The Hologram Theory is dead, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times
Topic started on 14-10-2007 @ 01:12 AM by robert z
IgnoranceIsntBliss struck a near-mortal blow to the hologram theory with his post asking John Lear to explain how holograms of the planes hitting WTC1 and WTC2 could have produce the perfect plane-shaped cutouts in the side of the building. John Lear theorized that the holes in the buildings were caused by explosives pre-planted on the outside of the WTCs in the shape of the planes.

While the IIB thread left the hologram theory bleeding on the ground and grasping for air, this thread will put the final sword through the heart of the hologram theory once and for all.

Why?

Because this thread is going to take the question posed by IIB one step further...

The fact that there were airplane shaped cutouts is only part of the story that the hologram theory must explain. What the explanation by John Lear cannot explain is this:

How could the explosive have been timed so precisely to match up with the image of the hologram to the millisecond, including having the explosives that made the hole from the tail fin go off literally milliseconds after the wings were shown to penetrate the WTCs?

Further, and probably more importantly, how could the holograms have been projected to the millimeter to show a plane entering the buildings at the EXACT, PRECISE location that the explosives were set to go off?

The videos show the plane entering the building in a precise, cartoon-like cut-out hole in the sides of the buildings. If these were holograms instead of planes, how could they have possibly been projected to be moving at such an incredibly high degree of accuracy so that the image matched EXACTLY with the location of the explosives.

To believe the hologram theory, one would have to believe that the hologram of a plane traveling at 500 m.p.h. was projected with such a degree of temporal and spatial accuracy to match the detonations of explosives on the outside of the WTCs in both TIME and SPACE.

No, this did not happen. Holograms did not cause the damage to the buildings, nor did explosives timed and placed at the location where the holograms entered the building. No, whatever hit the building is what caused the holes in the buildings.

Case closed.





mod edit: caps in title

[edit on 10/17/2007 by kinglizard]


reply posted on 14-10-2007 @ 02:25 AM by robert z
reply to post by zerbot565



I would respectfully suggest that there is no way in hell that there could have been explosives on the outside of the WTCs timed to match precisely the instant the image of the hologram entered the WTCs, right down to the vertical tail fin making a hole milliseconds after the wings entered the building.

I would also argue that there is no way that they could have guided the image of the hologram to fit down to the inch the location, angle, and orientation of the alleged pre-planted explosives designed to make it look like a plane hit the buildings.

So I think I can safely say that for anybody who sincerely wants to find the truth, bury the hologram theory once and for all. Drive a stake through its heart to make sure it never comes back.


reply posted on 14-10-2007 @ 02:58 AM by BuzzingOn
Originally posted by robert z
No, this did not happen. Holograms did not cause the damage to the buildings, nor did explosives timed and placed at the location where the holograms entered the building. No, whatever hit the building is what caused the holes in the buildings.


I totally agree. In my opinion the 911 incident is the type of tragedy that the use of any holograms, no matter how confident those involved in "pulling it off" were, it is a technology that could not be accurately made believable due to the fact that holograms are not "physical" but mere projections and therefore can not be reliable enough for the type of conspiracy that was needed for 911.

Something physically did hit the WTC buildings, IMO, whether it was the actual passenger airliner, a missile or some sort of military plane. I think that a hologram theory borders the lines of being a way to "de-rail" logical thinking and investigating of 911.

On the other hand the use of holograms in the use of a type of "Blue Beam" project, aka false flag Alien invasion, has much better odds in being convincing. The physical aspect of dropped bombs, laser beams or whatever coming from the sky causing damage will appear to be coming from those holograms. If the holograms are projected high in the atmosphere and across the skys from space so the actual holograms themselves "aren't the objects" causing the actual damage to buildings and the ground like the physical objects that are made to look to be coming out of them are doing then successful deception can possibly be easier achieved.

All said In My Opinion anyway,
Bzzzzzzz


reply posted on 14-10-2007 @ 10:39 AM by johnlear
Originally posted by Skyfloating



A friend of mine happened to be in New York that day as he witnessed planes fly above him right into the towers. What do you suggest that I tell him? That he was hallucinating? That he is lying? That he was witnessing another plane but only thought that it flew into the tower?



Thanks for your input Skyfloating. A friend of mine, my sister, my friends Mom, my boss, the guy who works with me, a friend of my friend, a the guys in the office, my brother, the guy who lives next door, the hot dog man, the pizza guy...they are all the same. They all saw a holograph.

When you see a holograph imaged with technology you don't even suspect exists, there is no fading of the edges, no transparency and no flickering,

It looks completely real. There is no difference between seeing a holograph and seeing the real thing except that the holograph is just an image like a movie. The Doppler type sound effects are much easier than the holograph to make. The combination of both of them made for a realistic “crash” into the World Trade Center towers.

