Dr. Judy Wood | The Evidence For Directed Free-Energy Tech Used On 9/11

00:05 Puppet masters almost surely have a clearly maybe something heavy And until you've thoroughly tested every last horse just to think, you know the less you really do That's true Dr. Seuss Where would we beat our THC? Cause we know they're lying to us Just don't know them without THC The Higher Side Jack Show Award Company

00:43 Hello again, Hireside Chatters. Drinking a little drink, smoking a little smoke and just altering to keep from faltering in this crazy world from sunny San Diego I'm Greg Carlwood And today is quite a doozy folks because as many of us recognized we were being lied to it seems like 9-11 has become one of the single biggest pivot points that brought most of us to take the conspiratorial worldview a bit more seriously Many of us saw what was happening on TV and knew that it just didn't look right. But when you filter out all the guesswork, how much do we really know about what took the Twin Towers down? Now of course a topic has been speculated about at length in alternative media ever since but as much talk there's been, you'll find a surprisingly small number of people actually go back and look at evidence from that day before coming up with various explanations or theories about what happened

01:29 Well, today's guest doesn't like speculation and theories and has dedicated herself to a very impartial tedious an evidence-based examination of what actually happened the World Trade Center complex on that day which she lays out in what I now consider the quintessential textbook on 9 11. Spoiler alert it's entitled where did the towers go? Evidence of directed free energy weapons on 911 She's put more work into this than most of us have probably put into anything. And her name is Judy Wood, she's extremely qualified to examine these events as she has earned a PhD from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis structural mechanics materials characterization and materials engineering science

02:15 She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes, and she has authored or co-authored over 60 peer reviewed papers and journal publications in her area of expertise. I do stand in awe for accomplishments and extreme dedication to truth seeking, and it is really an honor to help represent this research here today. Dr Judy Wood welcome to THC! Well, thank you very much for having me and a wonderful introduction. Absolutely it is what I do and you're very worthy of it! I'm so happy that you can make time for this You've changed my mind quite a bit on those events And honestly...I very much suffered from 9-11 fatigue in recent years But a listener named Jeff that I believe you know as well urged me to dig into your book And I am SO glad that I actually did! To get us started maybe you can talk about your approach to the subject? How it's different from

03:03 Everyone else, I mean even those researchers in the so-called truth movement. Yeah, researchers has been kind of used as a loose term for people who can type things into Google. I call that an opinion and an internet connection that doesn't make someone an expert there you need years experience in forensic engineering for diagnosing this problem but more than that it's observation and our culture has been a bit corrupted into seeing how fast you can color in the dot on the multiple choice test rather than problem solving and determining what happened. So there's a list of problem-solving steps for about any problem that you're going to approach

03:46 So this doesn't just apply to 9-11 it applies to anything that now I'm just a perfect example To use because there's so much evidence available But you first must determine what happened before you can determine how it happened You have to turn what it was that happened right bombs did it What was it the bombs did? You have to determine what problem. You're solving before you can solve it, so you first determine what happened and And then it emerges how it happened, and then who did it and why later. But I don't get into those things because that is not as important as what happened. It's sort of irrelevant almost. People like to go hang somebody or get somebody for it well in this case the technology that has revealed you get rid of the operator of it but doesn't get rid of the technology

04:38 There's a bunch more guys in line ready to push the button. Good point! That technology is there and making sure it doesn't happen again is knowledge about this technology and being able to identify its characteristics So you begin with what happened? And I'd like to read the definition of scientific method Please by Professor Eric Larson This is the scientific method as it came into being during the Enlightenment period, is a method known as empiricism or as empirical methods. Under the terms of empiricism all conclusions are must and can be drawn from observable evidence and from observable evidence only. Evidence must precede any and every conclusion to be drawn from it

05:28 then if sound logic governs in the relationship between the evidence and the conclusion drawn from it, that conclusion will be irrefutable. Hmm well said And so that's why the conclusions in my book are irrefutable. That's true and one of the big questions that is heavily contested in the alternative realm, that I feel like I now have a definitive answer to, is how many buildings were destroyed that day? I think if you surveyed the audience the most common answer would be three – The Twin Towers and Building 7 but you have maps and diagrams that really take the guessing out what can you tell us about that how many buildings were really destroyed

06:08 As I often like to emphasize, it wasn't just two buildings. It wasn't just three buildings or four buildings or five or six but seven buildings with the WTC prefix were destroyed that day and don't include the little church across the street that was of course destroyed and Bankers Trust was damaged repaired but then they disassembled it because it still had a problem So on that day the buildings that were destroyed were seven buildings all with the WTC prefix. Hmm, and I think that's probably somewhat surprising to people but if they get your book...I mean it comes right on the back you can see the outline of where all the buildings were and it removes any speculation or doubt, but it is

06:57 Kind of mind-blowing when you hear that it's more than double what most people assume and we're talking about massive buildings. Obviously a lot of the facts have been skewed about this event since it happened. In a magic show, the magician misdirects your attention He doesn't lie to you. He causes you to come to the wrong conclusion, he causes you to solve the wrong problem and so if he reframes The discussion and the focus area into something over here rather than looking at the evidence The truth always comes from the evidence And I am a strong believer in letting the evidence tell you what happened Don't tell the evidence what it's supposed to do You listen to it

07:40 And it'll speak to you and tell you what happened. If you don't know what happened, keep listening until you do! Either you have conclusive evidence or you don't. Like the Malaysian Airlines 370, all the stuff on the news right after went supposedly missing... So I won't even assume that it went missing but everyone was saying where did it go? What happened? Did they get an energy weapon taken out of the sky? Well first of all you have to establish what is known Was there such a flight and did it take off? And if it took off, which direction was going in? Can't answer any of those questions, so I'm done Mm-hmm. Yeah It's so odd because almost like a catch 22 sometimes because a lot of people in the alternative realm I mean it's kind of like conspiracy 101 to say you don't trust the media But then you know The media tells you a plane went missing and then it becomes this big dramatic thing on television It just it's really hard to discern what? real information and what isn't when a lot of it is outside of the realm of our

