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.

 

No plane theory is a Hoax!!!

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Hahaha no plane hit twin tower, so what was that we saw on 100s of videos ? An alien ship? These theorists should see a mental doctor i guess.




posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Mark_Amy
 


I happened to be looking at them because i was facing that direction went the first plane it. i was in my dads truck, he was driving me to school. we were at a red light on the top of the hill on Montgomery ST. if you look on Google earth you can see at the top of the hill on Montgomery and summit ave, u have a clear view of the NYC skyline. (this is where i saw it)


Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by ugie1028
Because i was in jersey city, NJ across the Hudson, I saw everything from when the first plane hit to the second plane hitting.

You've been registered since 7-23-2008 and this is the first time you're sharing this info?


ive shared it before here on ATS.


How can they say there were no planes when i saw WITH MY OWN DAMN EYES that PLANES hit the towers?


Then the no plane at the Pentagon theory must be a hoax too?


i didint see what happened at the pentagon, i think your making assumptions.


May i also add description of the planes... since im here...
the planes were all silver, solid silver. if anything, the planes were no American airliners


So what is that United Airlines plane I'm seeing in the second impact videos?


again i stress that i saw this live, not live TV, but live with my own eyes.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jimbo2167
 


What if?

Uhhhh i saw planes not missiles.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
As a member here for a very long time, i like the people here, ive seen a lot of crazy things but...

The NPT (no plane theory) in the 9/11 forum has gone a bit too far!

why?

Because i was in jersey city, NJ across the Hudson, I saw everything from when the first plane hit to the second plane hitting.

How can they say there were no planes when i saw WITH MY OWN DAMN EYES that PLANES hit the towers?



As much as it bewilders me, I fully agree with you, ugie, and it's the entire point I've been tryign to make since I started posting here.

The idea that the planes were all holograms is about as goofy an idea as it gets, but people aren't stopping to think these conspiracy theories through critically. For one thing, why the flip would the conspirators waste so many years planning for, and risk getting so many people involved in, this disinformation campaign (planted witnesses, faked video, planting fake aircraft wreckage, etc), not to mention inventing some wholly brand new hologram technology noone has ever seen before, when they can take a real plane and make a real airplane crash in five minutesl? Geez, it's one thing to theorize a conspiracy but the conspiracy should at least make *some* lick of sense, rather than doing it just for the sake of doing it.

People will believe what they want to believe. If they want to believe the Bible says the world is only 10,000 years old then that's what they're going to believe, regardless of what anyone tells them. Along those lines, if someone wants to believe there were no planes, the crash site in Shanksville is all fake, or that there were controlled demolitions in an occupied building, that's what they're going to believe, regardless of what anyone tells them. They're not believing it becuase of any review of the facts, as there's no flipping way that anyoen can look at the facts objectively and come up with the idea that the planes were all holograms. They're believing it becuase it fulfulls some inner need they have to believe it, and there ain't anythign that you, I, or colonel sanders could ever tell them that will make them believe otherwise.

It isn't any desire to learn the truth.It's religious zealotry.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


HOLY CRAP DAVES ON MY SIDE FOR A CHANGE!!!

im going to have to say for the first time as well.... i.... agree...

Wow that was difficult!!!

I see your point dave, but i still look forward to debating you on the other theories out there.
but this NPT, i think we have to work together to get this theory shot down because its just.... far fetched to an extreeem!



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
Because, no matter which conspiracy theory you believe in there will always be the group of people that make you look crazy for believing in any conspiracy. like
9/11- No plane theory
UFOs - GFL
Free Masonry - Reptilian agenda


The OS would be the perfect example here imho. Add to it the fact that most people deny that it is a conspiracy to begin with and you have the recipe for ignorance.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by muggl3z
 

120% agree!
Whether,or not,if they did use,holographic ,technologies,(the technologies do exist)It would have been to cloak the object (a different plane,missile,or a flying duck!)or whatever.....

