The Hologram Theory is dead

Originally posted by RiotComing

Yeah but the weird thing was that the flashes occured before impact, therefore, no aggravation or reason to set anything off. It's one of the real mysteries of 9/11 for me, to which I've never found an answer.

These flashes are most likely not explosions or anything of the like, but I believe they are caused by the flashing lights under the plane reflecting off the surface of the tower once it gets close enough. Watch a big airliner sometime and notice how bright and intense the flash is from the light... now imagine that being reflected off the towers, in which there are alot of windows to reflect that flash back onto the plane.

A hologram cannot do this as it does not exhibit a reflective property. The intensity, the brightness, and the speed in which all of this occurs tells me it's caused by the flashing light, which is why you see it appear to be before the actual impact.

I'm sorry what does killing JFK have to do with Nibiru and how does having a Nibiru make killing anybody an "OK" thing to do? Though, I say if you are a slave in bondage who cares if you have a planet either?

reply to post by johnlear


Holograms? Really? Holograms.

It's ridiculous that this can be stated as fact without any conclusive evidence to such a notion. And I personally find it irresponsible.

How Mr. Lear, can you state this theory as fact? How can anyone support this?

-You offer no detailed explanation as to how this could be accomplished on the grand stage that it did? You simply state this as truth and then proceed to tell people that those who died on those planes did not actually die. What?

-The logical question was then presented to you about how sounds could have been amplified to replicate the sounds of accelerated jet engines from 1000 feet up. You replied:

Originally posted by johnlear
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.

That's it? Not a great deal of effort? Wait, first you say not a great deal of effort to replicate the sound of accelerating jet engines from 1000 feet up, then you seem to claim that reproducing the surround sound effect in open air in lower manhattan would require little effort, then right after that you say you don't know how the sound was played, maybe speakers in windows. Come on man.

You are supporting a theory on what happened on 9/11 as fact. A theory that goes against all that is logical to rational human beings. Yet you provide empty answers when asked about a very crucial element to pulling such a stunt off.

Don't you think you owe it your credibility based on your background to provide in depth, conclusive evidence in a case like this?

Why is it so difficult to believe that planes actually hit the World Trade Center that day. Why are you creating such preposterous theories like this one?

I understand that all of us here want to learn the truth about what happened on 9/11. I understand that you are a master conspiracy theorist and this is what you do. But where do you draw the line?

I believe something fishy surrounds the events of that day. I do believe that our government and maybe a few others knew what was coming and let it happen. I agree, Mr.Lear, that there seems to be an agenda here and there's no doubt that 9/11 helped to accomplish some or all of it. But thats for another thread.

I'm especially annoyed here because I was down there that day, and had the unfortunate opportunity to witness first hand that 2nd plane hitting the tower. It was as real as it appeared and sounded. Not a fabrication in the sense of projected light using sound effects and pyrotechnics.

So stop pushing these crazy theories without any evidence on how it could've been pulled off. It's not right and makes me wonder Mr. Lear what your agenda really is.

You guys can have your fun with your hologram theory. Give each other stars for it. Thats fine. I know what I saw. The hologram theory is a waste of time and an insult to human intelligence.

Peace.

Originally posted 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.

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.

Although you are 100 percent correct, facts really don't seem to get in John Lear's way.
I have mentioned the following in another hologram group:
-The hologram plane (H.P.)would need to look completely solid and with extreme detail at all times.
-The H.P. would need to be able to move through space at near mach speeds and interact with in flight objects such as birds, debris, etc. without allowing any other solid object to penetrate the hologram until destination is reached.
-The H.P would need to have accompanying sounds coming from the H.P and take into account Doppler sound shift.
-Upon interaction with the building, the hologram would need to be times to slowly dissolve into the building EXACTLY when explosive are set of sequentially.
-The Explosives would need to blow inward (toward the center of the building) to account for the bent in vertical beams on the outside of the building.
-Fake debris would need to be instantly planted on the scene with no witnesses.

There is no hologram technology I am aware of, advanced enough to pull of anything even close to this.
At best, a group of super computers would be necessary to do the computer physics to pull this off? Anyone see a group of huge, air conditioned trucks, with laser pods on the top and special air cushioned shocks, all wired together, near the building? NO you say??? how shocking.

Originally posted by RedDragon
reply to post by eagle32

 

Isn't JohnLear supposed to be some kind of scientist?

