Zebra Imaging, Inplane phototonics, Operation Gelatin

The USAF were talking about a airbourne holographic projector that could do exactly that way back in 1996. In public. And military institutions don't tend to tell you about cutting edge technology in public.

This is exactly what I mean. "The USAF were talking about airborne holographic projectors."

There's no such thing. Holograms aren't "projected" and they aren't in the air.

You can't show me anything real that explains your fantasy in a scientific way.

Read up on how holograms work. Just find out what a hologram ACTUALLY is. I beg you.

You may as well invoke elfin magic! Holograms in the air and elfin magic are both fiction.

Making a bald claim about some imagined USAF "talk" is not proof of anything in any way.

Think about it. You WANT to believe in some fictional "airborne hologram" only because it CAN'T be proved. Anything with real evidence can be disproved and hence cannot be glommed on to your fantasy conspiracy.

It has to be elfin magic or "holograms bringing down the towers" or it won't be a mystery and that creepy little rush of paranoia doesn't happen for you and you have to go back to the tired old alien abduction or bigfoot "research

This 911 stuff isn't research! It's fantasy. It's mental masturbation.

Seriously. Honest. There is no such thing as USAF airborne holograms. It's retarded to insist so. You don't have to be a physicist to understand why it's not possible.

But only a True Believer can insist on it.

Show me anything that can produce an image in the air in bright 9am NYC sunshine.
How about you just show me what you know about how holograms actually work? Or even a full color hologram as big as a Boeing passenger jet? Then lets talk about one that moves and can be seen from every possible angle from approx. 20 miles away in broad daylight.

You're all high on conspiracy jibberish. No amount of logic is going to cure your addled thinking processes. Crack open a book about holograms.

reply to post by antler


There is a post titled "Tigers are Really Rhinos".

How much time would you spend trying to convince someone that the post (how ridiculous it is) is actually a lie?

Probably not much time, huh?

Then why are you trying to convince anyone that holograms cannot be shown on buildings from a distance?

If it's nonsense, then why are you contributing to the thread, instead of doing something more productive?

That is what makes me suspicious of some posters. Why bother with things you know aren't true? Unless maybe you aren't sure.....

or...you're fulfilling an agenda....
Which one is it?


[edit on 4-8-2009 by videoworldwide]

Paranoid much?
So you're suggesting that someone who witnesses people making mistakes and telling lies and running around being TOTALLY and WILLFULLY misinformed and ignorant about a subject that has thousands and thousands of scientific papers available should just shut up about it and not speak up?

So you just want this thread to be an echo chamber that only supports your fantastic opinion that holograms work in a way that is totally counter to the facts of how holograms actually work.

You don't want to know how they work do you? Because if you actually did find out how they work then it can't be glommed on to your fantasy conspiracy.

It is a fact that holograms can't be projected onto buildings or anything else. It is an especially huge fact that they can't be projected into a clear blue sky.

Holograms don't do that. A hologram is a recording of an interference pattern that is generated by 2 correlated, coherent light waves. It reconstructs a wavefront. It requires a recording material and specific lighting. It is not a 3D movie projected into space or the air or smoke or buildings. They can not be seen 1000 feet above the ground from New Jersey. They don't work that way.

Have you ever even seen a hologram? There is probably one in your back pocket on a Visa card. That is how holograms work. You can't see behind it. It is not projected into the air. No matter how hard you try or whatever "laser technology" you apply to it, it will never, ever be able to project an image of ANY size into the sky or on to a building.

I won't even begin to get into the practical implications of how much data would be stored in a hologram of a life size moving jet liner. There isn't enough bandwidth in the world to even create a static image of an object that size, let alone move it around.

These are basic facts. Have you spent any time investigating how holograms work? When you do you will be much chagrined. No chagrin on your part proves you are fundamentally out of touch with reality.

Did you listen to the points made in the audio podcast referred to in the original post?

I'll give a few bullet points here. Lets see how much sense it makes.

the theory goes like this:
The real planes were flown to secret Canadian airbases where all of
the passengers and crew were killed by secret agents.
What really brought the towers down was laser technology... and
holograms that made people see passenger jets that weren't really there.
It was part of a bigger conspiracy perpetrated by the "Bush-Clinton
Crime Family" that included a Canadian cruise line owner, Paul Martin,
contracted to ship, on an ocean liner, american nuclear weapons parts
to North Korea in 2003.
It also involves China blackmailing the USA via North Korea as a
stooge. (whatever that means)
Also AIG is involved and Obama is a puppet of the Bush-Clinton Crime
Family Mafia.
There was also something about the Bush-Clinton Crime Family running a
scam of "food subsidies" to Iraq via the Chicago Mercantile Exchange
which were actually "Weapons of Mass Destruction" to be used by Iraq
against Iran but were for some reason sent to North Korea. Uranium
disguised as food subsidies from Iraq on to North Korea and the
Russian Mafia was the middle man. And the head of the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange was actually the head of Israeli Secret
Intelligence Service for North America, Rahm Emanuel who is now White
House Chief of Staff.
And NASA helped steal votes in the 2000 election via orbiting
satellites.

