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.

 

Hologram dudes, how was it done?

page: 13
2
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

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'


In which case, don't you find it the least bit odd that they're bidding out a non-classified contract 8 years later to perform initial feasibility studies on the same technology?

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

Didn't they? What did you post then? It is on more than one public access site.



The really good stuff doesn't go to SBIR as a solicitation. You get a non-solicited SBIR "other funding" check for those.

The reason I went looking for the SBIR though, is that there's a way to use a code that's on the solicitation to find the funding, classification and awardee, and where it's based, who the SO is, who the project leader is etc. Well, I can anyway. They may not tell you WHAT it is, but the surrounding stuff is often exposed to some degree. The more squeaky it is, the less you can find out. A number of them just return "No further information - classified" which is sort of a bummer.

Unfortunately, the Army does their SBIRs out of the DoD mainstream except for SOCOM. So there's only lists of awardees and no codes. In that case, I looked to see if the project had been awarded, and it didn't appear. But they don't archive solicitations at Army and I don't have the files that far back.

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

Sometimes you can find what it was before it was classified, oddly enough, and that plus the extra data can tell you a LOT. I mean, if the funding is like 200K, 200K, 400K, 300K, 3M, 12M (transfer to Kirtland) no further information - classified, you know that it hit paydirt.

But I have already found three pieces of circumstantial evidence that at the very least go to 'intent'

Oh, there's LOADS of intent, you haven't scratched the surface. They've funded a metric dungheap of intent. But the fact they keep funding it is a clue that they haven't managed it.

And you probably won't find a lot of requests for funding the at-a-distance sound part after about 1988-1989.

Develop technologies to support the development of deception modules for radar, acoustic, seismic, and communication band


The acoustic and seismic thing - if you look at the rest of the research package for context, this was a project to make armor look like enemy armor or vehicles. One of the things you have to deal with is the emission of sound and vibration which can be picked up quite a ways away and analyzed for content. An Abrams makes a very different sound than, say, a T90S. So part of acoustic deception is to find a way to mask the Abrams and make a sound like a T90S.

[edit on 4-10-2007 by Tom Bedlam]




posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


not really adding any fuel to fire or extinguish

just giving a kudos to zorgon atleast for the great research



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Is there something on your link that's applicable? I've looked and it's not obvious to me.

Zebra is an ID card manufacturer, they have holos on their ID cards like on your driver's license. And they make RFID asset tags, which the military loves. This is for the quartermasters.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   
This may be a bit off topic.. But in WW2 they used cardboard cut out of tanks to make it appear as if they where doing something they where not..

Messing with our visual eyes have been in the works since the 1940's..
They have always known that seeing is not belivng. And you can fool groups of people with tricks of the eye. And make mock things seem very real.

Back to topic.. My question is this.. How did they go about making the sounds of the airplanes? How would they have fooled so many people not only visually but with the sound to enhance and make what you see real as it was?

[edit on 4-10-2007 by zysin5]



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
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


I was talking about the Purdue video.

Also some more research for you.

From the United States
Joint Forces Command

The Joint Warfighting Center
Joint Doctrine Series
Pamphlet 2
www.dtic.mil...

Hologram generator Produces holograms as decoys



Also try the DARPA budget for 2001 and 2002.

www.darpa.mil...

UNCLASSIFIED


Department of Defense FY 2002 Amended Budget Submission
June 2001

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE
Volume 1 -Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Approved for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED Distribution Unlimited




[edit on 4-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Dude yaeh I have to agree with you on this one.. and unfortunately even John Lear doesn't have all the answers his guess is almost as good as any knowledgeable person on the subject.

What I believe is the cockpit could not have been taken over, and there was no struggle. The person flying the plane was the same throughout the entire flight. Also, nobody seems to know anybody who was on the planes?!?!?! It's now 6 years later and I have heard very little from the people who lost close ones on any 3 of these planes. Usually the media would be all over them,.. but where are they?

Also, controlled demolition is incredibly obvvious at this point. It makes me sick to this day.



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
(transfer to Kirtland)


Now THAT was an interesting post


Funny you should mention "Kirtland" I just ran into that on two searches just last night and passed it on to Jack

Seems a lot of stuff is (transfering to Kirtland)

And your method is sorta like my 'follow the kitchen' LOL



Oh, there's LOADS of intent, you haven't scratched the surface.