Short answer, no. John Lear is/was a pilot. John Lear is the son of the man who founded Lear Jet. I have never seen Lear claim to be a scientist.

Originally posted by robert z

Originally posted by RedDragon
reply to post by eagle32

 

Isn't JohnLear supposed to be some kind of scientist?

Short answer, no. John Lear is/was a pilot. John Lear is the son of the man who founded Lear Jet. I have never seen Lear claim to be a scientist.

If he is a scientist, he is one of those scientists that don't use evidence to prove his hypothesis'.

John Lear uses the following formula:

Ridiculous claim + ZERO evidence = Absolute proof he is correct

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by robert z

Originally posted by RedDragon
reply to post by eagle32

 

Isn't JohnLear supposed to be some kind of scientist?

Short answer, no. John Lear is/was a pilot. John Lear is the son of the man who founded Lear Jet. I have never seen Lear claim to be a scientist.

If he is a scientist, he is one of those scientists that don't use evidence to prove his hypothesis'.

John Lear uses the following formula:

Ridiculous claim + ZERO evidence = Absolute proof he is correct

Just my opinion.

In fairness to John, he did post a copy of that sci-fi looking government brochure showing a plane projecting an image of another plane on a cloud. Technically, that is some evidence that the government is contemplating hologram technology for military applications.

Great points in your previous post!

Also, it is my understanding that witnesses inside the WTCs made calls describing the planes hitting the buildings. Has this been confirmed?

In fairness to John, he did post a copy of that sci-fi looking government brochure showing a plane projecting an image of another plane on a cloud. Technically, that is some evidence that the government is contemplating hologram technology for military applications.

I have seen some pretty impressive hologram demos but none come close to what would be necessary to replicate a plane in 3-d perfectly, while moving, etc..
Was the projected image perfect? Was there a cloud next to the WTC? I understand you're just trying to be fair to Mr. Lear but what he posted is VERY far from what would be necessary to make the hologram to be real as possible. I guess my "formula" should have taken into account, half truths and the manipulation of facts too. My bad

Also, please keep in mind that if the plane were a hologram, and even if it looked perfect, one little thing could blow the entire plan. What would that one thing be? Well it would be a fairly common occurrence in aviation. A BIRD HITTING THE PLANE. Think about it. The government puts in place all this super sophisticated computer, laser and audio system, rigs tons of explosives, etc... and one bird flying through the hologram at the wrong time and it's all shot to hell.
Also, were all three planes supposed to be holograms? If not why not?

Great points in your previous post!

Thanks, I appreciate it

It’s amazing how much resistance there is to accepting the no-planes concept.

It is understandable that folks question the hologram theory — to an extent — but the steadfast refusal to examine the no-plane indications is baffling. Why is it so hard to let go of the idea of hijacked passenger jets? And above all, why is it so difficult for CT-ers who already understand that 9-11 was an inside job?

Once the physical impossibility of the four 9-11 plane crashes is understood, John Lear’s Hologram theory is THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE to account for eyewitnesses’ claims. There is no other explanation short of calling people liars, delusional or hysterical. Perhaps there are other ways to manipulate bystanders into seeing something that wasn’t, but so far, no one else (other than John Lear) has presented any ideas.

So for all you newbie John Lear bashers, here’s for the umpteenth time a re-cap on why there were no planes;
physical impossibility of breeching WTC steel outer or core columns,
no passenger jet crash reports for the first time in U.S. aviation,
unrealistically little crash debris,
purposely ordered destruction of ATC tapes,
hi-jacked-airplanes scenario war-games being played on exact same day as ‘actual attack’,
near empty planes,
odd passenger lists,
hardly any passengers showing up in social security death index,
impossible cell phone calls,
Barbara Olson having called in first report of terrorists with boxcutters without even having a phone,
phony looking film footage.

