Andrew Johnson has recently published a thoroughly researched and thought-provoking book entitled "Climate Change and Global Warming - Exposed: Hidden Evidence, Disguised Plans". The book really is an essential read and I highly recommend checking it out as the research contained within the pages of this book has implications for everybody. The evidence will hopefully allow you to reassess the stage-managed / perception-managed false paradigms of "climate change" and "global warming". Below is an overview of the book from Andrew's website "checktheevidence.com" - with links to the various places where you can get a copy of it.
"The weather is something which affects all of us, every day of our lives. It dictates our long and short-term plans. In the UK, the weather is the "default topic" of conversation for strangers and friends alike. Though it has obvious and far reaching importance, most people don't know very much about the weather. These days, they don't take time to observe it and probably spend more time looking at a screen than they do looking at the sky. They don't really know why the weather seems to be changing. They are told by mainstream sources that anthropogenic (human) activity is having a negative effect on the weather. This book collects together, for the first time anywhere, a range of diverse data which proves that the whole issue of “climate change” is more complicated and challenging than almost all researchers into all these topics are willing to consider, examine or entertain. The book covers the global warming myth, geoengineering proposals, persistent jet trails, weather anomalies, weather modification, 9/11 and Agenda 21. Most of the people that need to read this book probably won't ever hear about it. It is hoped that, by the time you have read this book, your world-view will have been shattered completely and you will have learned about the manipulation that you and everyone else, has been subjected to, since talk of global warming and climate change was first heard in the late 1980s. Once you have read and inwardly digested the contents of this book, your immunity against global deception and psychological manipulation will be increased."
Around this time every year, I try to post a little something about the subject of 9/11. Today is the 16th (an inverted 91!) anniversary of the events of that tragic day in 2001. Despite the fact that many people have now awoken to (or are in the process of awakening to) the truth about what really happened on that day, there are still many people who maintain that 9/11 took place exactly as the mainstream media narrative dictated. There are also people who have always had questions about the events of 9/11 and have looked around the internet and “tripped over” the various limited-hangouts that exist purely to mislead people who are curious about the truth of 9/11. Some of these latter folk have stalled their curiosity by falling for the notion of bombs being planted in the WTC (and several surrounding) buildings before 9/11. Others fall for the idea of the use of thermite or even “mini-nukes” on 9/11. Such notions are based on a myriad of unsupported theories and endless speculation. This limited-hangout perspective of the events of 9/11 creates a conclusion in certain minds that, whilst being “very fishy”, the idea of the events of 9/11 being anything other than what the official narrative tells us has no real solid evidence. It’s all just another “conspiracy theory” from the “tin-foil hat wearing brigade”! I can tell you here and now that this conclusion couldn’t be further from the truth. Although I have been researching 9/11 since (pretty much) the day it happened, it wasn’t until roughly eight years ago that I discovered the ground-breaking research of Dr Judy Wood. For those of you unfamiliar with Dr Judy Wood, here is an overview of her credentials taken from the website “Where Did the Towers Go”: “Dr. Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division. Dr. Wood received her B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering), M.S. Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992).” http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/author/
I cannot stress how important it is for people to go away and study the evidence that has been gathered by Dr Judy Wood. There is no way I could do justice to the evidence, that this lady has presented in her book “Where Did the Towers Go?” - a few sentences here or even a lengthy article wouldn’t begin to scratch the surface. In a nutshell, Dr Judy Wood’s data evidentially demonstrates conclusively that the Twin Towers of the WTC complex did not collapse or blow-up. Quite simply, they sizeably turned to dust in mid-air. Dr Judy Wood’s data also demonstrates that this process was not caused by impacting “jet liners” and the like. Rather, the destruction of the Twins Towers (and seemingly multiple surrounding buildings in the WTC complex area) was caused by a weapon of directed free-energy technology. Sounds almost difficult to believe doesn’t it!? Unfortunately, this is the reality of what happened on 9/11 and the overwhelming and demonstrable evidence collated by Dr Judy Wood is the proof of this. The implications of the use of this type of technology in use on 9/11 is staggering. Not only does it evidentially prove that the world was wholly lied to about what really happened on 9/11 (and, for that matter, every single day ever since 9/11), but it also demonstrates that there are free-energy technologies in existence that (whilst offering a very real and practical way out of the economic and scientific prisons that the masses of the world are currently trapped in) have been perverted into usage as devastating weapons of destruction capable of killing countless people and potentially destroying vast areas