I think what's needed here is someone to play the "Devil's Advocate." Ideally, this should be neither a supporter nor a detractor, since cheer leading and debunking both interfere with objectivity. Rather, this task should fall to someone who is in general agreement with the proposals put forth by Dr Judy Wood in "Where Did The Towers Go?" yet retains a degree of skepticism. I would like to offer myself to fill the role of "Devil's Advocate." I started out with a great deal of skepticism, even though I had navigated Dr Wood's website rather extensively before even buying her book; but during my reading of the book that skepticism gradually gave way to more of an editorial critique of the material's organization and presentation than a critique of the material itself. This is not to say I have no reservations about Dr Wood's thesis, only that any reservations I might have fall short of dissuading me from her thesis. At first I was going to title this review "All Dressed Up With Nowhere To Go" because of the dearth of information regarding Free-Energy Directed Weaponry. I would advise even Dr Wood's staunchest supporters not to minimize that lack as it may very well prove to be her "Achilles Heel."
Dr Wood makes it perfectly clear from the outset that her sole aim is to identify what happened to the twin towers on 9/11/01 - not to speculate on what specific type of entity was responsible for the myriad anomalies she presents. However, she goes well beyond her original intent when she dismisses, step by step, every other kind of entity that has been put forward as the cause of the collapses; by doing this, she demonstrates how much easier it is to debunk a theory than to definitively establish one. She leaves herself wide open to this type of critique on pp 124/125 of Chapter 7, wherein she notes that there has never been any proof that thermite was ever used to demolish a high rise building; neither has there been any proof that free-energy has ever been used for that purpose.
Throughout the book, Dr Wood cautions her readers to be wary of first impressions and, especially, of the media's tendency to tell its viewers what they're seeing. Then, in Chapter 3 - "Jumpers" - she proceeds to do exactly that. Figure 30 on page 32 shows a number of people gathered on ledges along the building's facade. It's impossible to say with any certainty what these people are doing there; nevertheless, Dr Wood tells us that they are in the process of disrobing, as if their clothes have become overheated. Now it's true that at least one person appears to be shirtless, but that alone hardly warrants her conclusion that they're all disrobing. It's also true that one person is clearly reaching down, but that certainly doesn't mean he's attempting to remove his pants - he could be doing anything. In fact, it very much looks to me like he's holding on to someone who is already in the process of falling out the window. The implication of their disrobing, by Dr Wood's own admission, is that they are not attempting to escape the heat of fire - which their clothes would help protect their bodies from; but rather a kind of force that makes their clothes unbearably hot. However, later in the book (I forgot to jot down the chapter and page), one of the responders encounters a man whose body was "burnt to a crisp" while his jacket was intact; and, at another point, a responder's coat catches fire while she''s running - even though she was not aware of fires burning around her. Dr Wood points out that directed free-energy seems to "burn" things from the inside out; so it can't both burn the person but not the coat in one instance then turn around and burn the coat and not the person in the next instance. This energy seems, as well, to burn standing vehicles differently in different instances, either the interior or the exterior but rarely both together.
One of the book's strong suites, along with the myriad pictures, charts and graphs, is the eye-witness testimony of first responders. These statements are dotted throughout the book and do, indeed, paint an eerie portrait of the events of 9/11, adding depth to the pictures of various anomalies. The eye-witness accounts help quantify the particular kinds of anomalies Dr Wood identifies in the pictures in that they make it clear that these anomalies are not purely random events but, rather, pieces of a series of inter-related events. Which strengthens her case that every anomaly can - and must - be attributed to a single source.
I think by far the weakest part of Dr Wood's book is Chapter 18 - Hurricane Erin. Clearly I'm not a meteorologist - but neither is Dr Wood. She is puzzled by two things in particular regarding this hurricane: 1) its abrupt turning away from the coastline (it appeared to be headed directly for New York); and 2) its absence from the day's weather forecasts. But this is immanently easy to explain - the first, in fact, explains the second. As Dr Wood notes, a strong cold front had just pushed its way into the eastern United States. She whimsically suggests that the cold front and the hurricane were poised to do battle; but this is simply not the case. Having tuned in to The Weather Channel year after year every time a hurricane developed, I can state almost categorically that there's no contest between a cold front and a hurricane - the front will always win, hands down. In fact, it's not a contest at all. Hurricanes - even the most powerful - are steered by whatever weather systems they encounter; and just as easily diverted from their path. Which precisely explains Hurricane Erin's absence from the weather forecasts. Once it's determined that a particular hurricane poses no threat to the mainland, it immediately falls off the media's radar screen. Only a show like the Weather Channel - which does nothing but the weather (at least at that time) - ever follows a hurricane once it no longer threatens the US.
Dr Wood rightly notes that she need not give us "the exact technology that was used in the destruction, including its make, model and serial number" (p 349); but she most certainly must give us at the bare minimum the range of intensity, duration and location needed by any such directed-energy technology to destroy two of the tallest buildings on the planet. It's simply not acceptable, given the multitude of equations laid out in the book, not to give some ball-park estimate of the energy needed - preferably in the form of an equation. And, even though I accept her conclusion that the cause of the towers' destruction could not have been burning airplane fuel, conventional controlled demolition, thermite or "mini-nukes," I don't entirely accept her conclusion that, therefore, the cause of their destruction must necessarily have been directed free-energy. There could be a sixth candidate for the destruction effected on 9/11: none of the above.