08:41 Observable effect you know we have to get these things through some type of source and it just becomes difficult I know in our correspondence you mentioned how our education system is partly the blame for all this confusion mainly because it affects people's reasoning skills and. I totally agree with you but between the media manipulation the observer effect and all this it becomes hard but when i was something that even comes more surprising than you have this alternative media. I think your an exception to it but is this vest internet radio business or even best example youtube people don't believe the network media but they believe in anonymous poster on youtube right it boggles the mind,

09:24 But as for the Malaysian Airlines thing, when folks asked me about it right after the event I said well...I called it the Where's Waldo scavenger hunt. The news would have a different take on look over here today. People just follow wherever the bouncing ball goes. Mm-hmm, but it's important to establish what you know What you know that? You know that you know There's a question I've been waiting for you to ask and and you didn't I said today was the is a wonderful day for this interview because it was the The birthday of my hero which childhood and continuing on adult hero right who is that hero? It's 543rd birthday Nicholas Copernicus ah

10:06 In fifth grade, we had good school sense. There was 28 kids in our class and we were given the assignment of... We were given it each day on the calendar in February. Each one of us responsible for finding somebody who was born that day what significance. Well I ended up picking Copernicus And ever since then, I've always celebrated his birthday on February 19th. Wow! Synchronistic that we're doing this now. Yes. I did do some Googling trying to figure out who it was but I couldn't figure it out. What impressed me the most at that age was he took a licking and kept on ticking as I'd put it. He was confronted in so many different directions

10:48 Remember my favorite phrase? Know what it is that you know, that you know that you know and know that everything else You don't know. The most famous phrase by Copernicus is I'll read it to know that we know what we know and To know that what we do not know We do not know That Is true knowledge Haha, boom. There it is and so true It's important to keep the facts on the table and remove the speculation my friend Gordon white he's a really good researcher He always talks about separating data from interpretation Sometimes a guest or a researcher will have mined some important bits of data But they pack it in with a lot of their own biases And speculation and we have to know how to sift through that to just pull out that data You know, it's a similar kind of thing

11:31 But when people mix in the speculation, that's another thing I do. If any part of your data set is corrupt you have to throw all of it out. Otherwise you're biasing your sampling of the data so if somebody you're listening to they tell the truth most time but they have some other things that are just outright bogus I don't listen to them anymore, they're done. It's over? And that's in my profession that how it was In experimental mechanics you are presenting data and if you are found to have fudged your data or you misrepresent somebody else's data, you're done for the rest of your life. Well said! You've lost your credibility so being able to stay within the bounds of what that you know is important. On the side we can speculate about X Y and Z but do not mix that in as a statement of fact

12:23 And I think that's one of the errors that also happens. Another example, in case the audience isn't familiar with who Nicholas Copernicus was – heliocentric solar system. You know the sun is in the middle not the earth and he got a lot of flack for that but some other statements he made He had to be sure of what he knew that he knew. And, he went through that a lot even though other people were firing at him. He knew what he knew that he knew and I sort of experienced that on 9-11. I was in the faculty conference room and building looks like it's turning into dust and everyone said oh look at the collapse

13:07 As soon as the media said collapse, again I shut off my ears. They're not worth listening to but when looking at the image... It's ridiculous! That sounded like a collapse? And they looked at me like if was a lunatic. It was the creepiest day of my life so how do i sort out objectively is it me who's crazy or is that the rest of world and its probably same thing that Copernicus went through So I went upto my office and started doing calculations And you remember the billiard ball chapter, billiard ball example. It's just a mental example that actually came from that day when I devised simple equations about billiard balls and then went to my colleagues they act like I was having a senior moment because it is so simple well of course that is right but if it was applied to The Twin Towers I was a lunatic So that how I differentiated

14:05 So you know knowing what you know that, and being sure of it instead being swayed by doubt from others. What did we see that day? The link is turning to dust. There's another engineer who bought my book read it and was so impressed they made a movie about I was meaning to send you the link It's recently released if you go to http://tinyurl.com slash irrefutable tv all in word and there's several different chapters, one on dustification. And if people want to observe the video it shows this clear video they point out a different aspect but I usually point out this steel beam falling down in front of the corner of the North Tower Yes! And then pretty soon you notice that no more rigid material anymore is just dust That's a big part of the book use the term dustification

15:06 We should talk about that a little bit or maybe have you define it because that is what happened to the twin towers It really replaces the word collapse Exactly, and I get a lot of grief for using unusual words But actually this is more scientific than anything else if you this is a key thing. If you assign a known name for known phenomena to unknown phenomena. You're biasing your observations, for example you see this hazy atmosphere above the ground and say it's smoke well then you are automatically assuming fire is the cause And so I use the word fumes they could be chemical fumes or they could be fumes from a fire It doesn't specify what it is

15:55 And then there's these orange glowing things that look like they're probably pipes that were glowing orange. I call them Cheetos. I don't know what it is, it's not something glowing red hot because I don't have a thermocouple on it to determine what temperature it is. In my book I give the example of fluorescent light and an incandescent light. One glows because it's hot and one doesn't isn't hot You could change the light bulb on the fluorescent one without burning your hands, but you wouldn't do that on an incandescent bulb. It's a different process that is producing the brightness so just because it's glowing does not mean that its hot. Good point and I like those different terms you use. I think it makes it easier to understand some of this complex stuff And it really is the most scientific

16:44 You don't see that hot glowing pipe over there. If I call it a Cheeto, you're not going to confuse that with a piece of food but its an easy term to remember and so you can identify this as glowing orange piece of stuff Yeah, makes sense to me and I did hope early on we could kind of dispel some of the misconceptions so that we can reach people who think they might already have the answer. And of course, I think 95% of listeners here will acknowledge The official story makes no sense planes alone did not destroy these towers but i think Some of them might have bought into some of the theories that I also bought into originally probably the most widespread is that this was just a perfectly executed control demolition. Why is that not a sufficient answer? How does the evidence contradict that

17:30 Okay, with the controlled demolition with bombs in the building you know you have materials blown apart big kaboom and junk goes flying and then lands on the ground. Big solid chunks land on the ground so you get a seismic signal showing that the bombs went boom and then you'd also get the junk fall into the ground And both of those are like a hammer hitting a tuning fork You know that the ground would ring Let's look at the seismic charts. Well, the seismic charts from quite a few different seismic stations around the area do not show anything hitting the ground. They just have a surface wave and the surface wave isn't all that big. They calculate the equivalent Richter scale reading from the surface wave

18:22 and the Richter scale equivalent reading was less than or equivalent to a building that was blown up with controlled demolition, that's 1 30th of the potential energy. That is mass times height but if you justified all but the bottom 16 or 20 stories of each of the towers you would indeed get the equivalent surface wave. I found that to be some of the most compelling evidence, of course the charts and data and reading it is a little over my head but... You can identify the charts! Where's the signal for building 7?

