Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why there were no planes at the WTC

page: 11
2
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Holograms? What would be the point? Y'know the space shuttle flies without any actions by the "pilot". The only thing the pilot has to do while landing is deploy the landing gear, and that's just to let the "pilot" feel like he's actually flying the thing.


So why go through the rigamarole of projecting hologram planes, with passenegers that actually exist, when you can just use the darn planes and passengers themselves? I'm not saying that I believe -- meaning: have faith without proof -- that the gubmint was responsible for the 9-11 attacks (because I don't), but why in the world would they employ 22nd century technology to pull off an illusion that could more simply and easily be done with 20th century strategury?

The logical gymnastics that some are inspired to perform are mind boggling sometimes. "The planes left no shadows." "Shadows are clearly evident." "Hologram light can cast shadows!" "Where does the sound come from?" "Holograms of light can make vibrations in the air and there was no deflected debris immediately after impact." "Clearly there was." "No, it was driven by the explosion (that happened a quarter second later)."

John Lear, you say now that yer only keeping an open mind to possibilities, but began an earlier post with the words, "This is how it was done", and linked to that au.af.mil page that doesn't support the "plane-was-a-hologram" position at all. You say you "assume" that the government's holograms would be able to produce the appropriate accompanying sound as well. Why in the world are you "assuming" anything?

Brainsucker, my friend. You say "I don't discount anything other than that plane hit the WTC". You have made up your mind about that and refuse to consider, acknowledge or comprehend the evidence that has been presented because, imo, that would risk having to accept it.


The thing about deciding that a conspiracy exists is that, no matter what evidence is presented, it only means that the conspiracy is even more vast than we thought. Does the phrase "deny ignorance" ever mean "deny the bleedin' obvious"? For the sake of ATS, I hope not!


So, the hologram planes were directed with a pen on a screen to impact points on the towers at the precise moments that the planted bombs would explode in the facades in the perfect shape of real planes? And all those planes never crashed and the passengers were taken to some secret place where they've been either kept in quarantine or were "offed"? So what made the crater and aircraft debris and DNA of the passengers in that field in Pennsyvania? "Uuuh... a sooper seekret gubmint missile!" "Why? Why not the plane?" "Because... uuuh... because there were no planes!".

GOD: Heavens to Betsy, already. 9-11 was perpetrated by muslim terrorists.
brainsucker: Wow, God's a Mason!
johnlear: Nah, God, like me or you, just doesn't know what the government knows.
GOD: I know everything.
brainsucker: Then You know too much!
GOD: Maybe it's time for another flood.
johnlear: Dick Cheney can tell You how to do it... I assume.


Oh, by the way, the Mets never really won game 6 of the 1986 World Series. Y'see, the actual ball that Mookie Wilson hit went into Bill Buckner's glove, but the Mets (playing in the vacinity of the WTC, mind you) projected a transparant baseball that seemed to go right through his legs. Buckner -- believing his eyes rather than his hands -- never even realized that he'd snagged the ball and let it drop right near first base, so close that no one noticed the white ball at the corner of the white bag.


John, I think I finally understand your conspiracy theory leanings. This is fun!


But, y'gotta admit, yer statement that (paraphrased from memory) "you know your close to the Truth when they start calling you an idiot" is just kinda silly, right?


With all due respect, of course!




posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by stealth knife


I THINK ALL OF YOU THAT BELEIVE THIS HOLOGRAM THEORY ARE TOTALY EXAGERATING THE MILITARYS CAPABILITYS.



And let me respectfully point out that the above is your opinion and not based on fact. Because the fact is you do not know what the military's capabilities are. You may suspect, and you may theorize, you may guess, you may propose, you may hypothesize, you may assume, you may speculate, you may even postulate, but stealth knife, let me respectfully suggest that you do not have the faintest idea what the true capabilities of the military are. Thanks.



JohnLear, you are 100% wrong. I know a great deal about the military's hologram capabilities. It is only your opinion and lack of knowledge of my position in the military that gives you the ability to say such a thing.

It is pure fact, that holograms can NOT make darkness. FACT. No matter what you say, or what you think is possible, they can NOT make darkness with light.

It is also impossible to make a 3D object in free space in day light. Without loss in visibility.

And JohnLear I truly believe you loose ALL credibility believing this hologram theory. I am starting to doubt you are who you say you are.



