Jump to content

9/11 was there a plane ?


James Freeman (of the land
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, peter said:

Yes that one was weird ,from memory it stopped before land fall and started heading north up the coast when it was originally traveling in a south westerly direction, if it's the one I'm thinking of

 

Yep, mighty strange how a huge hurricane headed directly towards NYC, hovered for a day on 9/11, then pissed off in another entirely unnacounted for direction.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No plane hit the pentagon, this video shows a repeated part of that particular sequence, there is nothing that enters the row of trees to the bottom left of the picture, nothing enters that line of trees only something emanates from it, this missile was fired from a point of origin very close to the building, and too low for a jumbo jet. Even if it was a jumbo jet - it somehow took off, got up to speed (500+MPH) 😄 all in the space of a couple of hundred feet at most and exploded without trace.  Missile.  Alot of us know this - it's so easy to see, (hopefully this is helpful to any newcomers looking for evidence of a shitshow)

 

Edited by sickofallthebollocks
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

this video shows a repeated part of that particular sequence

 

I do not think that a plane hit the pentagon .... for a start you wouldn't hit that target when the White House is just 'up the road'!

 

But the video is shit (I download it and made a gif of it which I wanted to put on the forum but the end size is too great) .... cameras were not that bad back then and the quality should b greater in my opinion.

 

This is the bitchute I watched this morning of that :

https://www.bitchute.com/video/6HGcQaa0ibry/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, metak88 said:

Thanks Metak, will have a look later for that vid of the flash of white (palne or missile) taken from ground view too. (that this disinfo was probably based upon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheConsultant said:

After reading a decent portion of "where did the towers go" by Dr Judy Wood, it appears that is an impossibility as well. But absolutely planned, of course!


So you do not think I am just making stuff up, I previously believed it was controlled demolition. Going on seismic activity alone it shows that they fell at free fall speed, for this to occur each story cannot offer any resistance at all, the seismic activity of the events impact of it collapsing in to its own footprint didn't get near what is comparable to even lesser sized buildings and magnitudes measured on the richter scale. Seismic activity shows one tower may have collapsed faster than free fall, for that to occur no resistance and something amplifying its fall would need to occur. The title of the book being "where did the towers go?" is absolutely right, it turns out two 500,000 ton buildings collapsing in to their footprint didn't get near what is recorded and seen elsewhere with controlled demolition.

As well as there being no sign of other seismic activity reminiscent of controlled demolition charges.  

image.png.6e5184ccaaa6ea17caea02a5fb2bdd14.png

Free fall speed was calculated to be 9.22 seconds for structures of that height. 

image.png.4a77d38b058da98adc1fd7c0a0fd5465.png

 

Edited by TheConsultant
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:


So you do not think I am just making stuff up, I previously believed it was controlled demolition. Going on seismic activity alone it shows that they fell at free fall speed, for this to occur each story cannot offer any resistance at all, the seismic activity of the events impact of it collapsing in to its own footprint didn't get near what is comparable to even lesser sized buildings and magnitudes measured on the richter scale. Seismic activity shows one tower may have collapsed faster than free fall, for that to occur no resistance and something amplifying its fall would need to occur. The title of the book being "where did the towers go?" is absolutely right, it turns out two 500,000 ton buildings collapsing in to their footprint didn't get near what is recorded and seen elsewhere with controlled demolition.

As well as there being no sign of other seismic activity reminiscent of controlled demolition charges.  

image.png.6e5184ccaaa6ea17caea02a5fb2bdd14.png

Free fall speed was calculated to be 9.22 seconds for structures of that height. 

image.png.4a77d38b058da98adc1fd7c0a0fd5465.png

 

 

I see the penny is starting to drop! (Excuse the pun!).

 

I read all of this stuff a few years back on Judy Wood's old site and have never found anything since that can scientifically refute her ideas, or better them. This is proper science at its best from a proper scientist.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

I see the penny is starting to drop! (Excuse the pun!).

 

I read all of this stuff a few years back on Judy Wood's old site and have never found anything since that can scientifically refute her ideas, or better them. This is proper science at its best from a proper scientist.

 

 

 


We will see how it goes so far I cannot fault it. The next few chapters are where if I am going to find fault it will be within that as its something I know quite a lot about, forensic and material sciences, next to nothing. Although so far relatively straight forward physics of which her opening gambit to NIST "this defies the laws of physics" and they couldn't refute it, because it does. I cannot really believe I never bothered looking further in to this subject, other than knowing it was done on purpose and not by the people who they said it was.

 

Edited by TheConsultant
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

I see the penny is starting to drop! (Excuse the pun!).

 

I read all of this stuff a few years back on Judy Wood's old site and have never found anything since that can scientifically refute her ideas, or better them. This is proper science at its best from a proper scientist.