19:07 Actually, they calculated when they expected the S and P wave to arrive because it was nothing detectable from all five of the stations. They couldn't even detect a surface wave in one of the stations. Now for listeners, S and P waves – the P wave is the primary wave that is first arrived. It travels through the Earth and it travels faster than the shear wave or secondary wave As you probably remember from earthquakes, the lag time between those two can tell you how far away from the recording station the epicenter is. For all five events in New York that day there was no S or P wave.

19:48 record only surface waves. Right, that's so interesting I mean you have to take that into account when you're trying to figure out what happened at these towers because any other answer would result in all that material just crashing the ground and of course it would create a huge wave and you actually have some quotes in the book from people who actually say they didn't even remember hearing an impact right But if also, if you mash the building to ground forget about well Let's first deal with bombs. If you have bombs in the building they shoot things at high speeds They go boom for a reason Because it's above the speed of sound an explosion a sudden expansion So they're going to launch junk out there You know chunks out and so the adjacent buildings would all look machine gun fired by these chunks getting launched

20:37 That didn't happen. But even without that, if you're going to say it's a pancake collapse and it happened naturally with columns internally that nobody saw and the building getting smushed to the ground... You have all this material that was not there at the end of the collapse If you have this pile driver riding the pile down, where's the pile driver? But if it mashed everything down let's save argument sake. You have every single window open or removed in the whole building if It's going to go away and The time that takes for the roof to free fall of the ground By time against the ground that material inside and air is Is having to be thrown out at like Mach 2 mm-hmm

21:25 You know what happens when an airplane does a jet engine run up on the tarmac instead of the concrete? There's some pictures in my book. It was for a guy driving a 767 Boeing, did the engine run up on the tarmac and it tore up the tarmac just the air coming out of the engines, tore up the tarmac and threw chunks through the tail of the plane so if you had all that much air rushing out You'd have all sorts of chunks thrown all over the place and again you would have, it looked like machine gun fire on all the adjacent buildings. That didn't happen. Yeah and there was one quote here I did have from an EMT Ronald Cohn

22:09 But he said that as the building was coming down, he kicked in the window of an SUV and went to climb in for protection. And he said that in the time it took him to kick out the window his safety jacket was already on fire, his socks were on fire... ...and that's a little weird I mean that's not consistent with the demolition of any kind Right, and he didn't get burned up. There was somebody else whose shoelaces got on fire and their jacket was on fire. But that's their description. You know, lit up but didn't describe getting any burns from it Yeah And you also have a report from the chief medical officer David Prezant I guess he said that the lack of noise was odd again A high-ranking person who is an emergency responder and should have a good idea of

23:02 you know what happened on the scene and he says it also i mean, he doesn't speculate much further but he definitely acknowledges that the two largest buildings in new york crashing to the ground should have made a little more noise. Right, and some of them didn't even know that building 2 went away. Building 1 got an airplane shaped hole in it we won't assume how it got it but you had a hole got a hole and then the South Tower got a hole went poof, that's my simple term for it. It went away and then the North Tower went away – that is the sequence of things. There was a fellow who contacted me who worked in Tower 1 when it got its hole. He knew he wasn't going to get any work done on that day so he grabbed his stuff and decided

23:52 He walked past Tower 2, he saw that it looked like it was fuming. It looked like things were under control and he went down to the ferry terminal as he commutes by ferry. While he was standing there some guy thought it was an idiot because he came up and said Tower 2 just collapsed! Well wait a minute this has got be an idiot because he just walked past the building and it was standing It was in fairly good health, you know the bottom part of it. And they didn't feel a building hit the ground They didn't hear a building hit the ground They got on the ferry pulled out into the Hudson look back and there's only one tower standing He was just shocked it was just unreal and then this is big huge dust cloud and I realized that that was three minutes Excuse me the remains of Tower two

24:37 Yeah, it really shocked him. That is another element that I just think really spits in the face of those alternative ideas that are shuffled around the conspiracy world Another one of the big camps is that nanothermite was used to sort of melt the beams of the building even hearing reports that they found the components of thermite at the site Why is this not a reasonable explanation for what brought them down either? Whether it's, you know thermite is like a 19th century technology. It's used for welding road tracks. Nanothermite just means it works faster and it works through heat transfer so if you put on the surface...it takes well for the heat to get in there but if it burns faster, you know, it's all burnt up before the heat transfer can happen. So it kind of does

25:25 the wrong thing. But there's a piece of evidence that was missing on that day and let's see if I can play the clip for you. Sure! Remember that Man For Man Earth Band song? I guess it originally was written by Bruce Springsteen or this is the beginning version here If that building was taken apart with, you know, thermite nanothermite or whatever it would be lit up like a giant sparkler. Mmm Have you seen somebody? You know weld something right yeah this bit sparks all over the place very bright nobody Recalls having seen that and then nobody was blinded

26:08 So that pretty much solves that problem. Yeah, so and also we have the survivors in stairway B which I believe is the bottom of the spire? I don't have proof for that but it sure looks like that was a stairwell you know what is referred to as the spires its core columns are left standing about 700 feet tall right You can estimate that because it towers way over building 7 Anyway, these guys who were down at the base of that building in stairway B on the second third and fourth floor thought they were goners because they thought they're buried under 102 stories of stuff. But when the dust cleared...or 106 stories...when the dust cleared, they looked up and saw a blue sky

