It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 20
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 11:45 AM
Someone may wish to contact a six to seven figure income magician, and ask that magician how his "elephant" disappeared off stage, and ended up "reappearing" in the middle of a highway. Or how it is possible to "disappear" the Empire State Building" and made it "reappear" floating on the Hudson Bay water.

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 12:02 PM
Originally posted by wsamplet

I have a real problem here. I thought I read that one of the rules was not to bring bull# here and pass it off as fact.

Good morning wsamplet. One of your problems is trying to use words to express yourself that are not permitted her.

My second issue pretains to the fact that I have seen several people that have become sick of their crap get zapped by the all mighty Mod. Why enforce half the rules.

Another might be your issues with the Mods.

Why didnt any pilots key the mike. Here is my answer to your question. some did, several pilots and ATC discuss whether they heard a scream, ATC hears pilots begging for their lives. I suggest to you that the ones that did not key the mike were the ones trying to get out of there seats and fight.

Let me respectfully suggest that there were no pilots, no mikes, no conversations, no airplanes. There were no pilots begging for their lives. That was all a PsyOp.

you want to talk about pilot training and experience. Why waste time calling ATC, I think an experienced pilot would know that the could not do anything to help, time better spent getting out of the seat to defend yourself and call ATC later.

No. No pilot is going to get out of his seat. That is ridiculous. All the pilot has to do is roll the airplane inverted and push forward on the stick.. That will instantly put any hijackers on the ceiling of the cockpit. A few more pushes and pulls would incapacitate them.

But there were no airplanes and no hijackers. It was a magic trick. A scam. It was a PsyOp.

All your ridiculous questions can be and have been answered in this way, but of course you reject them. If I am kicked off, I am Kicked off. But at least I made my stand.

Well, it wasn't much of a stand with the language and arguments you used.

Better luck next time.

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 12:18 PM
´But there were no airplanes and no hijackers. It was a magic trick. A scam. It was a PsyOp.´

far fetched?
As far the discussion has reached through the years now, the POSSIBILITY of a use of unconventional weapons or MASSIVE PsyOp´s have to be THEORETICALLY considered. As any other obscure ´SciFi´ spaceship-in-orbit´ story. sorry.
again: what do we know what the military has ?

The Lockheed X-22A Anti-Gravity Fighter Disc

just this.

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 04:31 PM
reply to post by anti72

Thanks for the link.

So do you believe this technology was used on 911? If so would you say said craft was capable of both the images seen and the noise heard? Not to mention the explosions and the destruction of the WTCs?

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 04:57 PM
reply to post by infinityoreilly

hey, I wish I would´s horrible how less we know what ´our NWO/military/war guys´ already have.

I think that the black triangle UFO´s are ours, made by lockheed or so.

when you look at the sit of Judy Wood, about the whole 911 physics and problems with the official version, I think we can´t just fully ignore such a theory.

´bathtub´ facts, energy lack...dustification of steel:

there were some other interesting posts with material.. holograms, stealth tech (I dont know where exactly at the moment.. )

maybe John (Lear) has some ideas, how a (microwave)weapon could be transported underneath a military plane for that..

(we had a site with interesting 911 military fotos, I remember)

main questions there:
Here are the principal data that must be explained:

1. The Twin Towers were destroyed faster than physics can explain (free fall speed "collapse")
2. The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers
3. The rail lines, rail cars and tunnels had only light damage
4. The WTC mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Bros. Road Runner and friends
5. The seismic impact was minimal, far too small based on our comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition
6. The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not bottom up, unlike WTC7
7. The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth
8. File cabinet with folder dividers survive.
9. Office paper was densely spread throughout lower Manhattan, unburned, often along side burning cars.
10. Vertical round holes were cut into buildings 4, 5 and 6, plus a cylindrical arc into Bankers Trust and into Liberty street in front of Bankers Trust
11. All planes but top secret missions were ordered down until 10:31 a.m. (when only military flights were allowed to resume), after both towers were destroyed, and only two minutes after WTC 1 had been destroyed
12. Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were towed away, toasted in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers
13. The order and method of destruction of each tower minimized damage to the bathtub.
14. Twin Tower control without damaging neighboring buildings, in fact all seriously damaged or destroyed buildings had a WTC prefix, and no others.
15. The north wing of WTC 4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body which virtually disappeared
16. The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the mass, unlike that of WTC7
17. Eyewitness testimony about toasted cars, instant disappearance of people by "unexplained" waves, a plane turning into a mid-air fireball and electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, the sound of explosions.
18. The possibility that a technology exists. Since invention of the microwave for cooking in 1945 and laser beam in 1955*, commercial and military development of beam technology has proceeded apace, so use of high-energy beams are likely

[edit on 30-12-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 30-12-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 30-12-2007 by anti72]

posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 05:15 PM
here a photo of the military plane, that made that fotos.

new topics

top topics
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in