of landscape. There is also another aspect of the technology used on 9/11 with serious implications – that of the bizarre behaviour of Hurricane Erin, that was due to make landfall in New York on the morning of 9/11. Just before 9/11 took place, Hurricane Erin seemingly defied the laws of nature by making an abrupt right-turn on itself and headed straight back out into the Atlantic Ocean. How convenient for what was to subsequently take place! However, I don’t believe in coincidences on this scale! Dr Judy Wood’s evidence shows that Hurricane Erin was either a component aspect of the directed free-energy technological mechanism that occurred on 9/11 or, at the very least, was affected by the process. It seems a little bizarre that, on the anniversary of 9/11, the east coast of American has been battered by seemingly multiple hurricanes. Even the most sceptical of my friends and colleagues have voiced the concern that there is something really odd going on in the US with these weather phenomenon – although many of them have blindly and naively dismissed the oddities as “probably climate change” (my rebuttal to this will have to be a subject for another time!) If, as the evidence demonstrates, directed free-energy technology can affect huge hurricanes, it is not outside the realms of possibility that something has been manipulating the current weather phenomenon in the US. Some food for thought… With the anniversary of 9/11 once again here, it is always vital that we do not blindly accept the mainstream version of these kinds of historically tragedies. I’m sure (although the current weather phenomenon may take attention away from it somewhat) that there will be several documentaries aired on the mainstream media this week to “remind” people of, and reinforce, the “official” narrative of 9/11. No doubt, the mainstream news media will also give 9/11 a few mentions for the same reasons. If you are curious about, or have an interest in, the events of 9/11, I would suggest that this year you try something a little different. Give the mainstream “official” version of 9/11 a miss and have a look at the truth instead. It could very well completely change your perspectives on a great many subjects. Below, I have listed links to a wealth of material that discusses the evidence of what really happened on 9/11. If this is all new to you, you might want to fasten your proverbial “seat belt” as it can be an uncomfortable ride. Far be it from me to compare anybody to a horse, but it is apt to use an old adage in this regard: “you can take a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink!” Whilst it may be uncomfortable to see and hear the truth about 9/11, the rewards are infinite. We should always be prepared to ask tough questions about our own world views and perspectives. Yes, it is never comfortable when we realise we have been led down the so-called “garden path” and lied to repeatedly. Pride sometimes kicks in and can breed denial as a means to avoid admitting that we’ve taken for a “mug”! However, we should never be ashamed to admit that we don’t always know what we think we know or, perish the thought, that we might be wrong about something. As a species, our greatest strength can be in learning from our mistakes. In fact, admitting such things allows for growth and makes us more well-rounded human beings. It opens us up to greater possibilities and other avenues in our lives. It enriches us and helps to free us from any shackles we have, or allow to be, imposed upon us. It might be trite or clichéd to some, but it really is the case that “the truth can set you free.” Please try to take the time to check out the following links. You won’t be disappointed! Carl (The Truth Seeker’s Guide)
Dr Judy Wood - author of "Where Did The Towers Go?", will be speaking at several venues across the UK over the next few weeks. For anybody who is unaware of her work, this will be unique opportunity to hear her talk about her extensive and exhaustive research into 9/11 - research which truly lifts the lid on what really did happen to The Twin Towers and has huge implications regarding Free Energy Technology.
Following her appearance (this weekend) at the Breakthrough Energy Movement (BEM) Conference in Holland, Dr Wood will be giving a number of presentations around the UK – in a packed schedule. She will be giving an updated/augmented presentation following on from the ones she gave in October 2011 in the UK. It is hoped that at least one of these will be filmed and made available online and/or in DVD format.
I recently discussed how I could use my musical work in a more positive light. Well here is my first outing! I recently produced and recorded a cover version of Kate Bush's classic song "Cloudbusting", in order to create a short video highlighting some basic issues regarding environmental and weather modification. The original tune addressed the work of the groundbreaking scientist and psychologist Wilhelm Reich. In this regard, I felt the song fitted the wider subject perfectly. I hope you enjoy the song and the video and hopefully give me a "thumbs-up" on my new youtube channel!! I will be posting other videos there (and here) in due course: http://youtu.be/paH-yulDEZ4 I've also embedded the video below.
The methods used to bring down the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre is a huge matter for debate in the truth community. These matters have been fuelled and compounded by photographic and video footage combined with eyewitness testimony. As the media began coverage of events, many individuals (including certain reporters) made claims about all manner of aircraft and hardware, with some showing no knowledge of the involvement of jet airliners: “A bomb has gone off” and “There has been a huge explosion” were the sorts of statements made.