There are several examples of aircraft debris but nothing the size of what would have been there had an actual plane crashed into the WTC. Somebody photographed an alleged engine that allegedly flew off of Flight 175 when it allegedly hit the south tower. This alleged engine turned out to be a CF56 which neither Flight 11 or Flight 175 had. Flight 11 had CF-6's and the airplane that allegedly hit the south tower had Pratt & Whitney's. The exact model of which was: Engine Model: JT9D-7R4D. So however was in charge of planting evidence planted the wrong engine.

Here is an example of an alleged piece off of a Boeing 767 which pentetrated 52 steel box columns then blew up with 23,000 gallons of jet fuel and then dropped to the street. Doesn't looked charred or burnt to me. Maybe a passport was wrapped around it:



I refer you to Morgan Reynolds Quit Am Complaint filed in New York District Court which alleges fraud against:

Defendants. :
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.;
APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
BOEING; NuSTATS; COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.;
DATASOURCE, INC.; GEOSTAATS, INC.;
GILSANZ MURRAY STEFICEK LLP;
HUGHES ASSOCIATES, INC.; AJMAL ABBASI;
EDUARDO KAUSEL; DAVID PARKS;
DAVID SHARP; DANIELE VENEZANO;
JOSEF VAN DYCK; KASPAR WILLIAM;
ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC;
ROSENWASSER/GROSSMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C.;
SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & :HEGER, INC.;
S. K. GHOSH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL, LLP;
TENG & ASSOCIATES, INC.;
UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC.;
WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC.;
AMERICAN AIRLINES; SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES;
and UNITED AIRLINES,



I would also direct your attention to allegation 9:

9. Relator, in a Request for Correction dated March 8, 2007 (hereinafter generally referred to as March 8 RFC), copy annexed as Exhibit A, challenged NCSTAR 1 in its entirety based on the Data Quality Act Section 515 Public Law 106-554 and based on NIST’s admitted failure to determine what caused the destruction of WTC1,2, and further based on the submittal of proof that the actual cause was obfuscated by use of false, misleading and fraudulent simulations seemingly showing how hollow, aluminum aircraft could impact with structural steel and nonetheless, glide right through such steel structures (WTC1,2) from nose to end of its tail and wing to wing and leave an airplane shape, no less, all as though this event were a cartoon much like the Roadrunner; or much like a hot knife through butter. Such simulations violate the Data Quality Act and the False Claims Act and relator herein has so asserted.

Although the March 8 RFC is a comprehensive document detailing exactly how, in what manner and for what reasons NCSTAR 1 is fraudulent, and should therefore be read in its entirety in conjunction with the claims of fraud made herein, it can be said that in the main, NCSTAR 1 is fraudulent because it intentionally conceals the fact that the buildings known as the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center Complex, World Trade Center 1 and World Trade Center 2 were not hit by Boeing 767 jetliners and all such claims to that effect are glaringly and obviously blatantly false and are indeed, a manifested psychological operation (“psy op”) of the type that one or more of the defendants herein, including, without limitation, SAIC, specialize in.


The World Trade Center Towers were not hit by Boeing 767 airplanes. It was a PsyOp.

And what should I tell the millions of other inhabitants of new york, of which many were on the streets when it happened?


I would respectfully suggest that you hold off telling them anything until you know a little bit more about what you are talking about. That’s just a suggestion.

That they all suffer mass-hallucination?


It was not a hallucination per se. A hallucination is “a deluded perception of a non-existent sight or sound”. The Boeing 767 existed as a holograph.

Thanks for your input it is greatly appreciated.

The holograph thread lives on!


reply posted on 14-10-2007 @ 11:26 AM by The time lord
Well there have been many UFO sightings on 9/11 and I did make a post about seeing Rod type objects passing whilst the impact of the towers happened and that is only when footage is slowed down.

Just another theory, could Chem-Trails be holographic mist type substance to reflect light one that stays in the air to be manipulated like a Mirage. Just a theory of mine no quote here.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...:2005-08-22_fata_morgana.jpg

I also like to be scientific and use different ways to try and come up with an answer for truth, but if something is a negative result we should not hang onto it but try and expand in other directions.

9/11 could be a global conspiracy not just an American thing, and people of the USA should stop blaming just them selves but at the same time not ruling things out as that is what the land of the free is about, free thinking.
I believe conpiracies are global based not just national, a bit like global warming and economy of fuel, weapons and UFO encounters.


[edit on 14-10-2007 by The time lord]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 17 hours ago, 119 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 13 hours ago, 66 replies
I saw a cat turn into a bag..
  The Gray Area, Posted 17 hours ago, 42 replies