 

 

 

Have you looked in to what they call The Hutchison Effect outside of the book you posted on 9-11? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

Have you looked in to what they call The Hutchison Effect outside of the book you posted on 9-11? 

 

In all honesty I haven't delved into the Hutchison Effect as the information provided by Judy Wood is so convincing. Add to that the fact that much of the 'information' on the internet these days is tainted and practically worthless for serious scientific research.

 

I believe Dr. Wood herself acknowledged that Hutcison's work was controversial, but his experiments (even well before 9/11) seemed to be bang on the money when considering directed energy.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

In all honesty I haven't delved into the Hutchison Effect as the information provided by Judy Wood is so convincing. Add to that the fact that much of the 'information' on the internet these days is tainted and practically worthless for serious scientific research.

 

I believe Dr. Wood herself acknowledged that Hutcison's work was controversial, but his experiments (even well before 9/11) seemed to be bang on the money when considering directed energy.

 

 

 

I agree the internet is both a treasure trove and a cesspit all at the same time haha. I think what they call 'the hutchison effect' and the forensic findings I have read so far are one and the same thing! Not what I know it as but its definitely an area of physics people do not know, wish to look at, or acknowledge in the orthodox science settings as it opens the door to antigravity, free energy, teleportation etc. All of which have been experimentally achieved at least on some level, even acknowledged to some degree also.

Edited by TheConsultant
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TheConsultant said:

Have you looked in to what they call The Hutchison Effect outside of the book you posted on 9-11? 

Yes the hutchison effect is very interesting,it appears to be able to disrupt the molecular bonds of metal ,among other things.

I watched him being interviewed once at his place  and the fellow doing the interview asked what is that on top of the van , he said that's a working death ray ,the interviewer then said if you are capable of all these things you claim how come the government hasn't grabbed you. He sat there and said ,everyone thinks I'm mad including them, that's why I get left alone.

That was quite a few years ago now ,I don't know whats happen to him since,but I do know he was asked to demonstrate the levitation and  disruption of steel to Government scientists

Edited by peter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, peter said:

Yes the hutchison effect is very interesting,it appears to be able to disrupt the molecular bonds of metal ,among other things.

I watched him being interviewed once at his place  and the fellow doing the interview asked what is that on top of the van , he said that's a working death ray ,the interviewer then said if you are capable of all these things you claim how come the government hasn't grabbed you. He sat there and said ,everyone thinks I'm mad including them, that's why I get left alone.

That was quite a few years ago now ,I don't know whats happen to him since,but I do know he was asked to demonstrate the levitation and  disruption of steel to Government scientists

https://www.hutchisoneffect.com/Research/pdf/TheHutchisonFile.pdf - interesting but hard to read in places as its a digital copy of a photocopy. His website looks like it was made in the 1990s and remains in that time!

Edited by TheConsultant
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

https://www.hutchisoneffect.com/Research/pdf/TheHutchisonFile.pdf - interesting but hard to read in places as its a digital copy of a photocopy. His website looks like it was made in the 1990s and remains in that time!

I have just read the the first 5 pages and find it interesting that a company has got hold of it ( called Pharos Technologies Ltd,I know that's not how you spell Pharaohs but given the stories of levitating stone to build the pyramids it's an interesting name choice)     removed all the equipment from Hutchison's place  and finally dismantled it and put it in storage,to me that's sus ,but granted I will have to read the rest to make a proper determination

Edited by peter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another file exists on The Internet Archive - https://ia902306.us.archive.org/1/items/g-hathaway-hutchison-metal-analysis/G. Hathaway Hutchison Metal Analysis - cp2009mst0667 ASM int. - Enrico.pdf

 

There are some extremely interesting sections in that file, not the least of which are the following ...

 

The Hutchison Effect is a system comprised of three components: various pieces of high-voltage apparatus, the material under test (MUT) and Hutchison himself.

 

My goal during that time was to investigate the phenomena from a scientific standpoint if possible and develop ways to make the phenomena more repeatable and controllable by understanding how the physical apparatus interacted with the MUT. This I have not been able to do. It is a goal of this paper to demonstrate how unlikely it is that the apparatus by itself can have any effect on the MUT. Something else must be involved. It is my suspicion, and that of several other experts in the field [3], that John Hutchison himself may be an integral part of the system.

 

Assuming this author and others have not been massively deluded, the inevitable conclusion from these observations is that the apparatus plays no primary role in producing the phenomena constituting the Hutchison Effect. There have been several physics-based theories such as the action of “zero-point energy” or “scalar waves” involving certain aspects of the apparatus alone which have been put forward to explain  he Hutchison Effect. All are essentially useless.
What remains is that John Hutchison himself is an active part of the system, perhaps even the main part. In the absence of any reasonable  physical theory, we are left with psychokinesis as a possible, however unlikely and ill-defined at present, explanation of the Hutchison Effect.

