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 John Lear Hologram Challenge

page: 10
7
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
A sugar plum fairy dressed up as a Boeing 767.

Batman with a 156 foot cape span

Superman with an armspan of 156 feet.

A mothman with silver wings 156 feet wide.

Mighty Mouse with ears 156 feet wide.


Come on now....everyone knows Batman doesn't have the ability to actually fly...

I gotta' go with the sugar plum fairy...I never did trust the pesky little......




posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
perhaps John has an idea of some recent weapon developments..(guess not)





Originally posted by johnlear

A mothman with silver wings 156 feet wide.




well, this is it. that fits perfectly, and explains why the steel columns broke.

yes.


finally we got it.


or this one . it was dick cheney:

www.wallpaperbase.com...

[edit on 2-10-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 2-10-2007 by anti72]

[edit on 2-10-2007 by anti72]



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
John Lear wrote,

Ignoranceisntbliss, with all due respect. Please try and follow along here.

The 400-500+ mph Boeing wasn't supposed to do anything.

It wasn't there.


Fair enough. Please prove these statements.

I understand you're very busy but I think a statement of this magnitude does require substantial proof.

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Next he'll be telling us the holograms came from Ed Dames projector on Mars.

What a load of old bunk.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Originally posted by jfj123



Fair enough. Please prove these statements.

I understand you're very busy but I think a statement of this magnitude does require substantial proof.

Thanks.



Thanks for the post jfj123. This thread is 10 pages long. Many of the posts are mine. Let me respectfully suggest that if you haven't gotten it by now, then your aren't going to get it.

I don't teach a remedial class so you'll either have to go somewhere else.

Here is a photo of all they found remaining of the 2 Boeing 767's on the ground below the World Trade Center north and south towers. My personal opinion is that it didn't come off either of those Boeing 767's. I think the tooth fairy put it there.





posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Thanks for the post jfj123. This thread is 10 pages long. Many of the posts are mine. Let me respectfully suggest that if you haven't gotten it by now, then your aren't going to get it.

I don't teach a remedial class so you'll either have to go somewhere else.

Here is a photo of all they found remaining of the 2 Boeing 767's on the ground below the World Trade Center north and south towers. My personal opinion is that it didn't come off either of those Boeing 767's. I think the tooth fairy put it there.


Thanks for the post.
I notice you used the word "opinion". I think if you used it more often when making statements, you probably wouldn't take as much criticism.

Also, I would like to let you know I am extremely intelligent. I promise if you post any actual evidence, I will gladly read and respond to it.

Thus far, the only supportive evidence you have posted is regard to the size of the entrance damage pattern which you claim is too small for a 767 to fit. I posted a response showing that your math is actually incorrect along with the 767 wing span size you posted so, that supportive evidence is unfortunately no longer valid.

I am interested to know what evidence has lead you to believe in your hologram theory.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


this has actaully been a very great post and great criticism and john lear being able to hold his own to his opinion without reacting, showing contentment in his rebuttals

but its hard to see that there is so much paper and dust still around and nothing of planes that survived the crash? that is hard to believe just like the pentagon crash, no plane evidence?

why dont they just release the video? cause there is no plane to speak of...

i think this is an arguement that will never get solved until the truth is laid out on the table

it also sucks that we put so much energy into arguing instead of forcing out the truth of the ones who are with holding the info in the first place



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Reply to murdercitydevil,

this has actaully been a very great post and great criticism and john lear being able to hold his own to his opinion without reacting, showing contentment in his rebuttals


Well it's easy to have an opinion. It's harder to back it up. I'm sure mr. lear is a very nice guy.


but its hard to see that there is so much paper and dust still around and nothing of planes that survived the crash? that is hard to believe just like the pentagon crash, no plane evidence?

So what guide to you have to go by?


why dont they just release the video? cause there is no plane to speak of...

i think this is an arguement that will never get solved until the truth is laid out on the table

it also sucks that we put so much energy into arguing instead of forcing out the truth of the ones who are with holding the info in the first place


Actually what you consider arguing, is an attempt to use logical reason to find the truth.

I have asked that mr. lear prove his statement that there was no plane.
Everyone saw the plane.
The plane was on video.

So tell me why I didn't see what I saw and provide evidence to support your hypothesis. That's all I ask....to simply back up what you're saying.

