I'm sorry if I came across a little too harsh, its just that I have been down the tv fakery road and it leads nowhere and so far there has been no evidence for it.
I will be very interested to see what you have to say after you get time to study the issue.
if i might butt in for a moment on your conversation, i think there's a really
good chance that other planes WERE in the area, but were not the supposed
hijacked airliners in the offishal story. because if missiles or scramjets or other
were used, they would have been launched by other planes.
also, i still think it would be quite an interesting study to map out the
angles and positions that 'witnesses' say they saw planes from, as they could
have seen other planes fly BY right when explosion occurred.
also, of course our perps would have made sure they installed a bunch
of wanna be witnesses to babble about planes, such as the turdballs on
the snuff film naudet doc 9/11.
Thanks for the response. I guess you would have to beleive all the witnesses who saw the planes were lying and all the people who took video and pictures are part of the cover up. I would appreciate any explanation from you as to why the interaction between the plane and building is physically impossible so I could send it to a physicist I know to see what he has to say about it.
I'vew been lsitening to Fetzer for a long time and heard the interview he did with you. I wanted to know your opinion on the "impossible physics" of the plane interacting with the building. Is it really "impossible" as some seem to believe?
What I meant is that the towers collapse in a manner that the top blocks push down progressively from the top of the 94 floor block and the top of the 78 floor block. I am not considering the top or bottom of the top blocks or 16 floors and 32 floors. They wanted it to look like the top blocks crushed the bottom block by 100% gravity of weight forces.
It was an illusion of the top blocks crushing the botton blocks
If the top 16 floor block fell one floor or 4 meters, the energy needed to crush the bottom 94 block would have to be 52,000 time greater. The 32 floor block falling 4 meters would need to have an energy of 17,932 times greater that it was to collapse the lower 78 floor block.
That is what the physics of Vector Forces reveal. The collapse possibility is not even remotely close to happening, virtually impossible...
yea, you are 100% correct.
I do alot of research into these exotic technologies and the stealth/scalar/infrasound devices that may have been used on 9/11.
But you are exactly right, this stuff is very hard to prove.
The concrete scientific evidence holds far more water then vague theories based on photographic/video evidence, which has yet to be proven may or may not be 100% fake.
I do agree with you that it is important to keep this argument simple.
110 stories of steel and concrete x2 turned to dust in mid air within seconds, and left a debris pile of less than 2stories. That is impossible by means of conventional methods.
Both Twin Towers feel from top to bottom, exactly the same and the mini nukes can explain the total collapses, total, of both towers and the other big holed buildings and maybe WTC 7, which could have been a regular demolition since gravity did much to assist it, but not the Twin Towers.
I am not dismissing your ideas, especially since you are so convinced that there is some connection there. I hope you can come up with some concrete proofs that can not be even remotely refuted. I leave all options open, but strongly favor my conclusions.
Take the time to review my paper and listen to my interview with Jim Fetzer. I am trying to get Jim to help me to get the leading scientists in the truth movement to also review my work. it is very, very simple and based of Vector Forces math, addition more to the point.
I understand where you are coming from. Please get back with me after reviewing my work.
The truth movement debunkers always ask for quantitative evidence for the collapses and no debater to date has been able to give it to them in any conculsive manner. That is what my work does give irrefutable quantitative evidence for energy equivalent to atomic bomb multiples and no contest support forces against gravity based collapse.
Your ideas and work are interesting and thought provoking, but keep working of the physics and physical and presentable evidence. Maybe you can team up with a strong physicist who works in these areas. I strong scientist on your side will give your theories much more credence as far as the public is concerned and the public is going to make and break this 911 criminal venture, once they can underestand it and the media allow it to come out or word of mouth finally lets the truthers be victorious.
Keep you your interesting and good work and I hope you can find out more in your future research...because we all want to know about these exotic things and events.
My theories on scalar/infrasound weapons are new, confusing and vague because we are dealing with a highly advanced psyop weapon.
I am not a scientist,
I am a photographer, videographer, video producer and have extensive training as an audio/visual engineer in TV STUDIOS. I can't explain my theories with hardcore physics because the weapons we are dealing with are stealth and highly advanced. I have photographed and captured these strange stealth UFOs all over Canada and am starting to understand what kind of technology we may be dealing with.
The UFOs on 9/11 in my opinion had many different objectives. Their purposes: *Surveillance *Optical Projections & *Weaponry (Exotic)
As for their function dealing with the explosions and fires, if you look at the naudet brothers 1st strike video you see strange birds flying around the impact zone just seconds after the crash. Also odd objects are filmed from many angles around the 2nd strike just as the 'plane' hits the towers. These objects look like large birds, though they are flying far too fast to be actual birds.
Now Chuck, I'm not saying you are wrong about your theory involving the mini-nukes. I feel you have alot of evidence on your side and that you are more than likely right, though there were far too many odd systematic coincidences going on on 9/11.
The Transportation Secretary on 9/11 was Norman Mineta, he has ties to the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS). Mineta was Vice President of Lockheed Martin a sponsor of DEPS on 9/11. Mineta ensured minimal interference with the DEW by grounding as many commercial airliners as possible during the timeframe of the towers’ destruction.
