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: 11
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Hey, don't give up. Just because no airplanes the size of a Boeing 767 coud have possibly penetratred the World Trade Center doesn't mean everybody was watching a hologram per se.


You expect us to see what isn't there when you say (moon).....and not see what is there when you say (plane)?

You are a master of duality!




posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MurderCityDevil
 



There is plenty of plane debris, wheels, engines gear etc. Its just that people wont accept the truth.
I posted pictures of plane debris earlier, and good old John said he thought it was planted.
I mean, its simply not worth responding when one gets answers like that.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Chorlton
 


Judge by what people do, not what they say. 9-11 was the first time in U.S. aviation history that the NTSB didn’t bother to write up reports for commercial jet airliner ‘crashes’, for none of the four of them. Geez, is it a wonder why not? No-planers know the answer to that fact. Do you Chorlton? Why do you suggest there are NO REPORTS — again for the first time ever! We’re awaiting an answer with baited breath!

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods
 


I'd like to jump in before Chorlton if you don't mind.

Maybe because they were criminal investigations and not investigations into why the aircraft crashed?



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods
 


I suspect that its probably something to do with the planes being shredded into little bits and because of a Terrorist act probably the CIA or FBI took over jurisdiction, or is that too simple a concept for you?



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Dear mr. Leary.


I have one comment. As a frequent flyer, I allways notice how the wings bend and "turn" in turbulence ..

I have allso seen plane crash videos ( tests ) that show wings beeing bent backwards as it crashes in to solid wall. When you crash a big plane like this into an building with enormous steel pillars like this, the wings would likely bend backwards in the event, thus making the wingspan more narrow than it is.

Btw: loved listening to coast to coast .. we dont agree, but i like listening.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Hi Mr. Lear,

I have absolutely no problem believing that the buildings were brought down via controlled demolition, and not as a result of the "airplane impacts", but I'm puzzled how they might have faked the footage of the airplanes hitting the towers?

I'm always worked on the assumption that those planes were Air Force re-fueling tankers, or some other sort of military aircraft. The notion that the planes simply didn't exist at all didn't occur to me. I can certainly see how the Pentagon plane didn't exist, but I find it hard to imagine that *some* sort of planes didn't impact the towers.

The video "911 In Plane Sight", by Dave vonKleist, shows a lot of slow motion footage of the impacts, with some very interesting anomalies show. But if I understand you there simply were *no* planes involved with the towers.

Where did all that footage come from? Did "the powers that be" simply feed it to the media with orders to run it?

Sorry, if I have missed some prior explanation of this.. have just joined the board. Any clarification would be much appreciated.

Regards,
Bob



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods
 


I suspect that its probably something to do with the planes being shredded into little bits and because of a Terrorist act probably the CIA or FBI took over jurisdiction, or is that too simple a concept for you?



Excuse me? When Pan Am flight 103 was blown to smithereens over Lockerbie, Scotland, we re-assembled the plane. When TWA 800 exploded in mid-air we put the parts back together.

So what’s your point? Are you saying there were no parts left to investigate? If so, then welcome to the club of no-planers. There were no parts because there were no planes. The NTSB can’t hide that fact, it would involve way too many people to fake those reports. So they had no choice, they had to forgo their investigations, for the first time.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 10/3/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
9-11 was the first time in U.S. aviation history that the NTSB didn’t bother to write up reports for commercial jet airliner ‘crashes’, for none of the four of them. Geez, is it a wonder why not? No-planers know the answer to that fact. Do you Chorlton? Why do you suggest there are NO REPORTS — again for the first time ever! We’re awaiting an answer with baited breath!



False Dichotomy:

In a false dichotomy (also called a false dilemma, either or, black or white, the missing middle) you are presented with two choices, when in fact there are more than two choices. If one choice is discredited, then the reader is forced to accept the other choice. But this is not an adequate argument, the choice favored must be supported by evidence.
info-pollution.com...


The answer is simple: They intentionally did things of the sort that you mentioned to allow for these sorts of conspiracy theories to run rampant and divert everyone as a whole from reachng and getting active on what I call "Actionable Consensus" issues. In the aftermath, everybody ends up too diverted chasing pipe-dreams and disinfo theories to settle on the core issues which aren't 'over-the-top' and that everybody would have to agree warrant immediate new investigatons... as long as there aren't kookfest theories which are more widely parroted and debunked. The idea is to get the most controvesial and debatable issues possible on the 'front page' of 'whatever' so that everybody can go back to bed while all those crazies bicker over things like physics and so on. And it would seem phase 2 of the 9/11 operation, which I just described, is going much smoother than the attacks did. If you'd like to challenge my thesis be my guest:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Furthermore, now that I think about it, it's absurd to declare that "They" fabricated all of this evidence (we're talking live news feeds, smoking jet engines on the street corner, etc here) but then didn't bother to fabricate things like NTSB reports (paperwork) and so on. Now we're delving into all new areas of irrational kookery. Thanks for beating this perspective outta me on this issue, I couldn't have done it without you



Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Excuse me? When Pan Am flight 103 was blown to smithereens over Lockerbie, Scotland, we re-assembled the plane. When TWA 800 exploded in mid-air we put the parts back together.


