Hologram dudes, how was it done?

Originally posted by talisman

johnlear

If it is the case that they were holograms, then why the reluctance to show one hitting the Pentagon?

Thanks for thoe post taliman and good question.

The reason I think they don't show it is that the Pentagon explosion went off at 9:31 which conflicts with the ATC logged time of the crash a 9:43. The 9:31 time is verified by several Pentagon clocks which were stopped by the explosion and April Gallops watch which stopped at 9:31.

April as was an administrative specialist (with a Top Secret with SCI clearance) with the U.S. Army. April's desk was about 40 feet from where the airplane allegedly breached the Pentagon. When the explosion went off at 9:31 she grabbed her 6 month old son who was in his baby carrier just below her desk and crawled out the hole in the wall. She smelled no fuel and saw no airplane. Her watch was stopped at 9:31.

The problem is that ATC logged the crash of the airplane they were tracking at 9:43, about 12 minutes later. So either the bomb was early or the plane was late.

Also there are witnesses who definitely saw a plane fly north of the Citgo Station and then into the Pentagon.

I suspect that ATC was tracking a bogus generated radar target which crashed into the Pentagon at 9:43.

I also suspect that due to the time differences that they do not want to add fuel to the fire with photos of a holograph flying into the Pentagon at 9:31 and have to account for the ATC time of 9:43 12 minutes later.

There is also the possibility that instead of a holograph that it may have been a real airplane that simply overflew the Pentagon. I don't believe that though. Too many complications for the getaway.

All we know for sure is that there was no plane that actually crashed into the Pentagon and that the explosion occurred at 9:31. We also know that several people definitely saw an airplane fly by north of the Citgo Station and saw an explosion about the same time the airplane they saw, approach near the Pentagon. And we know that ATC logged the crash at 9:43.

Thanks for the post.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
You would really ruin the day for the people that still believe the official story if you could show anything wrong with the photos or videos.

Hmmm yes it would... I posted this in the other hologram thread (don't know why we need more than one.. )

The EVIDENCE everyone is looking for is recorded on film...

The problem with Youtube is that stuff doesn't always stay put and is hard to find. Also I cannot d/l youtube right now seems firefox addon is not working and kissyoutube is temporarily down so if anyone can snag a copy of these I would really appreciate it...

The following images are taken from screen captures..




























So a simple question... How is this possible?

Video One Showing the above clips in motion



Video Two This one seems cut short but it shows the first plane hitting... look at that closely



Yup this puts me into the "No Plane till planted Parts" category

Originally posted by zorgon
Video One Showing the above clips in motion

Ok, the particular Air Force plane in the video with the pod is not in production yet.

But there are other military, and civilian planes that carry pods. These include recon, weapons, jammers and target drone pods.

reply to post by zorgon


Good find zorgon. Love the youtube videos. However it shows how incompetent these goons really are, they were stupid enough to project a hologram of a modified plane that hit the second tower instead of the basic civilian passenger carrying airplane.... whahahaaa....

These goons are amazing dumb.

I think we stand a chance against them, they aren't that intelligent after all.

No sarcasm intended towards you. I am attacking the goons who plan this that were careless with the details.

As for the hologram... I am still not total conviced but these videos have made me wonder. Thanks.

[edit on 1-10-2007 by ixiy]

Zorgon,

An airliner with a pod.

i114.photobucket.com...

Would you like to see more civilain aircraft with pods?

[edit on 1-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods

Oh yes sir, all that does matter is PSI.

Two similarly shaped objects, of the same shape and density, traveling at the same speeds, will have the EXACT SAME TYPE — not size — of effect on whatever they bump into. The nine millimeter bullet and the Boeing 767 roughly have similar shapes. Alright the plane has longer proportions, but it’s also a lot less dense than the projectile.

The difference is, if the bullet can penetrate something it will leave a small hole, whereas the jet airliner would leave a very large opening under the same conditions. Vice versa, the same holds true also, if the bullet cannot puncture a substance, than neither can the passenger plane. Yes, the aircraft’s huge mass will give it a tendency to plow obstacles aside, but that’s NOT what we observed at the WTC’s. The perimeter columns were not pushed/bent, they were neatly severed.

I have been reading these posts for some time now and just had to pipe in on this one.
My son is 4 years old. Me and him have basically the same shape except I am of course bigger and weigh in at about 230 lb. Now if he runs at the front door as fast as he can....he is pretty fast by the way, and slams his little shoulder into it, nothing is going to happen except he is going to get a bruised shoulder. If I however manage to get my 230 lbs moving at the same speed and slam my shoulder into the same door, I am going to have to buy a new door. Same basic body shape, same speed, but wildly different results.
Theres a reason cannon balls are not the size of ping pong balls. Physics!!!
Mass Inirtia...Force.....In the realm of demolition...Size matters.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Once you get past "how do I get the first pixels in free air in the lab with no fog/mist/film/aerogel" then you've got all the other issues, there's lots.

