It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Retikx
reply to post by jfj123
Again you only show your unwaivering belief that the US military is forthcoming and honest with the info they release to the public. Assuming the tech does not exist doesn't make it so, granted this statement works both ways. But i suppose you could stop with your "its impossible" statements nows.
Originally posted by Retikx
My belief is based on the fact that science is a constantly shifting constantly changing set of rules and boundries. To believe one thing is completely impossible in the eyes of science is to beleive we are at the pinnical of what we can possibly do and know on this rock.
This belief that we know all that can be known has been had by men for thousends of years, each one claiming that the system of new is better than the system of old and that it cannot be changed or altered because it is impossible
Originally posted by BlueRaja
It sure makes their arguments easier when speculation is all the proof they require, rather than hard facts, yet they expect hard facts from us to disprove their speculation.
Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by jfj123
The problem with that crowd, is that they believe any and everything to be possible, and it's up to us to disprove a negative. It sure makes their arguments easier when speculation is all the proof they require, rather than hard facts, yet they expect hard facts from us to disprove their speculation.
[edit on 13-2-2008 by BlueRaja]
Originally posted by Retikx
As ive said before in this thread MANY times there would have been absolutely no need to make a 3D hologram.
it would have been completely possible to project a crappy moving image/outline of a plane for the 4 or 5 seconds it was seen by people on the ground.
Just long enough and vague enough to give the general impression of a plane, THEN when the people that thought they MAY have seen a plane hit the building went home and saw the myriad of fake footage being peddled on the news networks they would simply put what they thought they saw(crappy fuzzy plane'ish figure) with the crystal clear image they are seeing on the tube. The human mind then takes the two images and melds them together.
THE PERFECT PSYOP
Originally posted by jfj123
You are absolutely right! It must be a wonderfully simple side to be on- to require all others to do all the work for them
Originally posted by Retikx
While i agree that that it would have been impossible to project a perfect crystal clear 3D hologram in mid air for all to see (given our current understanding of civilian holography tech) it would have been completely possible to project a crappy moving image/outline of a plane for the 4 or 5 seconds it was seen by people on the ground.
Even if you hung a screen at the height where the plane was supposed to be projected for those 4 - 5 seconds, painted this screen sky blue and used projector, to project a plane on this screen, it would be so faint, that it would be pretty much invisible.
Originally posted by jfj123
Would it be similar to watching a drive in movie at around noon? I have actually seen this before and it's almost unrecognizable.
Originally posted by jfj123
I also wonder what resolution that projector would need to project at ?
The theoretical screen size would be an absolute minimum of
159 ft 2 in long x 156 ft 1 in wide (Boeing 767 200 ER plane dimensions). That's a lot of freakin pixels !!!
My computer isn't happy with anything higher then 1280 x 1024 on my 22" LCD screen.
Originally posted by deezee
Originally posted by jfj123
I also wonder what resolution that projector would need to project at ?
The theoretical screen size would be an absolute minimum of
159 ft 2 in long x 156 ft 1 in wide (Boeing 767 200 ER plane dimensions). That's a lot of freakin pixels !!!
My computer isn't happy with anything higher then 1280 x 1024 on my 22" LCD screen.
That would be just to show a realistic looking plane. To show it in motion, over the span of several seconds, you would have to make it as long, as the path the plane travels in those seconds.
I don't want to start calculating this now, as i'm in a hurry, but imagine how complicated this would be..
Much more complicated than, let's say using a real plane.. Or is this too radical?
Originally posted by jfj123
In addition, I believe the plane would need to be projected in extreme HD to prevent a washed out look of the detail lines. This would be due to the large distance between the projection and the viewer.