| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:32 pm Post subject: Press Release:Scientists see Hutchinson effect parallel |
 |
|
Via Andrew Johnson today:
| Quote: | http://www.prlog.org/10048184-scientists-see-wtc-hutchison-effect-para llel.html
Please post far and wide - perhaps we are finally turning a corner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Scientists See WTC - Hutchison Effect Parallel
14th and 18th January 2008, Washington DC, USA - In two appearances on a Washington DC Pacifica Radio Station, WPFW, on a show hosted by Author and Political Commentator Ambrose I. Lane, Sr., Dr. Judy Wood, a former Professor of Mechanical Engineering, and John Hutchison, experimental scientist, discussed how photographic and video evidence suggest that the World Trade Centre (WTC) towers were destroyed using Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). Many of the observed effects resemble those seen in John Hutchison’s experiments.
In early January 2008, Wood posted a new study on her website (http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ), which relates effects seen in photographs taken before, during and after the destruction of the WTC complex, to effects seen in Hutchison’s ongoing experiments. Wood and Hutchison co-authored the study.
John Hutchison is a Canadian inventor and experimental scientist who has been working with “field effects” for almost 30 years. The Hutchison Effect is a collection of phenomena discovered accidentally by John Hutchison in 1979 during attempts to reproduce the work of Nikola Tesla. Hutchison uses radio frequency and electrostatic sources. The Hutchison Effect occurs in a volume of space where the beams intersect and interfere. The results are levitation of heavy objects, fusion of dissimilar materials such as metal and wood, anomalous melting (without heating) of metals without burning adjacent material, spontaneous fracturing of metals (which separate by sliding in a sideways fashion), and both temporary and permanent changes in the crystalline structure and physical properties of metal samples.
Hutchison has reproduced his experiments many times and the results are recorded on video and have been included in a number of TV documentaries that focus on unusual scientific experiments. Hutchison’s metal samples have been repeatedly tested by scientists, including a group at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, confirming Hutchison Effects.
The article by Wood and Hutchison (http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ) documents effects and events seen in the vicinity of the World Trade Centre and compares these with observed characteristics of the Hutchison Effect.
The observed effects include:
“Weird Fires” - The fires seen near the badly damaged cars do not seem to ignite nearby office paper. Some photos show firefighters walking very close to or even through the fires. A video by John Hutchison shows similar looking “fires” on a model metal boat.
Bent Beams and “Jellification” - Samples that Hutchison produced show very unusual effects on metal. Sometimes the metal “jellifies,” turning soft and losing form, leading to severe bending or fracturing of the sample. Sometimes samples erupt from the centre and sometimes they turn to dust, similar to what happened to the WTC on 9/11.
Ongoing reactions - Hutchison’s samples often show an ongoing reaction, even after the energy field is removed. This “non-self-quenching” reaction seems to occur at the nuclear level. This also appears to be happening at Ground Zero (GZ). Dr. Wood’s study suggests that the WTC site is still being “decontaminated,” with trucks moving dirt into and out of the site, while “hosing down operations” continue, which Dr. Wood and Andrew Johnson photographed and recorded on video in January 2008.
Transmutation - Sometimes materials subjected to the Hutchison Effect seem to change at a molecular or even atomic level. This could be the explanation for the apparent rapid rusting at GZ, where steel rusts like iron. Also, some photographs show unusual effects on the aluminium cladding used on the twin towers that look similar to effects produced on Hutchison’s aluminum samples.
Wood, Hutchison, and Johnson appeared on two Ambrose Lane shows, “We Ourselves,” and discussed the similarities between the WTC event and the experimental evidence produced by the Hutchison Effect. “I have been collecting data over the last year and a half or so and I have found these distinct and unusual characteristics, which I have given names such as ‘fuming’ and ‘toasted’ cars – I have even noticed flipped cars in some pictures,” said Wood. “In some cases, the flipped cars are sitting next to trees that are fully covered with leaves.”