Those are only a few of the direct no-plane telltales. And I’m sure I’ve forgotten a bunch. The indirect clues — the ones that conventional CT’ers discuss routinely — form a long list as well;
buildings blowing up —some (WTC6 and 7) weren’t even ‘hit’ by planes,
the president not getting up or acting surprised when ‘first notified’,
none of his staff acting perturbed either — Ari Fleisher was cool as marble,
cobbled together hijacker lists with 15 of them Saudi’s — no Afghanis or Iraqis,
and so forth…

I probably left out some important pieces, but I figured something needed to be said quickly.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

I have a suggestion for the non-believers ( by the way i am one too) ? Do not waste your time with these guys , because they obviously have thier mind made up and there is nothing you can do to change it. If someone is keeerrazeee enough to believe that there is a soul catcher on the moon, then obviously nothing will change thier POV or thier believers. These stories are insane but I do admit they are entertaining.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by soulstealer2099]

well you can't say there was no plane because everyone saw a plane. That being said, you can pretend it was a hologram but a hologram of that type is simply not possible. Please prove me wrong.

physical impossibility of breeching WTC steel outer or core columns,

Please explain this in detail.

no passenger jet crash reports for the first time in U.S. aviation,

I'm not sure exactly what this means, please explain

unrealistically little crash debris,

In who's opinion? please explain using weight and mass of aircraft versus actual debris, taking into account debris either destroyed or mixed with building debris.

purposely ordered destruction of ATC tapes,

Please provide proof.

hi-jacked-airplanes scenario war-games being played on exact same day as ‘actual attack’,

Wow that was a big oops unless of course it was a coincidence. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a tunnel is just a tunnel.

near empty planes,

Is this unusual for this type of flight for this time of year? Please show proof with normal passenger manifest versus this particular flight manifest.

odd passenger lists,

Odd in what way?

hardly any passengers showing up in social security death index,

Please show detail. I find this very interesting.

impossible cell phone calls,

Why were they impossible? Show why.

Barbara Olson having called in first report of terrorists with boxcutters without even having a phone,

Please explain in greater detail.

phony looking film footage.

Which footage? Please provide links. Also, what makes it phony and how was this determined?

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods

I probably left out some important pieces, but I figured something needed to be said quickly.

No, I think it is safe to say you did not leave out any important pieces.

John Lear’s Hologram theory is THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE to account for eyewitnesses’ claims.

Are you kidding me? There are TONS of alternative theories.

Maybe an alien tower on the moon sucked up the souls of everybody in NY just before the attacks. While on the moon, the souls may have been transported to Venus where they were programmed to believe they saw planes hit.

Next the alien high energy beam on Mars took down the towers and the Pentagon. There was obviously some sort of miscalculation that caused WTC7 to come down too.

This theory would also explain how the plane debris was planted in NY, Washington, and Pennsylvania without anybody noticing. Venutian robots were sent in to spread the plane debris. Obviously something was lost in the translation and one of the debris planting robots mistakenly planted the wrong engine in NY.

Then, after all the debris was planted, souls could have been beamed back into their bodies, believing they actually saw planes.

Honestly, I am a little surprised that Lear failed to think of this theory.

To all concerned... and repectfully John Lear.

I would love to believe and even hoped that the first plane that hit the building was a hologram. A goverments coverup -- Yes!... The greatest political con for all ages -- I hoped so!

Now, lets skip to somewhere in Los Angeles - 2007. As I walk toward my sisters office, there sits a lonely picture of her companies CEO who died on that plane.

If his flight didn't hit the building, then where has he been hiding since 9-11??

John, how do you account for those 100 plus people on the flight that just up & vanished?? ------- "Soul Plane??"

Point making -

People are so fixated on the planes (angle, trajectory, altitude, color, speed, direction, eye-witnesses, time of day, CNN vs FOX) they have totally forgot about the missing passengers.

This isn't the Twilight Zone episode where he's flown back into the Jurassic Period ---- or is it??


[edit on 15-10-2007 by Level X]

Originally posted by johnlear
Both men looked up at the airplane flying south and couldn't believe what they were seeing because all airline traffic usually goes north into San Francisco

I have a house very close to Newark Airport.

On different days, or even different hours, the planes will approach or depart the airport from different directions depending on wind direction.

Why do they do things differently in California?

Originally posted by robert z
No, I think it is safe to say you did not leave out any important pieces.

John Lear’s Hologram theory is THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE to account for eyewitnesses’ claims.

Are you kidding me? There are TONS of alternative theories.

You might as well not even entertain these guys. We've all destroyed their theory and they wont change their view. It's likely that at least half of those who consistently push about it on this site alone are total deliberate disinfo agents. I wont speculate who, not even worth the time, as the goal of disinfo agents is to divert and waste time. The other half are devoted to their No Planer faith, their religion with even John now as the 2nd self-declared Messiah, and its pointless bumping their threads for them by responding anymore, in my view.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by robert z
No, I think it is safe to say you did not leave out any important pieces.