Thats really the question here, how a 3D object can travel as far was witnessed, and look and sound like a comercial airliner.

Originally posted by ixiy

Good find zorgon. Love the youtube videos. However it shows how incompetent these goons really are, they were stupid enough to project a hologram of a modified plane that hit the second tower instead of the basic civilian passenger carrying airplane.... whahahaaa....

Thanks for the post ixiy and very interesting comment about projecting a holograph of a modified plane.

Perhaps those pods where integral to the photography of the hologram. (not the projection but the initial photography). In other words maybe those pods emitted something that the holographic camera needs for the image to be projected.

I think we stand a chance against them, they aren't that intelligent after all.

They were intelligent in some respects, but I think they underestimated the intelligence and will of the American people.

I have seen this same thing come up on Clementine photos of the moon where the Navy puts photos of monkeys and snails and spiders in the craters as if it was an inside joke and we could never figure it out.

No sarcasm intended towards you. I am attacking the goons who plan this that were careless with the details.

I would say that they were over confident in their ability to hoax the public. But I also think that several things went drastically wrong. I belive that Building #7 was meant to be hit by an airplane or holograph of an airplane.

I believe that for whatever reason the bomb at the Pentagon went off early (09:31) or the bogus generated primary radar return of the Boeing 757 was late (09:43).

Whatever happend they certainly had their hands full and, of course, Larry Silverstein didn't help by opening his big yap about "pulling the building". I'll betcha he got a butt kicking over that one!

Here is what I want to know:

What did they tell the willing participants to get them to go along with the murder of 3000 Americans?

Was it possible that they told most of them a different scenario and then when the real one happened they awere all in too deep to come clean?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Would you like to see more civilain aircraft with pods?

No I want to know why the 'Airplane with the Pod' is halfway into the builing and still no hole in the building.. That's all

But thanks for the offer... I might one day

Originally posted by ixiy
reply to post by zorgon

 

Good find zorgon. Love the youtube videos. However it shows how incompetent these goons really are, they were stupid enough to project a hologram of a modified plane that hit the second tower instead of the basic civilian passenger carrying airplane.... whahahaaa....

i think thats a great point, why in the world if these are holographs would the airplane not be a passenger plane and have a weird pod on the bottom? The other plane did not have it right? So we cant say it was something necessary. And the other plane was different, so why make one passenger like and the other not? It doesn't seem to correlate with the hologram theory.

[edit on 2-10-2007 by luis9343]

Originally posted by johnlear
Here is what I want to know:

What did they tell the willing participants to get them to go along with the murder of 3000 Americans?

Was it possible that they told most of them a different scenario and then when the real one happened they awere all in too deep to come clean?

Assuming the holograph theory is correct (which I don't believe), the easiest way to do that would be for there not to have really been 3000 people IN there.

Which would also explain the decided lack of remains.

Maybe they took them out by subway.

Next issue - what do you do with the 3000?

S S S

reply to post by zorgon


You still aren't answering the first basic question, just like John and Wizard. You dudes dance around it like its some easy thing to overcome. Airplanes hit the buildings, theres some weird flashes that take place, but airplanes still hit the buildings.

You bring no proof to back up your claims, only retoric and "the government must have it, but we can't tell you about it" arguements.

I flat out call BS on the whole holograghic idea about 911, specifically the twin towers.

Thanks for all your imput but I'm not convinced.

InfinityO'Reilly out.

Originally posted by zorgon
No I want to know why the 'Airplane with the Pod' is halfway into the builing and still no hole in the building.. That's all

But thanks for the offer... I might one day

Because the aluminum airframe is being shredded by the steel beams.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
You bring no proof to back up your claims, only retoric and "the government must have it, but we can't tell you about it" arguements.

Just like you didn't explain how that video shows what it does?

Blah blah blah I hear that nonsense all the time yet you wanna be skeptics don't even look at the evidence... and I think it really dumb to have two threads on the same topic...

Maybe I should get a paycheck for all this double posting

I flat out call BS on the whole holograghic idea about 911..

Well I will see your BS and raise you DTIC and the Pentagon...

Originally posted by RTrev
This idea of John's seems to explain a lot of things that never made sense before, and only posits one assumption which is difficult to chase down.. do they have the technology to do this holographic number? I would have to say that yeah, they probably do.

And you would be right

Pentagon Budget Report Shows how much spent and completion deadlines




Bigger version Highlighted test






Bigger version Highlighted test



1998 Completed feasibility studies for advanced camouflage and deception technologies using holography

1999 Develop holographic techniques, materials, and processes. Evaluate DRFM technologies feasibility... and projection technologies

2000 Evaluate holographic techniques, materials, and processes
Develop technologies to support the development of deception modules for radar, acoustic, seismic, and communication band

2001 Demonstrate holographic techniques for improved deception capabilities for combat units.

Yup that be yer tax dollars hard at work... and just in time for a 'trial run'. What a way to Demonstrate the Tech for the troups


Available here..

www.js.pentagon.mil...

or here directly so I don't 'ping' everyone again

www.dtic.mil...

