Dr. Steven Jones & Dr. Judy Wood, Is one of them lying? If so, who? Options

[pookzta]

Dear Fellow 9/11 Truth Supporter,

My name is Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez, and I am a medical student. Throughout my rigorous undergraduate science and medical science coursework, I have had the privilege of receiving extensive training in the process of scientific analysis and evidence-based thinking.

I am writing to you today not only as a medical student, but also as a concerned American citizen, to ask for your help with something very important.

Have you heard of Dr. Judy Wood? Did you know she has been researching 9/11 since 2001 and has already filed several law suits against NIST and Congress demanding a new investigation and requesting that NIST’s false data gets reexamined? Surprisingly, Dr. Steven Jones has not supported Dr. Wood’s legal attempts to push for 9/11 Truth. Dr. Judy Wood has received many threats due to the research she has done and evidence she has gathered, and 2 of her friends that were involved in Cold Fusion / Free Energy research were murdered. In contrast, Dr. Steven Jones has not filed any such law suits, nor has he filed his nano-thermite findings with Congress or NIST.

I. Dr. Judy Wood has already filed several legal cases against NIST and many suspected military / defense / weapons organizations in 2007, including Data Quality Analysis (DQA), Request For Correction (RFC), and Qui Tam (whistle-blower) cases. She is actively pursuing 9/11 Truth with her lawyer, despite the lack of support she has received from Dr. Jones and his followers. One of the many reasons I believe that Dr. Jones may be misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement is because Dr. Jones has not filed his nano-thermite findings with NIST or with Congress, when he should have done so long ago if he truly wished to further the 9/11 Truth Movement. The many legal documents Dr. Judy Wood has filed in her pursuit of 9/11 Truth can be observed here:

1. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/NIST_RFC.html
2. http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

II. Dr. Judy Wood was once a highly involved member of Dr. Jones’s group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, but Dr. Jones suddenly expelled her from the group a while ago, simply because he disagreed with her conclusion that some form of Directed Energy Weapon was used to demolish the World Trade Center buildings. Dr. Wood has gathered overwhelming evidence suggesting that a Directed Energy Weapon of some kind was used to vaporize (‘dustify’) the primary steel and concrete portions of the buildings into dust, while leaving paper, aluminum, and many other materials completely unharmed. She has collected an overwhelming amount of photographic evidence which led to this conclusion, yet Dr. Jones disagrees with her so strongly that he decided to ban her from the group.

III. It is important to consider the fact that Dr. Wood has actively been taking legal steps and scientific steps to pursue 9/11 Truth, yet Dr. Jones has banned her from his Scholars for 9/11 Truth group and has not supported her costly legal efforts to bring about a new 9/11 investigation. They both should be working together, but instead, Dr. Jones speaks negatively of Dr. Wood because he disagrees with her conclusions, even though her conclusions are strongly supported by evidence.

IV. After reviewing this evidence, it seems very possible to me that Dr. Steven Jones is pushing the nano-thermite theory to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement down a false path to prevent us from finding out the true criminals behind 9/11, and the true cause of 9/11, which is related to Cold Fusion, Free Energy, and Directed Energy Weapons. Yes, the nano-thermite theory does account for some of the evidence, but it most certainly does not account for all of it.

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin

V. Please thoroughly review the following information with an open-mind, for it seems as though we need to examine Dr. Jones’s motivations and figure out why Dr. Jones kicked Dr. Wood out of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth group a while ago, rather than collaborating with her to pursue 9/11 Truth. Please read this information thoroughly, for it is very, very important.

VI. Dr. Judy Wood received her B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering), M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia. Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bi-material joints. She has taught courses including: Experimental Stress Analysis, Engineering Mechanics, Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials), Strength of Materials Testing.

1. Dr. Judy Wood, Ph.D - 'The New Hiroshima' Presentation (Part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1JFCpFd6CA
2. Dr. Judy Wood, The Hutchinson Effect, & Focused Electromagnetic Energy (Who Will You Tell?): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0EsJhEFz9A
3. Dr. Judy Wood’s website: http://www.drjudywood.com

VII. Please review the following evidence regarding Dr. Steven Jones, so that you can become familiar with all of the evidence that has led myself, and many others, to conclude that Dr. Steven Jones is purposely misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement. First he interfered with the Cold Fusion / Free Energy movement, and now it seems he is interfering with the 9/11 Truth Movement. Please review these links thoroughly, and with an open-mind, before drawing any conclusions:

1. ‘Hoax exposes incompetence or worse at a Bentham Open Access journal’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06...r-worse-at.html