 

 

So remember, as Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote: When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by webtrekker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, webtrekker said:

Another file exists on The Internet Archive - https://ia902306.us.archive.org/1/items/g-hathaway-hutchison-metal-analysis/G. Hathaway Hutchison Metal Analysis - cp2009mst0667 ASM int. - Enrico.pdf

 

There are some extremely interesting sections in that file, not the least of which are the following ...

 

The Hutchison Effect is a system comprised of three components: various pieces of high-voltage apparatus, the material under test (MUT) and Hutchison himself.

 

My goal during that time was to investigate the phenomena from a scientific standpoint if possible and develop ways to make the phenomena more repeatable and controllable by understanding how the physical apparatus interacted with the MUT. This I have not been able to do. It is a goal of this paper to demonstrate how unlikely it is that the apparatus by itself can have any effect on the MUT. Something else must be involved. It is my suspicion, and that of several other experts in the field [3], that John Hutchison himself may be an integral part of the system.

 

Assuming this author and others have not been massively deluded, the inevitable conclusion from these observations is that the apparatus plays no primary role in producing the phenomena constituting the Hutchison Effect. There have been several physics-based theories such as the action of “zero-point energy” or “scalar waves” involving certain aspects of the apparatus alone which have been put forward to explain  he Hutchison Effect. All are essentially useless.
What remains is that John Hutchison himself is an active part of the system, perhaps even the main part. In the absence of any reasonable  physical theory, we are left with psychokinesis as a possible, however unlikely and ill-defined at present, explanation of the Hutchison Effect.

 

 

So remember, as Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote: When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

 

 

 

 

 

One thing I would say about scientists or governments for that matter with a vested interest, if that was a repeatable effect,would it not be prudent to rubbish it in a paper thus keeping it under raps but develop it for your own benefit, the military implications alone would be staggering. I was under the impression that it was only effective on metals as far as molecular disruption goes however according to the first PDF it is effective on just about all materials biological included ,shit

Edited by peter
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, peter said:

One thing I would say about scientists or governments for that matter with a vested interest, if that was a repeatable effect,would it not be prudent to rubbish it in a paper thus keeping it under raps but develop it for your own benefit, the military implications alone would be staggering. I was under the impression that it was only effective on metals as far as molecular disruption goes however according to the first PDF it is effective on just about all materials biological included ,shit

 

Obviously it's a lot to take in and the very nature of Hutchison's work lends itself to ridicule for, to be honest, no one understands it, including Hutchinson himself!

 

However, Dr Wood is right in presenting it as EVIDENCE, as it seems to be the only explanation out there for pulverisation snd dustification.

 

It's a fact that no one can debunk her claims, because she makes none. All she ever does is provide precise forensic evidence for the things she, and we, have witnessed with our own eyes.

 

I must admit, when I saw 'psycokinesis' mentioned in one of those papers I was a bit sceptical, but it is what it is and I've had to open my own mind to the possibility.

 

There are many things we know nothing about it seems, but it's good to expand our own knowledge and form our own picture of the events of that day and I for one am indebted to Dr Wood for providing such thorough, unbiased evidence.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a scalar wave is only a longitudinal wave of electromagnetism, and the amount of lying around that existing at all only highlights their obvious cover up of a "new" phenomena to me. 

1 hour ago, webtrekker said:

no one understands it, including Hutchinson himself!


Incorrect, the Drs in the papers are working from an orthodox model of physics. It is understood, you obviously don't have to take my word for it though of course! It's just not called Hutchison Effect to people who understand it

For context a little part from "rationalwiki" under the "pseudoscience" heading.

image.png.4edccaa51039a2f7c95f6b578a72895c.png

Its kept from you because it can do wonders for both you and the planet (and the fact they have weaponised it). Do not mistake actual pseudoscience with something they do not wish for you to understand. 

In fact go and read it for an inverted disclosure of what is possible.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scalar_wave

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not specifically about the planes, but the aftermath, literally seconds before the controlled demolition of the first of the 3 near indestructable steel reinforced and, luckily, heavily insured WTC's.
I just don't know how Larry insured them for so much money - and just in time?    What a lucky so-and-so. 😉


 

 

 

Edited by sickofallthebollocks
add words
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot work out if this hour documentary is brilliant because I read her book "where did the towers go?" or if its not detailed enough, the book certainly goes in to far more detail on the events, measurements and surrounding evidence of her forensic studies and @webtrekker you are absolutely correct, nothing to refute whatsoever but a lot to add but not on here.
 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...