Also odd anomalies including Hurricane Erin and the strange weather effects around Lower Manhattan on 9/11 make it seem like the area was under some kind of controlled environment. Also if you look at the tower strikes and the collapse of the towers you see a systematic pattern in the events. The north tower was hit on the south side, the south tower was hit on the north side, the south tower fell from bottom to top, the north tower fell from top to bottom.
I believe this is evidence that some kind of systematic space weaponry was used.
For me Directed Energy/Scalar/Infrasound weaponry explains precisely how buildings 3,4,5 & 6 were damaged by what looks like some kind force from above, now we know that it wasn't falling debris so what else could it be ?
Plane shaped holes is what people saw that day, the media even reported it. Now the question can be asked, did people actually see it or was that more media fakery ?
I am not a scientist but I have formulated many arguments for the case that 'chemtrails' have nothing to do with planes spraying anything but that it is some kind of space based or ground based energy system that has many applications including, weather manipulation, crop circles, surveillance, optical illusions and can also be used as an offensive weapon.
Now there is photographic evidence of 'chemtrails' & scalar clouds all over the place on 9/11.
Tesla style Scalar Weapons used to HELP take down the towers (in addition to DEWs & MiniNukes), to make it look like planes hit the towers, to make it look like people were jumping out, to make them turn into dust. A wide variety of different devices were used to trigger molecular changes.
Chuck, understand that I also believe low yield tactical were used in the lower levels. I don't disagree with you, it's just I feel that this was a psyop terror attack and that many different weapons were used to keep the public chasing their tails trying to figure out what was done that day. This is why I feel it is very important not to get into the argument of 'one or the other'
I feel that there is evidence for: Mini-Nukes, Space Based Directed Energy Weapons, air based scalar/infrasound weapons & the possibility of minimal conventional explosives in the case of WTC 7.
I will be glad to look at your evidence and i'm sure it will be very compelling as, like I said, I am certain many different weapons were used on 9/11 and that Mini-Nukes were one of those weapons.
As you say about chemtrails, i feel that this is a highly advanced 'psyop' technology that actually looks like something that it is not. I feel that 'planes aren't spraying anything' and that what you are seeing is a molecular change in the structure of the air to create a 'circuit' for this energy. Like how plasma conducts electricity. Ionized air = plasma.
Anyways, yes i will listen to your mp3 and follow along and get back to you. Thanks.
9/11 Scholars Forum
Exposing Falsehoods and Revealing Truths
Chuck Boldwyn's Comments
Comment Wall (30 comments)
You need to be a member of 9/11 Scholars Forum to add comments!
Join 9/11 Scholars Forum
http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/3358484/
I'm sorry if I came across a little too harsh, its just that I have been down the tv fakery road and it leads nowhere and so far there has been no evidence for it.
I will be very interested to see what you have to say after you get time to study the issue.
Thanks,
Jeff
good chance that other planes WERE in the area, but were not the supposed
hijacked airliners in the offishal story. because if missiles or scramjets or other
were used, they would have been launched by other planes.
also, i still think it would be quite an interesting study to map out the
angles and positions that 'witnesses' say they saw planes from, as they could
have seen other planes fly BY right when explosion occurred.
also, of course our perps would have made sure they installed a bunch
of wanna be witnesses to babble about planes, such as the turdballs on
the snuff film naudet doc 9/11.
Thanks for the response. I guess you would have to beleive all the witnesses who saw the planes were lying and all the people who took video and pictures are part of the cover up. I would appreciate any explanation from you as to why the interaction between the plane and building is physically impossible so I could send it to a physicist I know to see what he has to say about it.
Thanks,
Jeff
I'vew been lsitening to Fetzer for a long time and heard the interview he did with you. I wanted to know your opinion on the "impossible physics" of the plane interacting with the building. Is it really "impossible" as some seem to believe?
It was an illusion of the top blocks crushing the botton blocks
If the top 16 floor block fell one floor or 4 meters, the energy needed to crush the bottom 94 block would have to be 52,000 time greater. The 32 floor block falling 4 meters would need to have an energy of 17,932 times greater that it was to collapse the lower 78 floor block.
That is what the physics of Vector Forces reveal. The collapse possibility is not even remotely close to happening, virtually impossible...
If you look, the south tower when it goes, the top of the building falls over, after the bottom starts to go.
the north tower,
the top of the building starts to sink before the rest of the building, almost initiating whatever was below, near the impact zone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKHgwLWVZEM
yea, you are 100% correct.
I do alot of research into these exotic technologies and the stealth/scalar/infrasound devices that may have been used on 9/11.
But you are exactly right, this stuff is very hard to prove.
The concrete scientific evidence holds far more water then vague theories based on photographic/video evidence, which has yet to be proven may or may not be 100% fake.
I do agree with you that it is important to keep this argument simple.
110 stories of steel and concrete x2 turned to dust in mid air within seconds, and left a debris pile of less than 2stories. That is impossible by means of conventional methods.