And Obama is an Egyptian prince or pharaoh.
And JFK.
And Monsanto.
And something called "chem-trails" in the sky.
And Lady Diana.
And Timothy McVey and the "Rambo Chip" that was injected into soldiers
in Vietnam.
And the Rockefellers.
Operation Gelatin?

Cripes. All I'm suggesting you do is educate yourself with real information about holography. They are way more cool than Princess Leia popping out of R2D2. I suppose you think that was real huh

And another thing...

I'll do you a favor and help you out with this.

You say either I'm not sure about the facts or I have a hidden agenda.

That, Sir, is called a False Dichotomy.

Google it on the Bing Wiki. Do some "research" I dare you.

"Either you are with us, or against us" = argument failure.

FALSE DICHOTOMY
The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix "di" in "dilemma" means "two". When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.

False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice ("If you are not with us, you are against us.") But the fallacy can arise simply by accidental omission—possibly through a form of wishful thinking or ignorance—rather than by deliberate deception ("I thought we were friends, but all my friends were at my apartment last night and you weren't there.")

When two alternatives are presented, they are often, though not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities. This can lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options are typically presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy can be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.

TL;DR? I wouldn't be surprised.

reply to post by antler


It's not my fault that the only technology you believe in is the stuff that is shown to the public.

The only things that are necessary to believe are things that can't be proved.

Things that can be proved do not require belief. The can be known. But that is contrary to your goal here isn't it.

It IS your fault if you believe things that are contrary to fact.

So you admit that you believe in holograms that aren't holograms and you admit that you know nothing about real holograms whatsoever.

You ARE responsible for what you write here aren't you? The burden of proof is on the person making that claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

You CAN'T provide ANY evidence to support your claims of fictional holographic sky display technology. The only reason that you insist on invoking these claims is precisely because they can not be proved. It's an imaginary fill in the gap invention that you hold on to to support your other beliefs.

You claim that magic sky holograms actually exist. Prove it. Otherwise you're just saying words and I've called you out. The world is ready for your proof. No proof?

Hmm. No proof. Then it must be concluded that you, Sir, are a liar.

It is an established maxim and moral that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false is guilty of falsehood, and the accidental truth of the assertion does not justify or excuse him.
-- Abraham Lincoln

I wonder what's on hulu.

This is what a small team of people in college can do, and it's current technology that belongs to all of us.

Imagine what the military DARPA has that's 40 years advanced of what the public knows about.




[edit on 5-8-2009 by videoworldwide]

[edit on 5-8-2009 by videoworldwide]

Puzzling evidence. Your video links don't work.

Still no proof.

Failure.

Keep trying though. People need to see how much teh researcher you are.

reply to post by videoworldwide


I got your crap URLs to work.

Dude. Those are digital projectors on a dark night on the side of a grain silo... on bikes.

They aren't holograms in the sky.

Do you think drive in movies are holograms too?

Do you honestly think these videos prove anything about the extraordinary claim of holographic broad daylight jet liners that were seen coming in from over New York Harbor from New Jersey and Queens?

Do you even know where New Jersey is?

Can you answer this question? DO YOU KNOW WHAT A HOLOGRAM IS?

Can't you do more than just say vague paranoid things about DARPA? Do you have any ability to think logically at all?

As they say on the chans... Epic Fail.

reply to post by antler


Whne they ask for the youtube number, which info should I be putting in?
I placed the URL inside, and I tried the embed link too. What are they asking for?

Originally posted by videoworldwide
This is what a small team of people in college can do, and it's current technology that belongs to all of us.

Um, projectors have been around for decades. Anybody can buy a projector and project anything they want onto buildings or walls at night time.

Originally posted by videoworldwide
Whne they ask for the youtube number, which info should I be putting in?

I'll highlight the part you need to put in:

youtube.com/watch?v=RLFJzgiCcHc


Also, in your second video, you tried using the YouTube embedder to post a Yahoo video. Maybe that's why you can't see why real planes hit the towers?

About your second video: Those "holograms" are just projections onto a screen, just like your first video. The screen they use is what they call a "foil" screen and it's a 3-sided transparent screen that projects an image onto it from a projector. Oh, and it's dark in the room where the projections are happening, just like it's dark outside in your first video.

There is no known technology that can project a moving image with sound in direct sunlight, into thin air. Every type of holographic technology today projects images onto some sort of screen.

See, every no-planer "theory" easily debunked every time.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Hey BoneZ, you are not welcome to post on my threads, so any post you make is irrelevant to me, and to this thread.