[edit on 3-10-2006 by stealth knife]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Originally posted by Tuning Spork




So what made the crater and aircraft debris and DNA of the passengers in that field in Pennsyvania?


I don't know what made the crater, it certainly wasn't any kind of an airplane. The debris? There wasn't much, maybe a small truck full. The DNA? I don't know of any DNA that was found in the Pennsylvania crash. I don't know of any passengers that were found in the Pennsylvania crash. I do know that the coronor walked away after 20 minutes saying there was no reason for him to be there because there wasn't any bodies. Do have different information about the Pennsylvania crash? Have you found the airplane?



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Look, its a hologram police car.

youtube.com...

I don't see any "deflection". And the hole that is left in the wall doesn't resemble a car, the hole is much bigger!

OMG its a conspiracy.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

I don't know what made the crater, it certainly wasn't any kind of an airplane.



JohnLear, you make me laugh. You watch to many cartoons or what? You believe in cartoon physics??

funnies.paco.to...


Cartoon Law III

Any body passing through solid matter will leave a perforation conforming to its perimeter.

Also called the silhouette of passage, this phenomenon is the speciality of victims of directed-pressure explosions and of reckless cowards who are so eager to escape that they exit directly through the wall of a house, leaving a cookie-cutout-perfect hole. The threat of skunks or matrimony often catalyzes this reaction.



I highly doubt this following picture is perfectly to scale, but it sure is close enough.



Unless you believe in cartoon physics, the crater in the building is exactly what is expected.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Let's discuss the topic without the personal quips please.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Tuning Spork

So what made the crater and aircraft debris and DNA of the passengers in that field in Pennsyvania?


I don't know what made the crater, it certainly wasn't any kind of an airplane. The debris? There wasn't much, maybe a small truck full. The DNA? I don't know of any DNA that was found in the Pennsylvania crash. I don't know of any passengers that were found in the Pennsylvania crash. I do know that the coronor walked away after 20 minutes saying there was no reason for him to be there because there wasn't any bodies. Do have different information about the Pennsylvania crash? Have you found the airplane?


John,
Have you seen the video where the plane hit a concrete wall (modeled on a nuclear power plant's wall) at 500 mph and was "atomized" upon impact?

Imagine flight 93 speeding along at 500 mph and then accelerating to nearly 600 mph when the highjacker/pilot realized that the passengers were at the door. Then factor in the acceleration due to gravity when the "pilot" turned the plane over under sideways down in the Pennsylvania countryside. It prolly impacted the not-so-flexible earth at 650-675 mph. Q: What would remain to "identify" after such an impact? A: Not much, my suspiciously suspicious friend.

Fact: Four airliners, four (or parts thereof [or more]) buildings and 2,996 lives were destroyed that morning. Some want to believe, and to convince others, that we didn't see what we all saw that day.

Why?

Hell if I know. Maybe it's just the college sophomore mentality that there is so much we can't understand.

To that I say ["bull"]. (Yay! I remembered how to do html in forums!) If there's one truism in human pathology it's that no one can keep a secret.

Ooops. Maybe I should just shut my big mouth....





posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
This is how it was done.

This paper (www.au.af.mil/au/2025/volume4/chap03/b5_6.htm) titled Airborne Holographic Projector describes a holographic projector which displays a 3 dimensional image in a desired location removed from the display generator (in this case another aircraft flying nearby). The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception managment. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary (you and me).

The 3 dimensional display of flying airliners was projected to to show airliners flying into the WTC. That is why you can 'see through' the projections.

My opinion is that this technology was perfected about 15 years ago.


Right.

I may be an idiot, but if we're going to begin a thread demanding that the laws of physics can't be broken then perhaps we shouldn't be talking about projecting 3D images onto open sky...

Why does the plane look transparent? Because it was shot on video. Video is a cheap medium prone to "optical illusions" as it receives too much data for its medium.

Jeezus, why can I see through my hand if I place it in front of the monitor and rapidly move my fingers?

Only film gives you perfect resolution.

Why do the best photogrpahers still use Leicas and not Sony Cybershots?



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Let's discuss the topic without the personal quips please.


Aw, c'mon Intrepid. Don't take all the fun out of it!!