As events progressed, people were continually being corrected by news anchors: “It was high jacked planes!“ Eventually there were numerous people, cited as eyewitnesses, who were actually from certain institutional agencies and organisations. Some have even been exposed as ‘fake testimony’ (individuals claiming to be a certain individual when they clearly were somebody else!). These people were shown by the mainstream media repeatedly as reliable testimony, almost as if to reinforce an engineered consensus: “Two planes slammed into the towers!” (I will discuss the media’s role in 9/11 in a forthcoming post).
Reconciling inconsistencies in the wealth of eyewitness accounts from 9/11, is difficult. There are a huge number of people who never actually saw planes, yet saw and heard the initial explosions. Some have subsequently filled in the gaps based on “general consensus”. Yet if pushed, they still cannot be 100% sure they even saw a plane. One or two witnesses have even claimed to have seen a plane, yet heard no explosion! Make of that what you will! Testimony from the moments before both the impacts and the collapses, also describe unusual sound anomalies. Droning, hissing and “thrushing” sounds were spoken off by several witnesses. The sound of military-like jets and missiles were also spoken of by others. It is difficult to imagine how the brain ultimately compartmentalises a first hand experience like 9/11. I believe the lack of consistency amongst these differing accounts, exposes the flaws in the ‘official’ story.
More revealing, are numerous accounts of various differing aircraft. Some witnessed small planes: “It looked like a commuter plane” (Don Wright), “The plane appeared to hold 8 to 12 people” (Steve Patterson), etc. Anthony Bartolomey , in his interviews stated: “Numerous civilians were telling me that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane”.
Former Republican Party insider Karl Schwarz began investigating oddities in the wake of 9/11. In running across the video footage in a French foreign film entitled The Barbarian Invasion (a film unrelated to 9-11), he noticed a 1 minute 52 second video segment, shot by an unknown amateur photographer at the WTC, which Schwartz says clearly shows a Boeing 737 airliner striking the south tower… rather than the government claimed 767. Schwarz said he also had evidence that the engine recovered in the WTC wreckage was a model type CFM56, which propels a 737, not a 767.
There was even an account from Tom Wright (an operations manager at FAA’s New York Terminal Radar Approach Control - DRACON) of a Sikorsky helicopter that was tracked until it collided with the WTC at 8.27am on 9/11. He also claimed that it was “the only target that we saw in the vicinity of the Trade Centre”.
It is conceivable that there would be numerous differing accounts. Despite the fact that, the FAA grounded all aircraft (including military) at 9.24am, various credible internet video footage shows passenger jets in the skies throughout the day. It has been confirmed that the Bin Laden family was flown out of the US after the lockdown, so how many planes were still in the air? Student video footage from across the Hudson River shows fighter jets speeding toward the Towers (between the initial ‘impact’ and collapse) and throughout the day. This poses the larger question of a military presence being able to prevent said ‘attacks’! Even at the moment of ‘impact’, video footage reveals both: a large commercial aircraft flying past the North Tower, as it was hit and a white aircraft behind the towers, as the South Tower was hit.
There were also claims of military hardware: “I was convinced it was a missile”, ”We heard what sounded like a missile”, “One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building” (Anthony Bartolomey), etc. At 9.06am, PAPD Police Desk radio report, PA Channel W reported: “Units on channel W, this is 8581 Sierra. There’s been a reported missile launching from the Woolworth Building. CPD, if you are monitoring, get in touch with New York City. Have them check the Woolworth Building roof top".
The debate about military vehicles and devices was blown open, with claims made about a ’pod’ attached to the underbelly of Flight 175. Subsequent study of numerous photographs and video footage has shown this ’pod’ to be visible from several angles. Researchers have studied the smaller amount of footage of Flight 11 and showed the possibility that it too had a ’pod’. Whilst it is difficult to quantify this theory given the ease with which footage can be doctored, it has fuelled truthers and sceptics alike. Those who follow the ’official story’ claim it is nothing more than shadows and light anomalies. Truth Seekers have been heartened by several independent successes with video analysis. Whilst experts don’t know what it is, they can rule out the shadows and lighting factors. It appears that it is very much a part of the whole vehicle. Combined with the ’flash’ footage that pre-empts the ’impact’, some believe that it is an Incendiary Device. Thus calling the nature of these two planes into doubt.
