Another great show. One thing I notice is...Since we know about thermite and how it functions and its effects, it becomes possible to say "no, thermite would not do that."Since we know quite a bit about "nukes" (including mini nukes), it becomes possible to say "no, nukes would not do that." or "nukes would have done that but that was not observed."But directed energy weapons are a huge question mark. Dr. Wood says there are different general categories of DEWs (hot, cold, directed free energy weapon etc) but does not say much on the subject. So, since we know almost nothing, critics of her work cannot say "DEWs would not do that." or "DEWs would have done that but the facts show not evidence of that."Dr. Steven Jones spent a few years endeavoring to move his "thermite" into the realm of DEWs, that is, to a category of the secret and unknown.Those who favor nukes seem to also have engaged in moving them into the secret unknown, saying some of the very very latest generations of nukes have capabilities that go far beyond what we think we know about nukes.One other thing I would mention is regarding the discussion of Hurricane Erin. I feel a little concerned that neither Dr. Wood, Dr. Reynolds, nor Dr. Fetzer ever even touch on the subject of weather modification technology. Erin having a role requires that technology operating here.
STOP with the Chuck Baldwyn cross references.... He's like listening to Buddy Hackett on acid. Morgan said it right that you're defying your own analysis principals.. why!?Why don't you look into Erin or the other anomalies JW falls short of defining, instead of accusing her of not telling you what she says she doesn't know???? it's ridiculous!!Stop with these thinly veiled futile arguments. It's obvious you still hold a grudge that Hutchinson mocked the private education system but WHO CARES! Get over it! I'm sure he didn't mean it to hurt you personally. You're a freaking genius... Move on!Judy is obviously on to something.. Why don't you use half the effort you use obstructing her analysis to help further flesh these things out??? Come on! The Planet Earth needs you to do the right thing!Help us Obi-wan.. we need your help!
Morgan has tried his very best to help Judy Wood as we all know she needs all of the help that she can get, but ever so few real scientists are falling for her unscientific analysis folly...
Chuck is the only one to challenge any of these other "experts" (Jones, Judy, AE911) to an open debate. Everyone else is justifying their position and attempting to debunk each other from behind a spokesman (Morgan), or via written releases/statements (AE911). I can't be the only one fed-up of this non-constructive sparring. I can see merits in many of the hypotheses put forward for the destruction of the towers, but they are worthless without numerous open debates between thermite, DEW, nukes, etc proponents. There needs to be an integration of all these peoples' expertise to expose the 911 scam -- it's way overdue. Plus, there does not seem to be anyone who has come forward with military/media computer expertise to try to explain the various computer simulation models that had to be designed prior to the execution of the 911 hoax.Jim, you and Chuck need to stop giving Dimitri such a hard time. Both the US and Israel have extensive and sophisticated underground nuke-testing technology. It is possible to direct the force of a blast into a controlled area, thereby negating any chance of destroying the bathtub.As for Judy's harping on about it's not the who, but the why .... well, she should refrain from restricting what can be deduced politically, and stick to her scientific analyses. A faction of the US collaborating with Israeli and Jewish entities, as it's been for many decades.I haven't had a chance to finish Judy's book, so I can’t determine how many of the pics she’s found contain just artifacts or actual results from some process related to DEW technology, and how plausible Judy’s opinions are for the cause .
Generally like Sally's comments."I can see merits in many of the hypotheses put forward for the destruction of the towers, but they are worthless without numerous open debates between thermite, DEW, nukes, etc proponents."The many hypotheses are not true hypotheses. True hypotheses are not possible at this stage of our acquistion of true evidence and "breakthrough", as Dr. Reynolds puts it, knowledge.Yes, we need "numerous open debates between thermite, DEW, nukes, etc proponents" but "open" is the operative word here. I do not see how such debates can be "open" if each of the researchers' research itself has not been "open."" There needs to be an integration of all these peoples' expertise to expose the 911 scam -- it's way overdue. "There can be no integration of all these peoples' expertise because not all of them want to expose the 9-11 scam. Some of them have other agendas.
As much as I like hearing both sides, I'd rather hear some form of scientific debate. Come up with some general questions, have Chuck and Morgan an maybe someone else come up with responses to those questions, and bring everyone on together to discuss each question at a time. If something like this could be done, it would make for a much more coherent "debate" than one interview at a time.