“If the flipping of the cars was caused by big explosions or ‘wind’ from the towers coming down,” asked Johnson, “how did the leaves stay on the trees?” Material scientist George Hathaway observes that the Hutchison Effect causes either lift or disruption of the material itself. Lift explains the flipped cars. (http://drjudywood.com/pdf/HutchisonEffectReport_txt.pdf )
In some of his experiments, Hutchison observed “spontaneous combustion” where “fires appeared out of nowhere.” He also confirmed that Col. John Alexander and others from the U.S. military visited him in 1983 and filmed his experiments with a team from Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL). (http://www.weourselves.org/mp3/wpfw_011808_judy-andrew2.mp3 ) Canadian MP Chuck Cook and Dr Lorn A Kuehne of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) contacted him in 1986 and told him his work was “a matter of National Security.” (http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ8.html) Hutchison says he’s been told that defense contractor, S.A.I.C., has his technology and has been developing it. (http://drjudywood.com/media/071212_JohnHutchison-TruthH.mp3 )
Asked about ongoing dirt removal and hosing down at the WTC complex, Hutchison commented, “I think there is an ongoing reaction or ‘infection.’” Wood noted that the damage done to the Bankers Trust (Deutsche Bank) building was repaired, but then they decided to take the building down. This evidence indicates there is a continuing reaction there. Rusting beams in the Bankers Trust building and in the temporary PATH train station also suggest ongoing reactions too.
At the end of the first show, a caller said, “This is a revelation beyond revelations…this trumps everything…If this story ever gets out, it will change the course of the United States’ and the whole world’s history.”
Another caller said during the second show, “I am thinking that these revelations we are hearing this morning should have the people so excited and so outraged that they should be flooding the lines to their congressmen and news people to get this message out as the number one story of the year.”
For more information please see:
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/
http://www.hutchisoneffect.ca/
WPFW Related:
http://www.weourselves.org/
http://www.wpfw.org/
Audio of interviews:
We Ourselves Dr Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson 14 Jan 2007.mp3
We Ourselves Dr J Wood J Hutchison and A Johnson 18 Jan 2007.mp3
Phenomenon “The Hutchison Effect”
Anomalies at the WTC
Weird Fires
The fires seen near the toasted cars don’t seem to ignite the paper. Some photos show firemen walking very or even through them. Are they “cold” fires?
Bent Beams
Samples that John Hutchison has produced show very unusual effects on the metal – sometimes severe bending occurs
Jellification
Sometimes the metal “jellifies” - other effects are also seen.
Cars/Lift and Disintegration
Some WTC pictures show cars that are upside down. (How?) One of the key effects John Hutchison has reproduced many times is a “levitation” or “anti-gravity” effect. Objects are sometimes seen to levitate or if they don’t, they disintegrate.
Toasted Metal & Effects
A number metal effects have been observed in samples from the WTC and these show similar features to some of the samples made by John Hutchison
Transmutation
Sometimes, materials subjected to the Hutchison Effect seem to change at an elemental level – could this be the explanation for the rapid rusting – steel is turned into Iron?
Holes
Samples seem to end up with “voids” in them, following their experiments. Could this effect have created holes in WTC6 and other buildings?
Fuming
Could this be related to the fuming at ground zero? Could it also be the result of ongoing reactions?
|
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Judy Wood is an engineer, Andrew Johnson is a software engineer and John Hutchison is a self-proclaimed inventor of indeterminate profession widely regarded as a self-publicist with unverifiable claims.
Can you point out which "scientists" were involved - or is that just another of Andrew's semantic attempts to manipulate the gullible?
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | Dare we look beyond a controlled demolition theory,and new forms of
weaponry?if we do we will surely be called nutters,or gullible followers
of fantasy theories by the establishment,naturally. |
Sure thing, you can do whatever you like.
I was merely pointing out the pathological dishonesty that seems to be endemic with these made up hoax theories, in this case bigging itself up with the support of so-called but not really "scientists".
You do realise, I hope, that shifting the cause of destruction onto space - oh sorry! - orbital beamery attempts to make the inside access necessary for CD redundant, and could have therefore been a number of other nations. And certainly not good ol' Uncle Sam's minions.
Just as no-planes attempts to let all the others off the hook.
I just wondered if you'd realised where any of this is going yet?
