I'd Like To Think They're Kidding
But I know they're not. In the midst of a discussion of the famed "beam weapons" imagined by Judy Wood and how ridiculous that speculation is, the supposedly responsible wing of the Troofers goes off the rails:
It could be that a lot of people come to DEW because they're already free energy believers. If you accept the latter then the former is obvious.
Another factor is probably that the pulverization of the concrete is poorly explained by conventional theories.
And while there seems to be general agreement that pushing the Death Star notion is not good politics, it cannot be ruled out.
Did it ever occur to you that it might be Judy Wood's job to incompetently advocate the advanced weaponry thesis so that the whole notion is discredited and never gets any serious research?
I am not satisfied by any of the explanations for the pulverized concrete. The notion that explosive nano-thermite could have done it has not to my knowledge been advanced in any rigorous way.
If the DEW people could provide adequate evidence, that's a different story entirely.
Agree. No one denies that Directed Energy Weapons are a lively, developing and horrific new field in unconventional warfare, nor that the Pentagon may well be 10-plus years ahead in terms of what is known to the public, nor indeed that DEW's may well be coming to a riot near you as a means of crowd control or as a new weapon to be used overseas (some reports indicate that DEW's are already being used in locales such as Iraq, but I have no hard evidence to indicate such), but there is ZERO evidence that they were employed on 911.
I do however find it interesting that both video morphology and directed energy weapons -- arguably two of the most significant (developing) means of unconventional warfare -- are being employed as disinformation tactics against the 911 truth movement.
There will come a time when both weapons will be used with some frequency, I suspect. Both audio and video morphing may have already been used in the various "Bin Laden" tapes.
One of the guys who refuses to rule out the beam weapons idea completely also decries using arguments from incredulity. But of course the whole "pulverized concrete" discussion is an argument from incredulity. "I don't believe it would look like that," is a classic argument from incredulity. Box Boy Richard Gage uses this in his presentations. He points out the pulverized concrete and claims that if explosives were not used, we would expect to see 110 floors of the World Trade Center stacked atop each other at the bottom of the pile. Since we don't see that, it must have been controlled demolition.
What a moron! Look, this is really simple. Even if the NWO had done controlled demolition with supernanothermitate, there would be no value to pulverizing the concrete. So we are left with two options: a) the concrete was (mostly) pulverized due to falling (on average) 55 stories, or b) the concrete was not mostly pulverized and claims that it was are largely a myth.
The website 9-11 Myths has a pretty good article on the pulverized concrete. Note in particular that Steven Jones himself has emphasized that describing the concrete as pulverized to a fine powder is an exaggeration:
As we examined the WTC-debris sample, we found large chunks of concrete (irregular in shape and size, one was approximately 5cm X 3 cm X 3cm) as well as medium-sized pieces of wall-board (with the binding paper still attached). Thus, the pulverization was in fact NOT to fine dust, and it is a false premise to start with near-complete pulverization to fine powder (as might be expected from a mini-nuke or a “star-wars” beam destroying the Towers). Indeed, much of the mass of the MacKinlay sample was clearly in substantial pieces of concrete and wall-board rather than in fine-dust form...
It seems that the 9/11 truth community likewise “has been slow to understand” that the WTC dust particles in greatest abundance are the “supercoarse” variety rather than “fine” particles, and that significant chunks of concrete were also found in the WTC rubble.
My take? I suspect a fair amount of the WTC concrete was pulverized from the collapse, but not all of it. I am thoroughly unsurprised by the notion that four-inch thick concrete floors falling from a great height were turned into dust by the collapse.