It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 9/11-no-plane-theory was never debunked

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Right around the time the truth movement started to die off (2009 - 2010), I did a rather thorough investigation into the 9/11-no-plane-theory, and I have to admit, I never really saw sufficient evidence to debunk its claim.

If anything, every time I go back and revisit the subject, the rabbit hole only goes deeper. I was never a hardcore 'No-planer', but I'm absolutely sure many of the WTC videos were edited (even the live shots). At the time, this was the very first divide I ever witnesses within the 9/11 truth community, because the Loose Change Boys were absolutely opposed to any discussion of it, and I never understand why.

The 9/11 WTC videos were edited... I'm sorry, but they were f'ing edited. This should be a slam dunk closed case, but many truthers were/are unable to break free from the second and third layers of cognitive dissonance... and for good reason because it's still hard to believe.

but there is little left to be doubted in 2018... they were edited... end of story. Case Closed.





posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029




Right around the time the truth movement started to die off (2009 - 2010), I did a rather thorough investigation into the 9/11-no-plane-theory, and I have to admit, I never really saw sufficient evidence to debunk its claim.


seriously why don't you stop trolling ATS?


So why not show that thorough investigating in a thread?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

So why not show that thorough investigating in a thread?



I want a fresh pair of eyes on this subject. I want fresh opinions.

the Hologram explanation is no longer a far-fetched theory.




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029


It was debunked by the aircraft parts found all over lower Manhattan.

Oh, and from the aspect of common sense.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:48 AM
link   
The no plane theory does seem absolutely ludicrous, but then again, and I'm clicking into hypothesis mode here. Say that there were no planes that day and the explosions up top were caused by rigged bombs or guided missiles, in order to make it seem like there were planes, you would need planted witnesses (actors) on scene testifying to the cameras of that fact. Even if no-one else seen aircraft that day, what with the coverage of the pre-edited aircraft impacts on a slight delay and the witness interviews, the deceit could be believed.

I stress that the above is not my personal view but merely a hypothesis.

In regards to 9/11, I say what I always say, I have no idea what actually happened that day, but I do know that there are enough holes in the story and events before and after, to cast suspicion on the official line



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029




I want a fresh pair of eyes on this subject. I want fresh opinions. the Hologram explanation is no longer a far-fetched theory.


So show the thorough research you say you have in a thread or add it to this and get it moved to the right forum.


How can you have a fresh pair of eyes on the subject when you wont show what you have uncovered in your research that backs up your claims of no planes.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:53 AM
link   
I don't think Boeings crashed in NY on 9/11/2001.

I just don't.

Maybe military planes were used and then later edited... but if you review the evidence CORRECTLY, you will see that the videos were in fact edited. 100% edited, end of story. so the question remains: why were they edited?

What is the explanation for the mass amounts of editing?

the only logical thing left for me to conclude is that Boeing's could not have been used.

if we are to believe it's possible that the WTC was brought down in a controlled demolition, why is the holographic airplane theory so ridiculous?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 09:58 AM
link   
When people say, "Why is ATS so politics-centric lately?", it's threads like this that have actually done more to kill decent conspiracy theories than any amount of politics ever could.




edit on 22-2-2018 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer because a demon stole it



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029




Maybe military planes were used and then later edited... but if you review the evidence CORRECTLY, you will see that the videos were in fact edited. 100% edited, end of story. so the question remains: why were they edited?


how can anyone review the evidence when you wont post it?

so the question remains

when will you post the evidence?






if we are to believe it's possible that the WTC was brought down in a controlled demolition, why is the holographic airplane theory so ridiculous?



I guess you have point.

those that believe in these 2 ideas do have something in common.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: DD2029



I want a fresh pair of eyes on this subject. I want fresh opinions. the Hologram explanation is no longer a far-fetched theory.


So show the thorough research you say you have in a thread or add it to this and get it moved to the right forum.


How can you have a fresh pair of eyes on the subject when you wont show what you have uncovered in your research that backs up your claims of no planes.




I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.

I'm just restating that the theory still holds water, and was never debunked in my eyes.

