I am now reading the book Where Did the Towers Go? : Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11 by Dr. Judy Wood. It is an exceptional book, filled with colored photos to back up her research and to illustrate to the reader exactly why she has so many questions. She is rare (unfortunately) in the scientific field these days, following in the footsteps of scientists like Einstein in a search for truth as she questions the "accepted" version of what happened to the buildings on that September day in 2001. Dr. Wood's study was really begun on the day of the tragedy, when she realized that what was being seen and heard on television was contradictory and appeared to violate the laws of physics. She has been a student of 9/11 ever since. Einstein once said, "The right to search for truth implies also a duty: one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true." In her search for truth, Dr. Judy Wood is faithful to Einstein's admonition--and to another of his instructions to others in the field of science: "I have been passionately curious. Never lose a holy curiosity." Unfortunately, as in Einstein's day, there are the naysayers and incurious who would like to silence those who bring up unsettling truths that don't fit with the "story"-- the already established and accepted explanation. Dr. Wood has had to suffer the brickbats of "scientists" like this. To read her book is to see the dedicated step-by-step path she followed in her courageous pursuit of truth. She was one-pointed and focused only on discovering what exactly happened to the buildings that seemed to pulverize in mid-air, and her conclusions can be weighed by those who follow her investigation, fully laid out in her book.
Dr. Wood holds a B.S. in Civil Engineering, an M.S. in Engineering Mechanics and a Ph.D. in Materials Engineering Science -- degrees that speak to an adult lifetime dedicated to scientific analysis and observation. Her academic preparation is most logically relevant to a study, simply and solely, of what happened, literally, in and to the WTC buildings on 9/11. She has 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. 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).
Over a half mile of vertical building height, containing nearly 150 football fields of floor space, was reduced to a near-level field of dust and debris, where rescue workers walked horizontally or rappelled into empty caverns to look for survivors. How was this possible, given the standard laws of engineering and physics?
The 9/11 Commission Report bypassed this central issue, as did the report of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Contrary to its stated objective of determining “why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed,” the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) made the stunning admission that it did not investigate how the towers fell.
Neither the standard view–that the Twin Towers collapsed from fire–nor the standard opposition view–that they were intentionally detonated by “thermite explosives”– explains the evidence, nor do they follow the laws of engineering and physics.
Dr. Wood left her professor position at Clemson University to research the 9/11 conundrum full time, and she has focused her research strictly on physical evidence and scientific principles. “Where Did the Towers Go?” provides an understandable, credible, and photo-enhanced summary of Dr. Wood’s disturbing findings, which resulted in her lawsuit against the contractors of the NIST report.
There is another element of Dr. Wood's research that qualifies her even more exactly for her study. She is not wedded to conspiracy theories or any point of view, other than what the empirical evidence reveals. Here is a passage from her web site:Many people have speculated as to who committed the crimes of 9/11 and/or how they did so. But without addressing what happened, speculation of this kind is nothing more than conspiracy theory, a phrase that also describes the 19 bad guys with box cutters story we were given before noon on 9/11/01.
My own research is not speculation. It is a forensics investigation of what happened to the WTC complex on 9/11/01. I don’t address who did it, nor am I concerned with that question right now. Before issues of that kind can be addressed, we must first determine what happened.
By definition, research that is purely empirical cannot be about and has nothing to do with conspiracy theory of any kind. The fact that others (in the mainstream media, the alternative media, and the so-called 9/11 truth movement) promote various theories about 9/11 is irrelevant to my research. On the other hand, to determine what happened, we must address all of the available evidence.
Anyone declaring who did what or how they did it before they have determined what was done is merely promoting either speculation or propaganda. The popular chant, “9/11 was an inside job,” is, scientifically speaking, no different from the chant that “19 bad guys with box cutters did it.” Neither one is the result of a scientific investigation supported by evidence that would be admissible in court. Neither identifies what crime was committed or how it was committed.
What is presented in this book is not a theory and it is not speculation. It is evidence. It is the body of empirical evidence that must be explained in order to determine what happened.
If you listen to the evidence carefully enough, it will speak to you and tell you exactly what happened.
If you don’t know what happened, keep listening to the evidence until you do.
The evidence always tells the truth.
The key is not to allow yourself to be distracted away from seeing what the evidence is telling you.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment