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: 7
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by muggl3z
NPT stuff belongs in skunkworks.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



I didn't see any planes did you.
I saw live the South Tower explode out the North East corner
with no clue of the airliner crash on the hidden side.




posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
I quite like this montage




More can be seen at September Clues

I'm sure theres one showing No plane

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bigyin]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigyin
I quite like this montage

More can be seen at September Clues

"September Clues - Busted!":


Google Video Link



"Debunking 'September Clues' - A Point-by-Point Analysis":

truthaction.org...



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ugie1028
 


ugie1028,

My friend, You are either lying, or you are a victim of 'project blue beam.'

There were no planes used in the attacks on 9-11......

If the videos of the 'planes' hitting the buildings were real, they would have broken up as they penetrated the building........an aluminum aircraft does not slip into a steal building like a hot knife through butter....

Think about it.....if you just rigged those buildings with explosives, would you risk flying an airplane into them......that could screw up the well placed explosives....

Think about it my friend....think hard...

Remember, we were not watching 'live' t.v. like we thought when we saw the 'second plane' hit the tower..... there was a 17 second delay, plenty enough time to add the pre-programmed CGI plane.... and remember the nose cone that was seen coming out the other side.......I'll bet somebody got fired in the Pentagon..


Hope you figure this out...

PEACE and LOVE...



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   




Why?



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by rainfall
There were no planes used in the attacks on 9-11......

Please show a scientific or professional analysis of an original video you've obtained, proving video fakery once and for all, or what you're peddling is disinfo.



Originally posted by rainfall
an aluminum aircraft does not slip into a steal building like a hot knife through butter

The 300,000 pound aircraft traveling circa 500mph didn't break or sever any steel columns. The aircraft broke the bolts and welds holding the columns together. Bolts and welds are no match for a 300,000 pound object. I go into more detail about this in my post below:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



Originally posted by rainfall
Remember, we were not watching 'live' t.v. like we thought when we saw the 'second plane' hit the tower..... there was a 17 second delay, plenty enough time to add the pre-programmed CGI plane

Yeah, except that doesn't explain how the 17 second delay was able to add a CGI plane into private citizens' home video cameras. Good luck explaining that one.



Originally posted by rainfall
and remember the nose cone that was seen coming out the other side

There was no nose cone coming out the other side. That is explained and debunked in my post below:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



Originally posted by rainfall
Hope you figure this out...

It's already been figured out and debunked for years now. I'm still waiting for a no-planer to obtain an original video and have it scientifically or professionally analyzed for fakery. Some kind of proof other than opinion or speculation. Just because you say there is fakery doesn't make it so. Get some real proof, or all you have is disinfo.





[edit on 23-10-2009 by _BoneZ_]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Yeah, except that doesn't explain how the 17 second delay was able to add a CGI plane into private citizens' home video cameras. Good luck explaining that one.




Umm...if I remember rightly, none of the private citizens videos were shown live on tv.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Umm...if I remember rightly, none of the private citizens videos were shown live on tv.

That doesn't matter. If the plane was a CGI plane, then you have to explain what the witnesses saw with their own eyes, and you have to explain the plane on private citizens' home videos. A CGI plane won't show up on home videos that were pointed at the towers. All you would see is an explosion with no plane in every home video. That's not what we see in the real world.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Why i don't get about no planers is the lack of want or desire to think through the planning of such an operation over a huge populace like New York. This alone makes me question the seriouness of the discussion, I am not sure all of them are coming from an honest place. At least that is my observation on this.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Since when does a video "prove" anything? Or a disclosure, news article, report from a public official, or any other piece of "evidence" for that matter? There is only speculation. People will believe what they want to believe, whether or not big foot was actually caught on camera.

This thread could go on for years and we still wouldn't have "proof" of anything. This is a waste of time. If you believe it was a conspiracy, simply leave it at that. There's no sense in trying to pinpoint all the details for our own mental gratification, just like there's no sense in trying to pinpoint the details of God. You either believe there is one, or you don't.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orion7911


funny how I've never seen anyone anywhere offer any logical counter-argument to the points and context of what that article discusses.


How about THIS for a counter argument? The guy who started this thread was physically there on 9/11, saw the plane with his own eyes, and even posted the location where he saw it. The guy who wrote that blurb wasn't.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Orion7911


funny how I've never seen anyone anywhere offer any logical counter-argument to the points and context of what that article discusses.


