Richard D. Hall debunks Simon Shack and recants his original "Ball Theory"

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Sorry, but I thought this was noteworthy. When Richard D. Hall of richplanet.net originally proposed his antigravity "Ball Theory" with 3D analysis, his work seemed to get plenty of support around the net, especially on YouTube where it was posted by multiple users, and also here on ATS. Hall had been an enthusiastic supporter of "September Clues" which he called an "excellent film" and which he credited as the inspiration for the research and production of his ball theory video.

Recently, however, he published a new video based on new research. He now claims that his original theory was erroneous and he has repudiated "September Clues". He now believes Simon Shack is most likely a disinfo agent.
(A thanks to NWOwned for bringing this to my attention).

In case you missed it, here's part 1 of his original video:


His new theory is--in my opinion-- just as bad, but nonetheless might be interesting to some, especially those who adhere to no-plane hologram theories. Enjoy!
edit on 1-6-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   
"Disinfo agent".

Lets not belittle illness here. SImon Shack is a deluded person, but I have every reason to suspect he has psychological issues rather than is some sort of 'disinfo agent'.

What evidence has anyone used to differentiate between the two options? Mental illness is far more parsimonious than subterfuge.

Besides, whoever took Simon Shack seriously after viewing his forum? All space flight a hoax? Public figures don't exist? Victims are faked? It's clearly delusional.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 03:54 AM
link   
This September clues video has some real thump thump thump music in it. Does anyone know what it is??



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
"Disinfo agent".

Lets not belittle illness here. SImon Shack is a deluded person, but I have every reason to suspect he has psychological issues rather than is some sort of 'disinfo agent'.

What evidence has anyone used to differentiate between the two options? Mental illness is far more parsimonious than subterfuge.

Besides, whoever took Simon Shack seriously after viewing his forum? All space flight a hoax? Public figures don't exist? Victims are faked? It's clearly delusional.


He is actually bang on the money with most of what he says. How did i know you'd be here dissing Simon Shack!



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 


Because he believes there's no such thing as the ISS.

So yeah, enough said there I think. I've literally seen it from the ground.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
The conspiracy theory insanity will find some new stupidities to waste the next ten years on.

psik



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 


Are referring to the person who calls himself "Simon Shack"?:


He is actually bang on the money with most of what he says.


Seriously?

Whoo, boy!.........for someone to be "bang on the money" in what they say, they first must be sane.

"Simon Shack" is neither.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I like it, a disinfo agent calls another disinfo agent a disinfo agent


If a "truther" person intentionally lies, I consider him or her a disinfo agent.
September clues has some quite obvious mistakes, Simon is aware of them, but changed nothing. So he is not a honest researcher.
Richard D. Hall, with all his technical education, believes in holograms and the weird DEW version of Judy Wood? It just cannot be like that. "Holograms" is another weird version of false "truthers" aimed to discredit "no-planes" theory. There is simply no need of holograms to sell "planes into towers" idea. MSM, planted eyewitnesses and conformism of sheeple will do the job even better.
And the DEW version is aimed to discredit the nuclear demolition.
The coverup is simply brilliant, they always a step ahead.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by DonJuan
The coverup is simply brilliant, they always a step ahead.

It can't be both. They can't be so brilliant as to have conducted three explosive demolitions in full public view, but so incompetent that they are easily visible to laymen. It can't be so brilliant as to have every conceivable narrative covered and kill witnesses, but so incompetent to leave key people alive and vocally spreading their theory.

It seems a lot of people want things both ways, 'TPTB' are both extremely stupid and simple but also incredibly complex and advanced.

It can't be both, and it's not the latter.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
I also invite everybody to check the background and belief of the member who posted here this piece of disinformation. I always do it in the 9/11 topic. It help to understand "why" he says this or that.


Originally posted by exponent
It can't be both. They can't be so brilliant as to have conducted three explosive demolitions in full public view, but so incompetent that they are easily visible to laymen. It can't be so brilliant as to have every conceivable narrative covered and kill witnesses, but so incompetent to leave key people alive and vocally spreading their theory.

