Nothing in your message mentioned the Hutchison Effect - which is a known phenomena. I simply couldn't understand the reason for a reply of no value.
Regardless, maybe it's best to send a private message if there's an issue. Either way, I suspect you'll be enjoying the show Richard Gage is bringing over and I'll continue to value the efforts of those I believe to be correct. Good luck on your chosen avenue, I hope you feel the same.
The Checktheevidence website clearly indicates a Judy Woods - type presentation which will describe DEW space beams. Judy Woods website refers to Hutchison effect - which is clearly hoax and joke science.
I referred you to ae911truth website that dismisses Judy Woods' claims. I can point to many others that suggest Judy Woods is either a crazy self-publicist or worse, a tool of disinformation. But that is not my point - my point is that there is nothing in her claims which can be supported by any science or reason.
This is not a puerile (your word) point.
Wild speculation does huge dis-service to 9/11 justice which I'm assuming that you would also like.
I don't think this topic should be discussed by private message - but online - in this forum.
You can promote AE911truth all you want. The truth will come out in the end - either way. While I see the Gage tour has got a sticky thread showing it's dominance, I wouldn't dream of posting anything to deride what they do. Having viewed Gage and Co and seeing how others on this site have been treated, I've formed my own opinion and would rather keep the what they preach at arms length. I suggest you haven't listened to the interviews Dr Wood has given or attempted to read her book. I can't blame you as I wouldn't bother with any further papers by Jones, Gage or Griffin. We're on different sides and obviously disagree. Lets not fight, ay? Rather, lets present what we feel correct and leave those on the forum - old & especially new - to take in what they feel plausible.
I think the moral is this: You can try to teach a pig to sing, but you'll waste your time and annoy the pig.
Even ignoring the ae911truth article and just concentrating on DEW and Hutchison Effect - it doesn't make any sense and it is not scientific - hence promoting it is bonkers. I don't want to annoy pigs but this is such an important point that it worth having the discussion.
Snap. We both feel the same about our chosen subjects. Through listening to all/most arguments, I am 100% behind the work of Dr Wood and the continual effort Andrew Johnson puts into keeping those concerned about the WTC event and other matters informed. I have not encountered anyone on this forum (other than Abe) who is as passionate in their understanding and research. Listening to Richard Gage and various others for several hours left me feeling they were playing the dis-info game. This along with S Jones, A Jones & Griffin appeared to be a waste of time to me - although I felt it handy to keep tabs on what they were up to.
I would encourage all to study the work of Dr Wood and attend the presentation on this thread or look out for another in their area. No doubt, with a 10 year 'anniversary' on the horizon, the BBC and other controlled media will be putting an 'official' slant on things to muddy the waters further.
So, lets see where our paths take us. In the mean time, the contenders are a big, glossy roadshow who appear to name call, point fingers and ridicule and the underdog who listens, observes and advises. May the factual man/woman win.
I see your point although I didn't dismiss your issue intentionally. I think this probably occurred further to the term 'space beams' being bound around. I've seen this before with people trying to attack Dr Wood with senseless name calling and it doesn't further any argument.
While it may leave me somewhat open as someone who simply tries to acquire knowledge, I'll try to respond to any questions you may have. Better still, I can pass on any information (DVD/audio link/literature) I have that may be able to answer any concerns without me being a middle-man.
Alternatively, there's always presentations like the one offered here. It may be out of the comfort zone as would be the situation with me nipping in to see Richard Gage in Bristol, but I may well do it to see what's going on.
Thanks for the reasonable response, Daniel. However while your offer of DVDs/audio/literature is much appreciated, I am actually interested in the science. The science of the Hutchison Effect, for example, which I believe is non-existant. If this cannot be proved - but promoted by Woods et al - then surely no amount of DVDs or literature will help...
Well, I'm not here to force anything down your neck, but simply to advise on a presentation by Andrew Johnson largely based on the work of Dr Judy Wood. Take it or leave it. There info I've viewed if there for all to see.
Not being a scientist, I'm not going to pretend I understand the workings of the world and I'm not going to dismiss the Hutchison Effect. Unfashionable as it is. For me, the explanations given by Dr Wood add up. Nukes, thermite, planes and the dismissal of field effect don't. I'll often look into alternative explanations, but they sinply don't sit well with me and it appears many have to fall in line with these belief groups or get out. (Abe/PookztA has noted this well elsewhere on this forum)
I attended a presentation in Scotland late last year with a fellow regurgitating the thermite theory. I later spoke to him as to whether he was absolute about what he was offering to which he replied along the lines of '....I KNOW I could talk about exotic weapons and no planes but it would lose the audience'. To my mind, it's the choice between a hard truth and an easy lie.
Anyway, I guess this is why we have these forums and presentations to absorb what we feel to be correct.
