Dr. Judy Wood

Deanna and Dr. Judy Wood discussed the events that took place on September 11th 2001. They also discussed the evidence that Dr. Wood has presented and published in her book, Where Did The Towers Go?
“Empirical evidence is the truth that theory must mimic”
A few calls were taken from listeners with a guest caller, Joey, a flight attendant for United Airlines who was in the air that day being the first and remaining on the line during the broadcast. He had taken off earlier in the day at 7:00 AM from Boston headed for San Francisco and was rerouted for an emergency landing to Des Moines, Iowa. (MP3)

15 comments on “Dr. Judy Wood

  1. Rebekah Roth has gone into huge detail about what happened to the planes. Pretty irrefutable. This flight attendant knows nothing compared to what Rebekah knows – and has learned. Deanna and Judy, I am ashamed of you. Two female truth seekers who can knock another truth seeker. Give me a break. This is incredibly disappointing.

    Rebekah Roth has a gigabyte of Freedom of Information she is pouring through, and in my opinion is putting her life at risk with what she is coming out with. I just did not think Judy Wood was so vindictive, and that “flight attendant” is just driving me crazy. Deanna, I am so disappointed in you for allowing this.

    Rebekah knows EXACTLY where the planes were sent to.
    Listen to some of her interviews. She tells you where they went and how she figured it out.
    For me she has the answers to what really happened to the planes.
    We’ve had lots of ideas, but she provides the proof.
    Judy gives the DEW information, Rebekah gives the plane information and others give the money / gold situation.
    Another remarkable book, “The Most Dangerous Book in the World” by Bain, gives us the occult forces behind 911.


  2. I have been pulling up Rebekah Roth interviews, trying to discover Judy Wood’s and her spokesman Andrew Johnson’s keen interest is in discrediting her. I think it’s surreal that Judy Wood would drag some flight attendant on Deanna’s show to say his plane was told to land on 9/11 and that Rebekah Roth’s book is fairy tales, fiction and lies, also boring and stupid. Really, what did his input add 9/11 understanding? He just sucked up the first part of the show, bored people away, anda distracted from discussion of 9/11 Evidence that is the reason people tune in to Judy Wood. We don’t CARE what Andrew Johnson has to say or some flight attendant has to say who’s taking an hour to rate Rebekah Roth’s book as though he is a professional writer instead of a has-been flight attendant. If his plane had to land on 9/11 that doesn’t make him a judge of anything and he had no facts or logic or anything to contribute to the discussion. Why Judy Wood wanted him on the show is beyond my understanding.

    Really: What gives with Joey the Flight Attendant and his breathtaking announcement that his plane had to land on 9/11?

    To find an answer to what is eating Judy Wood and her cult of followers, click on the link that Deanna posted above — to one of Andrew Johnson’s articles on his Aliens on Mars/Hollow Earth website, aka CheckTheEvidence – where he snipes at Roth. The article reminds me of The Attack of the Woodies on Mike King the last time Andrew Johnson appeared to bloviate on behalf of Judy Wood (a few weeks ago). In his article, which I find petty and whiny, he complains about Roth mentioning the recent DEW weapon attack on China, and comparing the toasted … err, wilted cars picture in China with Wood’s FOIA 9/11 crime-scene photo on her website. http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=410&Itemid=60

    It is all so surreal, but after reading this article it’s beginning to dawn clearer than it did at first when I was jolted by the complaint by the Woodie Cult that Mike King had used a photo off Wood’s website to compare to the photo of a recent DEW attack in China.

    It appears to me, the more I look into this weirdness, that the Woodies (my name for the Judy Wood cult) are all in a tizzy over the possibility of Wood having to share a big whistleblower settlement “they” expect to get for Wood’s work on 9/11 Evidence – evidence she obtained by a FOIA request, and organized, analyzed and presented to the public in a textbook and in lectures and in a huge website. It was a yoeman’s accomplishment, without a doubt.

    But apparently no one is allowed to add to this evidence, and no one can copy any of the photos on her website, even if it is evidence paid for by the NY taxpayers, and is in the public domain, and can be obtained by anyone by way of a FOIA request.