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KP50
Validated Poster
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 526
Location: NZ
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | Newspeak International wrote: | Dare we look beyond a controlled demolition theory,and new forms of
weaponry?if we do we will surely be called nutters,or gullible followers
of fantasy theories by the establishment,naturally. |
Sure thing, you can do whatever you like.
I was merely pointing out the pathological dishonesty that seems to be endemic with these made up hoax theories, in this case bigging itself up with the support of so-called but not really "scientists".
You do realise, I hope, that shifting the cause of destruction onto space - oh sorry! - orbital beamery attempts to make the inside access necessary for CD redundant, and could have therefore been a number of other nations. And certainly not good ol' Uncle Sam's minions.
Just as no-planes attempts to let all the others off the hook.
I just wondered if you'd realised where any of this is going yet? |
Not to mention that the reports of extreme temperatures in the basements of all 3 towers were in fact a "psy-op" according to the website of the good Dr Wood. If you were of a cynical mind, you might even think that they are actually trying to discredit all the really strong evidence that this was an inside job ........ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KP50 wrote: | | Not to mention that the reports of extreme temperatures in the basements of all 3 towers were in fact a "psy-op" according to the website of the good Dr Wood. If you were of a cynical mind, you might even think that they are actually trying to discredit all the really strong evidence that this was an inside job ........ |
You could certainly be forgiven for perceiving that to be their endgame KP.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John White
Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | KP50 wrote: | | Not to mention that the reports of extreme temperatures in the basements of all 3 towers were in fact a "psy-op" according to the website of the good Dr Wood. If you were of a cynical mind, you might even think that they are actually trying to discredit all the really strong evidence that this was an inside job ........ |
You could certainly be forgiven for perceiving that to be their endgame KP. |
One could even be forgiven NPT is a meme put out by a very few, specifically designed to capture the minds of certain archtype personalities (a very small proportion of truthers), which induces them to turn on the interests of their own community and actually assist those they oppose
But I guess we just have to forgive them for that (if it were the case) and soldier on
_________________
Free your Self and Free the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
the npt/dew crowd are all philosophers....
"I think I'm a scientist therefore I am"
"I think I'm a video expert therefore I am"
"I think I understand physics, dynamics and structural engineering therefore I do"
sadly this is only true in their dreams....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | Newspeak International wrote: | Dare we look beyond a controlled demolition theory,and new forms of
weaponry?if we do we will surely be called nutters,or gullible followers
of fantasy theories by the establishment,naturally. |
Sure thing, you can do whatever you like.
I was merely pointing out the pathological dishonesty that seems to be endemic with these made up hoax theories, in this case bigging itself up with the support of so-called but not really "scientists".
You do realise, I hope, that shifting the cause of destruction onto space - oh sorry! - orbital beamery attempts to make the inside access necessary for CD redundant, and could have therefore been a number of other nations. And certainly not good ol' Uncle Sam's minions.
Just as no-planes attempts to let all the others off the hook.
I just wondered if you'd realised where any of this is going yet? |
Hold on there mate,as already stated I was posting on behalf of AJ.
You all seem reluctant to let any avenue of inquiry outside the boundaries of pure CD to air on the forum,does this topic discredit the quest for truth?
I think not.
Mate,your point of "inside" access for CD, and letting those responsible off the hook is a bit daft.Everyone here (I hope) has seen the footage of bombs going off,and eyewitness accounts of bombs countless times.
(As an aside,when I asserted "inside job" once before you disputed that was the case?)
Bombs per se are not disputed,though it is clear asserting the
proposers are, is a handy tool
for you.Weapon technologies have moved on quite a way in the last 50 years,who would want to hide that?
So I'll throw your own question back at you "mate,do you realise where this is going yet?"
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Hold on there mate,as already stated I was posting on behalf of AJ. |
Indeed - Andrew's little elves have been busy all over the internet pushing this "theory". To no great avail though, I notice. Though Webhag seems smitten, which no doubt gladdens Andrew's heart. Wow.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | You all seem reluctant to let any avenue of inquiry outside the boundaries of pure CD to air on the forum,does this topic discredit the quest for truth? |
Yes it does. Find me one truthful statement from Hutchison, Wood or Johnson regarding their "research" that would make anyone with a science degree stop and think for a nanosecond.
