Judy Wood cleans house

James Concannon writes...

        Back in mid-September, expat blogged about Judy Wood's bizarre suggestion that there was so little débris at the World Trade Center site that the contractors had to keep themselves busy by needlessly trucking soil back and forth. I liked this point:

[S]he states that the upper 80%, approximately, of each tower was dustified. It seems to me that if that were the case, the load on the lower ~20% would have been instantly alleviated, and that portion of the towers should have been preserved undamaged. Since that demonstrably did not happen, I think it's a very serious problem for her idea.

        I made the same point in a brief post to Wood's FooBoo page. I didn't keep a record of the date or text of it, but it would have been quite soon after expat's bloggery. Well -- today I find this:

Abe here: Although I appreciate your interest in this very important topic, and your attempt to share what you feel is relevant or helpful information, I have removed your post for promoting false statements on this page. Dr. Judy Wood's observation that the top majority of the Twin Towers were transformed to fine dust in midair is absolutely correct. She has never claimed that his process happened "instantly" like you claimed, and she also never claimed that the dust "did not fall to the ground". The vast majority of the Twin Towers were transformed to fine dust in midair within a matter of seconds, and if we take into consideration the well-documented "lathering up" process, we see that the process technically took even longer. Please spend some time correcting your misunderstandings rather than spreading misunderstandings and false statements on this page.

This page is for discussing the conclusive body of empirical evidence from 9/11 and for showing our support for Dr. Judy Wood, so off-topic posts, false statements, rumors, theories, spam, and disrespect are not allowed on this page. We must present and discuss the empirical evidence from 9/11 as accurately and precisely as possible, so that others will view this important evidence with serious consideration. This is not a warning, but please still refrain from posting off-topic information, false statements, rumors, theories, spam, and/or disrespect in the future.

Sincerely,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez, M.D.
PGY2 Neurological Surgery
B.S. Biology/Neurobiology

Wow. Sorry I spoke, Abe.

       Of course, Dr Rodriguez is a long way from refuting the point. He is admitting that the dustification process happened in a fraction of the total time it took each tower to disappear. Therefore, as expat and I say, the load on the "undustified" part of each tower would have been relieved.

        I am far from the only victim of Rodriguez's intolerance. He dealt out the exact same treatment (on behalf of Judy Wood, I assume) to the following contributors:

Mark Jonas
Alex Bratcher
Barry O'Daniels
Richard Kelly
David Kaas
Maurice Herald
Ian Hilpus
Stephen Gadsun
Micah Zeidman
Pop O'hAodha [sic]
Kevin Hartin
Karen Boudriault

Judy Wood: pathway to absurdity

        How can you tell if an idea is seriously, irreparably wrong? When its implications lead to completely absurd conclusions. We were treated to a beaut example of that last Thursday, the 13th anniversary of the destruction of the World Trade Center.

        Bizarrely, Coast to Coast AM chose to mark the occasion by giving two hours' air time to Judy Wood, the former adjunct professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson who went totally off the rails and declared that the impacts of two fully-fueled jetliners were insufficient to bring the towers down. Instead, she says, an external directed-energy weapon turned the towers to such fine dust that they literally blew away on the wind. Her self-published book is titled Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11.

        To be more accurate, she states that the upper 80%, approximately, of each tower was dustified. It seems to me that if that were the case, the load on the lower ~20% would have been instantly alleviated, and that portion of the towers should have been preserved undamaged. Since that demonstrably did not happen, I think it's a very serious problem for her idea.

        This blog reviewed Wood's previous C2C appearance, in May 2011, contributing a very rough estimate of the total tonnage of drywall that would have been in each tower. That would certainly have dustified all right -- but the steel and concrete is another matter. Over a million tons of it was trucked out of the site altogether. But in order to make her thesis credible, Judy Wood has to persuade us that images like this don't really exist.

A good question
        Toward the end of Judy's second hour last Thursday, a caller asked a pretty good question.

GN: Peter is truck driving in California. Go ahead, Peter. West of the Rockies. Go ahead Peter.

Caller: I don't know where to start. I was going to ask you, if everything was pulverized that badly, why did it take two years to haul it off one dump truck at a time?

JW: The bathtub was cleaned out by May. It's actually... it was cleaned out faster than they thought it would be [[she's right about that]]. But they would also truck in dirt. Dump it down, turn it around, take it out, bring in more dirt, dump it down... I was there in 2007, dirt was still coming in and out.

        So you see where Judy's crackpot idea leads? Since according to her there was no steel and concrete wreckage, obviously the teams clearing the site had to keep up the pretense for eight months by needlessly trucking soil backwards and forwards. I think that tells us all we need to know about the woman and her theory.

Her rational wikipage has further info.

Dustified!

        Dr Judy Wood delivered her performance on Coast to Coast AM last night, eagerly awaited by the Branch Hoaglandians because it was her work that Richard Hoagland ripped off for his recent conference presentation.

        Dr Wood spent some time educating the audience about the importance of real forensic evidence as opposed to speculation, then almost immediately broke her own rules by making an ENORMOUS leap of conjecture. The twin towers were dustified, she announced, by a directed energy weapon. When George Noory asked her where she thought the actual weapon itself was situated, she dismissed that as unimportant.