    In the article, Andrew Johnson snipes Roth for calling herself a ‘9/11 expert’ when as he says “she doesn’t even know if it’s Wood or Woods.”

    Zzzzzzzzzz Cult much?

    And his talking about qui tam of 2007? Whistleblowers get to collect on a settlement?

    Listeners tune in to Deanna’s show to hear Judy Wood talk about 9/11 Evidence – but get stuck every time with Andrew Johnson blathering on about why people don’t know or care about Judy Wood’s work. Now lately, when people do bring up her work the big concern seems to be that people might be trying to steal her qui tam whistleblower settlement she ‘might’ get someday.

    Or, secondly, that people not be pointing any fingers at the Jews for 9/11.

    I used to greatly admire Dr. Judy Wood, and I still do appreciate her work. But she seems to have lost her $oul, and she is not focused, not the same cheerful and enthusiastic teacher of 9/11 Evidence she once was. She doesn’t seem to care about teaching.

    Maybe we need to take up a collection for poor Dr. Wood so she doesn’t have to work so hard to peddle her books and bring people on radio shows and posting in forums to help her debunk Rebekah Roth and Mike King for mentioning or using one of her FOIA-obtained photos from her website without permission?

    Seems Rebekah Roth noted the same thing Mike King did — and Andrew Johnson isn’t happy about THAT either! But then neither is Judy Wood, who brought on some flight attendant guy (retired?) to debunk her. How did she think he would be able to debunk the logical and factual things that Roth has brought forth? He didn’t even try to. But he did blabber on for a long time, vintage Andrew Johnson.

    Andrew Johnson’s sniping article is all about who is the ‘real’ expert on 9/11. Since Rebekah Roth doesn’t know about much of anything concerning 9/11 other than the stewardess/flight attendant’s perspective of analyzing the transcripts of the murdered flight attendant statements on 9/11 – to prove the flight attendants were reading from a script and not speaking their own words. And logically convincing why the planes could never have left the airport. Leaving us with one conclusion: that the passengers had to have been murdered right in the airport hanger, and now the Jews have their ‘proof’ that Muslims did it, and we can go to war andproceed to blow up the planet for the Jews.

    Why should we just ignore her arguments? We NEED her perspective, in this narrow area of the planes — were Americans really hijacked and murdered by Muslims? Roth has more evidence, more logic, to prove to us that there were NO MUSLIMS HIJACKING ANY PLANES ON 9/11. Further, she’s showing us that no planes even left the hanger of the airport. I want to hear what she says, and I find her information convincing. I think the Woodies are acting as bad as anything they’ve ever complained about Jones, Fetzer, or any of the Fake Truthers.

    I find Roth’s information compelling and convincing, and I’m glad to consider her input. When it comes to how airports are run and how flight attendants speak and do their job, Rebekah Roth is the expert, and Dr. Wood and her Woodie friends are the ones in the dark. They need to shut up and listen, and they might learn something. They are not the ONLY ones who know anything about 9/11.

    Hey, it’s a piece of the puzzle. We in the public are interested. It’s good information. If Roth ends up horning in on Judy Wood’s ‘take’ on a qui tam award, that’s fine with me.

    And I note also in his article (and really who cares what Andrew “Hollow Earth” Johnson says anyway?) .. that Andrew Johnson is critical of finger-pointing to blame Israel for 9/11. Why so? It’s obvious as the nose on our faces that the Jews were behind ALL of it, just like they behind are all the terrorist attacks and every war pretty much that’s been fought for the past millennium.

    Wait until Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson and the REST OF HER CULT OF FRIENDS (handlers?) get to arguing over her (their) Whistleblower settlement, if she ever does get one – and they are demanding THEIR share. Andrew Johnson is already claiming all of Dr. Wood’s work is “our work,” as though he had anything to do with writing her textbook or putting together her huge website, or presenting her lectures, which are totally excellent, and compiled on YouTube, many dozens of them.

    As to Who Dunnit – there is much obvious evidence that we ordinary dummies, any of us willing or able to even gently use the brains God gave us and some critical thinking, can figure out the obvious conclusion that the Jews Dunnit.