It has all the ingredients of unadulterated new-age hokery which you allow yourself to wallow in when you should be pushing every corner of the envelope to establish its credibility. I predict the Fetzer Disinfo Show is the only media outlet - even alternative media outlet - it will ever see.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | I think not. |
I disagree, plus your ability to conclude with anything like objectivety seems sorely wanting to me.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Mate, your point of "inside" access for CD, and letting those responsible off the hook is a bit daft. Everyone here (I hope) has seen the footage of bombs going off,and eyewitness accounts of bombs countless times. |
That can all too easily be ascribed to the side effects of some unknown Russo-Chinese satellite attack that was thought too injurious to National Security to admit to at the time. No doubt a posse of experts could be quickly rustled up to confirm that. CD? What CD?
| Newspeak International wrote: | | (As an aside,when I asserted "inside job" once before you disputed that was the case?) |
I sincerely doubt that, as I wasn't a member of this forum back when I was naive enough to concede that possibility.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Bombs per se are not disputed,though it is clear asserting the proposers are, is a handy tool for you. Weapon technologies have moved on quite a way in the last 50 years,who would want to hide that? |
For my sins, I have immediate family in the 'weapons business' from 'Yellow Sun' days to the 'Have Blue' era. Laying my cards on the table, this speculative Star Trek drivel is a crock.
Which I don't expect you to believe for a minute, as your faith in your fantasy version of imagined history is strong. But perhaps at least you may begin to question that it is a fantasy version and that may have some effect. One day. If only you didn't have to be told to do so!
Here's a free bit of advice. Whenever you're being sold something that needs to employ the unknown to sell it (the Tesla's Secrets scam is always a good one) be aware that you're being groomed immediately prior to being conned. Works that way every time, you'll see.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | So I'll throw your own question back at you "mate, do you realise where this is going yet?" |
As this is where I came in, and it's all too obvious you haven't had time to consider how far up the garden path and to what destination you're being led by non-scientists Andrew and Judy's Junk Science Spectacular (buy the soon-to-be-released DVD, folks! Includes GZ extra footage!)
My question to you is to illuminate the chasm of differences that opens up between there being an external (as your faction is promoting) and a provably internal attack.
At the moment - knowing you'll lap it up unconditionally - you're being sold that it's all down to the hidden capabilities of the PTB withholding the miracle of ZPE from the poor huddled masses.
But if the concept of remote external satellite attack were to become accepted (which btw is never gonna happen, not to the core "911 truth movement" that matters) that ownership could be changed, at a stroke.
And how could you argue?
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just a few observations:
You say you have family in the weapons industry, do you really believe they would be privy to new technologies, besides those working in such environs being covered by the OSA.
I’m sure nuclear weapons were a great surprise to most working in the weapons industries in 1945.
Despite your continued assertions, you may be pleased to learn I am not fully committed to JW and AJ
Theories, though I do see it fitting to show these and other possible issues on the forum.
I did ask you in a previous thread to state your opinions on these subjects but alas you may have been too
busy to reply at the time, so 2nd time around then:
Chemtrails
and
HAARP technology, inc weather modification
Wireless networking and microwave transmitters and associated masts in conjunction with HAARP (or not) , inc electronic smog effects and associated impact on cognitive function
Satellite tracking
Mind control techniques
Fluoride as an “anti tooth decay” measure in water supplies
AGW
____________
I appreciate you could find these questions beneath you, but indulge me this once eh?
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | Just a few observations:
You say you have family in the weapons industry, do you really believe they would be privy to new technologies, besides those working in such environs being covered by the OSA.
I’m sure nuclear weapons were a great surprise to most working in the weapons industries in 1945. |
That is only a somewhat true parallel - but anecdotally I know that after Japan the news was all over the shop, as they say up t'north. That hasn't happened on the defence (sic) industry grapevine since 911.
| Newspeak International wrote: | Despite your continued assertions, you may be pleased to learn I am not fully committed to JW and AJ
Theories, though I do see it fitting to show these and other possible issues on the forum. |
That's very discriminating of you which is always a good sign.
| Newspeak International wrote: | I did ask you in a previous thread to state your opinions on these subjects but alas you may have been too
busy to reply at the time, so 2nd time around then:
Chemtrails
and
HAARP technology, inc weather modification
Wireless networking and microwave transmitters and associated masts in conjunction with HAARP (or not) , inc electronic smog effects and associated impact on cognitive function
Satellite tracking
Mind control techniques
Fluoride as an “anti tooth decay” measure in water supplies
AGW
I appreciate you could find these questions beneath you, but indulge me this once eh? |
I'n not sure what relevance any of these above topics have NI.
