The famous or infamous dust was not created when the structures hit the ground. That is, it was not the impact that created all the dust. And we all watched; the dust was not ash. It was not the fires that created 110 floors of dust. Rather, the dust materialized as the buildings fell. Re-watch the videos, as I have just done. How is this possible?
I cannot speak to Judy Wood's comments on breakthrough energy. Or really anything else in this video. Nor can I comment on her credibility as a scientist or speaker.
I cannot speak to Judy Wood's comments on breakthrough energy. Or really anything else in this video. Nor can I comment on her credibility as a scientist or speaker.
But her point about the dust is fascinating. Should we not have seen a mountain of mangled steel girders? Yes we saw some, but not what we should have expected. We are talking about multiple steel-framed buildings, two of which were 110 floors and another was 47 floors. The official narrative is that the steel floors pancaked together as the buildings fell. But a 110-layer pancake of mangled steel, times two, would have been a mountain. In the hindsight of twenty-five years, we can imagine what that would have looked like. That is not what we saw.
We saw the dust and the lack of debris with our own eyes. Regardless of any other point Wood makes, regardless of her credibility or lack of credibility, we saw this ourselves. Here is a slide show she put together showing the dust and the lack of debris.
I always assumed that the dust we saw on that day was pulverized concrete and sheetrock. That is, it seems likely that buildings of that size would explain that amount of dust. But where is the mountain of mangled steel? And why was there no earth-shaking impact when the structures hit the ground? Wood's contention is that they turned to dust before and as they fell. As unlikely as that sounds, her video above is worth a watch.
Further, I find it interesting that Wood is not making an argument for a controlled demolition. This is the path of most conspiracy theorists. But I cannot imagine how someone could set that number of charges, in multiple buildings, without anyone noticing. Wood's argument is even more unlikely. So I cannot agree with anything other than what we can all see for ourselves.
I did go watch some Youtube videos of controlled demolitions. What I noticed is that the expected dust comes up from ground level as the impact occurs. And as we see in Wood's video, this is not what happened on 9/11. The dust starts high and falls. I cannot understand what I am seeing. And that, of course, is Wood's whole point. To her credit, she draws no conclusions. She merely points out the anomaly.
Finally, it seems plausible to me that the planes' high impact, and the subsequent explosions and fires, would explain some portion of the falling dust. Of course. But as Wood points out, it was dust all the way down. And the same was true for the 47-story building seven, even though it was not hit by a plane.
So, what should we make of all this? I have no idea.
This presentation is around fourteen years old. How did I first learn about it this week? What are they hiding and why are they lying? I post this as a follow-up to a speech Bret Weinstein gave last week. He questioned a number of odd, anomalous, and/or disharmonious situations, going back to the Kennedy assassination, where the government is clearly lying. Remember, there is no such thing as a magic bullet and these goons supposedly work for us. It is shameful and we need to shine a light on all of it.