26:57 Yeah, I thought that was so compelling. Clearly people inside the building should be crushed by it falling on them but to look up and see blue skies and not die... And where's the building? One described walking out onto what looked like an empty football field. Gosh! The debris field. Also if you were taking apart the building restoring it with thermite these guys would have been cooked to death And none of them remembered being cooked to death. I say that in a silly tone, sarcastically but they weren't burned and none of them described having been burned. There was 14 people there's also two people above that around the 22nd floor who survived even though the building round them did not survive

27:41 There's one of them that landed on the top of the cluster of stairs. He wasn't with the other ones, but he ended up landing on top of stairway B in the top surface when you rode the wave down and he ended up coming home that night his wife was watching the event on TV and thought she'd watched her husband be destroyed in that building then he comes home at night Quite amazing. Yeah, it really is! It's so odd how the evidence when you look at it and when you look through this book and all the work you've done... The evidence is so far different than what so many people have in their heads about what happened. So these survivors on Stairway B are evidence that the building did not burn up or didn't get crushed to the ground but it turned to dust mid-air. Everything is consistent with that

28:35 Yeah it's hard to fathom but the evidence is what the evidence is and I've heard you say that, It was a psychological operation. A lot of people admit that but you said do you think they also just forgot to plan a cover up too? And I think thats a great point how much of what the alternative media is looking at comes from this manipulation Do you think there are alot of orchestrated alternatives put out there Well, from the get-go those who were in charge of this event were they not anticipating somebody would be asking questions? Of course not. There would be people asking questions. People like to join groups and be with like minded people so you build it and they will come I call those collection agencies

29:20 People get into those collection agencies and it's groupthink, and they're given an answer. They have other people that confirm it around them so they join in without thinking themselves But if you look back these groups have been around since when? And who has done anything? Right! They just kind of talk-and-talk Oh we need new investigation Well there has been one but they cover up right they've been trained to covered up And so they're clearly not interested in investigation. Well, we need legal action! There was legal action. Anyone who supported it in those groups was banned from the group. So you know they were taught that's bad you don't want to support that evidence but few people realize there is a legal case and if enough people supported it could have had some teeth. But in this case there are only like handful of people

30:11 I count every one of them. There's only, let's see three people other than my lawyer and myself who were at that hearing this was the Court of Appeals and in their written decision they acknowledged the law applied to this case but they're ignoring the law to dismiss the case Yeah i did wanna talk about that and we might as well talk about it now just the whole legal battle because not only have you done the tedious research for this whole investigation in this textbook I got here but you actually did pursue the legal case. And I know your focus is specifically on what happened to the towers but everybody does want to know who's responsible,

30:52 And I know that your work has kind of brought you closer to answering that question than anyone. Yeah, see you don't speculate but I know who can tell ya. The NIST report National Institute Standards and Technology they were mandated by Congress to determine why and how the towers collapsed They didn't do that. Instead, they built a computer model and did a hypothetical scenario. They didn't analyze the collapse. It was just this hypothetical thing then they listed inventory of the steel that went into building and you know this type of steel or that type of steel lots of data but they ignored the data and just had this hypothetical model

31:35 Well, the outfit that did the hypothetical modeling they're the outfit that had the most number of contractors hired onto any of the contractors. Most number of employees on the ministry port this is an organization that is part of military industrial complex but their areas expertise as well as development and manufacturing energy weapons They also held a, and still I believe hold contract with the US government to know everything about any weapon of mass destruction that exists or is being developed anywhere. So they not only can identify what technology but whose technology who owns that particular gizmo? Right and so they are definitely complicit at least in a couple...

32:32 Even if they're out to lunch and just compartmentalization, you can excuse it too. But wouldn't it have been nice to have them under oath and ask them some questions? Those are the ones that I was most interested in asking a question of. That's Applied Research Associates. Is that who you sued for fraud? Well all of them but more difficult to sue a government agency but contractors No, that's whistleblowing. These contractors generated a fake scenario and then also Science Application International Corporation SAIC typed up the report

33:15 Uh-huh. And you know what their expertise is? Sign up! Wow They also supervised the site during the cleanup from like immediately afterwards and onward so they obviously knew of all this dirt that was coming and going and It'd be nice to have asked them questions about that, where did this idea come from that you needed to bring in fresh dirt dump it down stir it around You know scoop it back up take it out bring a new dirt Yeah, it is really surprising that well You know It's not surprising to someone cynical minded or conspiracy minded that they wouldn't hear the case but the judge actually made some statement. That was a pretty bizarre about not wanting to hear a case about who shot JFK Or who landed on the moon? Oh there was though That was the lower court judge and that's why we appealed it because you know that excuse me sir this case isn't about that

34:11 Right. Has nothing to do with who landed on the moon or shot JFK? Right, he was just trying to make it go away and also threatened that if I appealed it you know... It was going to get sanctioned or something like that but anyway having been what do we call it um Blackballed? Well no having also the Court of Appeals deny the case went to Supreme Court so we could say we did at all And they only have to hear cases now if they feel like hearing them. If they don't feel like hearing them, then you don't have to say why they don't feel like hearing them. Right gatekeepers Yes of course it didn't feel like hearing this case so it didn't bother them that the Court of Appeals said we're ignoring a lot to dismiss the case But you can bet if you had a few thousand people out in the streets holding signs saying was this court did Ignoring their law to dismiss the case right?

35:07 Unfortunately, there's no attention on it. Right? So if you're an operator of the cover-up group... Isn't that what you'd make sure that there was nobody would be wanting to support that case? Mm-hmm makes sense and Why wouldn't they want to support this case because they have one of their own well, they don't have a court case of their own right now The biggest thing I have pride in is I was not sanctioned by the courts And I took it all away at the top wasn't sanctioned. In other words It was not seen as a frivolous case And to the Supreme Court, that's when I cleared up my statement. It said it didn't burn up nor did it slam the ground but turned into dust in midair. That is in there. It has to be much more concise than that. You are limited 25 pages and that includes all of the addresses of all the...