But to say there was, not one, "Flying Object" ,that day,much less, saying there was, not 4 "flying objects" that day, and to say it was only holographic ,technologies,and demo? IS just down wright Foolish!

It could have been,any, number, of different, "flying objects".But which "flying 'Objects" that was used, Should be, what we, all are looking for? "The no PLNERS"! are here to slow us down. AnyKEY board time,wasted, on trying to debunk, "A" no planer!! Just means "They" have performed, their, job 100% complete.

Just ignore that part of the whole story. And look, at trying to identify,what was actually used to distract ,from Us from what was being demoed down deep,a 1000 feet away from the top of the building.
Timed! with stop watch accuracy!This was not performed, by a ragtag, group of,(the night before partying /drinking/forgetfull,guys)this was done,with a military, elegance.That only military training could duplicate.

OSBL, hmm I just dont think "HE" could have ever matched whits ,with USA military/Intell. I just cant buy that sorry , My family is to entrenched in military/civilian/gov angencies,to believe otherwise.

I am not their huckleberry today!

just my two cents



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Am I right in saying that the OP only saw one plane, ie the second one.

He states that he saw it all 'from' when the first plane hit, which means he did'nt actually see the first plane at all.

I would imagine that very few did see the first plane. It was only after that incident that attention was drawn to the towers.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bigyin
 


i did see it.

I was in my dads truck on the way to school. I had a great view of the towers at that time.

i saw the rest from the second floor of my school. (which also had a great view of the towers.)

i saw everything from when the first plane hit. check Google earth for the 3d view point to confirm my story... at least the view point of it. summit ave, Montgomery st. jersey city, NJ.

also to clarify my sincerity in my statements here, i would be willing to take a voice stress test, or a polygraph.

since its a conspiracy i can understand some of you not believing what i say. Ive been here on this site for a while to understand that lies are spewed here, or misinterpreted.

we may never know the truth of what happened that day, but the NPT is something that would kill the movement as a whole, and more people WONT take it seriously anymore. (IMO) meaning we may not ever uncover what happened at all.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
You will also notice here on ATS that no plane threads go on for a long time with many responses whereas the other stuff with good info dies quickly and gets buried.

That is definitely disinfo and I do believe it was created by debunkers, with hopes that such would get widely accepted in the Truth movement.

I am happy to say that the vast majority of researchers correctly rejected such theories.

Its one thing to tell people they didn't see what they saw with their own eyes.... Sound familar? UFOS? Isn't it debunkers who keep telling people they didnt see it correctly?? OF course that is the hallmark of debunking...

AGain, its one thing to tell people they saw something else, but it is another leap to tell people that all the camera's that day and video never filmed what actually happened!!!

IF the Gov had all the power in the world to make sure that *ALL* cameras and video's would never get what actually happened, then why isn't the Gov using that same omnipotence to silence this theory on the Net??



[edit on 19-10-2009 by talisman]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   


files.abovetopsecret.com...



files.abovetopsecret.com...

the view i had of the first plane hitting.

one image is from the street view, and the other is the main google earth view.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028

I see your point dave, but i still look forward to debating you on the other theories out there.
but this NPT, i think we have to work together to get this theory shot down because its just.... far fetched to an extreeem!


Sure, why not? The enemy of the enemy is my friend, and all that. Now that I have your serious attention for once, it seems to me that to quell these "no planes", "lasers from outer space" and other far out theories, you need to understand where they're coming from to begin with.

They're obviously not originating from the people coming in here and posting them, since all you need to do is ask them basic questions about how there weren't any planes to see them melt down becuase they're simply repeating what other people told them and they aren't thinking it all the way through. I don't subscribe to the idea it's coming from secret gov't agents planting disinformation, since all you need to do is work with people for only a little while to see that there genuinely are legitimate nutballs out there. I knew a guy who seriously told me to *never* shine a flashlight up in the sky at night, or else the UFOs will come and kidnap me(!) Not even gov't disinformation agents could ever come up with weird crap like that.