It seems a lot of people want things both ways, 'TPTB' are both extremely stupid and simple but also incredibly complex and advanced.

It can't be both, and it's not the latter.


It can be easily.
A lot of people realize that it was a controlled demolition, but what they can do? You have to understand how they control the masses. The majority does not care to take his own investigations and just belives the common opinion. Because it is safe to be like everyone else and not to rise against the powers.

They cannot start killing people who research 9/11, it would only bring attention to the topic. Instead they created a controlled opposition with many different wrong theories. And this is the best way to hide the truth.

TPTB are incredibly complex and advanced. That why they are TPTB. Do not underestimate them. They are smarter then you and me and everybody else. They can buy anyone or destroy anyone life, including literally.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by DonJuan
I also invite everybody to check the background and belief of the member who posted here this piece of disinformation. I always do it in the 9/11 topic. It help to understand "why" he says this or that.

Indeed. I invite anyone to view my ~1500 or so posts. You will find that I care only about the truth of the situation on 911. I have no political or economic or financial ties to anyone involved. I have no agenda to push nor name to be known. Compare that to most of my 'opponents'.


They cannot start killing people who research 9/11, it would only bring attention to the topic. Instead they created a controlled opposition with many different wrong theories. And this is the best way to hide the truth.

TPTB are incredibly complex and advanced. That why they are TPTB. Do not underestimate them. They are smarter then you and me and everybody else. They can buy anyone or destroy anyone life, including literally.

This is the pure fantasy of someone without a coherent theory. When you believe in so many thousands of weird things and also believe that there's a conspiracy behind them, this is the logical result. There's no actual evidence to support any of this, but because it best fits the conspiracy theory it is assumed to be true. In reality we just have incredible amounts of evidence of 'TPTB' being incredibly incompetent, stupid and ignorant.

For example: Bush.

The counterpart will be that there's actually a secret government that is totally hidden, but the evidence for it is.....

(We'll be waiting for a while)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by DonJuan
TPTB are incredibly complex and advanced. That why they are TPTB. Do not underestimate them. They are smarter then you and me and everybody else. They can buy anyone or destroy anyone life, including literally.


Pretty much the same properties as a god. All-powerful, all-knowing, omnipresent, but yet without a trace of evidence. The main difference would be the absence of benevolence.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


TPTB are not public, but are not that hidden. Those who control the financial system.

Bush or any other president is not the real power. The fact that Bush is not very smart highlight it, He could be even an idiot, does not matter, he does not take important decisions.
The idea that the western politics have less power that banks and corporations is basic and crucial to understand most of conspiracies, incl. 9/11



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by DonJuan
Bush or any other president is not the real power. The fact that Bush is not very smart highlight it, He could be even an idiot, does not matter, he does not take important decisions.
The idea that the western politics have less power that banks and corporations is basic and crucial to understand most of conspiracies, incl. 9/11

I'm sure we disagree about many things, but in general your points are pretty accurate here. Power is the ability to convince others to follow your wishes, and corporations (banks or otherwise) do hold immense power in our modern society.

I'm a pretty socialist type of thinker, and as a result I do find it quite disturbing. I don't think there's any conspiracy in it though, just human greed and desire.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


Maybe you live on a different planet, but on mine:
MSM is under control and brainwashing the population
They get away with false flag operations, start wars and coups to their goals and profits and nobody can stop them.
CTs remain CTs, 9/11 Truth movement is nowhere despite that the official story is a joke.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran... The world just watch and let them do what they want.
Financial system is under their control and used for their benefit at the expense of common population and third world countries.
ICC, IMF, UN etc. act to protect their interests.

Etc.
What kind of evidence do you need more?
Rothschild on TV, explaining how they control the world and are very close to establish the so called NWO?



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by DonJuan
 


I live on a planet where Internet exist, and everyone I know surfs on it and gets information from it. Often from non-MSM websites. Often its complete nonsense though, just like the MSM.

If you think there is some sinister force behind the media carefully controlling it, using it to control and brainwash the population, then I think you are paranoid. Sure, powerful people manipulate the media to their benefit. But that is not the same as control.