Again, mr. lear mentioned the damage hole in the building was too small for a 767 to fit. His calculations were incorrect and I proved it.

Why is it such a hard thing for him to back up his statements with facts??? If he doesn't want to discuss these things, why come here?



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Originally posted by jfj123



Also, I would like to let you know I am extremely intelligent.


You coulda fooled me.
Thanks for the heads up.



I promise if you post any actual evidence, I will gladly read and respond to it.


Thanks


Thus far, the only supportive evidence you have posted is regard to the size of the entrance damage pattern which you claim is too small for a 767 to fit. I posted a response showing that your math is actually incorrect along with the 767 wing span size you posted so, that supportive evidence is unfortunately no longer valid.


You are looking at the wrong post. You need to read the entire thread and try to keep up. Try this one:




Look very carefully. Box columns 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are not breached. Neither are box columns 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15. So keeping in mind that the airplane disappeared in 1/5 of a second, like a knife through butter, how did it get past the steel box columns that were not breached?

Answer: It didn't. It was a scam. It was a hoax. It was a PsyOp.



I am interested to know what evidence has lead you to believe in your hologram theory.


The planes couldn't get into the WTC. There were too many box columns in the way. The box columns were not breached or broken or cut or sliced. No plane went in, no plane came out.

There was not one single piece of wreckage, traceable to either of the Boeing 767's that crashed into the WTC. There was 'planted' wreckage in the street but nothing in the footprint of the building.

Now look at the NIST pattern of broken columns here. Do you see my yellow lines? Those yellow lines represent box steel columns that were not breached, or broke, or split or cut or sliced or separated in any way. Now, if those box columns that I have indicated where not breached, or broke, or split or cut or sliced or separated in any way then how do you suppose an airplane got in? Answer: it didn't. There was no airplane. It was a scam. It was a hoax. It was a PsyOp.



Thanks for your post.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Wow, the skill at provoking people to continue posting in this mess is commendable. It will do utterly no good to present any kind of logical, reasoned rebuttals to the bizarre opinions expressed here.

You cannot argue with unreasonable. The best you can hope for is to carefully pick out the most inane comments and hold them up to the light of day.

Clearly, this is not a topic to be "intelligently discussed". Because it really takes two sides to accomplish that. One side is missing here.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Originally posted by MrPenny




Clearly, this is not a topic to be "intelligently discussed". Because it really takes two sides to accomplish that. One side is missing here.



I agree MrPenny. What is it that people don't understand about a steel column that is not breached or broken or cut or split or cut or sliced?

What do they think? The airplane went through by osmosis?

Thanks for the support.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
What is it that people don't understand about a steel column that is not breached or broken or cut or split or cut or sliced?


There is utterly zero background, history, or expectation that a passenger airliner, flying at 500 mph, (give or take) would impact the side of a 110 story structure. It shouldn't have to be explained to anyone that their expectations of such an event, are likely, completely wrong. When they fall into the realm of ludicrous, it is shocking. Until someone can faithfully demonstrate exactly what to expect in an event of this sort, with a 110 story concrete and steel building, and a 767, declaring that what occurred is impossible, borders on deluded.

The entire, stupid plot smacks of a "Get Smart" episode. I'm not particularly fond of our current crop of politicians and "leaders", but, I will grant them the intelligence to figure out that one dumbass schlub, toting a really huge bomb up 100 stories, would have accomplished your scenario cheaper, faster, and much more believably. O.K. you got me....two dumbass schlubs.

Do you recall a post of mine that was deleted? Where I equated "Bobby did it" with another bizarre claim? This is another case of "Bobby did it".



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Originally posted by MrPenny




It shouldn't have to be explained to anyone that their expectations of such an event, are likely, completely wrong.


I agree completely.

Thanks for the post MrPenny.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
I agree MrPenny. What is it that people don't understand about a steel column that is not breached or broken or cut or split or cut or sliced?

What do they think? The airplane went through by osmosis?


Dear Mr. John,

I've asked you at least once to show proof or even evidence that plane debris didn't land on the ground in front of the imapct holes. Until you can do this your statements beg to be dismissed. This is important, because your entire collective argument rests on it at this point. Please don't let us down.

Also feel free to go back and reread my posts to dig out those hard arguments and related sub-challenges you've been avoiding.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Im sorry, but WHERE are all those people who were on the planes?

