The Hologram Theory is dead

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]

so what are you preposing then ,

that the planes where hijacked by remote controls in mid air,
passangers asking the flight captain why they are flying this close to the city and the captain only replying ,

- we re not controling the plane ,




to quote hitler ,

By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.


to quote bush

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

— Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000



but i guess even a blind dog can lick his genetelias ,

the blind dog being the ppl of the Us and genetalias the goverment ,

all this talk of land of free and the brave is more or less just propaganda bs ,

sorry for takin a piss out o you ppl who dont realize that it was an inside job,

Originally posted by zerbot565

but i guess even a blind dog can lick his genetelias ,

the blind dog being the ppl of the Us and genetalias the goverment ,

all this talk of land of free and the brave is more or less just propaganda bs ,

sorry for takin a piss out o you ppl who dont realize that it was an inside job,

Please come back later and post something a bit more coherent and a bit less nonsensical.

Thanks for stopping by to visit.

well being blind and being lead in to missery that affects the whole world and not doing jack s*hit about it is my consern/pissed off and i dont even live in that contry of the u.s ,

to be even ruder my 5 year old kid even knows the diffrence in goverment sponsord terrorism and random acts of violence,

its easily described in the story about the boy who shouted wolf ,


fact :

first plane is not documented anywhere , ( pictures , video ) ,
second plane that hit was not a normal fitted airplane , acording to the spanish goverment , who is just as legit as the us .

blasts can be seen before the plane hit the building ,

planes flying over the towers when theres a flight bann ,

basement set explotions

thermite ,

most of wtc complex is empty that day ,

and yes , remote controled detonations are very easy to time and detonate inside and outside ,

im not saying that it was a hologram pod an the planes circuling the towers nor am i saying i belive in the pancake theroy,

but having a country with bigger problems inside its own boarders then out side that keeps on insisting that the problem aint homemade is just sad to see

the remark about the dog i belive describes the situvation perfectly ,




How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.
Adolf Hitler



[edit on 14-10-2007 by zerbot565]

[edit on 14-10-2007 by zerbot565]

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.

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

ZerBot, Everything you have said is false and has been proven false. By Actual scientists, EVERYTHING. Says the Spanish government LOL.

To say your 5 yr old knows as much , IMHO is to think you know as much as a five yr old. That wasn't an insult, but an honest response to that.

IMHO the hologram planes theory will never get off the ground

Those rather heavy pieces of aircraft crashing into the streets below were definitely not holographic creations or will someone come along now and suggest they were dropped from a another plane at higher altitude to give the hologram more realism?

About the suggestion that sufficient explosives were discretely planted on the exterior of the building to create a hole to match the supposed hologram: has anyone actually worked how much explosive (say TNT) it would take to simulate the kinetic energy of a 767 at around 500 knots? I suggest something in the order of 1500kg :O and that's if was in the form of shaped charges. If the blast were to propagate in all directions then allow for at least 3 times that amount IE about a 3 tonnes of TNT minimum.

If all the people wanting to get to the bottom of the affair keep going off on tangents like hologram planes, micro nukes, thermite/thermate bombs, directed energy weapons ad infinitum then the real truth will remain obscured while the arguments gain a life of their own (wait a minute - they already have)

sigh


[edit on 14/10/2007 by Pilgrum]

Originally posted by zerbot565
fact :

first plane is not documented anywhere , ( pictures , video ) ,

There are at least 2 videos that I know of that show the first plane hittng the north tower.

and here they are...

Here is the best one...it is a 13 meg hi-res video, so you may want to right click on it and choose "save target as", instead of just left clicking the link.
wtc1-strike.avi

and the second one...
wtc1-strike-2.avi

Hello robert z, back in black, we see.

Nothing you’re saying is weakening the hologram theory. It is my understanding that none of the 9-11 films show holograms. Yes, that’s right, the holograms weren’t caught on camera. The images we see are all CGI inserted fakery.

I personally don’t believe there were holograms projected on 9-11, but I am absolutely certain there were no planes. I think there are no real eyewitnesses who saw them either, zero. For those who think there are authentic persons having observed aircraft flying into the twin towers or the Pentagon, John Lear’s hologram theory is a possible explanation.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods

but I am absolutely certain there were no planes. I think there are no real eyewitnesses who saw them either, zero.

