Prof's Jim Fetzer and Judy Wood discuss WTC Destruction

[Andrew Johnson]

http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/Jim%20Fetzer%20&%20Prof%20Ju dy%20Wood%20on%20RBN%20Live%20-%20WTC%20Destruction%2011%20Nov%202006. mp3

Or use this link and scroll down the list and do right click/save as.

http://www.checktheevidence.com/audio/911/

[James O'Neill]

Andrew: Your comments include the admonition to "ask the tough questions" and that could usefully be applied to the Fetzer interview with Judy Woods. I do not have the technical expertise to evaluate Woods' latest flight of fancy, some sort of high energy weapon to destroy the towers. But whether or not there is merit in the idea it is not served by the Fetzer style of interview which is to act as a cheerleader. The man seems oblivious to the fact that he is white-anting his co-founder of scholars for 9/11 truth Dr Steven Jones. Jones has done meticulous work which has been published in enormous detail to justify his conclusions. He is able to point to other published work by scientists, eg on Journal of 9/11 Studies that provide the scientific confirmation for his hypotheses.
Woods on the other hand, despite some initial good work, eg the billiard ball meataphor, appears now to have joined with Morgan Reynolds as a member of the 'no plane hit the towers' cheer squad.
This is junk science.
In my opinion the answers to what happened to the towers lies in the laws of physics. It is literally impossible for the towers to have come down in the manner they did without the intervention of some form of explosives. That is the only explanation that fits the known facts. Jones' research shows that one of the external elements was thermate. He has been careful to say that there were other means used as well. To determine exactly how it was done requires a proper investigation, not the half baked farce that Fire Engineering Magazine described.
I suggest that we as a movement do better to demand such a proper investigation and not lend our name to supporting speculation such as Woods promotes. Go to her website janedoe0911.tripod.com and listen to a recent interview she did. The host is another "gee whiz is that right?" type interviewer. When the speculation is backed by hard research we will be more inclined to listen.
Until then I prefer the careful research based analysis of Steven Jones.

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

So how did those cars get burnt out like that?

[James O'Neill]

I don't know and I am not prepared to speculate. All I ask is that whatever explanation is proffered it is based on sound science.