What I think is going on here is that you are trying to give yourself a feeling of self importance, being part of the few who figured it out, unlike all the sheep who watch TV. The reality though is a lot more complex than you like to think. There is no single evil driving force, there are many powerful people, often with conflicting interests. I think the games that are played among the people in power themselves are a lot nastier than what those poor "brainwashed civilians" have to deal with.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
I live on a planet where Internet exist, and everyone I know surfs on it and gets information from it. Often from non-MSM websites. Often its complete nonsense though, just like the MSM.


Internet has much smaller audience. They cannot shut up everybody of course, so hey just add a lot of nonsense and half-truth to make it complicated to get information. Like in 9/11 cover-up.


If you think there is some sinister force behind the media carefully controlling it, using it to control and brainwash the population, then I think you are paranoid. Sure, powerful people manipulate the media to their benefit. But that is not the same as control.


Apparently you missed the media coverage of 9/11 and the recent wars.


What I think is going on here is that you are trying to give yourself a feeling of self importance, being part of the few who figured it out, unlike all the sheep who watch TV. The reality though is a lot more complex than you like to think. There is no single evil driving force, there are many powerful people, often with conflicting interests. I think the games that are played among the people in power themselves are a lot nastier than what those poor "brainwashed civilians" have to deal with.


"feeling of self importance" is a popular therm among debunkers.
I figured out that there is no way to change the world and stop them. It only makes me unhappy.
And there is no practical use of this knowledge.

I believe that the Strauss Kahn case is an example of some conflicts. But I do not care about their internal "conflicting interests". They are together against us, the common people.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DonJuan
Internet has much smaller audience. They cannot shut up everybody of course, so hey just add a lot of nonsense and half-truth to make it complicated to get information. Like in 9/11 cover-up.


It depends on where you live. Where I live, Internet has a pretty large market share among time spend on certain media types. A quick Google search shows that its as much as 43% among 15-24 year olds, dwarfing TV, radio and papers. Internet penetration rates are >80% in most western countries.

As for nonsense made up by secret powers in order to make it hard to find real information about 911, do you really believe that is necessary? Again and again I experience how people can make up the biggest nonsense without any help from others. Can you give some examples of genuine 911 sites and the ones made by the secret powers?


"feeling of self importance" is a popular therm among debunkers.
I figured out that there is no way to change the world and stop them. It only makes me unhappy.
And there is no practical use of this knowledge.


If you actually had a case, meaning you have evidence, there are loads of ways to stop them. But since everything you believe is based on controversial websites, mixed with some gut feeling, you are indeed left powerless. Which it good, as I would hate to see world wide uproar for every crazy idea someone makes up.


I believe that the Strauss Kahn case is an example of some conflicts. But I do not care about their internal "conflicting interests". They are together against us, the common people.


Yes, I believe that too. See, I am a bit of a conspiracy nut too
I just don't believe there is a "they" and I also don't believe "they" are against "us". Its doesn't make any sense, its pure paranoia.
edit on 2-6-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:57 AM
link   
reply to post by lunarasparagus
 


Thank you lunarasparagus for posting this thread I was gathering data myself to post one but it all ties in here anyway so...

And so as a result of the first thing (see my animated avatar gif pic, upper left), that being close up evidence from the Naudet 'first strike' on the North Tower clip, showing an inconsistent 'damage pattern' on the building face, proven not to be caused by that of a right wing from a or any passenger airplane etc.

Well I just showed, conclusively I might add, that no plane impacted the North Tower.

Now exactly what does that mean?

Well for starters it means anyone saying one did or that it's the catalyst for the eventual collapse of the entire building is well, incorrect.

That's the first thing.

Well, maybe the second.

Actually the first thing is no plane impacted the North Tower.

The second thing has to do with the nonexistent 'plane impact' therefore having absolutely nothing to do with the subsequent collapse.

The third thing is there is some kind of plane image that Naudet seemed to 'catch' on his lucky intersection camera rotation but when we come to the wing hole and see it wasn't made by a plane's wing, then we have to ask if the 'plane' in Naudet's film is REAL?

