hologram theory (pod=projector)

As strange as it sounds, only the hologramme theory can explain

-- that the eyewitnesses saw a "flying object"
-- that amateur cameras caught ghostly planes with flicker-wings

911 hologram theory

Hologramme projectors: Big plane high in the sky somewhere and
helicopters hovering as supplemental or relay projectors. A missile (THE
POD) carrying the "projections screen" and a warhead.

read more/watch video




Mod Edit: cap title


[edit on 10/14/2007 by kinglizard]

Originally posted by u2r2h
As strange as it sounds, only the hologramme theory can explain

-- that the eyewitnesses saw a "flying object"
-- that amateur cameras caught ghostly planes with flicker-wings

911 hologram theory

Hologramme projectors: Big plane high in the sky somewhere and
helicopters hovering as supplemental or relay projectors. A missile (THE
POD) carrying the "projections screen" and a warhead.

read more/watch video

This theory falls apart even under superficial scrutiny.

How is a missile going to fly while carrying a projector screen?

More importantly, how is the screen going to continue to project the image of the airplane as it enters into the building until only the tail is showing? The so-called projection screen would have been long gone inside the building by the time the tail entered the building.

If the perps could fly a missile with a projection screen, followed by high altitude planes and helicopters projecting the image onto the screen, why not just fly a 757 into the buildings?

And how would they ever have been able to guarantee that the plane-shaped cut-outs in WTC1 and WTC2 would have matched up EXACTLY with the holographic image of the plane entering the building? Do you really think that a missile along with a projection screen could have been guided THAT precisely so that the hologram matched to the INCH the holes in the buildings?

Finally, how could the sound of the jet have been simulated? Where were the speakers? How much amplification would have been needed to simulate the sound of the jet engines?

It wasn't a hologram because there were people who survived on the very floors the plane hit.
cbs2chicago.com...

He is not the only witness, there are others. People at work who saw the plane come toward the building and impact. They were on the inside of the towers. There were others who saw the wing of the plane on the inside.

Seeing how Sept Clues were *deceptive and manipulative* the Media Fakery thing is a disinformation attempt.
See this,
www.nineeleven.co.uk...

Also see the debunking here, which is very conclusive on one of the more known Tv fakery people
proxyblahblahblahblahblahblahblah.com...

-- Yes Holograms take into consideration the people in New York that day.

But what they miss is the witnesses closest to the impact, namely those right inside the building. What they do with this, is they call everyone a LIAR who doesn't support their view. But by judging by the evidence, it is *THEY* who are lying and engaging in disinformation.

cruse missle type device flying in with a military 30+year-tech advanced hologram projector attached it("tube" attached to the bottom of the "plane" in video) projecting a plane, and an advanced directional energy weapon cutting through the metal outer structure (flash of light at the front tip of the "plane" before entry)allowing the projectile to "glide" into the building then detonate.

Even simpler yet:
If the pod was the projector, then why were we able to "see" it?

Then when you realize that the "pod" wasn't even a "pod", it's time to move on to the simple yet actionable issues out there.

Then when you realize that the "pod" wasn't even a "pod", it's time to move on to the simple yet actionable issues out there.

Like why all of the holes have dimensions smaller than what was claimed to cause them.

Weve had the technology since 1966...

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Then when you realize that the "pod" wasn't even a "pod", it's time to move on to the simple yet actionable issues out there.

Why wasn't it a pod ?

I think the my (variable visibility) hologram theory [VVHT] can be tested.

The photos and footage will be the main subject of investigation.

A hologramme has specific properties that an aeroplane would not have.

But even without detailed study it is obvious that the rudder and wing-angles are not correct. This may be an effect of the material used for the "virtual projection screen"

I urge you to get up to speed on "Dynamic Holography"
en.wikipedia.org...

The "projection screen" of the missile could be made of

... atomic vapors and gases, plasmas and even liquids

u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com...