I want others to acknowledge that the tapes are edited.... but do your own research.

if your research is executed properly, there is simply no disputing that the tapes were edited.

edited tapes equates to a coverup.




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

who knows what really happenned.
I dont like to post about 9/11. some of my scariest online experiences came in relation.

but.. this is 12 minutes long. Its about shanksville. flight 93. Its worth it.




posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Eyewitness testimony by the thousands of people in New York city that day who watched as the aircraft flew into the towers pretty much debunked a theory that never needed to be debunked in the first place.
Deny Ignorance !



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: DD2029
Right around the time the truth movement started to die off (2009 - 2010), I did a rather thorough investigation into the 9/11-no-plane-theory, and I have to admit, I never really saw sufficient evidence to debunk its claim.

If anything, every time I go back and revisit the subject, the rabbit hole only goes deeper. I was never a hardcore 'No-planer', but I'm absolutely sure many of the WTC videos were edited (even the live shots). At the time, this was the very first divide I ever witnesses within the 9/11 truth community, because the Loose Change Boys were absolutely opposed to any discussion of it, and I never understand why.

The 9/11 WTC videos were edited... I'm sorry, but they were f'ing edited. This should be a slam dunk closed case, but many truthers were/are unable to break free from the second and third layers of cognitive dissonance... and for good reason because it's still hard to believe.

but there is little left to be doubted in 2018... they were edited... end of story. Case Closed.



And you get all of your examples from places like YouTube where its user-generated-submitted-and unchecked edited content?

Speak with the dead victims families 1st. Amazing that personally submitted reposted videos and Wiki-anything is considered as FACT.

I'd say 1st the points are skewed because of the sources. I can post a dozen videos of a green eyed monster under the bed... 'doesn't mean it's really there.

Trolling the topic serves no purpose... and adds little to legitimate discussion. There is already VAST amounts both here and world-wide to answer such things.. without more..

Sorry......
edit on 22-2-2018 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



This was part of the reason I retired form 9/11 truth movement.

Who's gonna believe no planes were used?

But why is it so hard to believe that the videos were edited and CGI was in fact used.

I'm sorry... but the case of the CGI/Holographic 9/11 still stands strong today... 100%.

at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.
edit on 22-2-2018 by DD2029 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: DD2029
at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.


Probably because both planes that hit the Towers were 767's.

Maybe you should learn about the topic before trying to 'educate' everyone else.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: DD2029

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



This was part of the reason I retired form 9/11 truth movement.

Who's gonna believe no planes were used?

But why is it so hard to believe that the videos were edited and CGI was in fact used.

I'm sorry... but the case of the CGI/Holographic 9/11 still stands strong today... 100%.

at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.




So no planes were used but they used planes or a missile.


what was holographic again then?



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029


I did a rather thorough investigation into the 9/11-no-plane-theory, and I have to admit, I never really saw sufficient evidence to debunk its claim.

I could as easy say there was no 911. Everything that happened that day on your tv screen was CGI, to the witnesses that were there, holograms, to the forensics, all fabricated.

Prove otherwise.

Real easy to make stuff up, just assert it. Let the poor saps come over and over with their 'proof' and simply deny it.

One more rubble pile thread.

Here bury your head in this.



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

originally posted by: DD2029

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: DD2029


I looked into it... trust me. No need to reevaluate all the evidence.


Gonna have to be a no from me, stranger on the internet. Show your work.



This was part of the reason I retired form 9/11 truth movement.

Who's gonna believe no planes were used?

But why is it so hard to believe that the videos were edited and CGI was in fact used.

I'm sorry... but the case of the CGI/Holographic 9/11 still stands strong today... 100%.

at the very least, I'm a firm believer the airplanes or missiles used were not Boeing 757s.




So no planes were used but they used planes or a missile.


what was holographic again then?



I'm just saying Boeings weren't used. 100% convinced too.

but still on the fence about what was used instead of the big Boeing airliners.
edit on 22-2-2018 by DD2029 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: DD2029

Good thing we had so many live witnesses and amateur videos proving it happened.




top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join