From: mohanprao
Date: 2015-08-01 21:00:49
I like this page you created, Andrew. It brings some light onto what some researchers positions have been on Dr. Wood´s work.After reading Where Did the Towers Go, it is obvious that the entirety of the evidence indicate an advanced technology similar to what Hutchison has demonstrated. I personally could not find any misrepresentation of the facts or misleading analysis in the book. To the contrary, I found her work very objective and scientific and based on physics. Also, I have not found any criticism of her work that is scientific and genuine. It´s as if the critics either never read her book or assume you will never read her book to see where they are wrong. Totally disingenuous criticism in my opinion.For Jan Irvin to dismiss Wood´s work as having too many fallacies, he is either basing his opinion on what A&E911Truth or other poor critiques say about it, or is absolutely lying. Dr. Wood does not use Slippery slope, Ad hominem, Straw man, Appeal to authority, etc.With a degree in materials science and interest in non-university physics like free-energy and scalar energy, I am able to understand nearly every detail in the book.So yes, I will certainly be more discerning with Irvin´s work. I still feel that the psychedelic revolution was largely a product of MKULTRA just from the FOIA, Freedom of Information Act, paper evidence. This is in alignment with the history of the CIA intervention in society with media ownership and control, producing the Beat Generation, modern art, punk rock, Hollywood movies and other social programs.