Why all the hocus pocus? Why not just fly a plane into a building?. It has been pointed out that if it were a hologram, you could see birds, solid objects (ie flying/falling debris) that would pass through the hologram. Why, if these things could be seen, would you want to take a chance of your hologram op being found out? Thats giving a awful lot of credit to a goverment that cant find one man, his lone friend, and 50 bodygaurds in a cave in Pakistan.

reply to post by six

Many people believe that you couldn't fly a plane into one of those buildings.

You can collide with the building. You can dent the building. You can deposite a pile of wreckage at the foot of the building. You may scuff up the exterior of the building. You might get the engines wedged into the wall or maybe even penetrate with engines or landing gear inside the building, but bottom line, most of the plane ain't going into the building.

Aluminum is simply not going to push aside steel beams, except in fairy tales.

reply to post by ipsedixit


No offense..But you know this how? Your expertise in this matter is? Please show me the math/equations that prove a 220,000 lb aircraft at +500 knot could not penetrate the steel structure. That is alot of mass, moving at a high rate of speed to just simply stop at the side of a building. That sound like Looney Tunes cartoons to me.

reply to post by six

Show me the math equations that say it can. You name your speed for a piece of aluminum and give me (or qualified engineers in these forums) the calculations that make your point. It's an interesting challenge. How fast would a piece of aluminum have to be going to pass through a steel i-beam?

Incidentally, people with credentials are not always right. The history of science is replete with credentialed scientists denouncing scientific advances.

The OP has linked to some movies and there are nested links to different pages, one of which is an interview with a WW2 air force guy who turns the problem around and makes the point that if the plane were stationary and the earth were rotating the building at 500 mph. into it, the situation from a physics point of view would be identical but the intuitive notion of what would happen would be the reverse.

How fast would a piece of steel have to be moving to crush a piece of aluminum?

I can't give you the math myself, but it's a very good challenge. My intuiton tells me that it would be quite a bit more than five hundred miles an hour for aluminum to penetrate steel. After all a good baseball pitcher throws 95 mph.

Watch some of the Flt. 175 impact videos if you're interested in Looney Toons stuff. Did you even look at the OP's links?



[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

reply to post by ipsedixit


I dont have to show you..there is video proof. There are several engineers on this site that I have ALOT of respect for( griff, bsbray, valhal). I dont agree with them on all aspects of their arguments...they dont seem to have a problem with the aircraft penetrating the shell.

Dude, you're just telling me you haven't watched the OP's links. That's his whole point. Most of the videos are faked.

Look, I'm no aeronautical engineer or civil engineer, but it is part of popular folklore that you can shoot a .357 magnum bullet through a steel engine block. I don't know if that is a steel jacketed bullet, but I did some calculations based on info from the following website:

www.realguns.com...

Note:

A performance 300 grain factory load for the (Remington) Ultra Mag has a muzzle velocity of 2760 fps. . ."

Let's assume for a moment that you could shoot one of those into an automobile engine block.

2760 fps. x 3600 sec. (seconds in an hour) divided by 5280 ft. (in a mile) = 1881.82 mph.

I know this is bush league (no pun intended) science but it helps us get closer to reality. I think the planes to penetrate the building would have to go a lot faster than 500 mph.



[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

Holograms, projectors, CGI, amateur fakes, planes, no planes, phantom planes, diving planes, shadowy planes, melting planes, 737's, 757's, 767's, wreckage, no wreckage, not enough wreckage, Cessna's, blobs, helicopters, guided cruise missiles, bombs, planted explosives, thermite, people hearing things, people seeing things....Whoa, easy.

This is all starting to sound a bit schizophrenic to me.
Which is probably what those who are behind all of this want. We're playing right into their plan by debating about HOW instead of WHO. What's more important?

The killers are still out there.

As we all sit here and debate in circles how 9/11 was perpetrated, those behind it all are getting away with their agendas. There are people who are fueling this. To keep people such as ourselves occupied. Disinfo as some may call it. This is what they want, don't you see? Why are we so eager to find out how it happened?

What is the point?