2. ‘Bentham Open editor-in-chief resigns after fake paper is accepted for publication’: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/06...ors-resign.html

3. ‘A Peer-review of Dr. Jones’s Research’: http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&...uble_with_jones

4. ‘The Scientific Method Applied to the Thermite Hypothesis’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/...ificMethod.html

5. ‘Steven Jones' Contributions to Science, Humanity and the Planet’: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/cc/CB.html

6. ‘WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?’ http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/inde...1&Itemid=60

7. ‘Thermite and Glowing Liquid Aluminum’ http://drjudywood.com/articles/why/why_indeed.html#Thermite

8. ‘Steven Jones, Cold Fusion, & Free Energy’: http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/JJ7.html

9. ‘Steven Jones and the WTC “Spire” video’ (2min 35sec): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO9Iv_4ZfNI

10. ‘No Thermite Used on 9/11’ by Andrew Johnson: http://911thermitefree.blogspot.com/

VIII. Here are some important questions to ask ourselves when comparing the conclusions of Dr. Steve Jones and Dr. Judy Wood:

• How come steel and concrete were pulverized, but paper and aluminum were unharmed? Nano-thermite and heat do not selectively pulverize certain materials.
• How come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero, out of the reach of falling building debris, experienced metal warping and electricity-like burns and holes during the attacks, even though they were not exposed to thermite?
• How come countless vehicles located several blocks away from ground zero, out of the reach of building debris, were flipped upside down or on their side?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come there are many reports of power outages and electrical failures in the areas surrounding ground zero during the attacks?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, where is all the molten steel? Thousands of pictures, yet not a single one shows large quantities of molten steel?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come the resulting steel and concrete dust clouds were not hot enough to burn the people it coated nor to set adjacent buildings on fire?
• If thermite alone caused the ‘collapses’, how come there was significant magnetosphere readings in Alaska at the very same time of the 9/11 attacks?
• Why was the Alaskan magnetosphere normal until immediately before and during the 9/11 attacks, when there was suddenly a huge surge in electromagnetic activity?
• If thermite alone caused the destruction of the buildings, how come several cars were flipped upside down as a result of the attacks?
• How come Dr. Wood has already filed several legal cases against suspected 9/11-involved defense and weapons companies and NIST, yet Dr. Jones has not?
• How come Dr. Wood has already been taking legal steps towards demanding a new 9/11 investigation, yet Dr. Jones does not support her legal efforts?
• How come Dr. Jones has not officially filed or shared his nano-thermite evidence with Congress, NIST, or any official governmental body? Why the delay?
• Why is Dr. Jones just now claiming to be “pursuing a new 9/11 investigation” when Dr. Judy Wood has already filed many legal cases to pursue such an investigation, one which made it to the Supreme Court?
• Why isn’t Dr. Jones and his affiliates supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal efforts to pursue 9/11 Truth, regardless of whether or not they agree on a theory?
• Why did Dr. Jones ban Dr. Wood from his ‘Scholars for 9/11 Truth’ group just because they had different conclusions about what destroyed the towers?
• Shouldn’t we all be supporting the 9/11 investigation that Dr. Judy Wood has already demanded with her legal cases, even if we do not agree with her conclusions?
• Why was I removed from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition simply for asking Richard Gage to examine the research of Dr. Judy Wood?
• I have donated over $100 to AE911Truth, so why was I silently removed from the petition simply for bringing up Dr. Judy Wood to Richard Gage?

IX. Either Dr. Steven Jones is lying, or Dr. Judy Wood is lying. One of them is misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement, and the evidence points to Dr. Steven Jones. After thoroughly researching both of their stories and all of the evidence presented by both parties, I honestly believe that it is most likely Dr. Jones that is lying, and that he is using his fame and credentials to mislead the 9/11 Truth Movement in the wrong direction to prevent us from supporting Dr. Judy Wood’s legal actions and taking legal action of our own, to ultimately prevent us from finding out the true cause of 9/11 and the true criminals responsible for the attacks.

X. Lastly, I should let you know that I recently messaged Richard Gage and AE911Truth to ask him to contact Dr. Judy Wood, and as a result, I have been removed from the Petition Signers list on AE911Truth.org, despite the fact that I have donated over $100 dollars to Richard Gage and his organization over the past several months. As of the morning of March 4th, my name was removed from the AE911Truth petition, so it appears that I have been removed from the petition simply for asking about Dr. Judy Wood. This is very concerning, because I have not done anything wrong by asking Richard Gage to talk to Dr. Judy Wood and consider her research, yet AE911Truth.org has removed me from their petition simply for asking about her once in a private email. In addition, Richard Gage has never replied to any of my emails over the past several months, not even one of them, but Dr. Judy Wood has responded to several of my emails in just the last week. Oddly enough, Dr. Wood predicted that Richard Gage and Dr. Jones would ‘blacklist’ me for mentioning her, and she was right.

