You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] ZombiClown ago 

I agree, the explanation by DR wood and this narrative are the same, although some of the this narrative is contradictory , I.E the damage that occurred blocks away. its contradicts the idea that somehow it was a reaction to something contained IN or close to the building.

0
1

[–] justjakk [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I've read about 95% of Pauls research. He has EVERY doubt covered. Those cars along the street looked 200 years old. In 2 videos plus a scientific "experiment" video, you can plainly see that the live video taken by reporters on the ground, was being hit by radiation particles. The live vids exactly mimic "tests" conducted on the affects of radiation on video camera's. So NO. it is NOT contradictory. The radiation was being carried by the pyroclastic cloud which destroyed the cars/etc.

0
0

[–] ZombiClown ago 

man, i love this subject,but that was so,so many hard drives ago. when i stopped researching it i came away with connections to other beta tests of this weapon and got pretty fair impression it was external,yes maybe accelerators could be placed inside or near,sure,but more like a DEW. beam forming.