Who currently believes in hologram theory at the WTC?

reply to post by dingleberry77


Exactly.

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
And now your telling me nuclear weapons? COME ON!
Take a step away from the table and look at yourself please.

Sorry. That was a little much all at once. I didn’t realize you’re a newbie. You can always click on the posters name to see what they’ve written in the past.

What I’m saying is the truth. I wasn’t kidding around, at least not in content. Of course you won’t believe it. But reality will not conform to our wishes. It’s just there.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods
I too was probed by greys!

Originally posted by dingleberry77

I don't believe in the theory at all. It's a bit of a joke. It makes the whole 911 conspiracy theory look like a silly joke made up by 12-year-olds. There are a bunch of real, very, very plausible theories that should be talked about.

Thanks for the post dingleberry77. Actually this thread is titled, "Who currently believes in Hologram theory at WTC".

Your post wold be welcome at any number of other threads discussing the Hologram theory.

I would respectfully caution you that your comment 'silly joke made up by 12-year-olds' is disrespectful. There are many other ways to express your opinion without insulting people.

Thanks for your post albeit on the wrong thread.

reply to post by Wizard_In_The_Woods


All your story needs is leprichans. Im sorry I honestly don't mean to be insulting but that is exactly what I am thinking. But your theories ring awefully loudly of group imagination running away with them.

Yeh. I'm a newbie. Right. Any other passive agressive attempts to demean me or brow beat me into accepting what I see as a ludracris claim considering?

Like the whole "They couldn't have collapsed by themselves." thought. I say BS, you drop even one level of a building on another, that level wasn't made to take the impact much less the weight that is being excerted on it. It's going to collapse. Then that floor and the remnants of the other floor fall on the next. It's simple physics.




[edit on 12-11-2007 by WraothAscendant]

Regarding the use of 'nukes' at the WTC, I once believed this was possible.

I no longer believe that nuke were used.

Now I believe that directed energy weapons employing molecular disassociation technology was used in the destruction of the WTC.

Quit Am Complaint

Allegation 50 (excerpt)

Filed New York District Court

May31, 2007

VII. THE DEFENDANTS’ SCHEME

50. The destruction of the WTC on September 11, 2001, was caused, in whole or in part, by the use of Directed Energy Weapons, consisting in High Energy Lasers and or other operational, but largely secret weapons that are, nonetheless, known to exist and known to have been deployed and/or deployable in the year 2001, before and after.

Defendants:

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP.;
APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
BOEING; NuSTATS; COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.;
DATASOURCE, INC.; GEOSTAATS, INC.;
GILSANZ MURRAY STEFICEK LLP;
HUGHES ASSOCIATES, INC.; AJMAL ABBASI;
EDUARDO KAUSEL; DAVID PARKS;
DAVID SHARP; DANIELE VENEZANO;
JOSEF VAN DYCK; KASPAR WILLIAM;
ROLF JENSEN & ASSOCIATES, INC;
ROSENWASSER/GROSSMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.C.;
SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & :HEGER, INC.;
S. K. GHOSH ASSOCIATES, INC.;
SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL, LLP;
TENG & ASSOCIATES, INC.;
UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC.;
WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER ASSOCIATES, INC.;
AMERICAN AIRLINES; SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES;
and UNITED AIRLINES,

Ah its the infamous JohnLear. Hows the soulcatcher thing going?
Wizard read the post before his please.

reply to post by johnlear


Sorry John. I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone. I am posting in this because any topic needs lot be debated. What's the point of the thread if only people that believe in the theory can post in it.

I personlly think that there are more meaty, and real, theories out there. It seems far too far fetched to me. That is my opinion and that's why i posted it. That's the whole idea of the site.

Hello WraothAscendant!

Leprechauns? I haven’t come across one yet. But then again they’re always looking for gold, and with me is the last place they’ll find that.

Actually the hydrogen bombs at the WTC’s analysis is not ‘group think’ at all. I’m not sure which ‘group’ of people you’re referring to. But if it’s the John Lear fan club, of which I am indeed a member, then that charge doesn’t apply. This is an example of an area where him and I DISAGREE.