Well looking over the wtc web page you referenced and it refers to the Hutchison Effect - so there you go... To buy into Judy Woods is to buy into unreproducible magic. This is not science - it make the path to 9/11 justice completely untenable.
I'm not too sure why you are so anti-ae911truth - it all hangs together as far as I'm concerned - no nukes, no magic required - back by thousands of professionals, science papers and common sense. There's no regurgitation required - it can all be worked out from first principles with the known facts.
I believe there's a lot more to learn. I know this presentation will be a revelation to those who attend. Looking forward to seeing a good group of people there if I can make it myself.
Very good SP2. Looks rather like you have an agenda though, but I'll stand corrected and continue to view as much 'evidence' as I can - just as I have since 2004. Looks like it's ongoing.
I forgot to mention that anyone who can't make it this presenation can see a slightly older version for less than the ferry to the Isle of Wight. Have a look for '9/11 Finding The Truth' along with the Dr Judy Wood presentations.....
Gosh - an anonymous poster refusing to acknowledge evidence related to 9/11 court cases and the energy cover up.
Why am I not surprised?
I wonder if he/she will ever reveal their real name, website and any effort they've made to putting the evidence they believe proves what happened on 9/11 into some kind of court case. Like this:
Or will they, instead, invest their time in generating forum noise.
They will likely post some snide remark trying to "duck" what I have said and either make a direct or back handed insult - not addressing any evidence or discussing any action.
It's exactly this sort of behaviour which I documented here:
All free - so no one really needs to come to the IoW if they don't want to.
Some people claimed they were going to come to Liverpool in November (having made similar remarks to the anonymous "sciencenothanks" poster above). I guess that sets par for the course here too! _________________ Andrew
Gosh - an anonymous poster refusing to acknowledge evidence related to 9/11 court cases and the energy cover up.
Why am I not surprised?
I wonder if he/she will ever reveal their real name, website and any effort they've made to putting the evidence they believe proves what happened on 9/11 into some kind of court case. Like this:
Because it is doomed to fail, "Andrew Johnson" - if that really is your name - because it relies on non-sensical science "The Hutchison Effect" - it has been/will be laughed out of court and setting back 9/11 justice.
Quote:
Or will they, instead, invest their time in generating forum noise.
They will likely post some snide remark trying to "duck" what I have said and either make a direct or back handed insult - not addressing any evidence or discussing any action.
It's exactly this sort of behaviour which I documented here:
All free - so no one really needs to come to the IoW if they don't want to.
Some people claimed they were going to come to Liverpool in November (having made similar remarks to the anonymous "sciencenothanks" poster above). I guess that sets par for the course here too!
What have you said, Andrew?! Nothing! Let's go back to basics: some science please...
I don't think there is any 'justice' or worthy court in this game SP2. That's the trouble. The rules/law changes and you end on up a Snakes & Ladders board.
...and you get to the page it takes you to, why is it that this image...
...which features a piece of some sort of equipment on the left hand side of the cars...
...why is it that the image above has been doctored to edit out what looks suspiciously like a winch chain on the right hand side going across the wtc debris, and a little fella next to the winch itself on the left next to the cars, which are both totally visible here...
I mean, the image has been totally doctored to edit out completely the evidence of a winch chain and its operator being present.
...and you get to the page it takes you to, why is it that this image...
...which features a piece of some sort of equipment on the left hand side of the cars...
...why is it that the image above has been doctored to edit out what looks suspiciously like a winch chain on the right hand side going across the wtc debris, and a little fella next to the winch itself on the left next to the cars, which are both totally visible here...
I mean, the image has been totally doctored to edit out completely the evidence of a winch chain and its operator being present.
Is there a reason for this? Why have these details been edited out?
No answer! came the stern reply.
Why have you edited out those details in the image Andrew?
Is it because you want to keep the myth of "floating cars" on 9/11 going?
Having what looks like a winch and a little fella operating it just wouldn't help with the case would it I suppose?
You can't teach those with an agenda. It took me a while to understand that and this forum - and others - are full of those who name call, sling mud and simply show a lack of respect.
Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 575 Location: the eyevolution
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:38 pm Post subject:
Man, you really are something.
Here it is, plain as day, in yer face that Johnson has edited out evidence that the cars he believes were floatin' around on 9/11 were probably winched there from underneath the WTC debris and instead of broaching that subject you ignore it and go all ad hominem as usual.
There it is plain as day in yer face that the WTC spire didn't turn into dust as claimed by a few, it fell down. Case closed. The End.
But instead of broaching that subject you ignore it and go all ad hominem as usual.
Absolutely un - ckin - believable. I can't tell you the hours I have wasted "checking the evidence" only to have the actual subject matter of my responding threads almost completely ignored.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