I strongly support the 9/11 Truth Movement as a whole and I definitely think we all need to work together to share ideas and information, so I truly hope that you will consider collaborating with Dr. Judy Wood in addition to Dr. Steven Jones, so we can all work together to bring about real 9/11 truth and justice. Even if Dr. Wood’s conclusions do not resonate with you, we are all still pursuing truth and justice regarding 9/11, and therefore we need to work together. It is very concerning to me that Dr. Jones has chosen to outcast Dr. Wood simply because he does not agree with her conclusions, when he should be supporting her many legal cases. If Dr. Jones is indeed misleading the 9/11 Truth Movement, he needs to be exposed so that this movement can continue to make progress and move forward.

Please let me know how what you think about all this.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and help,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M1 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

This post has been edited by pookzta: Mar 7 2010, 04:21 AM

[tumetuestumefais...]

I think this topic was there mentioned at least 2 times before:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19499
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19687
started by the same author.
there was this quite clear answer:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10783492
Why pookzta doesn't continue there to defend his case and instead makes again a new thread about almost exactly same ad-hominem attacks against Steven Jones, promoting Judy Wood?

I was looking into the Judy Wood's stuff quite thoroughly and I didn't find anything scientifically convincing there for the alleged use of DEW, and from the interview with Greg Jenkins - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-558096240694803017 - it looks to me quite clear that she - if not a deliberate disinfo - is at least a completely unable to soundly prove her grave allegations - instead she alleges "facts" which plain-simply aren't true or probable.
So I think I must defend Steven Jones here against this ad-hominem attacks. I think he and ae911truth as well have really good reasons to disavow Judy Wood and all who support her, spreading ad-hominem attacks against them. I would find it absolutely justifiable reaction - if one doesn't want look like a fool.

I don't think we must stick together to support every bizzare "therrory" invented and form so a sect-like political body promoting a crackpotery of "making science" suing government to selfincriminate itself for one of the most heinous crime against humanity in history.

Instead I think we should stick with soundly probable facts.

Groupthink: A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.

Even if the US govt. was the entity who did the 911 - which I'm after years of research more and more reluctant to believe without really sound proofs - who sane could think they would after all the fillings obey a court and tell it then with all the details of exotic weaponry used to a Judy Woods?
I would not think this would be the Grizz's (RIP) "wise as serpent"...

[SanderO]

Abraham Rodriguez is of course on to something. Steven Jones has a very troubling scientific past which needs to be accounted for. On the other hand I know nothing about DEW and this sounds like speculation and not science.

The evidence that we have is in video, a few samples (we don't have access to), still images, and witness accounts. Understanding what the evidence says is what will lead to where all the energy came from... and it could be from multiple sources.

So they both could be right and both wrong.

The jury is out.

The politics is clear... If you ask the wrong questions you pay a price.

[amazed!]

I agree with SanderO--the jury is still out.

This has been batted around for years now, and my take on it is that it all boils down to some sort of personality conflict.

I admire both the people for what they have done, having met neither one of them.

I am not qualified to judge the scientific merits of Wood's statements, but it certainly appears that something MOST unusual happened there at WTC. Thermobaric or DEW? I am not qualified to say.

That the judiciary has rejected her attempts to publicize and investigate fits in quite well with the rest of the coverup.

[Ricochet]

Contemplate this for a minute. What if they are both wrong, inserted into the game to cause controversy, debate and arguments amougst ourselves preventing further investigation, thinking one or the other. Americans are used to Dem or Rep, left, right, us or them. Two sides no other. These two could be playing both sides against the middle without really proving anything. Anyone can tie up the courts with nutball lawsuits all dressedd up to look and sound authentic. Anyone can gather up some dust, salt it with just the right amount of material you want found. What was the chain of custody for the WTC dust? What is needed is imperical proof not schoolyard banter, "did not, did too" mentality. Ask yourself, how did they prove their claims?

[lunk]

Contemplate this for a minute. What if they are both wrong, inserted into the game to cause controversy, debate and arguments amougst ourselves preventing further investigation, thinking one or the other. Americans are used to Dem or Rep, left, right, us or them. Two sides no other. These two could be playing both sides against the middle without really proving anything. Anyone can tie up the courts with nutball lawsuits all dressedd up to look and sound authentic. Anyone can gather up some dust, salt it with just the right amount of material you want found. What was the chain of custody for the WTC dust? What is needed is imperical proof not schoolyard banter, "did not, did too" mentality. Ask yourself, how did they prove their claims?