35:57 legal stuff on both sides and all the stuff, but that was a statement that was in there. And also that NIST acknowledged to me they did not analyze the collapse That was the first person to bring that to their attention. They can't call it a collapse if they didn't analyze it." True And I said, well this tipping top of Tower 2 violates the laws of physics If that falls as rigid body and didn't turn into dust in midair because if they were claiming an airplane hit it and damaged at 35 stories below the top then why is the top disintegrating? So that's another thing about

36:40 demonstrates it turned to dust. That if you have a rigid body rotating, it's going to keep rotating if it remains a rigid body due to the laws of conservation angular momentum but if its not a rigid body each little particles in there starts rotating separately It can maintain the laws of conservation of angular momentum and appear from a distance just stop rotating because it all turns to dust and each of the dust particles are rotating Do you follow? I do. Oh, cool! Cool so that's more evidence that it... But anyway i brought this to the attention of NIST and they said oh it doesn't violate the laws of physics because their analysis violated a lot of laws of physics and they said because we didn't analyze the collapse The building obeyed laws of physics while it was standing And that's as much as we analyzed It made laws of physics while it was standing Because the rest was a hypothetical scenario

37:39 They brought about, they didn't relate to the collapse or the actual demise. Yeah, so another thing about dustification is the bathtub. It's another one of those terms that you use and I found it to be pretty compelling it tells us a little bit about the construction of the World Trade Center complex that I think a lot of people might not be aware but actually sits down into what you call the bathtub and that something that you would think would have been damaged but tell us a little bit about that piece of evidence Okay, the towers were built in the Hudson River. Southern Manhattan real estate is pretty valuable so they want to make more of it so they dammed up with kind of a dike an area out in the Hudson and then built this concrete wall kind of a dike around the edge some call it the slurry wall and built the towers on bedrock that was 70 feet...that's 7 times 10...70 feet below sea level

38:39 or the water table, and you have this dike keeping out the Hudson River with Tower One sitting just at the edge of it. Just a few feet away from it so if these buildings still slamming down to ground your going bust up that dike. Right water should have flooded lower Manhattan Some people have been saying because of a debunker video, they claim that's ridiculous because there is even more stuff further out now. The World Financial Center is built further out. Think of it as a boat.

39:19 that the towers are built in a boat. Just because you pull another boat up next to it doesn't mean that its now above sea level. So they're both, ya know, in jeopardy. That one's got its own bathtub walls around it but the ends don't and it's still fragile and actually right after the demise of the towers because there wasn't anything much anymore, it was gone underground structure in a lot of places. So the bathtub was unsupported inside where stuff had been, it was empty so when they brought in earth moving equipment to start cleaning up stuff they quickly realized that it was damaging the bathtub wall on Liberty Street the walls started leaning inward and there's this big crack

40:06 Liberty Street. Then they realized, whoops we've got to establish new rules these big mega cranes I call them have to be on wooden platforms that distribute the load and have three X number of feet from the bath tub wall and can't have another one close to it with an x-number feet because it was damaging the bathtub wall. It weighs how much? A mega crane compared to the weight of the building? These are two 500 thousand ton buildings that supposedly came crashing down, but a piece of earth moving equipment did more damage. Now why would it have flooded Manhattan? Well the path train that goes under the Hudson over to New Jersey connects into the bathtub as well as the subways that go all over Manhattan so if the bathtub springs leak everything's getting flooded

41:01 Actually, they had water in there so they were afraid that there was a leak. They made this big plug in late October I think that plugged up the PATH train tunnel going over New Jersey so you wouldn't have exchanged PlayStation over there and it wouldn't be flooded out if there's a big leak or whatnot but it turns out he had fire hoses in there and it had rained without the water having anywhere to go because they've opened up the bathtub. So, it was collecting all this stuff and once they pumped that out, it stayed dry. And same with a tunnel – once they pump that out, it stayed dry. Imagine if that was built in early 1900's? These tunnels would go under Hudson and come up on bedrock in the bathtub

41:46 You would think if something had gone cathode on the bedrock, it would shake the concrete in those tunnels and crack them. Didn't happen. I guess they used to build stuff better? Yeah, I definitely found that to be one of the compelling pieces of evidence because again, I just keep coming back to this thing of if they collapsed apparently then there should either damage to the bathtub or some type of seismic data we can get... And a big pile of stuff left over! Right. I mean it really was justified and another thing people talk about a lot is those witnesses who say they heard bombs in the basement now there were apparently explosions, but what were the source of those explosions? Oh whoops! I just heard an explosion out in my kitchen oh sorry I was cooking an egg in my microwave yeah Just because you hear boom doesn't mean It's a bomb And there were a few things that were actually identified as having exploded

42:43 But think about it, you have this big tall building and if you're a civil engineer. You know that you can only pump water up so far before you need to establish a new head. You can't pump water from the ground up to the top floor. The pressure is going to be unbelievable. So they pump it up 10 stories or so into a holding tank and then they pump it from that tank up...so they have tanks throughout the building. Your not gonna use a corner office for water tanks You probably use the mid-face of a building, of the building. Because inside, in the center part is where you have elevators and stuff so we can't put water tanks in the elevators So... The mid face every so often your going to have a water tank Now if your dustifying a water tank what's gonna happen? At some point it's gonna cut loose A pressure vessel if you start weakening the wall

43:33 At some point, it's going to not hold the pressure anymore. Think of a balloon! If you put instead of balloon on some acid that would gradually be eating through the rubber balloon It would come to a point where it would weaken the wall to the point that the balloon exploded So, you have all these pressure vessels in the building. You have air tanks for the... I call them turbo toilets to make the water more effective like on the top floor and so forth as well having the water all the way up. So, you have a lot of pressure vessels in that building and you're going to expect them

44:11 Do you think that's what people were seeing like when you watch some of these documentaries and they're trying to highlight little explosions? I call them the squirts out of the mid-face every so often. I don't have proof of it, but it sure looks like water would cut loose and spray out. It doesn't look like a bomb. A bomb would have smoke around it This looks like more of a water spring, but it's right where you would expect water tanks to be every so often in the mid-face of the building. And exactly in that center... Also if you're going to blow up the building with bombs don't you want them put them in the corners? Why in the mid face?