Our 'visitor' from the DoD put that a different way... "You only have the tip of the cat's tail..."



And ummm we have been 'snooping' around Kirtland a bit


The tubes for tunnel inserts...



Maybe one of those big mining machines under that camouflage... (compare to the houses)
830 ft Long Tube Under Construction





Tube ready for insertion... LOL sorry for the off topic but this goes towards your "before it goes classified" (either that or someone forgot about that google eye in the sky)




[edit on 4-10-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 09:10 PM
link   
LOL absolutely nothing Tom... that was a side step




Originally posted by zysin5
Back to topic.. My question is this.. How did they go about making the sounds of the airplanes? How would they have fooled so many people not only visually but with the sound to enhance and make what you see real as it was?


That brings me back to my question ...

WHO heard the airplanes?

The people on the LOUD and busy street? The incident only lasted a few seconds... so I would like to see reports as to who actually reported hearing the planes and not just assumeing there were planes so I must have heard it.

Also any other planes around that night have been heard?

Just little points... and you don't need fancy expensive government toys to make plane sounds... just a few well place loud speakers



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Also some more research for you.


Ah see now we are getting somewhere... extracuricular study'


Thanks for the links... there are some really nasty toys in that one..

• a robotic mini-torpedo that can swim into a hydro-turbine intake at a dam
and detonate inside the flow control valve or turbine, disabling the generator;
• an electronic bomb that can be dropped by parachute next to a building or
military unit and emits electromagnetic pulse (EMP) to disable the electronic
equipment in the area;
• and a system of micro air vehicles that swarm an air defense site, home
optically on the launchers or guns, and disable them with small precision armor piercing warheads.

I am glad they are working for our side
(I think...)



posted on Oct, 4 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   
So if your saying we're looking at a holographic image(hologram) that flies though New York, is captured on video from maybe 6 or 7 angles, using focused light from multiple sources, that looks just like a twin engine jet plane, then what is the focused light reflecting off back to all the cameras? Once again what is the light reflecting off of?

It's as if your saying to yourself, the terorists wanted to limit the damage so they spent millions on a holograghic device, so they could then later, after your first real bombs went of at exactly when the hologram hits , in the shape of an airplane, that you could then safely control demo both twin towers.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Ah see now we are getting somewhere... extracuricular study'


Thanks for the links... there are some really nasty toys in that one..



Oh thats just the tip of the iceberg as they say. Thats just some of the unclassified projects there are even more nasty toys that are still classified and may never be unclassified.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
So if your saying we're looking at a holographic image(hologram) that flies though New York, is captured on video from maybe 6 or 7 angles, using focused light from multiple sources, that looks just like a twin engine jet plane, then what is the focused light reflecting off back to all the cameras? Once again what is the light reflecting off of?



Excellent point! A projected hologram does not reflect anything, period. Nevermind all the other difficulties pulling something like this off unseen by people in all areas and angles, that fact alone disproves any hologram all by itself.

What I don't get is all the hypocrisy about all this, thousands of eyewitnesses, live TV around the world, amateur video, tons of photo's.. yet if this were to be a UFO sighting under the same circumstances, and someone said it was a hologram, and that the footage was all CGI,or that the witnesses were all fooled, they would be ridiculed.

I mean we have people swearing up and down they can see clouds and parking garages on the the moon, UFO's all over the sky, faces on mars....from photo's...reptiles on TV and those people will swear to you no matter how much real science you try and show them that what they are seeing is real.

However when it comes to 9/11, nope all the witnesses were fooled. From people who weren't even there. They will tell you things like "how do you know they heard a jet above street noise?" When there is clearly video, yes with sound and eyewitnesses who claim they did.

But show some of these people a Billy Meier (lol) trashcan lid photo... and it's like "OMG IT's REAL!!@!@!" Even though he's one of the only ones to claim to have seen it. Here we have THOUSANDS of regular people, but we can't believe them!

This sort of talk used to be reserved for the government, ie; mass hysteria, swamp gas and what have you. But now in this case it's been turned around. I suspect it has ALOT to do with political bias, and peoples unwillingness to not look at things objectively due to that bias. Those that say to actual eyewitnesses or to the families of the dead passengers that it wasn't real...shame on you, you've turned into THEM! The very ones that you despise, you use their tactics without looking at all the real peoples evidence, you discount it all.

