Judy Wood’s Blatant Misrepresentation of 9-11 Facts

February 21, 2013 

Judy Wood was on the John Moore Radio Show on February 20, 2013.  I listened to the 42-minute long show, which is archived on YouTube and can be listened to here:

Video Link - http://youtu.be/ZeW4A8GSs94

There are three fundamental aspects of the 9-11 evidence that Ms Wood completely and intentionally misrepresents: 

1.  The amount of steel left in the rubble;

2.  The nature of the active thermitic material found in the dust;

3.  The temperature of the dust.

About the steel that remained at Ground Zero, Wood dismisses it saying there were only “some pieces of steel here and there.”  Later, when asked by Moore about the steel that was shipped to China, Wood replies, “What steel?”

She then adds that the trucks leaving the site were not carrying steel, but dirt, which she claims was being trucked in to Ground Zero, and out again. There was, according to Ms Wood, “very little debris” left at the World Trade Center. This is all pure nonsense, of course, as is her digression about Hurricane Erin being “just off the coast of Manhattan.” 

THE TRACK OF HURRICANE ERIN (2001) – Erin, a tropical storm/hurricane, did not even come close to Manhattan.  It passed Bermuda and moved away from the strong high pressure zone over the Eastern United States.

There were, in fact, hundreds of thousands of tons of steel left in the rubble pile, which was huge.  The basements of the Twin Towers were 7 levels deep. One junkyard alone processed 250,000 tons of steel from the rubble.  The photographs from the site clearly disprove Wood’s statement about there only being “some pieces of steel here and there.”

Dust and steel was all that was left, according to one of the contractors who received steel from the World Trade Center.

There were hundreds of thousands of tons of steel left in the rubble. For more on the amount of steel that remained see my article:  http://www.bollyn.com/hugo-neu-and-the-giuliani-partners-who-destroyed-the-steel-of-911/

Secondly, Ms Wood misrepresents the nature of the thermitic material that was found in the dust.  Dr. Steven E. Jones of BYU discovered fragments and chips of a bi-layered active (i.e. explosive) thermitic coating in which the ultrafine particles of aluminum and iron oxide were combined in a nano-scale thermitic compound, like super-thermite. 

Furthermore, Wood wrongly compares the reaction of the nanocomposite of thermitic material with a typical thermite reaction. The nature of the reaction is very different when the material is mixed at the nanoscale.  She and Pete Santilli ask where are the white sparks? There were visible thermite reactions on 9-11, but the explosive super-thermite coating would not have reacted like “a sparkler”, as Ms Wood expects.

A THERMITE REACTION certainly appears to be occurring at this corner of the South Tower, shortly before collapse, where a very bright white spot on the end of a fallen column is producing a whitish smoke.  
(Source - The White Flames of Thermite)

The aluminum and iron oxide found in the active thermitic material were combined in a bi-layered coating that exploded when heated to 430 degrees C.  The ultrafine particles of aluminum and iron oxide in this explosive material were part of a highly energetic sol-gel coating.

It was not, as Ms Wood said, bits of aluminum and iron oxide sitting in the dust by themselves.  The ultrafine particles in the chips found by Dr. Jones had been mixed and combined in a sol-gel thermitic coating – and were found in that condition.  When heat (about 430 degrees C) was applied to these fragments or chips they exploded in an explosive exothermic reaction that released more energy per mass than the other leading explosives used in demolition.

Thirdly, Ms Wood challenged a caller who described the dust clouds of 9-11 being “pyroclastic”. The word pyroclast is derived from the Greek words for “fire” and “broken in pieces”. Eyewitnesses to the demolition of the towers, such as William Rodriguez, who was beneath a fire truck when the dust hit him, said the dust was very hot.

Judy Wood, however, misrepresents the dust as being cool.  Later, she says “the process wasn’t high heat.”  The USGS survey of the dust, however, shows that the dust contained a very large amount of iron in the form of tiny droplets of molten iron, known as iron-rich spheres. These droplets could have only been formed by the extreme heat energy released during the demolition of the Twin Towers. The heat was so great that parts of some steel beams or columns showed evidence of having beenvaporized. The thermitic material itself would have contributed super-intense heat and molten iron to the equation. The iron spheres found in the dust had been in the molten state only seconds before they flowed in the pyroclastic clouds that rolled through Lower Manhattan.  Wood’s statement that the process was not “high heat” is clearly proven false by the evidence.

An iron-rich sphere from the USGS survey of the dust.  The dust clouds that accompanied the demolition of the World Trade Center were indeed “pyroclastic” since they contained a large amount of molten metal that was very hot.

Judy Wood’s misrepresentation of the evidence is intentional and seems to be designed for one purpose:  to confuse the public about the nature of the thermitic material found in the dust and how it caused the pulverization of the 220 concrete floor slabs and the steel pans that held them.  

Wood says that a new word, “dustification”, is necessary to explain what happened to the World Trade Center when it was demolished.  I prefer the old word “pulverize”, which means to reduce to powder or dust.  This is, after all, exactly what the active thermitic coating did to the concrete floors of the World Trade Center – and everything on them. 

Sources and Recommended Reading:

“The White Flames of Thermite” by Christopher Bollyn, April 21, 2006


Note: Due to the transfer of information from the original website to this updated format, some article post dates may differ from the date they were originally published. However, most articles contain the actual publish date at the top of the article.

Leave a Reply