Do you use skype ? use any kind of email ?
I am not dismissing your ideas, especially since you are so convinced that there is some connection there. I hope you can come up with some concrete proofs that can not be even remotely refuted. I leave all options open, but strongly favor my conclusions.
Take the time to review my paper and listen to my interview with Jim Fetzer. I am trying to get Jim to help me to get the leading scientists in the truth movement to also review my work. it is very, very simple and based of Vector Forces math, addition more to the point.
I understand where you are coming from. Please get back with me after reviewing my work.
The truth movement debunkers always ask for quantitative evidence for the collapses and no debater to date has been able to give it to them in any conculsive manner. That is what my work does give irrefutable quantitative evidence for energy equivalent to atomic bomb multiples and no contest support forces against gravity based collapse.
Your ideas and work are interesting and thought provoking, but keep working of the physics and physical and presentable evidence. Maybe you can team up with a strong physicist who works in these areas. I strong scientist on your side will give your theories much more credence as far as the public is concerned and the public is going to make and break this 911 criminal venture, once they can underestand it and the media allow it to come out or word of mouth finally lets the truthers be victorious.
Keep you your interesting and good work and I hope you can find out more in your future research...because we all want to know about these exotic things and events.
My theories on scalar/infrasound weapons are new, confusing and vague because we are dealing with a highly advanced psyop weapon.
I am not a scientist,
I am a photographer, videographer, video producer and have extensive training as an audio/visual engineer in TV STUDIOS. I can't explain my theories with hardcore physics because the weapons we are dealing with are stealth and highly advanced. I have photographed and captured these strange stealth UFOs all over Canada and am starting to understand what kind of technology we may be dealing with.
The UFOs on 9/11 in my opinion had many different objectives. Their purposes: *Surveillance *Optical Projections & *Weaponry (Exotic)
As for their function dealing with the explosions and fires, if you look at the naudet brothers 1st strike video you see strange birds flying around the impact zone just seconds after the crash. Also odd objects are filmed from many angles around the 2nd strike just as the 'plane' hits the towers. These objects look like large birds, though they are flying far too fast to be actual birds.
Now Chuck, I'm not saying you are wrong about your theory involving the mini-nukes. I feel you have alot of evidence on your side and that you are more than likely right, though there were far too many odd systematic coincidences going on on 9/11.
The Transportation Secretary on 9/11 was Norman Mineta, he has ties to the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS). Mineta was Vice President of Lockheed Martin a sponsor of DEPS on 9/11. Mineta ensured minimal interference with the DEW by grounding as many commercial airliners as possible during the timeframe of the towers’ destruction.
Also odd anomalies including Hurricane Erin and the strange weather effects around Lower Manhattan on 9/11 make it seem like the area was under some kind of controlled environment. Also if you look at the tower strikes and the collapse of the towers you see a systematic pattern in the events. The north tower was hit on the south side, the south tower was hit on the north side, the south tower fell from bottom to top, the north tower fell from top to bottom.
I believe this is evidence that some kind of systematic space weaponry was used.
For me Directed Energy/Scalar/Infrasound weaponry explains precisely how buildings 3,4,5 & 6 were damaged by what looks like some kind force from above, now we know that it wasn't falling debris so what else could it be ?
Plane shaped holes is what people saw that day, the media even reported it. Now the question can be asked, did people actually see it or was that more media fakery ?
I am not a scientist but I have formulated many arguments for the case that 'chemtrails' have nothing to do with planes spraying anything but that it is some kind of space based or ground based energy system that has many applications including, weather manipulation, crop circles, surveillance, optical illusions and can also be used as an offensive weapon.
Now there is photographic evidence of 'chemtrails' & scalar clouds all over the place on 9/11.
Tesla style Scalar Weapons used to HELP take down the towers (in addition to DEWs & MiniNukes), to make it look like planes hit the towers, to make it look like people were jumping out, to make them turn into dust. A wide variety of different devices were used to trigger molecular changes.
Chuck, understand that I also believe low yield tactical were used in the lower levels. I don't disagree with you, it's just I feel that this was a psyop terror attack and that many different weapons were used to keep the public chasing their tails trying to figure out what was done that day. This is why I feel it is very important not to get into the argument of 'one or the other'
I feel that there is evidence for: Mini-Nukes, Space Based Directed Energy Weapons, air based scalar/infrasound weapons & the possibility of minimal conventional explosives in the case of WTC 7.
I will be glad to look at your evidence and i'm sure it will be very compelling as, like I said, I am certain many different weapons were used on 9/11 and that Mini-Nukes were one of those weapons.
As you say about chemtrails, i feel that this is a highly advanced 'psyop' technology that actually looks like something that it is not. I feel that 'planes aren't spraying anything' and that what you are seeing is a molecular change in the structure of the air to create a 'circuit' for this energy. Like how plasma conducts electricity. Ionized air = plasma.
Anyways, yes i will listen to your mp3 and follow along and get back to you. Thanks.
About
Welcome to
9/11 Scholars Forum
Sign In
© 2024 Created by James H. Fetzer. Powered by
Report an Issue | Terms of Service