Sorry about the rant, this should probably have it's own thread because I think it's very telling about people and it's important to examine the thought process to help weed out the people that just blindly believe and jump on a bandwagon and those that think without some form of bias whether it be political or what have you.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist
What I don't get is all the hypocrisy about all this, thousands of eyewitnesses, live TV around the world, amateur video, tons of photo's.. yet if this were to be a UFO sighting under the same circumstances, and someone said it was a hologram, and that the footage was all CGI,or that the witnesses were all fooled, they would be ridiculed.


What i don't get is how people can still beleive the official story with no hard evidence to support it and more and more evidence comming out against the official story, more and more first responders speaking out against the official story.


Just a few things:

6 years and no official FBI and NTSB crime scene reports.

6 years and NIST still cannot tell us how building 7 collapsed.

No actual videos or photos of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon even though the builidng has cameras and their are cameras on several nearby buildings.

Witnesses at Pentagon cannot agree on what type or size of aircraft they saw.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 05:22 AM
link   




You seem to be trolling quite a bit, I have presented all the hard evidence in the other thread. If by hard evidence you seem to mean "official" reports, what's the point? You wouldn't believe them anyway! You keep changing your story about what it was.. a missile....a military plane.... you would never be satisfied with an official report. And you won't get one, because most people already know and accept what happened.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist
Here we have THOUSANDS of regular people, but we can't believe them!


yes and thousands of conflicting 'eye witness' reports like the fireman who was inside and heard the explosions and showed with his hands the progression of blasts.

For ever witness that says one thing there is another that says the opposite... Look at the pentagon witness stories... but then you probably pick and chose which ones are 'credible' to you (those that confirm your version
)



the families of the dead passengers that it wasn't real...shame on you


So if we don't agree with you we are 'trolls' or 'one of THEM' Show me the law suits and insurance claims from the families of the passengers...

Show me where the millions collected for the families went to...



you use their tactics without looking at all the real peoples evidence, you discount it all.


No actually I look at all the evidence, unlike your 'selective' view..

Like this CNN report immediately after the Pentagon attack...


Google Video Link


I have many eyewitness reports but there would be no point as I am sure its been covered somewhere in these myriad of 911 threads. I think the CNN report says it all




this should probably have it's own thread because I think it's very telling about people and it's important to examine the thought process to help weed out the people that just blindly believe


Just what we need still another 911 thread to 'weed out' those that don't think as you do... I suppose if you start enough threads you will finally find a room where everyone shares your views... (good luck with that
)

[edit on 5-10-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist

You seem to be trolling quite a bit, I have presented all the hard evidence in the other thread. If by hard evidence you seem to mean "official" reports, what's the point? You wouldn't believe them anyway! You keep changing your story about what it was.. a missile....a military plane.... you would never be satisfied with an official report. And you won't get one, because most people already know and accept what happened.


No, i am not trolling its called looking for the truth. Doing research, fileing FOIA requests with the actaul investigating agencies and e-mailing the companies that were there at ground zero.

What have you done to find the truth of what happened that day? Or are you just going by what you saw on TV and what the media told you?

I am looking for the truth of what actaully happend that day, that is why i am looking for official reports becasue without the official reports neither you or i know what really happened.

I am a government analyst with a background in aviation and law enforcement and know what reports and documents we should have, i also use my knowledge and common sense to see that there is a lot of things wrong with the official story.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

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



Look at it this way, they have some of the best equipment in the modern world (Lasers, holograms, demolition/technology experts, etc. etc,) and still managed to screw it up.....whahahaaaa.

That must really suck.

On the flip side, someone in the know might actually be deliberately sabotaging these malevolent plans slightly, hoping that the public may some day "figure it out".

Like leaving a back door open with the smoking gun there.

We may have discovered at lot, but not all of it yet. There is still hope. Until they start taking out the more inquisitive people with stealth missiles.

Start sleeping in different locations every night......



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


They don't have have you..... yet.

Your brain is your best arsenal, everything else, are just toys.

"Outwit, Outplay, Outsmart, Outlast the game". Survivor series quote... I think.

EMP might level the playing field. Good luck.

[edit on 5-10-2007 by ixiy]



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Soloist, honestly...I had really given up hope here in the 9/11 conspiracy forum of finding anybody who even slightly doubts this nonsense. The spooky part of it all is that these hard core CT's are actually living, breathing and thinking adults who are out there among us. Forget Lizard men and Zeta Raticulan's, these types are downright terrifying; because we know for a fact that they are indeed out there!