Were they military in nature? FOX employee, Mark Burnback stated at the time: “There was definitely a blue logo with like a circular logo on the front of the plane, toward the… yeah, definitely toward the front. It definitely didn’t look like a commercial plane. I didn’t see any windows on the side… It was not a normal flight that I’ve ever seen. It did not look like it belonged in this area”. Footage from the time shows eyewitnesses initial observations. One woman screams: “That was not an American Airline” (repeatedly). One man said; “The plane wasn’t no airline or anything. It was a twin engine, big, grey plane”. With this in mind, you have to ask the question: If not Flight 11 and 175, what happened to the planes they claimed were used? Where are the passengers and crew? Considering the answer to this question is a chilling realisation…
You would also have to ask, would those responsible have people prepared to fly vehicles into certain death? The Japanese did it in WW2! Those who believe in an agenda would loyally lay down their lives for, what they perceive to be, the greater good. However, what if these aircraft were unmanned? As crazy as that may sound, it has applications based firmly in reality. In 1984, The NASA Dryden Flight Research Centre and the FAA flew a fully fuelled Boeing 720 via remote control and crash it into the ground. In 1994, An experiment at the Crows Landing NASA Facility in the Central Valley of California involved 110 landings of a Boeing 737 airliner using an experimental GPS navigation system. On April 24, 2001, The Global Hawk made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned, robotic aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean. On August 25, 2001, Raytheon (several of the listed 9/11 flight passengers were employed by Raytheon!) and the U.S. Air Force successfully auto lands a pilot-less FedEx Boeing 727 six times using a military GPS landing system that enabled ground control to take control of a hijacked airplane and force land it. They also successfully completed flight testing of a system providing accurate and reliable landing guidance for both rotary and fixed wing aircraft during low visibility (Category I and II) approaches, on September 6, 2001.
All four planes hijacked were made by Boeing (a major defence contractor) and have virtually the same flight decks, can store an entire flight path plan, and can be automatically flown immediately after takeoff up until landing. It is strange when you consider that the two Boeing 767's that were claimed to have hit the North and South WTC Towers crashed at approximately the same angle, both hitting their targets tilting to the left. The technology to precisely fly planes by remote, avoiding obstacles and undertaking manoeuvres of near impossibility for a living pilot, is in commercial use today. Military technology is known to be at least 20 years ahead of that in commercial use, so it is certainly feasible.
In examining the theory of unconventional weaponry use to collapse the towers, I must credit Dr Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson for their tireless research into the subject of energy weapons or means. Whilst I still have certain reservations about these matters, I am certainly open to the idea. Especially if you consider the 60 year or more history of classified research, development and testing of microwave weapons, exotic energy weapons and weather modification technology. I am convinced these means exist in some form and, with this in mind, it is not such a stretch of the imagination to entertain the notion of black technology usability in a false flag or covert operation.
Many in the truth movement have lambasted these ideas and, whether you agree or not, the research into this theory is certainly worth taking the time to at least examine… instead of immediately dismissing out of hand. Whilst studying the “bubbling”, “foaming” and “dustification” effect, visible in footage of the collapses, they have also pointed to anomalies in the surrounding area. Upturned cars, bizarre scorching of vehicles, inconsistent fire damage of property and environment and ’cold fires’ (photographs show rescue workers walking through small fires with no effect on the person).
Evidence of these unconventional methods to bring down the towers, may lie in the mystery surrounding Hurricane Erin, which was over the Atlantic Ocean and the longest-lived hurricane in the 2001 Atlantic hurricane season. The hurricane maintained peak strength for 18 hours. Erin should have made New York landfall on September 11, yet it rapidly decelerated and veered off in a totally different easterly direction. Although it could be argued that nature is, by it’s very nature (no pun intended), is unpredictable… is it just a bizarre coincidence?. If Erin had continued on course, we would not have had clear blue skies on 9/11 (for the footage!), flights may have been delayed or cancelled and we may never have had an event called 9/11. It may have been 9/14 or 9/26 (the numerological significance of the date would have diminished though!)… who can tell. However, anybody who knows the history of weather modification projects knows that altering the path of a hurricane is not so far fetched as it may appear.
The problem with examining the twin towers as evidence of a cover-up? It is difficult to get close to solid proof. The Towers evidence (whilst damning) contradicts itself… left, right and centre.
Proof of something more tangible lay just down the road from the centre of attention though. Whilst most people didn’t realise it, a confession of guilt was televised, live and for all to see…. At World Trade Centre Building 7. To Be Continued…
.jpg)
Andrew Johnson has recently published a thoroughly researched and thought-provoking book entitled "Climate Change and Global Warming - Exposed: Hidden Evidence, Disguised Plans". The book really is an essential read and I highly recommend checking it out as the research contained within the pages of this book has implications for everybody. The evidence will hopefully allow you to reassess the stage-managed / perception-managed false paradigms of "climate change" and "global warming". Below is an overview of the book from Andrew's website "checktheevidence.com" - with links to the various places where you can get a copy of it.