Bingo.
i think nukes were used. And any story, true or false, other than that,
is being promoted.
Like splitting the vote by promoting, a third, fourth, or fifth, party, in an election,
to ensure the minority gets into power,
justifying the will of a few,
on the many...
...democratically.
(edit added)
perhaps pseudo-democratically,
would be a better term.

This post has been edited by lunk: Mar 7 2010, 11:30 PM

[paranoia]

related to the topic, but seperate of the current discussion, does anyone (pooktza especially) know whatever became of woods' court case?

[SanderO]

There are several disturbing feature to the destruction of the towers.

How were most of the slabs turned to find dust and powder?
Why was there so much paper left unburned... how did it escape the high heat?
How did some of those massive steel section become bent like wet noodles?
What cause the corrosion eating away massive amounts of the steel
Why was the north tower not damaged by the fall / explosion / destruction of the south tower?
Where are all the truss joists and corrugated metal decking which the floor slabs were poured on - part of the ~5,500 pre fab floor assemblies?
How were the entire contents destroyed into such small pieces?... throughout the entire structure?

[Ricochet]

Keep going. Rare blood cancers, skin hanging off (like Hiroshima), exploding cars 7 blocks away, glittering in the black smoke (in which many said you could not see 2 inches in front of you), the use of "pyro-cool" an ultra-violet absorber, the need to get rid of the contaminated steel as soon as possible, decontamination of dust covered survivors on the NJ side of the ferry, Haz mat suits by FBI, damage to the Fiterman building behind WTC 7, un-burnt paper, earhquake like events prior to collapse, vapourised steel.

[amazed!]

Wood's Qui Tam suit is over, according to a phone conversation with the lawyer listed in the court documents. That was about a month ago.

It had been accepted by the District Court, but rejected at the next level.

[Ricochet]

Wood's Qui Tam suit is over, according to a phone conversation with the lawyer listed in the court documents. That was about a month ago.

It had been accepted by the District Court, but rejected at the next level.

And with that any future legal action down this path. This would I assume any type of exotic weapons which would include small nuclear weapons. That was the point to all the law suits. One thing I found strange in regard to Judy Woods and Steven Jones, the people backing them, either or, always put the title "Dr." infront. Most (almost all) physisists don't. It's almost as if they NEED people to give them reverance like a cult status. Frauds (snake oil sales reps) always need to be respected before you are conned. You just have to believe, no proof required. Do any of you believe the "legal" bullshit you put up concenring ramifications of them? BS in BS out, the door get's closed. Why do you think all law makers were/are lawyers? They know and do not want you to know. We have to be smarter, faster, better, see beyond the contrived bullshit. Think, Read, learn, listen to your inner skeptic. Most of all communicate, we need to know your thoughts. Critical thoughts. I know you have them, not just biased leanings. LOOK AT SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 AND TELL ME WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? This is the question.

[lunk]

related to the topic, but seperate of the current discussion, does anyone (pooktza especially) know whatever became of woods' court case?

From my understanding the court case was used as a "catch all" to eliminate any, and all, possibilities of future claims of "exotic weaponry",
getting used to court, to explain the building demolitions.

So, by using a hair-brained theory, of space beams demolishing the buildings, and taking it to court, and failing, any question of nukes, being used in 9/11, means that this case, can now be legally sited, as nukes are still considered exotic weaponry, too, and be thrown out of court, on these grounds.

Pretty clever, if you are a lawyer...

If anybody brings up the use of nukes, by the evidence,
the case gets thrown out of court,
because of the loss, in the Wood case.

...almost like,
if it wasn't planned,
it was encouraged.

[Ricochet]

almost like,
if it wasn't planned,
it was encouraged.

The whole point of the exersise. Now the "Dr.'s" just play tennis with their foolishness.

[lunk]

The whole point of the exersise. Now the "Dr.'s" just play tennis with their foolishness.

Unfortunately, yep,
it seems that way.

If i had gotten an edumacation, i too would be a phd, in something, or other, by now. but i probably wouldn't have any idea about false-flags, or 9/11, and would be, instead, working toward my next grant.
Tough habit to break.

Instead i have inadvertently, spent about the equivalent time,
self-educated myself in the truth.

...and, for so long, i thought this was an "oops."

[GroundPounder]

lunk swings....going..going..gone, another homerun for the lunkster!