    ONE BIG OBVIOUS PROOF that it’s the Jews is all the subliminals of burning Twin Towers that were planted throughout the movies, television programs, comic books, and even (and especially) in the design of our money for years before the 9/11 caper. Planted by who? Well, who else? By the people who own and makae these movies, television programs, comic books — AND OF COURSE WE KNOW WHO MAKES THE MONEY.

    Also, proof number two: que bono, who profits? It’s obvious. Even if we didn’t know about the Dancing Israelis or the Israelis arrested with all the bombs and plans to blow up NYC bridges – who were sent off to the Badlands of Israel – I mean it’s obvious. Even if none of these things were so – no subliminals, no Dancing Israelis , and even if the world were not in a meltdown now from Israel’s patsy sending our American planes and drones to beat the Mideast and Northern Africa into a river of blood and rubble – it would still be a no-brainer to know who is behind 9/11 and pretty much every other war that’s been fought in history.

    Who Dunnit is a big part of the 9/11 story: Who Dunnit and How. And Roth has an important piece to the puzzle of how the scam was pulled off. Sorry, Woodies. That’s just the way it is. Get over yourself! It’s not just all about what kind of weapon was used on 9/11, although that surely is a big and important part of the whole thing. If we want to know more than just what kind of weapon was used, you will just have to get a grip on yourself and live with that fact and stop bringing Andrew Johnson on to bloviate about why people don’t appreciate or listen to Judy Wood. Just stop it. It’s destroying the credibility of her excellent work.

    Who are the Powers that Be? That’s Who Dunnit. It’s certainly not the Muslims, and I’m sick about belonging to a country that is blowing up the planet and killing peaceful Muslim families for the Jews.

    Rebekkah Roth proves the words spoken on 9/11 about “Middle Eastern” men hijacking planes, was part of a SCRIPT, and points out examples, anomalies, words spoken that were not the kind of words American flight attendants use. She also takes apart the Lets Roll transcript, things that flight attendants would pick up on even if nobody else did.

    The world is being blown to smithereens over the outrageous caper the Jews pulled off on 9/11 – and Judy Wood is only worried about peddling her Textbook or that somebody else might horn in on her Whistleblower bonanza.

    And why is her outrageously presumptuous and monotonously tedious spokesman covering for the Jews? Seems like everybody has a price.

    I confess I myself used to be a Woodie, but I’m not anymore. Not since Andrew Johnson appeared to claim Judy Wood’s work as his own and to speak big monotonous nothings in her behalf, and to whine and cry over other people discussing 9/11. And what really jolted me out of the Woodie cult was when Mike King was called a thief for ‘stealing’ a 9/11 crime scene photo to compare with a photo of the recent DEW attack on China.]

    Update – 29 Aug 2015 (exerpted from Andrew Johnson’s article and cited/recommended by Deanna, see above):

    “In August 2015, Rebecca Roth appeared on truth frequency radio in an “exclusive” with Kev Baker- https://youtu.be/HbIAZsfPUzI?t=7m6s. She started to discuss the Tianjin explosion in China, which had occurred a few days before the broadcast. She said
    … What’s going on with China and the devaluation and their money… All of these things are interconnected – a lot of people don’t realise how connected we are – and when I say how connected we are I mean if they start devaluating (devaluing?) money then we start to see things happening like crazy weird explosions that look like a nuclear blast. And if you look at that Chinese explosion you will see… And if you’re not familiar with Doctor Judy Wood… “Wood” or “Woods” – I don’t know… I’m not sure what her name is but… whether there is an ‘s’ on the end or not… Because I wasn’t really concerned about her name as much as I was the pictures I saw on her website… And this was a long time ago… I don’t remember the exact spelling of the name. But she showed these cars – she called them “toasted.” If you look at the pictures of the cars in China – very much like the cars around the World Trade Center… Which tells us they are using some type of weaponry or something exploded in China and of course that was all done around the same time as an economic hit as well, so… everything is connected.
    In the past, Roth has claimed to be a “9/11 Expert” – yet she couldn’t remember Dr Wood’s name? She didn’t know about the 2007 Qui Tam Case? And so, she muddles up all this with explosions in China which we only have a couple of videos of and a few photos. But hey, it’s all “good conspiracy fodder” now, isn’t it…?