Originally posted by videoworldwide
Hey BoneZ, you are not welcome to post on my threads, so any post you make is irrelevant to me, and to this thread.

I'm so sorry for upsetting you by debunking your lame attempts at trying to prove NPT. There is that little "Ignore" button you can use so you don't have to see my posts anymore.

But anytime a thread is active that concerns NPT, I will be there, debunking every single bit of it. So, you have a choice: stop making NPT threads, or put me on ignore. Otherwise, get used to my name. You'll be seeing alot of it.


*edit to add*
I don't post for you, so it doesn't matter whether it's relevant to you or not. I post in these threads to debunk NPT and so that others have both sides of the NPT story.




[edit on 5-8-2009 by _BoneZ_]

reply to post by _BoneZ_


I guess thats what happens when you debunk garbage. You get ignored. Ah well, let them live in their little fantasy world. It doesnt matter how wrong they are, they arent willing to accept defeat.

You can lead a horse to water, but you sure can't make it drink.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Instead, why don't you prove to me that planes flew into the buildings.

reply to post by videoworldwide


Nice try. See, no-planers have the burden of proof and thus you have to prove there were no planes (which you can't):

burden of proof -
If in some situation there is a proper presumption that something is true, anyone seeking to prove its opposite is said to bear the burden of proof.

Since there is a proper presumption that planes hit the towers, then it is up to the no-planers to prove the opposite. Good luck. I haven't seen any real evidence of no planes yet.

Instead of beating around the bush, post some evidence already. Oh wait, you can't. You have none. That's probably why you tried to flip the script to make me prove there were planes.

All this supposed, alleged, factual evidence of no planes and you'd rather attack people and post nonsense than to actually post some real evidence to win some converts. You're doing the no-planer cult a disservice.

Enough BSing and post some real evidence of no planes already. No more games.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


BoneZ... It is obvious to many what you are. The Paid disinfo agents use the 25 rules of disinformation and you do too...

You keep talking about this burden of proof junk. Why don't you apply it to yourself.

Where is your proof buddy?

Prove planes hit those buildings. Prove NO PLANE hit the pentagon.

Eye witnesses say a plane hit the pentagon LOTS OF THEM. Their are lots of eye witnesses to Shanksville too. Would you call those folks liars?

You have said before that you are not familiar with the technological abilities of the media.

Instead of arguing from a stand point of ignorance why dont you google around the net and look up just what the mass media can manufacture and then get back to us to prove us wrong?

Or do you want to continue to post about this burden of proof broken record and be seen as a disinfo troll?

I mean it is kinda hypocritical to say the witnesses lied about seeing a pentagon plane but tell the truth about the WTC plane...



[edit on 5-8-2009 by titorite]

Originally posted by antler
This is exactly what I mean. "The USAF were talking about airborne holographic projectors."

There's no such thing. Holograms aren't "projected" and they aren't in the air.

You can't show me anything real that explains your fantasy in a scientific way.

Read up on how holograms work. Just find out what a hologram ACTUALLY is. I beg you.

You may as well invoke elfin magic! Holograms in the air and elfin magic are both fiction.

Making a bald claim about some imagined USAF "talk" is not proof of anything in any way.

Think about it. You WANT to believe in some fictional "airborne hologram" only because it CAN'T be proved. Anything with real evidence can be disproved and hence cannot be glommed on to your fantasy conspiracy.

It has to be elfin magic or "holograms bringing down the towers" or it won't be a mystery and that creepy little rush of paranoia doesn't happen for you and you have to go back to the tired old alien abduction or bigfoot "research

This 911 stuff isn't research! It's fantasy. It's mental masturbation.

Seriously. Honest. There is no such thing as USAF airborne holograms. It's retarded to insist so. You don't have to be a physicist to understand why it's not possible.

But only a True Believer can insist on it.

Show me anything that can produce an image in the air in bright 9am NYC sunshine.
How about you just show me what you know about how holograms actually work? Or even a full color hologram as big as a Boeing passenger jet? Then lets talk about one that moves and can be seen from every possible angle from approx. 20 miles away in broad daylight.

You're all high on conspiracy jibberish. No amount of logic is going to cure your addled thinking processes. Crack open a book about holograms.

This is all an elaborate personal attack seeking to argue with a person and their (you presume) level of knowledge and information. Like other 'no plane debunkers' on this thread, your aggression and attempts at insults illustrate that your position lacks credibility, so has to be masked with such rhetorical tactics in the hope I'm too stupid to realise that.

Sadly, friend, I am not that stupid.

www.metacafe.com...
www.youtube.com...

A couple of videos for you to mull over, talking about 3 dimensional holographic projections, the very thing you claim does not exist.

I will accept your apology via Paypal.