I'm not really a hobby conspiracist, and apart from observing the sometimes interesting, mostly inconclusive and often half-baked discussions here and elsewhere on those subjects, I don't concern myself too much with pursuing them. Am I also required to have an opinion on the Loch Ness monster?
Having said that, I was involved in the campaign against water fluoridation locally 10 or 12 years ago, and it's hard to believe the whole thing is kicking off again. As an interesting aside, the town where the campaign organiser lived (Holywood) did have its supply treated, but the rest of the country escaped. Make of that what you will...
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It’s a shame that in your many hours of research you seem to reject out of hand most “out there” topics, that may quite possibly have a direct bearing on what we are fighting against.
I would also add this being “the time of great change” for mankind, one would also expect to see
massive campaigns of disinfo in all media outlets, that’s a given.
Regardless, I’m pretty sure on what has been happening and what is being proposed that these topics
“not to be mentioned in polite company” may well be very relevant.
What do you make of the UK airport chemical plot extravaganza of 2006, likely or impossible?
Indulge me this 1 answer eh!
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'm currently looking at hutchinson effect stuff. it is intresting.
however proving it was a method used on 9/11 is a totally different subject altogether.
the exsistence of any technology dos'nt prove it was used just because it exists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGC-ZuFr3Oo&feature=related
whilst i have seen and know 100% u.f.o craft are real (man-made or not)
and i find the information on hutchinson effect intresting. i am somewhat suspicous this method is being linked to 9/11, when the same effect is being linked to things like u.f.o's. it makes me think its some type of discrediting campagin to link 9/11 to u.f.o's.
i could be wrong of cause, and still have a lot to look at, so my suspicions could be unjustified. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | It’s a shame that in your many hours of research you seem to reject out of hand most “out there” topics |
I keep hearing this kind of response from people pushing npt/tv fakery/space beams - and it's a straw man.
I don't think that these topics are rejected for being "out there" - after all, most of the topics discussed on this forum would be considered "out there" by most people.
it's more to do with the plausibility of the claims being made, the lack of any real evidence and/or the evidence not standing up to any degree of scrutiny, not to mention the credibility of the people presenting it.
just one example on the latter point....
watching judy wood's interview with greg jenkins really puts the credibility of her claims into perspective - ie when somebody who understands the science much better than she does asks her a few simple questions about her "theory", she's completely incapable of answering them.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/8110
and as for "out there" topics - what if i told you that the twin towers were actually brought down by a massive invisible holographic banana.
can you prove that they weren't? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 1158
Location: South Essex
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | what if i told you that the twin towers were actually brought down by a massive invisible holographic banana.
can you prove that they weren't? |
Now that's just silly....a massive holographic pineapple on the other hand... 
More on 9/11 and The Hutchison Effect – The Chips Have Fallen
Jim Fetzer and Ace Baker and Video Fakery
On 27th Feb 2008, Ace Baker appeared with Jim Fetzer on the Dynamic Duo. They discussed how Ace was sure that John Hutchison had faked his videos and how Ace was therefore greatly concerned that Dr. Judy Wood had associated herself with “a fraud”. The problem with Ace’s analysis then became the subject of an article I wrote, describing why his conclusions were ill-founded as they were based only on a limited set of evidence.
Dr. Judy Wood and John Hutchison on Dynamic Duo
On 28th February, Dr. Wood and John Hutchison appeared on the show with Jim Fetzer. Fetzer introduced John as follows:
JF: John I want to welcome you to the Dynamic Duo.
JH: Hello-o…
JF: John – could you tell us a little bit about yourself – ye know - your background and your education – especially your training in science and technical subjects?