44:54 I guess there's a lot more to that, but the few things that were actually identified as what was exploding. Are you familiar with that? It's in chapter 7. Well, I did see the thing about on-the-ground some of the emergency vehicles. Right! Let's see... So here it is page 110 and 111 if you want to read one those for example Yeah, whichever one you think would be most appropriate. Love Todd Heaney firefighter 110 yeah he says I remember getting a drink of water out of the cooler there and then we just started to put out the car fires and the rigs were going ambulances I mean there must have been 50 of these things burning heavily The Scott cylinders and the oxygen cylinders were all letting go they were all blowing up left and right

45:50 And the Scott cylinders, and there's a picture of one there. Those are the air tanks that firefighters wear so they can breathe clean air in a smoky environment So those are blowing up? Yeah they have those on their fire trucks at ground level and they're exploding Hmm. So we're looking at a lot of interesting evidence that doesn't fit the explanations we've been given thus far and we're talking about dustification Tell us a little bit about as we're getting to kind of the midpoint here, what is being suggested? What can we look at that has what you call parallel evidence To suggest that might be what's happening one of the biggest pieces of evidence and you know think of water when it becomes steam or

46:31 The molecules need 1600 times the volume. That's 1,600 times more space and more elbow room so that is why you get steam explosions because water turns to steam it needs to expand Think of that concept now apply it as an analogy to what you think a solid building material suddenly all these atoms need get away from each other, if the atoms are no longer attracted to each other but instead want to repel each other. What would that look like? And then when you look at the building frothing out into dust it kind of looks like that or the steel beams that looked like they were put in a jar of water as though they're an Alka-Seltzer tablet Now Alka-Seltzer is a rigid material until you change its environment and you put in glass water and fizzes and dissolves

47:28 Steel is a rigid material until you change its environment and it fizzes and dissolves. And that might be what this energy field or weapon is like, I suppose? Well again don't speculate...I could go on for the rest of this hour hour in the next saying I don't talk about this. They don't talk about that No, that's not what I say now That's not we wouldn't have time left to talk about what I do say right you know it's what the evidence leaves a conclusion of That's irrefutable as well that The atoms and molecules are now repelling each other where they normally retract each other Something instructed them to do that something directed them to do that. I call that directed energy mm-hmm

48:15 I'm not talking about space beams, laser beams from outer space. Actually right here...I'll make it clear! I can rule out laser beams from wherever because we're..I'm talking about the destructive mechanism what happened actually to the material? What was the mechanism of destruction? What caused the material to come apart something didn't hit it like a hammer Gravity collapse would be that type of thing. That's kinetic energy, so we can rule out kinetic energy because it would also show up in the seismic thing. That is why you have to rule out pulverization because we see these beams flying through the air and they are not hitting anything. It is not kinetic energy that is destroying those. And thermal energy... We explained building did not get cooked to death So didn't get beaten to death nor cooked to death, so we can rule out thermal energies as well

49:09 And what I'm calling a destructive mechanism is directed energy or instructed energy. The energy was directed to do something differently than it normally does, so laser beams would...destructive mechanism they cause? Thermal! They would heat something up and so that's not the destructive mechanism here So those can be ruled out But it's important just you know talk about what we know that we know that we know so the material something caused It to want to come apart And then, okay what else do we know? Let's go look at some parallel evidence. I think that is what you were suggesting. Right So what other things similar to this? Well putting it on the level that anyone just about can relate to... Tornadoes Okay My detractors often say well you need calculate how much energy required to turn a building into dust so if you can't do that then you've got nothing No calculations are an assumption

50:07 Because you what are you calculating? We're talking about visible evidence, you know empirical evidence and what is the empirical evidence of tornadoes You don't have to calculate where the energy came from that cause their destruction. You just know that this weather system causes destruction Right if this all you need to know and horrendous destruction. And it's very weird, we're often taught that it is wind but you can identify that it is not wind You can have a stack of papers sitting on the bookshelf in a particular room I witnessed this in Texas about three years ago I think it was and the roof has gone big screen TV flat-screen TVs there not damaged roof has gone and the papers aren't blown around the room they are just sitting there

50:55 It's pretty miraculous. Building 4 looked like the main body was sliced off and gone, removed except for a little corner of it and it is only the north wing left of building four And when I saw that it reminded me of a tornado in Topeka Kansas I saw when I was a kid We were going to be driving my grandmother's house The night before we were to leave there was this horrendous tornado It was biggest in US history that we've known And we drove through Topeka and we went past, I thought it was an apartment building but i think it was a dorm. But for kid it's an apartment building. It was sliced in two half of which is gone the other half there's a bed in there that perfectly made had some magazines on the bedspread and some books on the dresser and clothes hanged closet nothing disturbed how could that be if its wind?

51:51 When wind isn't black and white, it shades a gray in between. You have strong wind and next to that strong when you have less strong wind and tapers up you don't have 2000 mile per hour wind next with zero miles per hour right so that doesn't explain this And of course no one saw a tornado near the Twin Towers either. Right, well let's think about it what happens if you weaponize the tornado? Do you think they haven't studied...somebody somewhere hasn't studied how to start and stop tornados so for all we know this could cause a weaponized tornado. Hmm wouldn't we see some type of funnel? It depends on how they create it okay We saw that people are calling smoke we saw these fumes coming out of the tower for awhile

52:37 And also we don't know what the various components are. In other parallel evidence, there's a type of field interference that, like John Hutchison's work. He creates a static field and within the static field he interferes various radio frequency signals like microwaves so in his static field and where that interference is is where these weird things happen So you have a general static field but then specifically you want to affect that item or that item There's a lot of parallels with what he does. I went there to his lab and witnessed what he has.

