Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Hologram Theory is dead

page: 66
16
<< 63  64  65    67 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:38 AM
link   
yeah, what do we know what ´our NWO-boys´have as their toys?
they laugh at us, but the last laugh..

img208.imageshack.us...

www.stormingmedia.us...
Feasibility of Implementing Near-Field Acoustic Holography at Large Scale

Digital Holography
www.stormingmedia.us...


www.smh.com.au...
smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/27/1211654006265.html

www.libertythink.com...
libertythink.com/2002_12_01_archives.html
www.au.af.mil...
au.af.mil/au/2025/volume4/chap03/b5_6.htm

www.abovetopsecret.com...
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE FUTURE WEAPONS PROPOSALS
AIR FORCE 2025 STUDY

many more...
cheers




posted on Jul, 11 2009 @ 03:44 AM
link   


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?


- There 25 + years advanced in technology from the public.
- Precession is , let me say this in bold " Key " for a " PLAN " on this SCALE and Global matter.
why someone might ask? It's for there own benefits in either testing out there weaponry, there agenda, or other premeditated plans.



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 explosives were rigged in a unique way which looked as if a 767-200 Plane went through it. In reality this is a hoax, a plan well thought out. Pilots such as John Lear and others confirm to me that in all of it's capability/ Theres no way in hell , First of all Inexperienced "hijackers" could ever achieve hitting DEAD center of the WTC with the planes latitude and speed.

Technology has and is being exchanged from et's to leaders on the upper levels of this planet for there own use in there own agenda and time.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Since this thread ended on a misinformed note, and since No Planer threads are still front and center, bumping this thread is needed. I'm citing myself from about page 2 in which this post alone has all the PHYSICAL PROOF you could ever need to conclude that planes hit the towers...


Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I'd like to make it even more perilous:

In addition to Robz examples, I'd like to add to that:

1] How did they manage to 'spit' the monster fireballs out the other side with perfect timing?




2] And launch the 'engine' and related debris out with perfect momentum and angles coinciding with the planes speed and impact angles?
Note the smoketrail from the engine:

CLICK THIS ONE:
www.erichufschmid.net...
It shows the shooting engine in high-res!


When you add those in with my other argument, which I've posted in multiple threads yet not one single person has been able to answer it (be sure to click the first link):

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
In the first video of interest the cameraman was on W. Broadway, which was right in line with where the the plane debris was ejected from the opposite side of WTC2. At around time 7:00 the impact occurs. You can hear pandemonium and loud noises as if large things are crashing down around him. Then, as he turns back, you can see plane debris that had apparently landed and killed a pedestrian.
911blogger.com...


www.lib.utexas.edu...
As we've all been covering inother recent threads, other large bits of plane debris were found including a 'still smoking' engine that landed on a street corner not too far from our above cameraman.


While I haven't done an advanced analysis on the raw source video presented above, it does seem to debunk the "MIB Flashy Thing" Theory for how they placed the plane debris on the streets, once and for all.

www.abovetopsecret.com...[/im]

It's case closed. But, if you insist...

For those of you claiming only 4 parts were found, here's some more tidbits from none other than Killtown's website, all WTC related:
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...
killtown.911review.org...



Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
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 see nothing can shake your faith in No Planes.

But since you're obviously right, tell me, how in the world could they prevent every 'rogue' citizen with a video camera from capturing it?

Ok, say you're a conspirator: You have to assess how to ensure getting away with your crime: You consider that you might be able to get away with these mumbo jumbo technologies... But there is one problem: If one single civilian just so happened to get a recording showing no plane whatsoever, you're busted. Even a 10 year old would be clever enough to realize that's not the way to go.

You're suggesting that every camera and tape produced from that day is faked. Sinc etey're faking all of these tapes, why not fake the tapes of the video cameras at the Pentagon to "show" a plane, thus "proving" that one hit there? Why release tapes that look more like a missile than a Boeing? And, again to the 50th time, why not also produce some fake NTSB/ec reports to put the icing on their fabricated event?

No Planes is about as real as Aesop Fables.

Ok, I'll be fair, I won't say that it's impossible, however, considering the difficulty in producing the observed effects to 'near' perfection, in conjunction with the decisions they'd have to go thru in consideration of my statement to you above, and so on, I'd say there's a about a 0.002% chance of "No Planes" being what happened.



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I think the hologram debate is still much alive...



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I've said this over and over again, the "no plane theory" is a distraction from the "no passenger plane theory"

These two videos suggest to me that the planes were not commercial jets

Flash of light, possible explosion, indication not a passenger jet



Guiding beam, suggesting military plane and not a commercial plane



The pentagon hole and the shanksville hole are too small for a passenger plane, that should be obvious.

Thus, no passenger planes were used on 9/11.



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Lord Jules
 


That flash was the result of kinetic energy turning into heat upon collision. Also that is the location of the oxygen tanks on board the plane.