I am now claiming (based on my research) that it cannot possibly be. And in fact isn't.

Now here's where things get crazy cool and interesting - check it.

Recently I was reading an article by Jim Fetzer about the JFK assassination and the Zapruder film. Fetzer is a JFK assassination scholar as well as a 9/11 Truth Scholar it seems, anyway...

In the article Fetzer was trying to prove, or he dug up some proof that the Zapruder film was doctored, with things added, and that many frames had been removed to tell a particular story that didn't really match what a number of eye witnesses claimed to have seen and reported.

Now I don't want to go into the whole JFK thing right now but I was thinking about the Zapruder film you see?

I was thinking that with JFK and that incident there was like one film and it was heavily edited/doctored. Where with 9/11 you had many many videos and clips, especially of the second hit of Flight 175 approaching and then into the South Tower etc.

Recently Richard D. Hall produced a new updated and expanded second video to his previous "ball" one, where he mapped out something like 26 Flight 175 approach videos to show rather conclusively that despite the crazy angles that appear to exist on any single video's approach trajectory, that really, when taken all together and mapped out against the known radar flight path and a 3D model of Manhattan, that there is only one object and it is correct in placement or "congruent" across all 26 videos it appears in.

This is sort of significant I think, for a number of reasons, not the least of which was that I actually thought there was something in the sky myself that day and that I also believed all the Flight 175 videos would end up proving to be "congruent".

And so, Hall was able to prove or show to my own personal satisfaction what I had personally suspected was true all along.

Now it's also significant, (Hall's work) in showing that a strange angle of Flight 175's trajectory on one video not matching on another video with a wildly different seeming trajectory was really not the big problem someone could make it out to be. You follow?

That person being Simon Shack. Simon thinks and promotes, I gather, that the plane is 'video fakery', that the videos are fake, that the "nose-out" sequence is a video overlay that went too far through the building etc. etc.

Hall shows these interpretations and cries of "video fakery" may be only in interpretation and may not be in actual fact.

And as it concerns the many second plane videos, especially the 26 Hall uses in his demonstration, I tend to agree and it is my current position that as it concerns those videos that there is no 'video fakery' about them.

There are 26 clips Hall uses all shot by different people from vastly different places and vastly different angles.

Really I would EXPECT them to all match up when compared TO ONE ANOTHER.

Which brings me back to the Zapruder film. It was one film heavily doctored and edited, at least according to Jim Fetzer. That I'll just accept say for a minute right?

Now look, the Zapruder film was ONE FILM so therefore there were really NO OTHER FILMS TO COMPARE IT TO. And so they played around with it before releasing it. In the article Fetzer talks of it coming from the first guy Zapruder and then going off to different labs to get "processed", then LATER it was 'released'.

Now I hope you can see where I'm going with this, right?

A SINGLE FILM, by ONE PERSON of a certain "incident" that has NO OTHER CLIPS from other people or other locations or other angles TO COMPARE IT TO, that is released LATER.

to be cont...


Cheers
edit on 3-6-2012 by NWOwned because: spelling



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 03:09 AM
link   
continued from my previous post above...

A SINGLE FILM, by ONE PERSON of a certain "incident" that has NO OTHER CLIPS from other people or other locations or other angles TO COMPARE IT TO, that has to wait just a bit for "processing" and as a consequence only gets 'released' LATER... Hmm

The first film I described like that (The Zapruder Film) Jim Fetzer thinks is "doctored" with many frames missing and certain other things added!

Hmm...

Want me say it outright?

Ok.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, while Simon Shack is going off in "September Clues" about all the 'video fakery' on the second plane hit. Little ol' Naudet with his ONLY CLIP of the North Tower hit releases that footage, captured "accidentally" only "later", like the next day or whatever it was... yeah right.

All along a case was made that the second hit Flight 175 videos were FAKE when ALL ALONG it was the Naudet clip that was the fake one!

The one with the CGI plane inserted to appear like it was going into the North Tower.

The Naudet clip of the Flight 11 'plane' hit IS THE VIDEO FAKERY ONE!!


Cheers






top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join