Thanks for all your imput but I'm not convinced.
InfinityO'Reilly out.

Not surprised... don't let that door hit ya in the backside

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Because the aluminum airframe is being shredded by the steel beams.

I watched that video many times... because I did not believe at first... I see no shredded aluminum... I see no buckling of the airplane... I see no hole in the building and I see no shards of glass flying...

All I see is a little orange 'tint' as the nose touches the building than the plane literally 'disappears' into the building... still no hole at the last frame I have


Ergo

Hologram 1 Plane 0

I see pentagon documents that say they demonstrated the tech for Combat Units BEFORE 911

Hologram 2 Plane 0



[edit on 4-10-2007 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


Ahem - you see the date at the top right?

This is the budget plan before even the feasibility studies began. For this pass. There were others before it. Like the others, this one is a research project funding budget stretched out over 7 years. That doesn't equal development or deployment. Just "let's go look at this".

This is one of a number of them. There was another in the late '80s, another in the mid 90's, and some after this 1999 budget. The late 80's the one that got you the acoustic effects. We bid the one in '99 for fun (note that "SBIR" bullet?) but we bid AF, not Army. The Army dropped it for 1999 and retasked it for 2000, but I don't think it ever happened.

When you look at the NEXT year's budget, you'll see a big change. All that IMEDS stuff is truncated, they're definitely more into stealth coatings and optical patterns on equipment to suppress the signatures now, although they've still got money budgeted for it.

And that's the end of the funding for research project AH35 - FY2001. It got dropped from the budget.

I can't find if the SBIR even happened, Army does theirs differently than the other branches. I can find award funding but not the bid package.

The rest of that document is techspeak for radar and IR deception to mask signatures from sensor suites as they say, you probably know it as ECM. That's why they mixed the DRFM into the very first line.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Assuming the holograph theory is correct (which I don't believe), the easiest way to do that would be for there not to have really been 3000 people IN there.

Which would also explain the decided lack of remains.

How do we know that the upper part of the WTC itself wasn't just a hologram? No wonder they didn't want any full investigation of the debris as it would have revealed the towers were only 14 stories high .....

I consider this idea to be at least as credible as the idea that Jean Luc Picard flew back from the 25th century to use his holodeck to create a holographic aircraft around a photon torpedo as some seem to think

Found this right here at ATS

In the ATS Content Archives (thanks to that U2U reminder )

Holographic projection. The Defense Weekly article describes a quasi-information warfare/psychological operations program that was first discussed by the Air Force after Operation Desert Storm in the Gulf War.

This involves projection of a three-dimensional holographic image to act as a decoy. The Pentagon spoke openly about its use of holographic projections during discussions of its non-lethal weapons program back in 1994. Since then, the program disappeared, most likely becoming a black project.

The article concluded by stating that the U.S. Army's JFK Special Warfare Center and School disclosed back in 1991 that it was looking to develop a 'PSYOPS Hologram System' with the capability to "project persuasive messages and three-dimensional pictures of cloud, smoke, rain droplets, buildings, flying saucers and religious figures.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Holograms 3 Planes 0

Originally posted by ixiy
These goons are amazing dumb.
I think we stand a chance against them, they aren't that intelligent after all.

I disagree... They don't need to be very smart... they are playing to a gullible audience Its been seven years and still all we do is pass theories and and debunker arguements back and forth. THEY probably even stopped laughing and paying attention... on to other things

The few that have the intelligence to figure out 'something is not right' are small in number and can easily be brushed over as 'lunatics'

And those few stand a chance against them? Well I have my swords and a few antique rifles... they have stealth planes with weapons that can take out my house from so far away I won't even know they are there...

Not to mention beam weapons from space

Don't know what YOU have in your arsenal but I see little chance of prevailing here

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
but I don't think it ever happened.

Well I do...

You don't really think they would post the actual projects that ARE in the works on a public access site?

That was also an Army budget... there are other forces, there are black ops projects that you won't find budget pages for

Point is while most skeptics are shouting "get me the proof" I am at least spending hours digging for hints and leads...

I hardly expect to find the actual contract report without breaking the law

But I have already found three pieces of circumstantial evidence that at the very least go to 'intent' And my eyes tell me that plane in the CNN video was half way into the building without any damage showing to the building, no glass flying etc...


Market News
High Resolution Animated Holograms
A large-format color hologram company, Zebra Imaging, dropped out of the exhibit and retail markets to focus on military and architectural applications.
New Marketing Technologies