What?! I thought Pan Am was a hologram too? Surely they had to test their hologram equipment years in advance to get all the bugs out. The panam103 debris was some other plane they downed at Area 51.



[edit on 3-10-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
The NSTB can’t hide that fact, it would involve way too many people to fake those reports.


Suddenly, the numbers of people involved in faking the reports is an issue? What about the massive numbers of people it would take to fake "holographic" planes? That is truly a laughable position and worthy of derision. They would fake the planes with massive, secret equipment, yet cannot fake several documents? Really?

[edit on 3-10-2007 by MrPenny]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   
To Wizard_in_the_wood
Are you incapable of reading what I posted? I said the planes were shredded. Please dont change around what was posted.

The Pan Am Plane left substantial remains on the ground.
I dont know about the other crash.

The WTC planes were shredded then most parts (apart from larger objects of which there was substantial evidence) were probably burned and melted in the heat. Aluminium burns and melts quite easily, especially magnesium alloyed aluminium which burns VERY well, as I found out one day welding up a VW gearbox.

When Terrorism of such magnitude happens, I suspect other organsations took over, though I dont know but would suggest that was the reason.

[edit on 3/10/07 by Chorlton]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by RTrev
Hi Mr. Lear,

I have absolutely no problem believing that the buildings were brought down via controlled demolition, and not as a result of the "airplane impacts", but I'm puzzled how they might have faked the footage of the airplanes hitting the towers?


whoops, my apologies.. I've read the entire thread now and understand your thesis about the holographic projections.

Seems plausible to me. We *know* things didn't happen as the official story indicates.. so I'm willing to entertain any alternatives that have some basis in the facts as we think we understand them.

As for the actual flights, I presume they are setting on the bottom of the ocean somewhere?

Regards,
Bob



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by RTrev

whoops, my apologies.. I've read the entire thread now and understand your thesis about the holographic projections.

Seems plausible to me. We *know* things didn't happen as the official story indicates.. so I'm willing to entertain any alternatives that have some basis in the facts as we think we understand them.


But the Holographic theory has absolutely no basis in fact. It is entirely theoretical. As was mentioned it would need to be a 360 degree hologram and be vieweble in the correct context both inside and outside of the projection. It simply doesnt exist.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
False Dichotomy: If one choice is discredited, then the reader is forced to accept the other choice.
The answer is simple: They intentionally did things of the sort that you mentioned to allow for these sorts of conspiracy theories to run rampant


Your latest post ‘takes the cake’. I’ll summarize both our positions for brevity.

It seems you’re suggesting the NTSB reports were PURPOSELY omitted as a means to confuse us, so that we might bicker and rack our brains over what happened.

I’m theorizing that the NTSB never issued reports because they couldn’t, neither real ones (there were no real plane crashes) nor fake ones (would have involved too many partners in crime).

Not having reports HAS caused debates/arguments. Having reports would have kept the peace, and that many more people in the belief that there were 9-11 highjackers/terrorists.

Muslim terrorists are the linchpin to 9-11. Without them, what is 9-11? A scenario where we ourselves leveled 12 million square feet of office space, just as to scare our populace and the world public into embracing specific ‘strategic’ foreign policies!

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 10/3/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The idea is to get the most controvesial and debatable issues possible on the 'front page' of 'whatever' so that everybody can go back to bed while all those crazies bicker over things like physics and so on.


I agree with you on the fact that this subject has been sidetracked with abdurdities and the REAL issues, whether one theory or another, still remain.

I'm not sure what "whatever" is, but the Truth will not make the "Front Page" of anything. The simple fact is, for whatever theory you believe, there was a motive behind it. Why did we allow the plans to be carried out? Why did we carry the plans out ourselves? Whatever your stance ... the attacks occured to induce a war. Who would want a war? Central Bankers of the world. Why would Central Bankers want war? So that the respective governments would barrow money from them. Why would the truth never make the front page of whatever? Because these entities that run the Central Banks have so much wealth that it ranks up in the Quadrillions. These people no longer want money ... they want power. They control nearly every aspect of governments, including the propaganda machines — meaning: newspapers, televisions stations, radio networks, magazines, etc., etc.

