It seems you did not work through the article at all - I suggest reading through it again and listening to the video where Fetzer is talking, below the following statement:
"Now, if you decided to let go of the official narrative of jet fuel not being able to bring the buildings down as well as thermite not being able to do it, well there is another option you can fall back on and that is the nuke theory. So, let us investigate that as well, whilst we’re at it."
You might not have studied the material i referenced. I am trained structural engineer, registered for 40 years, who has invested thousands of hours into Twin Towers vaporization. I talked to Richard Gage at four A & E Truth events since 2009 and interviewed him on my TNT Radio program. "Breathtaking" has 45 power point slides, three 90 min videos and when posted at VeteransToday in 2019 had 80 article bibliography. Fetzer and I discussed this in the BitChute video linked in my comment.
I suggest you get your hands on the book and study it, something you confirmed you have not and will not do: https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
You want to dismiss EVIDENCE that you confirmed you have not yet studied.
So much for your thousands of hours you have put into studying the "vaporisation" - You do know vaporisation implies heat - of the towers, when you HAVE NOT studied what is included in her 500 page book, discussing EVIDENCE.
So, if you've not studied her book, then you most probably also have not worked through her Qui-Tam case which she filed with the US Supreme Court back in 2007.
So, I'll suggest you get your hands on her book.
I would like you to then REFUTE all the EVIDENCE presented in her book and Qui-Tam case that does not come close to being touched upon your THEORY of nukes being used.
It's been 15 years since the book was published and no one has been able to refute the COLD dust cloud, the cold rubble pile, the ongoing metal transmutation that was easily observable for 100 days post disintegration, the lack of seismic readings, the change in the earth's magnetic field, the lack of ionising radiation, the 1400 toasted cars, and so much more which is covered extensively by the ONLY independent forensic study in the public domain of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001.
If you are so sure of your theory of nukes being used, show me your filings to NIST for correction of the scientifically flawed NIST Report.
I got Judy's book around here someplace. It certainly ain't 500 pages. Some very good photos. After reading much of this stuff, I find no discussion of the observation - obviously high heat and "explosions". Heat and pressure destroyed the 3 towers of 9/11.
The if you study chapters 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 17 for example, you'd find the explanation for the lack of heat in the disintegration of the towers as well as the anomalies with the 9/11 Orphans building 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Banker's Trust building that never get's mentioned by the 9/11 "truther" movement.
I've read em all. David Ray Griffins 10 books are the single best source. Bollyn's "Solving 911", Thompson's "Terror Timeline", and the "Toronto Hearings", Ryan's site: "Dig Within". I try not to get into that mud hole of who's right or wrong. Woods' book is an excellent source of pictures and she certainly asks some very good questions. There are many eyewitness accounts of extreme heat. "No answers, only better questions."
"Unequivocal 9/11 Nukes" > "Breathtaking: Solving Nuclear 9/11" > "Exposing NIST Jenga Game" > VeteransToday.com > https://bitchute.com/video/qsSdSIWX9Jxl/
It seems you did not work through the article at all - I suggest reading through it again and listening to the video where Fetzer is talking, below the following statement:
"Now, if you decided to let go of the official narrative of jet fuel not being able to bring the buildings down as well as thermite not being able to do it, well there is another option you can fall back on and that is the nuke theory. So, let us investigate that as well, whilst we’re at it."
You might not have studied the material i referenced. I am trained structural engineer, registered for 40 years, who has invested thousands of hours into Twin Towers vaporization. I talked to Richard Gage at four A & E Truth events since 2009 and interviewed him on my TNT Radio program. "Breathtaking" has 45 power point slides, three 90 min videos and when posted at VeteransToday in 2019 had 80 article bibliography. Fetzer and I discussed this in the BitChute video linked in my comment.
I suggest you get your hands on the book and study it, something you confirmed you have not and will not do: https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/
You want to dismiss EVIDENCE that you confirmed you have not yet studied.
So much for your thousands of hours you have put into studying the "vaporisation" - You do know vaporisation implies heat - of the towers, when you HAVE NOT studied what is included in her 500 page book, discussing EVIDENCE.
So, if you've not studied her book, then you most probably also have not worked through her Qui-Tam case which she filed with the US Supreme Court back in 2007.
So, I'll suggest you get your hands on her book.
I would like you to then REFUTE all the EVIDENCE presented in her book and Qui-Tam case that does not come close to being touched upon your THEORY of nukes being used.
It's been 15 years since the book was published and no one has been able to refute the COLD dust cloud, the cold rubble pile, the ongoing metal transmutation that was easily observable for 100 days post disintegration, the lack of seismic readings, the change in the earth's magnetic field, the lack of ionising radiation, the 1400 toasted cars, and so much more which is covered extensively by the ONLY independent forensic study in the public domain of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001.
If you are so sure of your theory of nukes being used, show me your filings to NIST for correction of the scientifically flawed NIST Report.
I suggest anyone wanting to see the muddling of of what Dr Wood presents being demolished in her FAQ page on her website and you can start by reading this: https://truthsummit.info/media-files/DrJudyWood-refutation-RichardGage-claims.pdf
Your call to authority being aligned with muddlers of the truth is mute.
I got Judy's book around here someplace. It certainly ain't 500 pages. Some very good photos. After reading much of this stuff, I find no discussion of the observation - obviously high heat and "explosions". Heat and pressure destroyed the 3 towers of 9/11.
You're right - The book in excess of 500 pages.
The if you study chapters 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 17 for example, you'd find the explanation for the lack of heat in the disintegration of the towers as well as the anomalies with the 9/11 Orphans building 3, 4, 5, 6 and the Banker's Trust building that never get's mentioned by the 9/11 "truther" movement.
I've read em all. David Ray Griffins 10 books are the single best source. Bollyn's "Solving 911", Thompson's "Terror Timeline", and the "Toronto Hearings", Ryan's site: "Dig Within". I try not to get into that mud hole of who's right or wrong. Woods' book is an excellent source of pictures and she certainly asks some very good questions. There are many eyewitness accounts of extreme heat. "No answers, only better questions."