53:23 detractors like to say, oh you made it up. They have all sorts of speculation but how many of them have actually gone and observed? Right in the past I had heard about John Hutchinson and the Hutchinson effect and i'd heard it kind of equated to Oh this gets into the realm of electro-gravitic levitation type technologies And there's some type of physics that just seems to be quarantined from modern science It might have many different effects I guess this John Hutchinson guy is someone who's been messing with direct energy and he records his experiments. Directed, directed as in like instructed. Directed energy and it has some strange effects he has taken a metal beam and it looks like it collapses into itself kind of

54:08 Oh, not just that but there's even some samples that somebody sent to or another scientist in Canada sent to a metallurgy department at a major university. I can tell you which one but it is not important and asked them how to reproduce that they couldn't They had no idea how it was made and couldn't reproduce it It's quite interesting from the white world of science meaning above-the-table It's not known, but in the black world below the table obviously it is known. Hutchison has never signed on any confidentiality agreements or top secret agreements to disclose anything like if you go work for a government agency you get security clearance and can't talk about it.

54:56 So the beauty of his work is that he's not restrained that way and the same with me. And there are no people in that position right? That is definitely key to what you're doing does John talk much about this, does he think that this could be scaled up to destroy buildings of that size Yeah, but he's not into weaponry. He is into let us see what good we can use it for and I think that is the focus and as for the title of my book – of course, we get detractors spinning what the meaning is – I say its evidence of free energy technology in 9-11. What is in the book is evidence that a technology exists that can do what was done

55:40 But that evidence is also of a technology exists that doesn't have to be used for destruction, it can be used for good purposes. It can be used to provide free energy to the world. That's the meaning of that statements evidence of directed free energy technology. Right, and that makes sense it's also what apparently people talk about Nikola Tesla talking about this kind of thing that the things that he was working on could be used for providing energy? Providing free energy! He was worried it would be used for evil purposes. So here we are... Well, we don't have that worry anymore. That risk has already been realized but

56:23 The important thing if you want, if you want this to not be used for evil purposes Look at what it does. If everybody can identify when it gets used the user can't get away with it Right and is less likely use it and also the other end of it is You don't have to go to John Hutchinson's lab To verify that such a phenomenon Is true that exists everyone just about everyone is familiar with 9-11 mm-hmm Look at the buildings, they're turning to dust. You're told to see something else but look at them, they are turning to dust in mid-air That means everyone in the world with eyes is capable of knowing that free energy technology exists

57:06 Yeah, and it's a sticky situation because of course a big part of what we do is looking at things like alternative energy and the idea of free energy or cold fusion generator zero-point energy. These are the terms people talk about but isn't it a little dangerous if you know let's say we could outfit every home with type of Zero point Energy Generator If that thing could be switched on to be a weapon I mean obviously We can't do that. It already is It already is. Right, but we can't give one to everyone! No it already is... This something that I don't talk about that much and needs to be shown You know how Hutchison's work is you create a static field within that interfere radio frequency signal Well in the Midwest of United States its normal every year to have tornadoes lots of them There are a band of tornadoes that goes up Tornado Alley

57:58 Now, you remember in the summer of 2008 we suddenly had a huge increase and they became mega-tornadoes. And each year since then. The other thing in Joplin Missouri. Right near my hometown. Yeah, a whole lot of these kinds of things... Did you think that was kind of interesting how they went up as step function? Of course we have the backdrop of oh it's climate change is doing it but let's look at what causes tornadoes what they are about I lived a lot of my growing years in Kansas City, and you can smell the tornado in the air. You probably know what I mean! I've never been that close but... Oh you can feel it! The pink kind of color sky, you can sense it because you feel that static environment That being the case, a storm system has a static field around it

58:51 Now, what happened in the summer of 2008? Well if you remember February 2009 was the deadline for switching over to digital television. So you had a whole lot of new radio frequency transmission towers going in all over the place. Now what can they do? Well, you have a normal static field and then you have nice radio frequency signals Remember the birds that fell out of the sky? BB Arkansas. Yeah, the mass die-offs? No just they fall out of the sky dead I looked there and yeah a storm system had just moved through and you had radio towers going across that path now think of all the new wireless transmissions Wireless Internet wireless this wireless that cell phone towers

59:50 What are we doing to our atmosphere? Who has studied that? They don't want you to have solar energy because it might hurt the environment, but let's not think about all this wireless stuff. So go back to what we do know – John Hutchison's work creates a static field and it interferes with radio frequency signals So what do we expect in our environment? Yeah, same similar type of thing. So you have any wonder why this is that it could be very much being an unintended consequence if somebody's just blindly putting up cell phone towers and doesn't think anything out of it that you have now these mega tornadoes and a whole lot more destruction with them right

1:00:36 Man, that's a really disturbing when you think about yeah all those signals out there. Yeah who studied the effects of all these things? And charging up the environment and if the environment is charged up if you know anything about air filtration systems You put a static field around the air going into an air filter in it causes the Contaminants to stick together more clumps and they get caught in mechanical filter better They can precipitate out now Let's talk about chemtrails. Think about that, you have airplanes moving through the environment but maybe the environment has changed and it has got a static charge to it so when a plane flies through it precipitates out contaminants in the air. You know like if you have moisture in the air then that makes for condensation trails but if you have a static charge in the air I'm willing to bet the same thing kind of happens

1:01:33 I'm not saying that I have proof of that, but it's a good direction to look in. That is what the chemtrails might be about Wow. Well, Dr Wood I very much appreciate you being here. I think you really are the top of the 9-11 researchers out there and you've done a lot to change my mind and just by showing all the evidence as you do but before we call it... I'm a forensic engineer not a truther so it's a difference there but It does make a difference for sure One thing that I mentioned is somebody who bought my book

1:02:09 After they read it, they said wait a minute I never knew we were supposed to ask that question. The title of the book Where Did the Towers Go? So few asked! Yeah but think about it shouldn't than the first question It should have been That's that perception management so before we really do call in please remind people where they can get this book and dig deeper into your investigation of this Well you go to wheretodethetowersgo.com There you can buy it through my website or there's a link to take you to Amazon, Barnes and Noble. You get your choices there. Or do a search on where did the towers go? There is also that movie that is freely available online in bite-sized pieces Irrefutable. Go to tinyurl.com slash irrefutableTV