Second: That "laser" is nothing more than a piece of paper fluttering down, and in better quality videos of that same scene, you can see it progress down lower and even "onto" the brown building in the foreground. Military aircraft dont need a laser to fly them towards a building. The pilot can see it just fine.

This was debunked years ago, I'm surprised its STILL coming up as "evidence" of something "sinister".



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
There was no beam or anything out of the ordinary, just as the person above me has said. And the plane was definitely what it's claimed to be (imo). There are too many videos and pictures proving it.



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Suppose you had a nice big depleted uranium penetrater, such as would be used in a bunker buster, sitting in the front of your plane you want to go into a building. Doesn't sound too smart, but what can you do?
Well you wouldn't want to attach it to the plane itself in any sturdy sort of way because you do not want to hold it back. DU is used because it is really, really heavy. So here you have this thing just sitting there in this really, really light weight thing, the plane. As soon as the plane starts to slow down just one tiny little bit, that penetrater is going to fly off, that is in relation to the plane. When these things do that, they lite-up, meaning to burst into flame. You can see it from the other side of the building when it flies out, still flaming and leaving this very visible smoke trail behind it.
edit on 13-11-2010 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   
No planes is the only way of explaining how the whole thing was done. September clues has proved beyond any doubt that here is no way the videos are real. Pilots for truth has shown again and again that the planes are impossible. No planes can go at that speed. And as for a plane knocking down a building like the wtc? lmao! So you can say that the planes had bombs in them or argue over stupid stuff like that, but it's obvious your missing the simplest truth. There were no planes.



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by 00FOG00OF00WAR00
 
Please tell us what part of September Clues is in your opinion conclusive evidence for no planes.
Check out this video. www.youtube.com...
It's from the new FOIA release from the NIST. This is the raw video from before it was transmitted and recorded on someone's VCR, then gone through further conversion on YouTube.
There is a link there to download the raw video but it is over 500 mega bites and takes a while, even if you have 2 G/sec cable.
The point being, check out the other videos available trough that uploader, and the old stuff used in the old videos like September Clues just do not hold up. That stuff has a certain entertainment value and gets people's curiosity up, which is good, but it does not prove anything.



posted on Nov, 13 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Eyewtinesses saw the planes. The planes or something planeshaped can be seen on video uploads recorded by a handheld cam. Either somebody is really delusional, or this whole no planes theory is a case of "the best way to deal with the dissents is to lead them ourselfs". I am guessing somebody who wanted to confuse and derail spread the "no planes theory" and a combination of people of want to derail and people who cant be arsed with facts keeps it alive.



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by 00FOG00OF00WAR00
 
Please tell us what part of September Clues is in your opinion conclusive evidence for no planes.
Check out this video. www.youtube.com...


Look at the video the guy says theres no plane! he specifically mentions an explosion only! Obvoiusly the plane has been faked onto the video.

This is actually good proof of no planes.



The point being, check out the other videos available trough that uploader, and the old stuff used in the old videos like September Clues just do not hold up. That stuff has a certain entertainment value and gets people's curiosity up, which is good, but it does not prove anything.



But also look at the other datas. Pilots for Truth have shown conclusively that there is no way planes can goa t that speed. Add in the september clues information and only one conclusion is possible. No planes.



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
The fact that people thing there could be holograms or mass brain delusion in the first place is an immediately dismissive notion for the entire "theory."

If people honestly think that then they need to look up Occam's Razor and see that critical analysis of such events is to proceed from the accepted conclusion and find evidence that supports diverging views.

And really there is zero evidence for a hologram. I mean holographic technology (as the world understands it) is almost impossible with a 3D image in air. Adding it flying and being projected above a city and crashing into something and you get something that makes no sense at all. That guy adding bombs could have cut those plane-shaped holes into the building? Yeah, well now you have someone who clearly needs to reevaluate their theory. That is not taking an objective view of the evidence, that is distorting the evidence to make your point no matter how illogical it is.

The truthers who have some semi-legitimate questions over WTC 7 or other matters are tolerable to me, but outlandish theories about technology that has no legitimate proof of existence and overly complicated outlandish reasoning, that borders on magic, is something that is dismissed by 99.99% of people intellectuals or otherwise.