        I really have neither the time or the skill to analyze Wood's data—in any case, others have already done that quite well. I thought, however, I might provide an additional data point by estimating the total mass of drywall in the North Tower. As anyone with any construction experience can tell you, sheetrock dustifies very nicely, often when you wish it wouldn't. It's just loose chalk between sheets of paper, really. Was the dust cloud that drifted over Lower Manhattan mostly gypsum? Let's see....

The North Tower was 1,368 ft tall, cross-section 208 x 208 ft. If you imagine the entire building clad in drywall, the area would be:

1368 x 208 x 4 = 1,138,176 sq ft
assuming drywall mass 1.6 lb/sq ft, total wall mass is almost 1000 tons (US).

As for ceilings, from the total ceiling area of 208 x 208 = 43,264 sq ft we need to subtract 80 x 138 = 11,040 sq ft for the elevator well.

So ceiling area = 32,224 x 110 floors = 3,544,640 sq ft or 2,836 tons.

        Now, I make no pretense that this is in any way an accurate measure. It's just a little better than pulling a random figure out of my ass. It's "in the ballpark," as the sports fans say. I'm just saying that around 1000 tons of drywall would have dustified immediately as the tower collapsed, and over 500,000 cubic feet of air would have been pumped out of each floor as it pancaked, helping to form the white dust cloud. It's a lot harder to estimate how much of the 2,836 tons of ceiling would also have crumbled, but very likely some of it.

        Judy Wood appears to think that the cloud contained most of the structural steel, too. Put me down as a sceptic on that.

Richard Hoagland, Judy Wood, and Adam Parfrey

        Latest victim of Hoagland's contempt for copyright[1] appears to be Dr Judy Wood of Where Did the Towers Go? pseudo-fame.

        I don't propose to get into analysis of the startling case that Dr Wood has made and Hoagland has now latched onto, hoping to make a buck out of it. Others have already pointed out some absurdities.

Two planes not enough
        We all saw two fully loaded Boeing 767s fly into the World Trade Center on 11th September 2001. In a nutshell, Wood and Hoagland say that this was not what caused the towers to collapse. I can't help giggling over Hoagland stating, last night on Coast to Coast AM, that the WTC towers collapsed "at escape velocity" — but OK, let's assume that was just a slip of the tongue.

        Andrew Johnson, another fringe investigator, is pretty annoyed with Hoagland for hijacking Dr Wood's research, lecturing on the subject for a couple of hours, and preparing to sell an edited DVD of that lecture, all without having contacted Dr Wood. In my opinion, although it was outrageously unprofessional of Hoagland, in the end Wood will have little to complain of, since she's going to be invited to C2C-AM pretty soon. As we know, that sells books rather efficiently.

Dangerous and stingy
        It was the story of the publication of her book that got my attention. According to Johnson's page, Wood signed a publisher's contract in early 2009 and accepted "a small advance." Two years of acrimony then followed, with the publisher refusing to publish 540 pages and protesting that he couldn't afford color illustrations. Eventually Judy Wood bought out her contract and self-published.

        So who was this intransigent publisher? Step forward Adam Parfrey, Univ. Calif. dropout and possibly the most dangerous publisher in America according to a HuffPo piece from last December.

        Others have wondered if Parfrey is the stingiest publisher in the world, since he published Hoagland & Bara's Dark Mission without an index and with totally inadequate photo reproduction, despite making a very large pile of $$$ with the first edition (55,000 copies sold.)

        In comments on an Amazon user's review titled "Where Did the Book Go?" a few of Judy Wood's fans took Parfrey to task over his handling of the contract.

Kim Greenhouse wrote:

Let me tell you this: You have no interest in this book becoming known or in the 10 years of her courageous work being fulfilled. Your comments are totally inappropriate about how you desperately wanted the book published, about how you were working to get high resolution images, about how Dr. Wood was upset about the idea of this and that.

She left you people because you are unprofessional, you refused to publish the book and you air your issues in a way that stinks. Stop urinating on her book launch.

As for saying that the book was quite stressful for Dr. Wood, you are simply condescending and so out of touch with the nature of the project that if you had an ounce of class and professional decorum, you would take yourselves off of the amazon page falsely representing that you are her publisher, since you are not.

Parfrey replied:

The commentary here has no relation at all to the reality of the situation, which would not reflect well on Ms. Wood. That said, I willingly relinquished rights to Ms. Wood after she disappeared from communication with me for months at a time. I'm glad the book finally appeared.

False book promo
        I'm on Kim Greenhouse's side on the question of Parfrey's lack of professionalism. Even now, 18 months later, the Product Description of Dark Mission 2nd Edn on both Amazon and Borders includes this:

Authors Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara include a new chapter about the discoveries made by ex-Nazi scientist and NASA stalwart Wernher von Braun regarding what he termed "alternate gravitational solutions," or the rewriting of Newtonian physics into hyperdimensional spheres.

Buyers of the new edition will be provided a code that will enable them to log on to DarkMission.net to download hundreds of images discussed within the book.

        The interesting thing about those two statements is that NEITHER IS TRUE. Adam Parfrey knows this, it has been brought to his attention, and he takes no action. It's even possible that commentary right here on The Emoluments of Mars in August 2008 was the reason the Von Braun chapter was killed.

        About the only good thing I can think of to say about Parfrey is that he refused to publish Mike Bara's God-awful book The Choice. Deo Gratias.

====================================

[1] Other notable victims are Keith Laney and Walter Myers.