The movement to get the truth out there is going to have to be a major population based effort. Meaning that we can't rely on reporters to do their jobs. We have to rely on one another.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chorlton
To Wizard_in_the_wood
Are you incapable of reading what I posted? I said the planes were shredded. Please dont change around what was posted.


Dear Chorlton:

Oh I read your post quite alright. Are you saying flights AA77 and UA93 were ‘shredded’ too? If so, by what?

And, I thought you were the one, or was it IgnoranceIsn’tBlisss, who mentioned all the UA175 plane parts found on the roof of WTC-5. Why weren’t those ‘pieces’ worthy of a report? Along with the ‘engine’ and ‘wheel’ found elsewhere! Yeah, we had parts all across Manhattan — but still no investigation…

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods
 


Now all of the sudden we have one agency which isn't part of this gi-normous conspiracy that involves thousands of people?

The perps would go to the extent of faking the planes, cartoon cutout holes, the fireballs, the demolitions, hijackers, the people on the planes, the news propaganda, the charred remains of people strapped into rows of airliner seats (Pentagon), spraying the parts all over the lawn + inside the building / downed lightpoles / etc (Pentagon), the engines and other planes parts on the streets of NYC, the large section(s) of plane(s) they manually hauled into the center of ground zero amidst thousands of rescue workers and cameras, the Flight 93 scene AND SO ON... oh, oh, and the FEMA / NIST / Purdue / etc reports, History Channel / PBS / etc 'report' shows, AND SO ON... yet they couldn't conjure up a NTSB report???? You've got to be kidding me? It makes absolutely no sense they'd jump thru so many hoops to convinve us and then not go thru with the final 'shred' of 'proof' to finish off the home stretch... unless they had motives.

Now compare that with the rest of my thread I just linked in above and then try to make an argument that I'm more wrong than you are. You might want to start by offering up some alternative arguments to that thread. I've lumped in tons of examples (including more on the last page of it), while trying to leave out the normal 'obvious' 9/11 "Conspiracy" arguments which also fall neatly into my thesis.

I might also point out the the NTSB themselves released flawed FDR videos that even further added to the confusion and debate. Fuel on the fire. Diversion at it's finest. Welcome to 21st Century Subversive PROPAGANDA (The science of persuasion AND diversion).

[edit on 3-10-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The perps would go to the extent of faking the planes, cartoon cutout holes, the fireballs, the demolitions, hijackers, the people on the planes, the news propaganda, the charred remains of people strapped into rows of airliner seats (Pentagon), spraying the parts all over the lawn + inside the building / downed lightpoles / etc (Pentagon), the engines and other planes parts on the streets of NYC, the large section(s) of plane(s) they manually hauled into the center of ground zero amidst thousands of rescue workers and cameras, the Flight 93 scene AND SO ON... oh, oh, and the FEMA / NIST / Purdue / etc reports, History Channel / PBS / etc 'report' shows, AND SO ON... yet they couldn't conjure up a NTSB report????


All the items you listed can be easily faked by a handful of loyal, hard-core operatives.

By the way, for the record, I don’t think there were holograms, I think the eyewitness accounts are all hyperbole. But if there had been holograms, the personnel working in that field would be hand-picked, pull-a-piano-wire-through-throats, sworn-to-secrecy type.

This is in stark contrast to NTSB officials, who would tend to be much more bureaucratic, by-the-book, nose-to-the-grindstone, analytic and scientific individuals. And, the sheer number of people needed to (genuinely) examine plane wreckage must be huge. Don’t get me wrong the NTSB has a corrupt past, they penned all kinds of ‘fishy’ crash reports in the sixties and early seventies, and of course the TWA 800 investigation (fuel-tank explosion my backside). But 9-11 was really BIG, too large for that institution (NTSB) to help out (with phony conclusions).

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 10/3/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
All the items you listed can be easily faked by a handful of loyal, hard-core operatives.


A handful? How many is that? 5? I think your idea of the numbers of people necessary to work an operation of this sort is seriously flawed.

Also, you will achieve a bit more legitimacy with the correct acronym...its NTSB, the National Transportation Safety Board.



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
My question still stands but let me rephrase it differently. Was there any turbulence that day in that location and if so how did the pilot or pilots manage to miss hitting either horizontal floor slab flying at that speed in those conditions. Was it happenstance or cruel luck? Leave out the plane or no plane arguments and think about the obvious. If it was done, how was it done ? I haven't seen any big thick yellow lines denoting the floors on any of the pictures painted on so the pilot or pilots could see whereto aim. Where was the big X marks the spot for them to aim at? I don't care how well trained they supposedly were, It obviously couldn't be done. Thankyou. Sorry I forgot to say: " Therefore NO planes. " You are asking John how to do it with a PBW and I'm asking you how to do it with a 767.

[edit on 3-10-2007 by michial]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join