1:03:07 Sounds good. And also that presentation you have on the front of your website is also great at walking people through the mountain of evidence in this book I started out and ask you the question is the answer 27 or The right answer you got to know the question tonight to know the answer. Yes! Congratulations awesome well thanks again it is an honor pleasure I've taken up a lot of your time but i have so much respect for what you've done and keep doing what you do Well thank you so much for having me, I have a lot of respect for that courage There it is guys wow

1:03:44 I love that you know a lot of people have been asking me for nine eleven show and i resisted and resisted thinking you know this is been done to death why do i need to do in nine eleven show in two thousand sixteen, and then the solution or jeff bought me judy's book and sent it out and big thanks to him for doing it clearly he is passionate about this position. And i'm glad we did the episode cuz i don't think this perspective has been done to death at all And I have so much respect for the work she's done now, and I know anybody who picks that book up would feel the same way. It's so full of pictures and seismic charts and calculations, and that's sort of why I called it a textbook! It's so graphics-heavy and photo heavy... ...and of course educational. I know I couldn't knuckle down in focus and put something this thorough together So please if you can't afford the book and just want to get a more visual accompaniment to this information

1:04:33 Watch Judy's presentation on her site or the videos that she mentioned at tinyurl.com slash irrefutable TV I'll include a link with the show and maybe contact some of your other favorite podcasts and see if we can't get Judy Wood a little more attention I actually think it's quite amazing how you can now connect the dots between subjects like UFO disclosure, secret Nazi technology, the suppression of Tesla's work and free energy and 9-11. Obviously there is a lot of speculation in those other realms but in all cases the answer seems to be that the elite will do everything they can to keep people from understanding or discovering this type of technology

1:05:12 free energy seems to be the crux of a lot of it. That's what UFO disclosure would lead too, that's what the truth about 9-11 reveals, that's why we know so little about The Nazi Bell and the physics they were working with... It touches on the Electric Universe model and the work of Eric Dollard? I mean this is a major slice of the THC pie at this point! It's a staple of the show because it comes up so often and who knew that the single biggest event could put me and many of us on this path had the breadcrumbs of such a deep topic right there on the Channel 5 News, and we've been looking at it for years. Well I certainly see it with new eyes and I hope the case was made well for you but the Alka-Seltzer analogy is pretty spot on! Watch the footage again watch it super carefully all the edges in the antennae and the things that you'd think would just fall to ground as solid objects watch them they really do break apart and just kind of evaporate like they're separating at the atomic level

1:06:07 Dustification. You can't unsee it, and you'll wonder what the hell took you so long? But these are the days that I'm proud to have built a decent-sized show here because of course we're not CNN or Fox News but if we can build this alternative platform to even half the size of conventional platforms We take away a lot of their power And I think that's the stage that were in right now So please out of respect for Dr Woods decades of work and expertise Take a look at what she is saying and thank her if you get the chance I just feel so bad for people who put everything on the line for the truth and are just met with apathy and ignorance.

1:06:43 Even the court cases. It's such a shame she didn't get the support she deserved and guys I just hope we did a little bit to change that today But anyway, like every episode of The Higher Side Chats The first hour is free and we have a second hour for the members who sign up at thehighersidechatsplus.com Five two-hour shows for five bucks a month it keeps us commercial free influence free and stable enough to keep the bar high No pun intended And in the second hour today We talked about the harp hypothesis that people float around and how that doesn't help the history of this directed energy technology and the hundred-year old patent of it, more on the relationship between 9 11 and tornadoes. I really do find that interesting its changed the way I think of tornadoes. Go ahead and google tornado damage and see if you think its really all caused by wind You really will find some strange embedded objects that make tornados seem a lot more complex than just a wind funnel

1:07:37 But we also talked about the fused paper Bible with metal that the Pope came to see. The jumpers and the people coming out of the windows of the Twin Towers, were they really jumping or were they ejected? Or maybe they were relating to the field inside I think that would make a lot more sense because really with the speed that the buildings fell in the time before that why would you jump out? I didn't reflect on that much before but now i see it as one of the many clues to this strange tech that was used We also talked about some other possible instances of structures being destroyed with this technique. A bridge in a building before 9-11, maybe testing the tech? Wouldn't want to speculate but we also talked about Hurricane Aaron

1:08:20 Something that no one talks about which was in New York at the time, how this whole thing has affected Judy's career. How this tech could possibly split the earth in half and a bunch of other great stuff you know the drill but how silly I was to think oh I know it was a false flag now I know the big secret No they're more willing to let you know This is a government false flag than they are willing to tell you the truth about Tesla Hutchinson style directed energy And maybe a tornado gives us clues to this energy just like lightning was a clue to electricity. I don't know, but i feel like i did learn a lot this week hopefully you feel the same Again big thanks to the lady of the hour Dr Judy Wood and that's it for me! I've done what i can Your move keepers of the quarantine sciences and hidden physics your fucking move Well they tie that yellow ribbon round the oak tree

1:09:14 They've worn out all the prayer in their heart All along thought they were rooting for the home team As they're sent to the game and torn apart We twist this tourniquet upon the pipeline That it carries all the pain in the world As we blindly clap and cheer from the sidelines It's clear, on a losing streak from the very start And that's where they found me

1:09:50 In the cemetery A smoking gun in my hand Now I'm down for the land of the free THC, The American Scream They took that faded ribbon off the oak tree They've worn out all hope in their arms

1:10:29 For so long thought I was doing the right thing Now I'm lying in a pool of my blood And that's where they found me In the cemetery A smoking gun in my hand, I am from the land of the free Sing with me and that's where they found me In my cemetery A smoking gun in my hand Now I'm damned from the land of the free THC The American scream And that's where they found me, in my cemetery A smoking gun

1:11:51 I'm down for more than a dream Sing with me, the only one who can scream