Is it going to get us any closer to who pulled this off?

So we've determined now that never before seen, sophisticated holograms were used to pull off the most atrocious and complex "terrorist" attacks on US soil. But what does that prove? Well that we have cool holograms for one. But where does that get us? Nowhere. Now who did it? Al Qaeda? Who's behind it all? Bin Ladin? Seems less likely everyday, ESPECIALLY if holograms were used.

I'm fairly certain that our government knows what's going on. And we're letting them get away with it by devoting our time and energy into pointless theories like this one. Sorry, just my 2 pennies.

Frankly I'm ok with believing how it happened--real planes crashing into the WTC.
Now lets move on to the who.

Peace & Good Luck.

reply to post by PhotonEffect


If videos were faked and broadcast on network news, who do you think was behind 911?

The "how" is very much to the point of the "who." But I take your general point. Aside from that crackpot Moussaouai, who has been prosecuted for anything in this? The 911 commision made a point of saying that it wasn't trying to assign blame. I say it's time for an independant commission whose job it is TO ASSIGN blame. We might get somewhere then.


[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

reply to post by ipsedixit


Listen man. I think we all want the same thing here. WHO DID THIS? That's why I question the purpose of pushing such a crazy theory when there are easier ways to expose the criminals involved. If that is what the purpose of following this theory really is.

I think there is more than enough evidence out there which point straight to the who and why without having to use that same evidence to prove a how which we already have. There's no point in my view.

Who stands to gain from 9/11? Start with that.

Holograms are a waste of time.

reply to post by PhotonEffect

I'm not suggesting holograms. I haven't a clue how the aviation portion of the scam was pulled off, but if you can show that more than one or two of the videos are fake, then I think you've got enough evidence to launch an investigation of the media, certainly, and probably government agencies as well.

There is more than enough circumstantial evidence to launch any number of criminal investigations of 911. Larry "pull it" Silverstein being first in line as far as I'm concerned. Not one investigation has taken place along those lines. This is a serious political problem. The American people are gradually being cut out of their own government. The way the Patriot Act was "passed" is an outrage. How about US Army anthrax in Tom Daschele'
s office? The whole WMD lie is a scandal and has cost hundreds of thousands of people their lives.

America's political house needs to be put in order. This forum can help people in many ways. A lot of the discussion here is "academic", but hopefully some people can have their thought processes sharpened so that they can go into the political arena with their BS detectors finely tuned.

If some people propose holograms, others will debunk holograms. The positive thing is the interaction and debate. It makes everybody sharper. Maybe there should be a thread on assembling indictments.

[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

Didn't mean to suggest that you were a believer of the hologram theory. Apologies if I did.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
...but if you can show that more than one or two of the videos are fake, then I think you've got enough evidence to launch an investigation of the media, certainly, and probably government agencies as well.

There is more than enough circumstantial evidence to launch any number of criminal investigations of 911. Larry "pull it" Silverstein being first in line as far as I'm concerned. Not one investigation has taken place along those lines. This is a serious political problem. The American people are gradually being cut out of their own government. The way the Patriot Act was "passed" is an outrage. How about US Army anthrax in Tom Daschele's office? The whole WMD lie is a scandal and has cost hundreds of thousands of people their lives.

Bingo. Let's start with this. Why throw holograms on top of it? There's enough out there.

This forum can help people in many ways. A lot of the discussion here is "academic", but hopefully some people can have their thought processes sharpened so that they can go into the political arena with their BS detectors finely tuned.

Couldn't agree more.

If some people propose holograms, others will debunk holograms. The positive thing is the interaction and debate. It makes everybody sharper. Maybe there should be a thread on assembling indictments.
[edit on 17-10-2007 by ipsedixit]

And I understand that. To me it's a waste of time. Makes this more overwhelming than it already is. The implications behind the hologram theory are enormous too, would create too much distraction. All Im saying is if you believe in holograms then you already have a pretty good idea of who is behind it. And I don't think you need holograms to figure that out.

Peace.