How about THIS for a counter argument? The guy who started this thread was physically there on 9/11, saw the plane with his own eyes, and even posted the location where he saw it. The guy who wrote that blurb wasn't.



That's what I mentioned in my first post.
The OP saw both planes crash into the towers.
We need more witnesses perhaps.
The 911 report was an online download but don't think they
bothered with witnesses.
What the online arguers need is a list of valid witnesses.

That might do it.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Every few weeks another bunch of no-planers (or maybe the same ones) come here and push their agenda. They soon after become so angry and belligerent they get themselves banned or are so thoroughly thrashed they don't come back. Just use the search feature - for your own gratification and amusement.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


Very true indeed, and in the last year or so (maybe more) I just started to avoid their nonsense. Now though, it has to be dealt with because it is such a disgrace to the city of New York and the people of New York.



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne

That's what I mentioned in my first post.
The OP saw both planes crash into the towers.
We need more witnesses perhaps.
The 911 report was an online download but don't think they
bothered with witnesses.
What the online arguers need is a list of valid witnesses.

That might do it.


I seriously doubt it. If these people are so seduced by the idea there weren't any planes, despite all the eyewitnesses and despite all the video, then I can't see how introducing any More eyewitnesses or video will make any difference. They'll just assume it's more disinformation being put out by secret gov't agents.

Heck, there are truthers here accusing *them* of being secret gov't agents.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by bigyin
I quite like this montage

More can be seen at September Clues

"September Clues - Busted!":


Google Video Link



"Debunking 'September Clues' - A Point-by-Point Analysis":

truthaction.org...




Point by point analysis by whom exactly? Where is the scientific anaylsis?
"It's not cgi because its a plane" Yeh, real in depth study that one. I watched it in the honest hope that the NPT would be debunked, but it's exactly what i expected, namely, just some guys opinion. Stop using this video as a debunking tool against sept clues. It proves absolutley nothing.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by thesneakiod
 


Calm down. Now this is what I'm talking about. You won't persuade people with that attitude - well, you might if you're Nico Haupt. You'll persuade them you are a nutcase.


There are several threads where these ideas have been thoroughly debunked. The topic "No plane theory is a hoax" is absolutely true and proven as far as I am concerned.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by thesneakiod
 


You are not trying to establish any truth.

There is an incredible population in New York. IF there were NO PLANES and PLANES showed up on the evening news when they went home there would be such a riot you would never forget it.

You think Rodney King caused a riot?

Be real man. There were Planes. No one would plan an operation like this. You guys discount any amateur video for the most ludicrous of reasons.

The No Planers now have people saying that hardly anyone died? Or that the passengers were fake?

Be real and not fake.

Being real is understanding that there were planes and being fake is being ridiculous. If people want to be fake then there is no end!

People can start saying ....."9/11 didn't happen~!" "iT was project blue beam!


Or....."No is dead and the Iraq War is fake!"


Its ludicrous. There is only so much a person can fake, and faking planes over a population like NEW YORK can't work.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by thesneakiod
 


Calm down. Now this is what I'm talking about. You won't persuade people with that attitude - well, you might if you're Nico Haupt. You'll persuade them you are a nutcase.


There are several threads where these ideas have been thoroughly debunked. The topic "No plane theory is a hoax" is absolutely true and proven as far as I am concerned.


Nico Haupt


Deleted




His group also investigates on the thesis of Directed Energy Weapon Disintegration or Cold Fusion Weapons [-> Rosalee Grable]. This includes Jeff "Plaguepuppy" King from the M.I.T., who is researcher on unconventional weaponry, refers to the Twin Towers on 9/11.


Not saying the Beam Weapon did it or was involved, however high
voltage does exert physical force.
The development into a powerful force and electrical effect might well
be developed since 1892 discovery by Tesla.
So far the occulted technology has been used for crop circles by
killing plants and tests killing cattle.
Small time.

Also as far as this weapon is concerned:



the very existence of which are categorically denied by establishment and corporate scientists---

lyne4lyne.tripod.com...

is not good enough so I would not rule out the scalar weapon.

So plane fires did it all.
Or explosives alone perhaps, so why need planes.
DNA evidence says passengers died so planes crashed.
Then explosives and beams, as trigger perhaps, to finish the job.




top topics



 
11
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join