Rather than, say, asking John how he started to perform his experiments, or perhaps what he thought of the intriguing data that Fetzer and Wood had just been discussing, Fetzer chooses to ask a question about John’s training and/or education. Why did Fetzer seem more interested in this than in the bizarre data and effects that had also been touched on, both on Fetzer’s previous show with Ace Baker and with Dr. Judy Wood only moments earlier? Regardless, John replied candidly, and cheerfully. Fetzer then asked about him going to High School and pointed out that John did not “matriculate to a university” or have a university degree. John agreed, without any reservation or hesitation. Fetzer, still not asking about the anomalous data or effects, then said “How have you made your living, John?” What was unclear to me was how this was relevant to the study of the WTC evidence - which was the subject of discussion at the time John came on. How exactly was Jim Fetzer’s line of questioning relevant to the Hutchison Effect evidence itself?
As I mentioned in the previous article, during the broadcast, Jim Fetzer seemed noticeably quiet and there were a number of longer silences as Judy waited for Jim Fetzer’s reaction. He made no points of science and did not specifically query or re-interpret any of the points of evidence in relation to the WTC that Dr. Wood presented.
When Jim Fetzer asked John Hutchison for an explanation of the Hutchison Effect, John Hutchison gave a summary describing how it may be caused by a poorly understood interaction between Radio Frequency (RF) fields, Electrostatic Fields.
Did Fetzer not consider it significant that the Hutchison Effect was actually named after John? If Prof Stephen Hawking had been on the program, because someone in the 9/11 Truth Movement had referenced Hawking Radiation for example, would Fetzer have asked about Hawking’s background in the same detail as he did of John Hutchison?
Dr Wood first learned of Hutchison's work in October 2006 and she has said that she felt she could not endorse it or deny it without additional information and/or studying. It took well over a year for her to feel confident enough about the science of John Hutchison's work, and to fully appreciate the striking parallels with what happened on 9/11. She reached that point, very carefully and methodically, by conducting research in that area of science.
Jim Fetzer, though has written a number of books and has studied and taught courses in the Philosophy of Science, is not an engineer, and not a scientist per se, and hasn't studied the science. However, he seems to have few reservations about the methods employed by Ace Baker to mimic and by inference discredit John Hutchison’s work. Is this a credible position for Jim Fetzer to adopt?
---------------
This is just a part of the scenario,much more of the before and after
is here:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&tas k=view&id=164&Itemid=60
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/glassasylum2
Dave Sherlock's:
http://www.myspace.com/GlassAsylum
http://www.myspace.com/chemtrailsuk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Did Fetzer not consider it significant that the Hutchison Effect was actually named after John? If Prof Stephen Hawking had been on the program, because someone in the 9/11 Truth Movement had referenced Hawking Radiation for example, would Fetzer have asked about Hawking’s background in the same detail as he did of John Hutchison? |
Apart from on a gaggle of quack sites, there is no scientific phenomenom in any textbook called "the Hutchison Effect". That's merely a self-publicising layman's conceit.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Dr Wood first learned of Hutchison's work in October 2006 and she has said that she felt she could not endorse it or deny it without additional information and/or studying. It took well over a year for her to feel confident enough about the science of John Hutchison's work, and to fully appreciate the striking parallels with what happened on 9/11. She reached that point, very carefully and methodically, by conducting research in that area of science. |
I suppose we just take that - the type of research and its conclusions at face value, do we? Not really how science works though, is it? Though I'm sure it's more than enough for Andrew's intellectual circle.
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Is this a credible position for Jim Fetzer to adopt? |
About as credible as his new besty mates ostentatiously calling Hutchison a "scientist" (with the accompanying connotations), I guess.
What goes around comes around, as they say.
Even 'out there'.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gruts
Major Poster
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 1050
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newspeak International wrote: | | Quote: | what if i told you that the twin towers were actually brought down by a massive invisible holographic banana.
can you prove that they weren't? |
Now that's just silly....a massive holographic pineapple on the other hand... |
no - it was definitely a banana. 
the latest article you posted seems to confirm that inter-factional bitching in the npt/tv fakery/space beams ghetto continues to increase.
so what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