Seriously, though, I'm only in it for the fun.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:51 PM
link   
John Lear,
Have you ever read Eric Hoffer?

Jus' curious...



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Hmmmm. Ok guys all your theories sound believable. But I have one that I think is really compelling and challenging to the mind.

Ok..my theory is:

Several Terrorists took control of 737 and a 757 commercial aeroplanes and then procceded to crash them into the WTC. This in turn killed 1000's of people (towers and planes provided).

This is proved. When amature camera caught the second plane hitting the north tower. There was no time to edit any of the footage. The "transparent" tails and wings could be made from the slow frame speed of the camera an example of this would be moving your hand extremly fast infront of the monitor. The "transparency" could also be accounted by a reflection of sky off the planes white surfaces.

The fact is that the terrorists were smarter than the american defence force and managed to run those planes into the WTC and the pentagon...but thats another story.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by stealth knife

Originally posted by johnlear

I don't know what made the crater, it certainly wasn't any kind of an airplane.



JohnLear, you make me laugh. You watch to many cartoons or what? You believe in cartoon physics??

funnies.paco.to...


Cartoon Law III

Any body passing through solid matter will leave a perforation conforming to its perimeter.

Also called the silhouette of passage, this phenomenon is the speciality of victims of directed-pressure explosions and of reckless cowards who are so eager to escape that they exit directly through the wall of a house, leaving a cookie-cutout-perfect hole. The threat of skunks or matrimony often catalyzes this reaction.



I highly doubt this following picture is perfectly to scale, but it sure is close enough.



Unless you believe in cartoon physics, the crater in the building is exactly what is expected.


I believe he was talking about the crater in Pennsylvania......if your going to critisize the guy atleast be accurate with your information.



Originally posted by John Lear
I don't know what made the crater, it certainly wasn't any kind of an airplane. The debris? There wasn't much, maybe a small truck full. The DNA? I don't know of any DNA that was found in the Pennsylvania crash. I don't know of any passengers that were found in the Pennsylvania crash. I do know that the coronor walked away after 20 minutes saying there was no reason for him to be there because there wasn't any bodies. Do have different information about the Pennsylvania crash? Have you found the airplane?



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr_plain
Several Terrorists took control of 737 and a 757 commercial aeroplanes and then procceded to crash them into the WTC. This in turn killed 1000's of people (towers and planes provided).


For crying out loud. Why on earth would anyone listen to anything you say, when you can't get simple facts straight?



American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767-223 wide-body aircraft crashed into the north side of the North Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) at 8:46:30 a.m. local time (Eastern Daylight Time, 12:46:30 UTC).

United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767-222 crashed into the South Tower at 9:02:59 a.m. local time (13:02:59 UTC), an event covered live by television broadcasters from around the world who had their cameras trained on the buildings after the earlier crash

Source.


Anybody?



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Stop being so padantic



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Implosion

Anybody?


You needed a source to help you with that? You could have easly just said, they jets used during 9-11 were only 757's and 767's. So he got one wrong, OH WELL.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Ok, so you're a racist, and a muppet. Congratulations.

[edit on 3/10/06 by Implosion]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Implosion
Ok, so you're a rascist, and a muppet. Congratulations.


You should be warned for that. Its funny how some guy gets three warnings and probably a temp ban for saying "idiot". You just called me a "racists" and a "muppet". You should get three warnings and a ban too.

[edit on 3-10-2006 by stealth knife]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
No problems Mr Implosion..."buddy" Ol Pal.
Anybody?
Who'd of thought that stating opinions about terrorists brands me a racist.
Anybody?
At what point in my post did I or anyone even mention a race?
Anybody?
And as for the muppets......good show.
Anybody?

Well glad to see your a fan of that show. I like Animal. Good drummer. Or does that make me racist?

Anybody?

[edit on 3-10-2006 by mr_plain]


Edn

posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Holographic planes... Hold on a second here. Why would they go to all the trouble of creating a holographic plane when they can do it a lot more easily and more cheaply by flying a real plane into the towers?



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr_plain
No problems Mr Implosion..."buddy" Ol Pal.


Not you mr_plain the poster directly above mine is the person i was referring to.

You do know that having more than one account is a violation of T&C, don't you LAES YVAN?

[edit on 3/10/06 by Implosion]






top topics



 
2
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join