9/11 Controlled Demolition vs. Forensic Facts: Judy Wood's Devastating Takedown of Richard Gage

Source: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-controlled-demolition-vs-forensic

This is going to be a rework of an answer by Dr Judy Wood, to Elsa Schieder, PhD, who hosted a truth summit from June 12 to 23, 2023, and during the two weeks she had interviews with 21 “truthers”, with vast array of differing subjects they specialize in, and one of the guests was Richard Gage, and let’s just say that Elsa was in for a surprise, when it came to the subject of the September 11, 2001 attack on America. More on Elsa’s truth summit here.Elsa Schieder has a triple disciplinary PhD - Psychology, Sociology, Literary Theory.She has taught in 6 departments at the university and college level: Humanities, Education, English, Film Studies, Women’s Studies, and Sociology. She was long a tenured Humanities prof at John Abbott College.Richard Gage was one of the first interviews she had recorded for her “Truth Summit”, scheduled for June 2023, and after posting about the interview to her contacts, she was contacted by numerous people for an additional 9/11 researcher, that she must get a hold of, and it ended up in some rather interesting additional conversations on the 9/11 subject.I suggest you check out the following articles she wrote, after the summit. Make sure to check out the explosive comment sections, as well as the rather explosive panel discussion on the close of her “truth summit”, where two 9/11 “truthers” ended up having a sparring session, and surprisingly enough, most of the panelists DISAGREED with Richard Gage. (Video below 5 minutes)1. A Personal Taking Stock on 9/112. REFUTATION OF GAGE’S GAME. See my original 2023 article - The Molecular Dissociation of the Thermite & Nuke theories And with that background, I would like to get into this article with regards to the refutation of Richard Gage, as the links in the PDF linked in point two above, need to be updated, which I will now do below, and add in some video clips, to help you understand more of the points highlighted, but also be sure to have a listen to my interview Dr Judy Wood, Dr Morgan Reynolds and Mark Conlon, aka 9/11 Planes Research, from March 11, 2026 - interview link I don't respond well to dishonest or insincere statements. My time is too valuable. If someone keeps posting the same nonsense for 15 years, it appears their objective is to consume my time and to manipulate others. How does it feel to know you’ve been manipulated? Mr. Gage has said that I dismiss thermite on page 126 of my book. Have you actually looked at page 126? What is discussed on page 126 is the lack of significant seismic signal as stated by Shyam Sunder, a section on “The Kitchen Sink,” and a section on “Occam’s Razor.” Thermite is mentioned in “The Kitchen Sink,” but only as an example of how some folks assume they’ll have the right answer if they claim everything was used, which is why I call that “The Kitchen Sink” approach. Thermite is discussed elsewhere, in depth. Why does Mr. Gage reference a page that does not discuss thermite in depth? Is it to be deceptive? If someone goes to page 126, they won’t find much of a discussion about thermite. So by referencing page 126, Mr. Gage is being deceptive and dishonest. If you want to know what thermite looks like, while just doing a single weld of railroad track, watch this and imagine what lower Manhattan would look like if a significant amount of thermite were used. From space, it might look like a piece of the sun had crashed into lower Manhattan. Andrew Johnson on Stew Peters, 2023 below. Have you reviewed where I addressed this very same nonsense article by Gage fifteen years ago? That article is over 15 years old. I addressed it July 2, 2008, shortly after they posted that article. The fact that Mr. Gage is still promoting that article tells you all you need to know about him. See Dr Wood’s FAQ page on her website. Click here.If you REALLY want me to refute Mr. Gage’s propaganda piece, you would read through the FAQ page. You’ve had that link. If you need particular links, here they are: Please go to the links for the information. I’m not going to reproduce my entire webpage in email and send it to you, but this should help get you started.Note the members are banned from AE911Truth if they talk about the evidence. Why would this be? See FAQ #38 The “URL” links below where the videos should be and should take you to the YouTube videos if the videos don’t show on the page. Clip below, from 2011.As I stated at the bottom of that section, “An organization that bans discussion of the truth, while promoting disinformation, brings into question their agenda.” That includes the audio to Mr. Gage’s claim that I’m practicing witchcraft. Note, insults usually indicate that the person has no facts to rely on. FAQ #38 “If someone makes the statement that I have overlooked this issue when this is not true, it brings their credibility into question.” FAQ #39FAQ #40 & FAQ #41 Figure 21. Thermal map excerpt taken September 16, 2001. Zone F was supposedly the largest hot spot. (9/16/01) Source and hereFigure 22. This is a view from the southern "shore" after a water-main broke. Note the "steam" appearance along the "northern shore" that cannot be the result of "hot water" because there are live people wading along that shore. (9/11/01) Source:Does Mr. Gage believe these first responders are wading through “hot molten metal”? FAQ #41 Why doesn’t Dr. Wood write refutations of all of the refutations claimed against her work?This