And I suppose if I told you that I knew someone that was on one of the plans I would then be told "they are in hiding, our Govt has killed them or put them in a concentration camp on Mars"???

I only see evidence of one side. No matter how hard I tried to see the other side (because im pretty open like that), there is absolutely not one shread of evidence to show that "no plans hit the towers" . It is all just opinion and speculation. That is fine, but it should never be presented as Truth.

I have seen some excellent evidence presented here that proves that planes hit the towers. This holds weight, as speculation just doesnt.

If someone could just provide evidence that it was a hologram or that it was this or that, well, Im sure many could be persuaded



It has been a very entertaining thread to read, thats for sure! Never heard about the hologram theory before. But that would explain all those alien UFOs people claim to see. Now we know they are just holograms. Whew, mystery solved



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear


Originally posted by MrPenny

It shouldn't have to be explained to anyone that their expectations of such an event, are likely, completely wrong.


I agree completely.

Thanks for the post MrPenny.


Perfect!! So now you realize that what we saw happen, sets the expectation. "Oh, so that's what happens in this circumstance, I had no idea that would occur." Cast off what you think should have happened. We all saw, vividly, what actually does happen, a little over six years ago.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by MurderCityDevil
this has actaully been a very great post and great criticism and john lear being able to hold his own to his opinion without reacting, showing contentment in his rebuttals


Oh, never mind. You said "Reacting". I read it as "Recanting." I was just about to go off on morals and the structure of American values today.

Rather, I must agree with you on your post. Very well disciplined responses compared with other threads. Maybe he's finally reached a point where he realizes that other people don't want to change their minds. Kinda of like trying to show people the corruption in Washington. They just smile, shrug and say, "Yeah. There it is. Hmmm. Wierd, huh?" And I can't help but think, "WTF?! Care about something other than yourself!"

I think at some point, those that try to reach out to others and open their minds to other ideas outside of what is spoonfed to them by the Boob Tube (there is a reason why it got that name) eventually just become monotone in their efforts when they see the response they get.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Well I guess another great showing of alternative one. Definition...

Alternative One - Elimination of a huge portion of world population. Massive population thinning will be blamed on acts of terrorism.




posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I do not know where to begin with this reply, but throughout reading this ENTIRE thread I have felt that I must say something. It's been a while since I did some thorough reading here on ATS, but the idea of a hologram 'hitting' the towers tickled my fancy enough to finally get back into it. I cannot, absolutely cannot, believe the ridiculously poor quality of debate which I have unfortunately wasted the last half hour of my life reading through. I have not read much, if anything, by John Lear so far but I have assumed that our board has merely been graced with presence of another highly articulate and thoughtful individual. I could not have been more wrong in my life.

It cases me such great pain on this board when I see well presented, well thought through, well articulated posts which clearly address well defined and relevant material are completely ignored, and dare I say purposefully. IgnoranceIsntBlisss in particular has done a great job in presenting more than enough evidence to convince any rational individual that a hologram explanation cannot be seriously entertained at present. There is NO evidence for it, and the evidence against it has NOT been dis-proven, or even seriously addressed by John Lear.

John Lear has continuously adopted a condescending and provocative tone in this discussion which has sickened me. Someone of your age and stature Mr. Lear, to stoop to such childish and ignorant means of discussion is absurd. I do not think that any amount of evidence could convince Mr. Lear of anything in his current state-of-mind. I would highly recommend giving your internet ego a break for a day or two to let it cool down before you continue to ignore the efforts of the likes of IgnoranceIsntBlisss and Chorlton.

Mr. Lear, please present some evidence for your claim that has not already been dismissed in the thread (by this I mean stop showing us your overlay diagrams with incorrect scale and measurements), please address the serious claims which have been presented against your theory by those who have clearly put time and effort into their posts (by this I mean stop replying to the guys who say "I totally agree with you John" or "there's like, no way man, I just can't believe it was a hologram dude") and for the love of all that is true and good in the universe, please drop the condescending tone.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by The_Modulus

John Lear has continuously adopted a condescending and provocative tone in this discussion which has sickened me.


Me Too! and often on other threads.

Don't you think it's time to take your position here as an ATS conspiracy master a little more seriously. Or will you remain the ATS CLOWN?

Sad



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join