• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Were Directed Energy Weapons Used On 9/11?

davebrigade

davebrigade

Fresh Blood
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
13
Where did the towers go. By Dr Judy wood.

A book I can recommend to all, proves without a doubt that advanced technology was involved in 911.
 
...proves without a doubt...


Where have we heard that before ?

INT21.

By the way, it should be 9/11 not 911. That.s the American version of our 999.

Or to borrow a line from 'papa was a rolling stone'...

It was eleven September, a day I'll always remember.
That was the day three thousand people died.
 
Advanced technology WAS used.....2 commercial jet aircraft are pretty advanced.
 
AlchoPwn said:
I don't like this post. I came here to see an article on energy weapons, and instead I am having a 9/11 Conspiracy book advertised at me. I find the title of this post to be misleading and I don't appreciate it.
Click to expand...
I felt the same. The title of this post feels like a deliberate deception. I was hoping to read about new developments in directed-energy weapon technology, not yet another 9/11 conspiracy. Although the thread is in the conspiracy section, I think the title still needs changing. Better still, since it exists only to plug a book anyway, there surely must already be a 9/11 thread on which this can be tacked.

EDIT As though the initial synopsis of the book in question isn't ridiculous sounding enough, a Google search conjures site after site of people vigorously tearing shreds from Dr Woods theory and little in the way of acceptance.
 
Last edited:
AlchoPwn said:
I don't like this post. I came here to see an article on energy weapons, and instead I am having a 9/11 Conspiracy book advertised at me. I find the title of this post to be misleading and I don't appreciate it.
Click to expand...
^kinda agree^
 
What about field effects, on 911 the earth's magnetic field. Magnetometer readings show something was happening on that day.
 
Coal said:
I'd like to see that data.
Click to expand...
The military supposedly uses sensitive magnetometers to try to track submarines, so the movement of that much steel that fast would possibly have registered. It does not mean there was some magnetic weapon though.
 
There's not very much steel in a Boeing 767 though - only around ten percent. Airliners and their engines are mostly constructed from aluminium alloys, titanium and composite materials and kevlar and stuff.

Sorry to be pedantic :)
 
Andy X said:
There's not very much steel in a Boeing 767 though - only around ten percent. Airliners and their engines are mostly constructed from aluminium alloys, titanium and composite materials and kevlar and stuff.

Sorry to be pedantic :)
Click to expand...
Lots of steel in those buildings. :)
 
Ah, I see what you're getting at. Got the wrong end of the stick, sorry!
 
kamalktk said:
The military supposedly uses sensitive magnetometers to try to track submarines, so the movement of that much steel that fast would possibly have registered. It does not mean there was some magnetic weapon though.
Click to expand...
Certainly silicon devices exist that can track the earths magnetic field, so it's possible, but I'm not sure what kind of range they might reasonable expect to do that.
 
Coal said:
I'd like to see that data.
Click to expand...

The data Wood cites is very limited in timeframe and source. It covers no more than the immediate timeframe of the event, and it's drawn from only one set of magnetic field sensor arrays (those operated by the University of Alaska).

This tightly focused scope of reference insinuates the possibility of a forced 'peephole' perspective.

I'd like to see:

- data from other magnetic field sensor facilities (e.g., those in the 'lower 48 states'; any others around the planet);
- data reflecting a much wider time span (to see if the variations on 9/11 were notably anomalous); and
- additional data on solar / space 'weather' during the focal period of interest (to see if the fluctuations were responses to external perturbations).
 
EnolaGaia said:
The data Wood cites is very limited in timeframe and source. It covers no more than the immediate timeframe of the event, and it's drawn from only one set of magnetic field sensor arrays (those operated by the University of Alaska).

This tightly focused scope of reference insinuates the possibility of a forced 'peephole' perspective.

I'd like to see:

- data from other magnetic field sensor facilities (e.g., those in the 'lower 48 states'; any others around the planet);
- data reflecting a much wider time span (to see if the variations on 9/11 were notably anomalous); and
- additional data on solar / space 'weather' during the focal period of interest (to see if the fluctuations were responses to external perturbations).
Click to expand...
So... "control conditions" then.
 
As for magnetometer readings.

large steel ships, often with steel containers on deck. are going up and down the Hudson on a regular basis.

INT21.
 
Coal said:
Certainly silicon devices exist that can track the earths magnetic field, so it's possible, but I'm not sure what kind of range they might reasonable expect to do that.
Click to expand...

You have actually answered your own question if you unpick what you wrote. How can you track the Earth's magnetic field unless you are tracking it across the globe? https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/geomagnetism
 
AlchoPwn said:
You have actually answered your own question if you unpick what you wrote. How can you track the Earth's magnetic field unless you are tracking it across the globe? https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/geomagnetism
Click to expand...
Bad writing on my part. I was suggesting that integrated devices that can measure variations in the earth magnetic field, already exist.

However, how well they might fare in detecting local variations caused by (say) a big metal boat and at what range, is another matter.
 
Last edited:
...However, how well they might fare in detecting local variations caused by (say) a big metal boat and at what range, is another matter. ..

It is, however, someone with a sensitive magnetometer and access to a river and some passing ships (of various sizes) can quite easily investigate.

INT21
 
INT21 said:
...However, how well they might fare in detecting local variations caused by (say) a big metal boat and at what range, is another matter. ..

It is, however, someone with a sensitive magnetometer and access to a river and some passing ships (of various sizes) can quite easily investigate.

INT21
Click to expand...
I would have though most smart phones have one. Apps are around to give you access to raw data from said sensors.
 
Maybe they have an application, but won't they still need the detector ?

There are a few magnetometer sites around the world that provide the data if you don't want to carry out a local test.

'Radio Skypipe' springs to mind.

But it can be tested on your nearest canal. Canal narrow boats are usually steel. One could sit on the canal bank (maybe get in a bit of fishing) and see if a passing boat registers. As you will only be a few feet away, it may do.

INT21.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top