one is most significant. There are numerous "debunking" articles that have been posted around the internet on various hit-piece sites, such as the Journal Of Nine Eleven Studies (or JONES). One might ask why they have chosen to spend their time presenting the appearance of "infighting" rather than submitting a Request for Correction (RFC) to NIST with their purported "evidence", as I have done with mine, and why they have spent their time writing deceptive and dishonest hit pieces on the only person who has filed a Federal Qui-Tam case, to hold anyone accountable for science fraud, covering up the destruction of the WTC buildings. Why haven't they spent their time filing a Federal Qui-Tam case with their so-called "evidence" instead of writing deceptive hit pieces? This is especially troubling and brings into question their organization's true objective. I have chosen to spend my time on determining what happened on 9/11, then submitting my findings to NIST in a Request for Correction (RFC), and subsequently filing a Federal Qui-Tam case seeking accountability for those who committed science fraud, and covering up the crime of 9/11. Some of those covering up the crime know whose technology was used to carry it out. So, why would the organized "truth movement" spend their energy and time writing hit pieces on me, instead of supporting this Federal Qui-Tam case? As of today (September 30, 2011), my book has been out almost a year. In that time, no one has refuted any of the information in my book. They cannot. It is empirical evidence. Much organized effort has been made to divert attention away from the evidence I have presented, and to misrepresent it, and to cover it up. Those spending their time writing hit pieces that create a false impression of my work, instead of addressing the evidence of what happened on 9/11, reveal their primary objectives in doing so. Note, twelve years (2023) after my book has been out, still no one has refuted anything in the book. They only promote disinformation about it. Here is the book, “Where Did the Towers Go?” You can ask yourself why Mr. Gage & Co. are denying this evidence?So, will Mr. Gage spend the next 15 years posting deceptive articles and demanding I refute the same article over and over, and over again? Or will he do something useful? What is his objective? Mr. Gage came on the scene and first posted his AE911Truth web page, shortly after I filed my RFC (Request For Corrections) to NIST (March 2007). And, from the start, Mr. Gage’s top priority appears to be to undermine the work of Dr. Judy Wood. If Mr. Gage wanted accountability for 9/11, he would have supported my Federal Qui-Tam case. If he felt he knew better, he would have filed his own case. Please answer this question: Why does Mr. Gage try to convince people that these first responders are wading through hot molten metal? FAQ #41Mr. Gage has been promoting this as rivers of hot-molten metal and lakes of hot-molten metal for 15 years. Why? Remember, he’s had my book for over 12+ years, and those images are in my book (page 272).There are more pictures of the firefighters wading in that area on page 274. Actually, it was a broken water main that flooded the area. No steam explosions and no boiled first responders. It should be pretty obvious they aren’t wading through hot molten metal. Andrew Johnson said it well. After these events, there is always, 1. the official story, 2. the official cover-up, and 3. the truth. Remember, it’s easier to control a large group of people than it is to control a single person. I now reclaim the remainder of my time. Dr. Judy WoodAlso read: 9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline - “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” - Vladimir Lenin 9/11 Jersey Girl, Patricia Casazza discusses her open letter with Sonia PoultonA half truth, is still a WHOLE LIE. - Patricia Casazza - Interview If you like reading my articles and would like to buy me a coffee, please follow the link to my PayPal, as substack does not allow for payments to my country yet.If this is the first article of mine you’re reading, please rewind to my first article and work your way through all of them, as you’ve missed out on a lot of valuable 9/11 and “9/11 truther movement” information.The long awaited “New Investigation”, read this very scary book by Dr Judy Wood.For a 1h crash course into the destruction at the WTC watch the 9/11 Essential Guide.For a crash course into all three sites on 9/11, watch 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality.Free PDF book downloads by Andrew Johnson:9/11 – Finding the Truth and also 9/11 – Holding the TruthCome join the discussion on Telegram, find me on X and check out my Rumble channel. Share

🔐 Cryptographic Verification

Archived URL: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-controlled-demolition-vs-forensic

�� CONTENT HASHES:
  SHA-256:  5a5e80c289bd799da7462be93e71c9296102c262c6fbead73daccc963cf2043d
  BLAKE2b:  d991df3c214bcf415196a1d721b5e12978ecf616cd1f361b70c07e734c7de1d9
  MD5:      a187a0ee87d33d207601a8c970d5fb64

�� TITLE HASHES:
  SHA-256:  0f4846debb1372900890e28e14f7818baae95e9c627f016b1a41f4f59371c1e4
  BLAKE2b:  c443911fa5de5daba9e96db559f6ecc77399f98d785e44667d8b0138608ea0b0
  MD5:      618b806ed1ffb06e4e5ac180a4a2a94a

�� INTEGRITY HASHES:
  SHA-256:  0b3169c00ce669331be6df43282e3bff7d9254080c58ee08bdeedb3b1294d795
  BLAKE2b:  bd3d4dd1ffd913b261d6d1ef9dde336f7d43ed66664f02fdd1e9d041406ed5dd
  MD5:      f545d91e11d4d6a97cae314e16887005

Archived with ArcHive - Client-side cryptographic archival system