Rense and Wood: Disinfoteque

11 minutes, in, Wood is asked about what can turn solids into dust, and instead of mentioning a nuclear blast, says "the Hutchison effect". Now, as far as I can tell, the Hutchison effect is completely fraudulent, but even assuming there is something to it, nowhere has anyone shown the Hutchison effect turning steel into dust. So this is complete misdirection. What happens next is even more remarkable-- Wood starts referring to chain reactions of disintegration. But instead of referring to the obvious example-- nuclear fission, she ascribes it to the bogus Hutchison effect. Then, just as remarkably, Wood mentions the Bankers Trust building being contaminated, so they had to tear it down even though it wasn't really damaged. Contaminated-- no, not by radioactive material, but by some mysterious chain reaction, according to Wood. Then they go onto discuss the fine dust made during the destruction of the WTC, and of course Wood doesn't mention that high explosives and especially nuclear explosions, produce fine dust from disintegrating the substance. No, it's some MYSTERIOUS effect we don't know what it is, even though in every way, the evidence she describes perfectly fits nuclear demolition. And of course, much of the other strangeness can be explained by EMP effects, and EMPs are well known to be produced during nuclear blasts. But does Wood ever mention this? Not that I've heard. It's almost as if THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT NUCLEAR DEMOLITION. Yeah, they will say, oh, there were no bright flashes (when there were some, and such flashes would have been greatly dampened in the way and underground nuke is mostly know by its debris trails), or there were no loud blast sounds (when there were), or the heat at Ground Zero did not even exist (though it was extremely well-documented)!

Then, at the same time, Rense starts going on and on about Israelis being behind 9/11 (when they are obvious patsies if you think about it).

Now I should note that I hadn't heard Rense before. He's got a very nice, pleasant voice and easy style-- much better than most other conspiracy hosts I've heard, particularly Alex Jones and Josh Reeves. But here we have Wood spouting the disinfo, and Rense lapping it up, and adding to the mix with his own disinfo.

It's enough to make a serious conspiracy researcher gag. Amusingly, this segment starts out with Wood complaining about all the people attacking her. I have really tried to refrain from attacking Wood as a person, but she is blatantly misrepresenting the evidence. There are other odd things about Wood's story that I won't go into here, but I will mention how incredibly slick her book is.