[DoYouEverWonder]

Wood's Qui Tam suit is over, according to a phone conversation with the lawyer listed in the court documents. That was about a month ago.

It had been accepted by the District Court, but rejected at the next level.

That's interesting. There's nothing on Wood's website about it. I won't hold my breath waiting for a big announcement. In the past, her bots would flood forums with the latest exciting news and now they don't even seem to know it's over.

When I saw that JW was filing a Qui Tam suite, I knew she was pulling something but I don't have the legal background to understand exactly what. But I did know that Bev Harris, the fraudster of BBV fame, used the same trick when she 'went after' Diebold. Except in Bev's case, she also managed to make about $60 G off the case, which did significant damage to her credibility. Probably, why they stayed away from the money this time.

This post has been edited by DoYouEverWonder: Mar 15 2010, 05:03 PM

[DoYouEverWonder]

Wood's Qui Tam suit is over, according to a phone conversation with the lawyer listed in the court documents. That was about a month ago.

It had been accepted by the District Court, but rejected at the next level.

No. 09-548
Title:
Judy Wood, Petitioner
v.
Applied Research Associates, Inc., et al.
Docketed: November 4, 2009
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Case Nos.: (08-3799)
Decision Date: July 16, 2009

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oct 14 2009 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 4, 2009)
Dec 2 2009 Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 22, 2009, for all respondents.
Dec 4 2009 Brief of respondents Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc, and Computer Aided Engineering Associates, Inc. in opposition filed.
Dec 22 2009 Brief of respondents Applied Research Associates, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
Jan 6 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 22, 2010.
Jan 25 2010 Petition DENIED. Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Jerry Vincent Leaphart 48 Nod Road (203) 438-4589
Ridgefield, CT 06877
Party name: Judy Wood
Attorneys for Respondents:
Patricia B. Gary Donovan Hatem LLP (617) 406-4500
Counsel of Record Two Seaport Lane
Boston, MA 02210
pgary@donovanhatem.com
Party name: Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc, and Computer Aided Engineering Associates, Inc.

Gail D. Zirkelbach McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP (303)-634-4000
Counsel of Record 1400 Wewatta Suite 700
Denver, CO 80202
gzirkelbach@mckennalong.com

Docket for 09-548

[amazed!]

I'm no attorney, but it seems the purpose of a Qui Tam action is to somehow force a government agency to do its job properly, and I think in this case NIST was the target of the legal action.

Her claim I think was that NIST erred in its analysis in a very big way by excluding certain things, or that it was prejudiced by having so many researchers from 2 companies closely involved in DEW.

[bearsf]

What did your eyes (not your lying eyes) see when you viewed the available video coverage of the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and MOST importantly WTC7?

http://www.galacticroundtable.com/profiles...911-truth-now-1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3898962504721899003#

These buildings came down in a CONTROLLED fashion at essentially FREE FALL SPEED and there were multiple EXPLOSIONS heard comming from the INSIDE of all three buildings. Whether or not the military was "experimenting" with additional advanced weapons on that day (WTC6????) we may never have enough evidence to submit for proof and if we did the National Security State would never permit the evidence as the technology is CLASSIFIED. Think MANHATTEN PROJECT.

But there is evidence in the dust gathered by USGS, EPA, and Dr. Jones and on what steel was left for sampling that has been analyzed for FORENSIC evidence of thermite as would have been done in ANY other crime scene involving fire and it shows conclusively that there were thermitic reactions. It may show additional reactions suggesting DEW, but the thermite is there. How did it get there and on the steel ? Osama, DEW, or conventional demolition? Occams Razor!

Remember, this was a VERY CAREFULLY PLANNED OPERATION and the BANKERS needed to get back to business immediately so damage controll was paramount. You go with a tried and proven method. Conventional demolition with lots of redundency. It is quite simple to do as far (as placing charges) and is done all over the world regulary. Does WTC7 which came down after 5PM in the afternoon even come close to exhibiting DEW?

The real question is will there EVER be a REAL INDEPENDENT investigtion and will any judge be permitted to admit the evidence or even hold a trial and will currently disclosed and undisclosed witnesses make it to the trial and not recant?

[Sanders]

The real question is will there EVER be a REAL INDEPENDENT investigtion and will any judge be permitted to admit the evidence or even hold a trial and will currently disclosed and undisclosed witnesses make it to the trial and not recant?

You are asking if we the people can utilize a system which "they" have spent the last 100 years getting under their control in order to incriminate "them".

We have to think outside of the box on this point. An "independent investigation" by some undefined respected body is a wonderful idea, but it will never be allowed to happen.