|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Jul 29, 2008 22:47:03 GMT -4
Not many know that a major hurricane - Hurricane Erin - was in the Atlantic Ocean in September of 2001. In fact, Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself. But the TV news networks had little reporting on this hurricane. Contrary to Erin, however, Hurricane Katrina had virtually 24 hour coverage, even before it hit land. Interestingly, Erin was stronger than Katrina the day before 9/11. So why didn’t the media cover Erin, say, on September 10? The astronauts in the space station commented on the WTC smoke plume, but made no mention of the monstrous hurricane next to it. How come? Those interested in learning the secret between hurricanes and Tesla Coils should see Dr Judy Wood’s new paper “9/11 Weather Anomalies and Field Effects”. She presents evidence suggesting Erin was part of the mechanism used to turn the Twin Towers to dust. The paper is chock full of photos and analysis and is highly recommended. drjudywood.com/articles/erinMagnetometer data from alaska.edu shows the earth's magnetic field shifted with every 9/11 "event". This includes the plane-shaped holes appearing in the towers. The World Trade Center was destroyed with directed energy weapons. See this analysis by former Clemson University Professor of Mechanical Engineering Dr Judy Wood for info on the magnetometer data: drjudywood.com/articles/erin/erin5.html
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Jul 30, 2008 8:28:24 GMT -4
Not many know that a major hurricane - Hurricane Erin - was in the Atlantic Ocean in September of 2001. In fact, Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself. But the TV news networks had little reporting on this hurricane. Contrary to Erin, however, Hurricane Katrina had virtually 24 hour coverage, even before it hit land. Interestingly, Erin was stronger than Katrina the day before 9/11. So why didn’t the media cover Erin, say, on September 10? From Wikipedia (I didn't bother with a more thorough research, as someone who believes in Judy Wood you are going to ignore it anyway)... So appearantely Erin wasn't heading for the Coast, there was much less cause for alarm. Also your claim " Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself" is at best misleading (at least the windspeeds were higher on the 10th according to the National Hurricane Center)
|
|
|
Post by dmundt on Jul 30, 2008 10:13:44 GMT -4
What about the plane sized, er.. planes that actually hit the towers? Were they decoys to distract us from Dr. Evil's super magnet?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jul 30, 2008 11:10:02 GMT -4
Tesla coils? Magnetic field shifts? Directed energy weapons? Go on, pull the other one.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jul 30, 2008 12:07:24 GMT -4
You know, I saw this yesterday and thought, "It would take about a minute and a half's research to demolish this, wouldn't it?" And then I thought, "Anyone who believed it in the first place wouldn't listen to my research, would they?"
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 30, 2008 14:46:36 GMT -4
Not many know that a major hurricane - Hurricane Erin - was in the Atlantic Ocean in September of 2001. In fact, Erin was closest to NYC, and at its largest size, on 9/11 itself.Arguable, as already pointed out. It was also weakened, hundreds of miles away, and no threat to the U.S. East Coast. Over its existence, Erin injured no one and caused only minimal damage anywhere. It was a non-event. But the TV news networks had little reporting on this hurricane. Contrary to Erin, however, Hurricane Katrina had virtually 24 hour coverage, even before it hit land. Interestingly, Erin was stronger than Katrina the day before 9/11. Katrina was threatening a flood-prone population center. Erin was hundreds of miles away, weakening, and heading away. So why didn’t the media cover Erin, say, on September 10?Wrong again.The astronauts in the space station commented on the WTC smoke plume, but made no mention of the monstrous hurricane next to it. Can you provide evidence that the crew did not mention Hurricane Erin that day? How come?Hmmm, that's a tough one. Could it be because they were more concerned with attacks that had killed several thousand people than with a hurricane that didn't hurt anyone? Those interested in learning the secret between hurricanes and Tesla Coils should see Dr Judy Wood’s new paper “9/11 Weather Anomalies and Field Effects”. She presents evidence suggesting Erin was part of the mechanism used to turn the Twin Towers to dust. The paper is chock full of photos and analysis and is highly recommended. drjudywood.com/articles/erinMs. Wood presents no theory, let alone evidence; she merely waves her hands and makes a series of bizarre and unsupported claims. In a thread over at the Randi forums, I and other posters debunked her "directed-energy weapon" claims thoroughly (including quantitative analyses by four separate posters). Among other things, she claims directed-energy weapons were used to destroy various WTC structures, but is not even able to specify what kind of weapon was allegedly used. It's a sad mess; she appears to be mentally ill.
|
|
|
Post by dmundt on Jul 30, 2008 15:11:21 GMT -4
cbbrooklyn, are you a one hit wonder or do you want to discuss your post?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 30, 2008 15:21:13 GMT -4
Judy Wood is grade A nutcase, period.
|
|
|
Post by pzkpfw on Jul 30, 2008 20:44:27 GMT -4
Is she the one who was given glowing reviews on GLP?
(If so, she seems to have gone right off the deep end, looking for the most odd relationships to "prove" what she already wants to believe.)
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Jul 30, 2008 22:32:30 GMT -4
How come Erin was parked closest to NYC on 9/11, and then u-turned the next day?
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jul 30, 2008 23:02:02 GMT -4
I think the answer is...currents. When I was in Newfoundland in 1989 Hurricane Dean came to town. Notice anything similiar?
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 30, 2008 23:46:34 GMT -4
How come Erin was parked closest to NYC on 9/11, and then u-turned the next day? Not even true. Erin had been predicted to turn for days before based on winds and currents. It was also mentioned in the news on the 10th and the 11th but was not a big deal because it was not expected to make landfall. Even if for some reason it did it would likely have weakened as it went over progressively colder water. It is also not true that it was " stronger than Katrina" to use your own words as it only ever made it to a category 2. This is a huge non-issue.
|
|
|
Post by cbbrooklyn on Jul 30, 2008 23:57:26 GMT -4
The wind speeds were stronger than Katrina. Try looking at the data.
Why did the earth's magnetic field shift with every 9/11 event?
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Jul 31, 2008 1:06:58 GMT -4
The field shifts constantly, as can be seen on the source site, and if you look at a few - random - days - and - stations you will find many plots that looks similar, some calmer, and some noisier. The fact that a few of the event times sort of match some of the peaks and transitions on that day is purely grasping at straws.
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Jul 31, 2008 1:14:47 GMT -4
|
|