    So much for Check the Evidence. According to the Woodies, it’s: “Check OUR Evidence, and nobody else’s, EVEN if it has to do with the DEW weapons we’ve been trying to warn everybody about. WE’LL do the warning, and this is proprietary information so don’t anybody else even MENTION it because when it comes time to split up the Whistleblower settlement, we get ALL of it.

    Bottom line: Stay off DOCTOR Wood’s website, and do not copy any of her photos to compare with current DEW attacks in China, Russia, or anywhere else. And please don’t be pointing fingers at the poor Jews and don’t be blaming them for ANYTHING.

    Publisher’s Note: Bye CAB


    • So CAB – I just have to thank you for straightening me out here. And, of course, I say this without a hint of sarcasm 😉 Let’s see it all fully referenced with your name and address on it – and telephone number. Like there is on my website. Then we’d know you are truly proud of your work…..


    • Harriet Beecher Stowe, the author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, fomented hatred between the North and South with her highly volatile, prejudicial and unsubstantiated novel. Yes, it was a novel, not a documentary examination of the South and the institution of slavery. It is an example of what a novelist can do. Stowe had never even been to the south yet she effectively pretended to portray life there. It was strictly propaganda. A novel is one of the most effective means of spreading disinformation. Novelists may make any claim that they wish without having to provide sources, citations or evidence of their credentials and without any legal ramifications. It takes a very critical mind to perceive the deceptive objectives of a novel, especially one that is highly promoted, like Stowe’s novel. With the Internet, the promotion of such fictional works is even more dangerous.

      Novels, like many television shows or Hollywood movies, are the most benign form of propaganda yet they have functioned very effectively as propaganda because people subconsciously accept fiction, portrayed in a novel or movie, as if their writers and producers had based their creation on absolute fact. While there might be a modicum of truth or accuracy in some novels, shows or movies, we must remember that there is no such thing as valueless entertainment; everything, whether non-fiction and especially fiction has an objective. Unfortunately, people, when enjoying something purportedly entertaining, have their guard down and do not expect people to manipulate their values and dispense false information. Writers compose books, articles, essays, novels with a particular agenda. It is up to the reader to dispassionately accept or reject certain portions or an entire work or to be a critical student and discern the truth through his/her own investigation and conclusions.


    • How does one cover-up irrefutable evidence? Do as many of the commenters here do: create doubt with speculation about theories about personalities, and discuss anything but the evidence.

      Nobody has refuted Dr. Wood’s work.

      Excuse me, CAB, but why would you want to bring focus to a fiction author with a fake name rather than focus on the physical evidence? Dr. Wood has shown very clearly that thermal and kinetic mechanisms were not employed in the destruction of seven World Trade Center buildings on 9/11.

      A course in critical-thinking — to this day, Where Did The Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11 by Dr. Judy Wood, a structural engineer with a Ph.D. in Materials Engineering Science, remains the only existing forensic study into the destruction of seven World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. This book is the new investigation that so many have been seeking; it will change your life, should you commit your time and careful attention to it. http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/buy/

      More than just pictures and video clips:

      SEISMIC IMPACT FOR WTC 1 (110-stories, 500,000 tons): Local Magnitude (ML) 2.3 — without p-wave or s-wave

      SEISMIC IMPACT FOR WTC 2 (110-stories, 500,000 tons): Local Magnitude (ML) 2.1 — without p-wave or s-wave

      SEISMIC IMPACT FOR WTC 7 (47-stories, 230,000 tons): Local Magnitude (ML) 0.6 — without p-wave or s-wave


      *For comparison: Seismic Impact for Seattle Kingdome Collapse (130,000 tons):
      Local Magnitude (ML) 2.3 — with p-wave and s-wave

      16 Survivors at Stairwell B:

      Tritium at WTC: https://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/240430.pdf

      Magnetometer data: http://magnet.gi.alaska.edu/table_index/2001_table.html

      Dr. Wood’s Request for Corrections (RFC) to NIST (March 16, 2007): http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/NIST_Wood_RFC.html

      Dr. Wood’s Appeal to the NIST’s Response (August 22, 2007): http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/NIST_WoodAppeal.html

      Subsequent Qui Tam case (October 20, 2009): http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

      Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration per F.R. Civ. P59(e) and Local Rule 6.3, Sttorney Jerry V. Leaphart (July 11, 2008): http://www.drjudywood.com/pdf/080711_Wood_07CV3314_103.pdf

      Dr. Judy Wood received her

      B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),

      M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983),


      Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.

      Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints. She has taught courses including

      Experimental Stress Analysis,

      Engineering Mechanics,

      Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)

      Strength of Materials Testing


      Peer-review papers from Dr. Judy Wood (available online):

      Deformation Measurements of Composite Multi-Span Beam Shear Specimens by Moire Interferometry: http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA304605
      Detection of Delamination Onset in a Composite Laminate Using Moiré Interferometry: http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOURNALS/COMPTECH/PAGES/CTR10308J.htm

      Deformations and strains in a thick adherend lap joint: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19890022713

      Determination of thermal strains by moiré interferometry: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02321415

      Micromechanical Study of Thermal Strains near the Interface of a Bimaterial Joint by Microscopic Moiré Interferometry: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992exme.conf.1692W

      Thermal Stresses in a Bimaterial Joint: An Experimental Analysis: http://appliedmechanics.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/article.aspx?articleid=1411212

      Influence of Matrix Chemistry on the Short Term, Hydrothermal Aging of Vinyl Ester Matrix and Composites under Both Isothermal and Thermal Spiking Conditions : http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/33/20/1918.short

      Determination of thermal strains in the neighborhood of a bimaterial interface: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-06072006-124140/ (Only available to Virginia Tech staff)

      Rebekah Roth

      Rebekah Roth, who claims she was a flight attendant, is not a credible source of information when analyzing the destruction observed on 9/11. Being an author of fiction, her books have no worth in obtaining scientific understandings of the event nor with prosecuting those who are responsible for killing 2,977 people and destroying seven WTC buildings.


  3. ALL evidence is important because you never know where it will take you. WHAT happened to the planes and the passengers is important. HOW the towers were destroyed is important. WHO did it is important. It’s ALL important. I found some of the comments in the chatroom to be really quite pathetic!

    If the prosecution tries to prosecute a murder and they can’t say how the murder was done; what kind of “guilty beyond reasonable doubt” is that?!

    Too many people are ready to jump to conclusions and throw the baby out with the bathwater, and the killers are laughing at us, again!


    • Copying the work of others without citing them as the source is dishonest. So the only piece of irrefutable evidence presented by the Roth character is that she is dishonest. That is all we know about her.

      Dr. Wood has actually done more than anyone on this. She took it to court. The judges said in their written decision that they had to ignore the law to dismiss the case. Why? Only a small number of people supported this case.

      Scott, did you support this case? Why not?

      None of the Truthers supported this case. (Some who discussed it were banned from ae911truth for just discussing it.) So, it is clear that the leaders of the Truther groups did not want this case in court. So what is their objective?

      Speculation covers up facts. Those who promote speculation or fictional stories will not take it to court.

      By the way, the truth is known beyond any reasonable doubt.
      Why doesn’t Scott know what it is? I can only assume it is because he doesn’t want to know or he has an agenda that is inconsistent with the truth.


  4. If Rebekah Roth is such an expert, why did she admit to me that she DID NOT READ the only scientific forensic investigation about the events at the World Trade Center in the public domain? After reading what CAB posted, I can discern that person has not read it as well. It does not take a genius to understand that Rebekah Roth is being promoted by the same people that want to cover-up a type of directed energy that was used as a weapon to “dustify” the World Trade Center in midair. This is the BIG NEWS, not another non-credentialed self appointed “9/11 researcher” that came out of nowhere without a verifiable history as Joey has. Rebekah Roth is as much of a 9/11 research expert as these women:


  5. Hi Deanna,

    I’d like to hear you interview Rebekah Roth and let her tell her story.

    Also it was disturbing to see you on the dog pile.

    I do like most of what you do — You can’t please all the people all the time.

    Thanks for what you do



    • Hello Karl, Please listen to my program of 9/17/2015 where I address the enormous differences between novels and scientific evidence. You may listen to that program here: https://spingolaspeaks.net/ I have considered inviting her to be a guest on my program but I think that she would probably decline. My interview would be drastically different than the soft interviews she has had.


Comments are closed.