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?

And what should I tell the millions of other inhabitants of new york, of which many were on the streets when it happened? That they all suffer mass-hallucination?

There are also many members of ATS that were there and saw the planes. I guess that means they're in on the cover up too?

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!

Originally posted by Zaphod58

There are also many members of ATS that were there and saw the planes. I guess that means they're in on the cover up too?

Thanks for the post Zaphod. No, they are not in on the cover up. All they saw was a holograph. Maybe we could get each one of them to tell how real it looked. Do you have any of the 'many' names?

But thanks for your input it is greatly appreciated.

Ok but one thing that does not make sense is that okay maybe they could have been Holograms but what about the sound that all the video cameras picked up of the planes. Not saying this technology does not exist but are we sure it was used for this event?

If this technology is present then it's very Biblical as signs in the sky because apprarently the one who will use this will also decieve the elect with signs in the sky in full view of the world.

Thanks for your input, greatly appreciated.

Most people would agree that our case is neither against the plane- nor against the hologram theory. Our first case is against the ocassional poster who think he can pop in here once and awhile and say "there are no witnesses to anything happening" and then leave again without further debate. Either these people are living in a parallel universe or they are deliberately lying for reasons unknown.

As for the other theories: No comments from me, Ill leave it up to the experts to figure out that one.

Originally posted by The time lord

Ok but one thing that does not make sense is that okay maybe they could have been Holograms but what about the sound that all the video cameras picked up of the planes. Not saying this technology does not exist but are we sure it was used for this event?

I wish I had the time and money to research the alleged jet sounds. It wouldn't take a great deal of effort to match audio signals with those of real Boeing 767's.

Neither would it take a great deal of effort to determine left to right or right to left audio or to determine if it was simply a Doppler effect sound.

At this point I don't really know how the sound was played. There may have been speakers in windows along the flight path or it may have been a speaker in another craft. It may have also been a part of the holograph. Remember what Arthur C. Clarke said, "Technology sufficiently advanced looks like magic."

Thats all 911 was: an illusion of 4 plane crashes to cover up a secret agenda. An agenda that included but was not limited to the destruction of the World Trade Center towers, building no. 7, a reason to go into Afghanistan to secure the cultivation, distribution and sale of 93% of the worlds opium, a reason to go into Iraq to steal their oil and a reason to gradually remove the personal freedoms of all Americans who would question their right to do so.


Thanks for your input 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]

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Either these people are living in a parallel universe or they are deliberately lying for reasons unknown.

Thanks for your input Skyfloating. I think you are wrong on both counts. There may indeed be parallel universes but it is no reason to suspect it is part of the 911 holograph debate.

And I don't think aynbody is deliberately lying. This is an unfounded allegation I wish people would stop using.

I think that the debate on 911 and holographs is reserved for people who are passionate about their beliefs. People who truly want to understand what happened and why.

There doesn't seem to be any question that 911 was deliberate fraud aginst the American people. The questions are: who did it. How did they do it?

Many people who post have trouble controlling their passion for their beliefs and resort to name calling and accusing others of lying. Thats to be expected of those with limited ability in debate. Uncontrolled frustration leads to personal attack.

But to call people liars for expressing their passion is to fail to grasp the larger issue. Who did it? And why?

Ok Lear - Im sorry but your dont even deserve the nicities I give most people - so Richard Piccioto is a liar ?

or maybe the John O'Neils death and phone calls telling what hapened ?

or my friend a Cantor Fitzgerald calling me that day ?

Perhaps the broker at Marsh I spoke to on 9/11 lied to me

admin edit Removed childish name calling, post banned member per the DOZENS OF WARNINGS all over this forum including the BIG YELLOW cautions on the top and bottom of each page. This is getting old. If you are incapable of controlling your emotions when discussing these theories, and you feel the need to resort to name calling PLEASE DO NOT POST, you will be post banned for THIRTY DAYS, three days was not getting the job done apparently.



[edit on 10-14-2007 by Springer]