Physics Proffessor Slams Death Ray Theory

[Stefan]

"As Dr. James Fetzer suggests, Dr. Judy Wood may be unable to provide answers
to basic questions regarding her own speculative hypothesis. However, this paper does
quantitatively analyze those issues raised during the interview as well as address other
evidence advanced by Dr. Judy Wood and others that the WTC towers may have been
destroyed by directed energy weapons. The following arguments will prove that the
degree of implausibility places the hypothesis squarely in the realm of the impossible."

The Paper: http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200702/Implausibility-Direct ed-Energy-Beam-Demolish-WTC-by-Gregory-Jenkins.pdf

[Micpsi]

Here's the other side of the argument. A scathing criticism of Jenkins' modus operandi and a partial rebuttal of criticisms his paper directs towards the directed-energy weapon hypothesis of Dr Judy Wood: http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/dr_greg_jenkins.htm

[CB_Brooklyn]

[chek]

[Stefan]

CB,
That paper does not "debunk" it just repeats the same evidenceless nonsense Judy Woods does on a regular basis, and fails again to offer any real argument for any of the claims.

Defenders of Woods are yet to realise they are unwitting attackers of this campaign's credibility. Campaign remember not club.

When will the penny drop (from the window sill)?

[WhoKilledBambi?]

[John White]

[ian neal]

[Stefan]

Ian,
My point was that the truth campaign is a campaign CALLING for the truth, not a fringe club of people claiming to know it.

But, point taken.

[Andrew Johnson]

It's good to see who is posting material to debunk the hypothesis which explains the most data and who posts material in support of SE Jones who claims that there was no fine dust in the destruction of the WTC 1 & 2. Can a truth campaign be based on such a bogus claim?

Why did Jones suggest I write a paper on DEW and submit it to him when I am not even a research scientist?

All this evidence is linked here, folks:

http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/TheNew9-11Hijackers.htm

No "claims" here - you can find the link to the audio where Jones actually says there was no fine dust.

[David WJ Sherlock]

[marky 54]

regardless of whats true since beams have been around the movement has certainly split in to two sides fighting rather than one side with differant views amongst it debating.

im so trying to understand certain things about energy weapons, but do dread the replys for questioning it(although i have'nt had any real nasty ones reading others turns you of trying to understand.)

fact both hyothesis could be right there is no reason to presume not!

truthers are turning on each other and that aint good. i also get the feel people cannot ask questions anymore or point out what they think is a fault or something to think about without being attacked by someone being protective from the opposite side.

ive had it trying to understand it aint worth tiptoeing around in fear of saying the wrong thing about someones theory.

people can get there point across without being nasty and paranoid everyone is against it as oppose to trying to understand it.

[Thermate]

[Annie]

I posted this earlier in another NPT thread in this section, so I AM saying this till I'm blue in the face!

What is self-evident to us - that the OCT is a pile of nonsense - is still a frightening intellectual leap for most people out there. But there are many pieces of solid evidence we can use to get them to look at and question 911. Whatever the rights or wrongs of holograms/pods/beam weapons, as an initial argument these theories just sound too mad and "out there" and will scare people away.

What are we trying to achieve? Is the movement's primary function to establish, down to the last detail, exactly what happened that day? Or is it to wake people up to the reality of geopolitics?

With another war looming in the Middle East, people being murdered, tortured and imprisoned, and our liberties being decimated, I would say that the most urgent task is to expose the root cause of the bogus "war on terror" as a lie, and to get as many people as possible to re-engage with politics and say enough is enough.

Only once we have reached a tipping point will we be in a position to demand answers to what actually happened that day. Until then, these discussions will remain speculative, and I would urge people to get out there and spread the word, rather than obsess over the details of what might have happened.

This is not a game - we need to campaign as effectively as possible and as quickly as possible in order to prevent further innocent lives being destroyed.

Regards

Annie