In the history of the world - so far as we know - there has never been an instance of two 110-story buildings being destroyed within an hour of each other. This is a brand new event, that, for all we know, may have open a brand new chapter in physics. How do we know what kind of phenomena might be generated just by the destruction of two massive skyscrapers? And could the act of falling itself create enough energy to tear the building materials apart? And could the destruction of the first tower begin a chain reaction that caused the second tower to likewise fall? And could the cumulative effect of the two towers falling create an energy field capable of bringing down the third building (WTC7)? I wouldn't dream of questioning the basic tenets of physics as we understand it. But isn't that exactly what John Hutchison did when he inadvertently discovered what's come to be known as "The Hutchison Effect?" Maybe there are more "Effects" out there just waiting for the right chain of events to reveal them. Maybe directed free-energy is not at all the last piece of the cosmic puzzle.
UPDATE
After perusing other reviews and, especially, comments posted at the end of reviews, I see no alternative but to lower my estimation of Dr Wood's work. The expression "You are known by the company you keep" comes to mind. I didn't encounter one single comment critical of a previous comment that didn't resort to ad hominem attacks on the person who made the comment. This is true of "both sides" - the DEW's and the thermites. "911," as everyone knows, is one of the most important issues of this nation's history; whether one accepts the official (i.e., airplane/fuel), the controlled demolition, the thermite, the DEW, or even the mini-nuke theory, every effort should be made to raise the debate above the level of name calling. One is not idiotic for not seeing the other's side: there is wiggle room for even the official theory - in fact, in light of the inane bickering between the various factions, the official theory is starting to look a lot less absurd.
Dr Wood's supporters go ballistic whenever anyone accuses her of fabricating death rays in space; and while it's true that she never once proposed such a specific weapon as the likely culprit, it's equally true that she dances all around it - as if to say "See, as long as I don't pronounce the words, I didn't say it!" Well, I'm sorry, but there is absolutely no getting around one extremely uncomfortable fact: if indeed a directed energy weapon was used, it had to be stationed somewhere. And since Dr Wood makes it abundantly clear that the twin towers were disintegrated from the top down, the most likely place for it to be stationed was somewhere above 110 floors. There aren't too many spots in the greater New York area much higher that 110 floors; so unless a DEW with the magnitude to disintegrate close to one million tons of material can be directed from any angle, it becomes exceedingly disingenuous for Dr Wood and her supporters to insist that a death ray in space was the farthest thing from her mind.
Let me point out, also, that I find the Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth every bit as disingenuous in their dismissal of Dr Wood's theory. To put it bluntly, neither theory ties up all loose ends. And above all else, neither theory adequately accounts for the attack on the Pentagon; indeed, Dr Wood doesn't even so much as mention it in passing. Who knows, maybe the two incidents weren't related. Maybe even the infamous "September Clues" paradigm had it right all along. None of it happened; it was all trick photography.
ONE FINAL NOTE: Dr Wood's "Qui Tam" Lawsuit - touted as evidence of her sincerity and selflessness - is against Applied Research Associates, Inc., on behalf of the US Government. If successful, Dr Wood, as "Relator," stands to gain monetarily from the suit. The suit basically accuses Applied Research Associates, Inc., of failing to advise the government of a conflict of interest when it became a contractor for NIST - the conflict of interest being that the company researches and develops Directed Energy Weaponry, yet failed to apprise the government (via NIST) of the possibility of DEW's being used on 9/11. Anyone who's been following Dr Wood's work knows that this "Qui Tam" Lawsuit has been used as a club to beat the thermite proponents over the head: why haven't they brought a lawsuit? The implication is that there's no merit to the thermite argument; but the simple fact is that there's no government contractor the thermite faction can point to as having defrauded the government. That is to say, there's no contractor which appears to have a possible conflict of interest for having worked with thermite yet not having apprised the government of the possibility of thermite being used on 9/11. That's the whole thing in a nutshell. "Qui Tam" is also widely known as the "Whiltleblower" Lawsuit. And that's that
Enjoy fast, FREE delivery, exclusive deals and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery
Where Did the Towers Go? ... has been added to your Cart
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Flip to back Flip to front
Frequently bought together
$51.40
Get it as soon as Thursday, May 18
In Stock.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
What do customers buy after viewing this item?
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
No More 20+ Years Of Lies!
Images in this review
Top reviews from other countries
Hunnie
A Review of Judy Wood book 'Where Did The Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free Energy Technology What drew me to this book is wh
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on November 15, 2016Mark A. Ayres
Disturbing and upsetting because it made me realise that I had accepted a massive lie for years.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on June 20, 2019Anon
Truth conquers all - Dr Wood is correct
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on February 11, 2018
Ian Hawthorn Thain
A Welcome and Thorough Analysis
Reviewed in the United Kingdom 🇬🇧 on March 12, 2017