I am for an open debate and I am willing to take on any individual or group of people that propose any theory that can be supported by any factual scientific evidence, solid hard core scientific evidence and not just guessing and hoping and unsupported "scientific method" wishful evidence. All of the requirements of the "Scientific Method" need to be met, not just one or two components of that unique, weeding out, method.Dr. Judy's fairytale can not meet the stringent requirements of the Scientific Method, not the last 2 streps, anyway and amen.All of you should try to rigorously put her theory through the steps as Jim Fetzer has shown that Judy can not withstand that scientific pressure. Her whole thery is based on "Faith" similar to a religious "faith"Faith and factual and tangible evidence are definitely two separate things
chuck, i'm sure you're a nice guy but your science is drivel and incoherent. sorry.
So Stevie, does this mean you would challenge me to a debate in defense of Dr. Judy & Morgan on Jim's show? Please tell us your science background.what is your counter to my arguments other than calling it drivel?please expand on your criticism you call drivel. Are you a " peanut gallery" critic or a truly knowledgeable citric? show us your knowledge, please.
Yes, mr Boldwyn shows a scientific attitude.Progress is being made when someone is proven wrong and his model must be corrected or scrapped.Unchallenged claims are nearly worthless.
I have a problem with the "ground effect" and claims of theoretical top speed limits of aircrafts.Also I am not convinced that a plane that crashes into a building must show deacceleration on video. The speed momentum is so great it would perhaps compress the body of plane. Also I think the energy in the plane is enough to punch holes in a steel framed building, even if it is made of steel. You can cut through rock and steel with a water beam if enough speed is applied (forgive my poor english please). But on the whole it seems obvious to me that the buildings were prepared for demolition and to me it seems like "they" blew the first building up when the top started to fall down, and to avoid greater cathastrophy the building was brought down. Number two was demolished later for the same reasone, a preemptive collapse. I think the demolition was intended to lessen damage and loss of lives but was shamelessly used as propaganda in the war on terror.
A plane can only go about 350 mph at sea level, not fast enough for it to "punch" through the building with no deceleration.
so chuck,PAPER IS THERMITE /thermate nano super thermite RESISTANT?
FULL VIDEO: National Press Club press conference with Dr. Jerome Corsi and Adobe expert Mara Zebest.obama long from birth certified a forgeryFULL VIDEO OF WND PRESSER HERE:Via WND: - Bogus Obama document 'bigger than Watergate' - 'Not just a crime of some plumbers breaking into an opponent's office' - Bob Unruhyou tube videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLW9pK1p4KM
paper in direct contact with Thermate will burn, but only several inches away it will not burn due to the Scientific Law or Principle called the "Inverse Square Law" that explains the localized heat effect concerning any radiating source.Heat Intensity is proportional to the Inverse of the distance from the source of the radiating object,. whetherr it he light, heat, elecdtricity, magnetism, radioactivity, sound, etc......... I have discussed this concept with graphics in great detail in several of my podcasts.Can you show a photo where the hot materical is in direct contnt with the paper. I have seen all of the photos and not one shows direct contact. Maybe I missed one that you can show all of us.Please educate yourself about the Inverse Square Law and then get back to us that already understand it, including Jim Fetzer who now understands it.If you are not scientifically educated or inclined to educate yourselt you may be in for a lot of em bare ass ment or something similar to those.Chuck BolldwynScientifically inclined
Björn Eriksson: The crash of a B-25 into the Empire State Building in 1945 is still the only real-world criterion for what happens when an airplane crashes into a skyscraper and its fuel tanks explode. 14 people died, but the building was open for business the next Monday. Apparently, we already had a sufficient number of boogeymen at the time, so that the crash was not blamed on terr'ists.
Then how did so many cars get burned, or melted down by "thermite", yet ; no photographic or video tape exits of a human being burned or melted down by "thermite"? More so the streets? Sides of buildings?...Just cars......only cars got melted by the thermite cloud.....that covered the entire city, oh and only cars close to the WTC. According to Boldwyn Oh by the way, that is bullshit on its face and bullshit in fact.
(Right-click on guest name to download mp3)
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F: