [11]
Hurricane Erin
Unbeknownst to most, an Atlantic Ocean Category 3 hurricane was hurtling towards New York City on the days leading up to and on the day of 9/11. Hurricane Erin had become a Category 3 hurricane by September 10 with wind speeds of 120 mph. [12] The enigmatic details surrounding this hurricane include news weather reports making little or no mention of this significant weather event. On the morning of 9/11, news agencies ABC and NBC made no mention of the hurricane, CBS mentioned the ‘hurricane that’s going away’ and the FOX weather reporter was convinced the hurricane is ‘not going to affect us at all’. [13] This is significant because low lying areas such as New York, Long Island and Cape Cod in Massachusetts would have been in real danger of storm surges and flooding, with ‘Evacuation from these areas… a mammoth undertaking and could not be organized at a moment’s notice – and yet the public remained uninformed’. In comparison, the hurricane that would hit Louisiana four years later known as Hurricane Katrina, had a lower cyclonic energy than Hurricane Erin, with the National Hurricane Center projecting ‘Erin to be of stronger force than it was to project in the case of Katrina four years later’. Additionally, the WTC Towers were ‘built to withstand wind loads of up to 140 mph (225 km/hr)… only 20 mph more than the wind speed of Hurricane Erin.’
As Wood explains, ‘On the morning of September 11, the storm stopped at its closest approach to New York City, then in the afternoon it veered dramatically to the east’. [14] The following image tracks the path of Hurricane Erin from the days of September 1 to 17, with the yellow lines representing “field effects”, which are atmospheric changes created by the hurricane, examples of which would be thunder and rain reported by all three airports in the vicinity of New York City on the morning of 9/11. [15]
Alaska Magnetometer Readings
Belonging to the Geophysical Institute Magnetometer Array (GIMA) of the University of Alaska are stations which record data on the earth’s magnetic field, called “magnetometer readings”. On the days around and including 9/11, readings from six stations in northern Alaska were taken.
This map shows the location of the six recording stations, not including “Gakona” or “Eagle”.
As Wood writes, ‘The magnetometer readings from the six different research stations in northern Alaska reveal anomalous changes in the Earth’s magnetic field at the exact moments that key events were taking place in New York City on 9/11. . .Until about twenty minutes before the first two events – those being the creating of the holes in WTC1 and in WTC2 – values hovered close to the average. And then they revealed changes…’ [16]
‘Immediately before the first event, at WTC1, the magnetometer readings began to fluctuate from the average. These fluctuations increased, and at each destructive event from then on, the values shifted dramatically either up or down. In all cases, the fluctuations of the magnetometer readings were dramatically different from normal, especially in their timing. . . By themselves, fluctuations in the magnetometer readings are not unusual. But the timing, magnitude, and relationships of these fluctuations are unusual. In fact, the timing of these anomalous fluctuations is downright uncanny.’ [17]
Here is a timeline graph from Wood’s book, showing the six magnetometer readings and WTC events occurring at the same time, across a 14 hour window on 9/11.
Wood continues to write, ‘The precise moment that WTC1 went poof seemed to coincide with the initiation of a significant geomagnetic event, which gradually subsided at just about the same time WTC7 went poof. After this, all six values seemed to resonate together at the same frequency (a type of magnetic resonance), but with slightly different amplitudes. . .In the time between WTC1 going “poof” and WTC7 going “poof,” some strange magnetic events were taking place’. [18]
Wood explains that the angle between magnetic north and geographic north of the Earth was changing rapidly in the duration of the period between WTC1 and WTC7 (Building 7) being destroyed, such that ‘if you were standing at one of those geomagnetic stations holding a compass, you would have seen the needle swinging wildly’. Wood emphasises that there is a connection between magnetic fields and electrical currents, in that these do not operate completely independently of each other but are in fact related to each other and indeed, interact. Wood goes into further detail about the Earth’s magnetic field on 9/11 which can be read here.
A Note on Flying Objects
According to Newton’s third law of motion “for every action there is an equal and opposing reaction”, in that, when an object is in motion and there is a structure that is in the path of motion, the structure will exert an equal and opposing force to the object upon contact. It is also noted in the National Transportation Safety Board “Radar Data Impact Speed Study” that the “United Airlines Flight 175” traveled at speeds far in excess of even the ‘emergency dive speed’ [19], moving at 510 knots at 1000 feet altitude [20], which is close to sea level. A Boeing spokesperson, when questioned about the capability of a Boeing 767-200 to travel at 500 mph at 700 feet altitude, stated the implausibility of such motion in: ‘not a chance, not that fast.’ [21]
___________
Thanks to Judy Wood
In ending referencing the work of Judy Wood in forensically examining the empirical evidence of 9/11, I wish to give thanks to her and honour her profound and magnanimous efforts. The substantial evidence that is laid before us is effectively, the “lion of truth” unleashed from it’s cage – you don’t need to defend it, it will defend itself.