It's gotten to the point where I'm actually starting to wonder who is in fact crazier?

The Muslim extremists, or the conspiracy theorists themselves?

Both share a very real desire to oppose western democracy, to the point of seeing it obliterated in some fashion.

Both are delusional (that much is plainly obvious.) Just read into the thought workings of those endorsing the 'hologram theory' in this very thread. They honestly believe in what they're typing without even displaying even a shred of healthy common sense towards it all.

Their resentment of the government is at an all time fever pitch. In the most recent polling done by Scripps research (university of Ohio) they have concluded that conspiracy theories and government resentment are at an all time high in modern history. Over one third of the entire population. Granted, a lot of that stems from the conflict in Iraq and the deception of slickly produced CT documentaries (most just aren't informed.) But picture that fringe element out there (that's still a remarkable number of people.) Those that believe in holograms on 9/11 and that I may have poisoned their big mac at McDonald's while they weren't looking. If not now, pretty soon the lid on the pot is going to start popping off on these types.

Since they buy into such propaganda as this, how long before they become convinced that it is their responsibility to act out and retaliate in someway? After all, in their rationale they are the victims already and feel powerless in their quest against the government meanies.

What is the difference really between an extremist strapping on a bomb vest and detonating it convinced that he is about to encounter 40 virgins and a mule and a bunch of people that chug cyanide convinced that they will be instantly beamed aboard a space craft trailing a comet? (Other than the fact that the cyanide chuggers didn't take a portion of society with them of course.) Answer; there is no difference!

But I'm under the impression here after reading this, that if Mr. Lear happened to rent out a mansion in the Hollywood hills somewhere and started cultivating these types (hypothetically speaking of course) -- He'd wind up with a small brigade of lunatics on his hands before long. Completely out of touch with reality & capable of anything after a few weeks of late night slide shows and conspiracy paranoia.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminatinatifofotty
It's gotten to the point where I'm actually starting to wonder who is in fact crazier?

The Muslim extremists, or the conspiracy theorists themselves?



Funny and a litlte sad that people who have some inteeligence and common sense who try to do research to find out what really happened that day are called names by those who are living in a media fed fantasy world.

Its been 6 years and people who believe the official story can still not come up with any actual hard evidence or official reports to suport their theories or the official story.

6 years and NIST still cannot tell us why builidng 7 collasped.

6 years and still no FBI and NTSB crime scen reports on any of the 9/11 aircraft crash scenes.



posted on Oct, 5 2007 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminatinatifofotty
Both share a very real desire to oppose western democracy, to the point of seeing it obliterated in some fashion.


You should hope for it. We were supposed to be a republic. Someone asked Ben Franklin right out of a convention, something along the lines of, "What kind of government have you given us?", and he told her that we would have a republic if we could keep it. We couldn't.

What's the difference? In a democracy, mob rules. In a republic, the law, the constitution is the highest authority, and everyone is assured certain rights regardless of what the mass of people may want.

Maybe you shouldn't assume you always know what you're talking about, or that the opinions you already hold are correct by default, simply because they're your opinions. The fact that a lot of professionals doubt the "official story", and are "out there" as you put it, should say something to you besides that democracy is under attack by idiots. There are members here who are engineers that are respectfully employed. Valhall is one of them, Griff is another. If you were to take their place for a day, your idea of who's really ignorant might change a little, but you wouldn't know anything about that. Maybe you can ask them.


Completely out of touch with reality & capable of anything after a few weeks of late night slide shows and conspiracy paranoia.


Who's paranoid? Of what? Tell me that I'm afraid of feds crashing a plane into my house. Or that I'm just a Bush-hating liberal. Anything like that will do, right?



You can tell who this stuff really bothers. It really bothers you if you have to go out of your way to try to justify what all of us have come to realize, to make it still fit into their way of seeing things. When you say "common sense", what you really mean is, "all the opinions I already have about 9/11". Even going so far as to giving me an armchair psychological diagnosis.


I've asked before, if anyone wants to wager a pschiatrist's/psychologist's bill, I'll run down to one and document the results somehow. These guys are professionals, right? Surely they could tell me how delusional I am, if you're willing to pay the bill if you're wrong.

[edit on 5-10-2007 by bsbray11]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join