Thus, there's only one culprit left that I can see- these damned fool conspiracy web sites pushing out all these absurd conspiracy theories. They present their information in such a carefully manipulated way, telling us some things, while withholding other things, in order to get use to believe what they want us to believe, and the people who'll believe any goofy thing if they read it on the internet will swallow it up like candy. You can make the weather report look like KKK hate literature, too, if you're intent on presenting it in that light.

This is what I've been saying from day one- if these conspiracy theorists would only hold their own conspiracy theories up to the exact same level of stringent critical analysis that they do the gov't account, they wouldn't be conspiracy theorists, for very long. You DO see where I'm going with this, I trust?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

posted by ugie1028
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


HOLY CRAP DAVES ON MY SIDE FOR A CHANGE!!!

im going to have to say for the first time as well.... i.... agree...

Wow that was difficult!!!

I see your point dave, but i still look forward to debating you on the other theories out there.
but this NPT, i think we have to work together to get this theory shot down because its just.... far fetched to an extreeem!


No ugie Dave is not on your side. It is Dave and his fellow zealous 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY conspiracy theory defenders who are behind the silly WTC no-plane fantasies in the first place.

They create these wacko strawman arguments to have something to beat down so they can pretend the real gigantic flaws in the official myth do not exist. They have created many other strawman arguments to assist their disinformation.

Yes the WTC No-Plane Theory is a HOAX.

Dave is just trying to drive another wedge in the 9-11 Truth Movement. Ignore his antics. You do not need partners like Dave or Reheat or whacker or thedman or Joey or mmichael or hooper or trebor or jthomas or any of the myriad of paid 9-11 shills.




posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seiko
Stating that this theory relates to the pentagon theory of no plane, is where I don't follow.

The OP wants us to believe the no planes theory is a hoax because he saw planes hit the WTC, so be that logic, the no plane at the Pentagon theory must be a hoax too because lots of people claimed to see a plane hit that.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Yep, you got us. Us government guys made up the whole no-plane thingie to make the truth movement look foolish.

Oh wait.....didnt need any help from us for that......



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
It is understandable to be frustrated with new information that does not match to what is acceptable and norm.

The fact is that the military does have advanced Holographic technology.

In these forums we are not dealing with facts, more of conjectures and trying to cross correlate pieces of information that by themselves are not facts. The massive deception necessitates this. We are the philosophers and thinkers unbound by the restrictions of the average folk.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by curiousindian
Hahaha no plane hit twin tower, so what was that we saw on 100s of videos ? An alien ship? These theorists should see a mental doctor i guess.

The theory is that the plane you are seeing in the videos is fake. CGI, computer generated imagery. No planers argue the technology existing long before 9/11 to be able to do this. They give evidence that the planes seen in the videos are fake because the plane doesn't react when penetrating the buildings. It flies through it effortlessly, just as if these planes were flying through clouds. Another point they bring up is the dodgy looking videos, about how the videos taken from the news helicopters are in pretty poor quality even though news helicopters are equipped of top of the line cameras.

The theory itself is not crazy. Just look at the Pentagon no plane theory for example. Whether this theory at the WTC actually happened is another story, just like at the Pentagon.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
i didint see what happened at the pentagon, i think your making assumptions.

But lots of people claimed to see a plane hit the Pentagon with their own eyes just like you claim to have seen at the WTC. So do you think a plane hit the Pentagon?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by jimbo2167
 


What if?

Uhhhh i saw planes not missiles.

I think his point is how do you know it wasn't really missiles disguised as planes that you saw? How much of you memory has been influenced by seen all the replays of the crash videos on TV and on youtube, etc?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


No it does not follow. Not only is there his eyewitness to the event as stated, there is a numerous amount of video footage both amateur and professional from many angles backing up his claim.

On the pentagon we have eyewitness testimony, but no numerous video from multiple sources. We have a "blur". We're talking about the pentagon, the center for military intelligence in the free world, and no other footage exists?

These two things are not equal. In My opinion the op should have stated his eyewitness testimony was pertinent to the wtc plane and not to the pentagon as to avoid this.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join