John Lear’s Hologram theory is THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE to account for eyewitnesses’ claims.

Are you kidding me? There are TONS of alternative theories.

You might as well not even entertain these guys. We've all destroyed their theory and they wont change their view. It's likely that at least half of those who consistently push about it on this site alone are total deliberate disinfo agents. I wont speculate who, not even worth the time, as the goal of disinfo agents is to divert and waste time. The other half are devoted to their No Planer faith, their religion with even John now as the 2nd self-declared Messiah, and its pointless bumping their threads for them by responding anymore, in my view.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

I wonder if it's a bit more mundane??? I wonder if a certain person, shall we say, leading the no plane idea, may just be a plant here to fire discussion and keep membership up as this site is after all ad supported? This same "leader" hits all he big topics and always injects completely unsupportable ideas. Just a thought

Originally posted by craig732

I have a house very close to Newark Airport.

On different days, or even different hours, the planes will approach or depart the airport from different directions depending on wind direction.

Why do they do things differently in California?

Well the guys were 25 miles south of San Francisco International. The airplane flew over at 500 feet headed southbound. SFO is 25 miles north. An average altitude for 25 miles out is between 6000 and 8000 feet. And when they are that low it is customary for the airplane to be headed towards the airport. Not away.

Thanks for the post.

Oh, by the way. In California when airplanes are too low, headed in the wrong direction, apparently they turn 'em out like a light.

reply to post by jfj123


Well, I have learned that laying down the law on a subject results in very few attention or response, but then you see the most absurd posts ever, and I'm talking any forum topic, get front page breaking news attention and reponses. Or take Loose Change for example, its probably the most debatable video amongst the list of respecatable ones out there, and its globally more talked about than anything, while the deadon videos of good quality even can barely fall in the shadow.

reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods


How is it so amazing that people who witnessed this incident first hand( like myself) or knew people who perished in any of those planes don't believe in some hologram theory? What physical impossibility of planes hitting the WTC are you speaking about? How is this so impossible? Show me.

An inside job? Quite possibly. I believe that our gov't knew about this before it happened. Which is why Bush wouldn't have acted surprised when first hearing about it. Then again he was sitting in front of a classroom of school kids.

What the scope of the gov'ts involvement was if any is pure speculation, ESPECIALLY saying that holograms were used. Come on. And Mr. Lear is not presenting this theory as an idea, he is stating it as fact. There's a difference.

What is your allegiance to Mr. Lear that you feel compelled to believe such a thing without any concrete evidence? Where is the direct no-plane telltales that say hologram? What are you talking about???

edit-spelling

[edit on 15-10-2007 by WASTYT]

reply to post by WASTYT


Dear WASTVT:

All issues you bring up have been discussed over and over on ATS. But ATS is a busy place and it is practically impossible to retrieve specific info without wallowing through thousands of posts. So I’ll try to give you some answers here and now.

Did you see a plane crashing on 9-11 with your very own two eyes, in real life and not just on a television screen? How well did you know some of the people on those flights? Can you personally confirm the integrity of their characters?

Regarding the physical impossibility of aluminum aircraft flying at 500 mph slicing into the twin towers, I will say the following. The perimeter columns at WTC 1 and 2 were quarter inch thick steel ca. 14x13” box beams spaced 39” center to center. The window space in between was only 25”. Above and below — every 7’08” — there were 52” wide 3/8” thick steel plates in ten foot sections welded together wrapped around the entire circumference of the towers. This means 62% of the tower outside surface area was solid steel, one half inch thick (two quarter inch plates of beams put together for simplicity of argument) to 7/8” thick beneath the spandrel plate belts (1/4”+1/4”+3/8”) wrapped around the building. Other ATS members hate me for this statement, but it’s a good comparison, if a 9 mm bullet traveling at 500 mph won’t puncture quarter inch steel (let alone half or seven-eights inch) then neither will a Boeing 757/767. Plow over yes, maybe, but poke a hole in it, NO!

There is bodily evidence or lack thereof proving that there were no planes on 9-11. The presence of holograms is only as real as the eyewitness accounts. If people truthfully did see planes, then they saw holograms. Because actual planes would have had corporeal effects, much different from the ones we were shown.

Greetings and Good Night,
The Wizard In The Woods