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 00FOG00OF00WAR00
 
You should probably go on YouTube and do a search for low fly-by and think about how long you would be able to see a fast moving plane, like if there were obstructions to a full field of view, such as buildings or trees. It would be pretty easy to miss, by maybe a longer than normal eye blink.
I do not put it beyond the realm of possibility that there are fake videos or modified videos, but the main thing that makes a real difference is missing videos.
If someone was to look far enough back on this thread, they would probably find posts by me advocating for holograms. My theory had to do with maybe a device attached to a plane to make it look like a different sort of plane than it was.
People like to put up the argument, "how could they change all the videos people took with hand held cameras?"
I think that is more feasible than doing the hologram thing. I think it is up to ninety something, the videos of the crash on the WTC towers. Some show a plane and some don't. None show a plane more than about thirteen seconds before the crash. Once the plane was close enough, it really doesn't matter and it probably does not need to be modified. So the total videos needing to be changed does not end up being very many. All of the videos we can see on the internet was at some time in the hands of authorities before being released for viewing by the public.
About the speed, watch out for deception when anyone talks about that. There are a few ways to measure speed and one needs to make themselves familiar with the difference between knots and miles per hour. The claimed plane that hit tower two probably could not have been going 520 knots, but it could have been going 520 miles per hour. So pay close attention and don't let anyone confuse you. My calculations which I spent months working on, from videos, puts the speed between 520 and 530 miles per hour. There are other ways where people came up with higher speeds and that was by using radar readings, but those do not pretend to be accurate from an official authority involved in doing that tracking. (dig up the thread Impossible Speed to see my calculation. It is a simplified version, the one I did to check the results was a lot more involved)
edit on 14-11-2010 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00FOG00OF00WAR00
No planes is the only way of explaining how the whole thing was done. September clues has proved beyond any doubt that here is no way the videos are real. Pilots for truth has shown again and again that the planes are impossible. No planes can go at that speed. And as for a plane knocking down a building like the wtc? lmao! So you can say that the planes had bombs in them or argue over stupid stuff like that, but it's obvious your missing the simplest truth. There were no planes.


Oh my god !
I can't believe anyone is still shoveling this dung !
There were planes. Proof positive. Plane parts everywhere. Plane passengers. videos. Camera photos. Eye witnesses, etc..........
Time to stop drinking the koolaid !



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   
It was ALIVE?

psik



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by robert z
 


It was alive????

Edit: I hadn't read the last answer. We are in unison though. I know holograms are now cutting edge technology so I was coming to discuss the new developments there but then saw it was a theory that 9/11 planes were actually holograms. I missed that one. I definitely think it was an orchestrated attack and by whom still remains very troublesomely fuzzy.

Funny we are thinking exactly alike. Is that unusual?
edit on 15-11-2010 by rusethorcain because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WolfElyts
- The explosives were rigged in a unique way which looked as if a 767-200 Plane went through it. In reality this is a hoax, a plan well thought out. Pilots such as John Lear and others confirm to me that in all of it's capability/ Theres no way in hell , First of all Inexperienced "hijackers" could ever achieve hitting DEAD center of the WTC with the planes latitude and speed.

Technology has and is being exchanged from et's to leaders on the upper levels of this planet for there own use in there own agenda and time.


Maybe I'm not following, but are you saying it's impossible for people to learn to fly a plane and hit the side of a couple of big buildings yet possible for a group of people to rig bombs along the sides of the WTC buildings and utilize technology that has no proof of existence in order to create the illusion of planes as those bombs went off at the same time?




posted on May, 23 2012 @ 02:45 AM
link   
IF holograms of planes were used, of course eye witnesses would have believed they saw real planes. And unless they understood just how advanced this technology is, they would remain convinced that the planes were real. Holographic technology has had extraordinary breakthroughs, much of which is hidden from the general public. There are even holograms that can be physically touched now. Recently, the 2Pac hologram set off a frenzy of attention in the hip hop world. As for 9/11, it is highly likely that holograms were used, along with timed explosions. People think of those old high school projectors when they hear the word "hologram", not realizing the full potential of holographic technology and how far it has come. I'm sure that with a little research, you can find government documents that give a basic run-through of the psychological & sociological affects that hologram images could have on the general public when used in the right scenarios. All I'm saying, is that there is a strong possibility that the planes could have been holograms. I seen one in my own back yard that was flying right in the middle of two real planes, it looked very real, but also kind of odd, and then it slowly disappeared piece by piece. People still to this day don't believe me. But I swear by it. Everyone knows that the official story of 9/11 doesn't add up, take that in consideration with just how far the "powers that be" are willing to go to deceive the masses, & do some extensive research; the picture will soon become clearer. The more you know, the harder it is to be dismissive of even the most radical conclusions.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek

That flash was the result of kinetic energy turning into heat upon collision. Also that is the location of the oxygen tanks on board the plane.

Second: That "laser" is nothing more than a piece of paper fluttering down, and in better quality videos of that same scene, you can see it progress down lower and even "onto" the brown building in the foreground. Military aircraft dont need a laser to fly them towards a building. The pilot can see it just fine.

This was debunked years ago, I'm surprised its STILL coming up as "evidence" of something "sinister".


Impossible, because it happened before the 'plane' hit! It was either a marker for the CGI editors, or a missile for the plane theory, nothing to do with kinetic energy at all!

The 'plane' went completely into the building, no debris, and no hole until the plane was part way through, it's very CGI like. Even if it was a plane, it was no American Airlines plane!

Nothing on 9/11 has ever been debunked, you might think so, but one person's opinion is not an official debunking!

How much do you get paid for the shill job BTW?





new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 63  64  65    67 >>

log in

join