Morgan Reynolds is a good man. And a brave one for filing his Qui Tam Complaint on 11-Jul-2007. But luckily his litigation is about ‘no planes at the WTC’s’ and not about what destroyed the World Trade Center complex. His lawyer is well aware of this also. Which is why he wrote the excerpt John Lear has posted above in careful ‘legalese’. Article 50 of the complaint: “The destruction of the WTC on September 11, 2001, was caused, in whole or in part, by the use of Directed Energy Weapons, consisting in High Energy Lasers and or other operational, but largely secret weapons that are, nonetheless, known to exist…”

Now that’s typical lawman’s gobbledygook! The last part of the sentence disqualifies everything stated before. and or other operational, but largely secret weapons…
In translation that reads ‘anything could have done it!’. It’s that classic AND OR runaround! But that’s okay. Since this lawsuit has plenty of other strong points to make the cabal sweat. Of course it won’t matter practically. Because the powers that be can stonewall this case into infinity. But it’s nevertheless nice to know somebody’s doing something.

I guess a directional pure hydrogen antimatter-triggered fusion bomb qualifies as a directed energy weapon. So maybe Dr. Reynolds has got himself covered. High energy lasers don’t make any sense at all because they would require three, four times more energy to generate than the nukes used at the WTC’s released. So no matter what it’s a question of efficiency.

Sorry antsi for derailing your thread a little. But you needed more ATS points!

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

I don't and in my opinion anyone who does needs to show some proof?

Are you guys reading
david Webber books for these ideas from Holograms and timed explosives to some sci fi weapons straight out of a John Ringo book. LOL

[edit on 083030p://upTuesday by seridium]

reply to post by seridium


Seridium, good to have you back. See you’ve simmered down some. Good. Because here’s a link for you. It’s easy to read. It was written ten years ago. Ieer.org — Dangerous Thermonuclear Quest: The Potential of Explosive Fusion Research for the Development of Pure Fusion Weapons.

Anything I can do to help.

Post scriptum:
Ieer is in the process of removing this link. They want readers to pay for this document. So you’d better get it while you can.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

Since it looks like no no-planer believes in holograms were used at the WTC, I'm beginning to think these hologram debunking threads are being started as a smear campaign against the no-plane theory. If people keep seeing the words "hologram" and "no-plane theory" in the same sentence, the uneducated will associate the two and think holograms were an integral part of the no-planes theory.

I certainly do not believe in any hologram theories. I have had this arguement with mr. Lear. I was there that day, I worked a few blocks away, but was having an egg sandwich from a vendor at the base of the towers.

When I challenged him and axplained my view, he politely told me I did not see what I think I saw, and what I think I saw was what the government wanted me to think I saw.

I have to respectfully disagree with him. Although I did not see the first plane, I did hear the impact. I MOST DEFINITELY DID SEE THE SECOND PLANE, FIRST BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND THEN THE IMPACT. I am sorry, I have to disagree with you, but it was a plane that day.

For people that do not believe a hologram is possable please see something called Volumetric Disply.

en.wikipedia.org...

It is thought that the device could be scaled up to any size, allowing for 3D images to be generated in the sky.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


For the one who allways talk about doing some research ... Holometric hologram is a rotating piece with LED's on it. How in the world would you send an rotating piece the size of a commercial airplane TWICE on to the WTC ????

Originally posted by tep200377
For the one who allways talk about doing some research

Please read the following lines slowly and try to understand them.

It is thought that the device could be scaled up to any size, allowing for 3D images to be generated in the sky.

Do you have any evidence to support your theory or are you still just trolling?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Please read the following lines slowly and try to understand them.

It is thought that the device could be scaled up to any size, allowing for 3D images to be generated in the sky.

Do you have any evidence to support your theory or are you still just trolling?

You accusing someone else of trolling makes me laugh.

Seriously though, I now name this theory the lol-o-gram theory, it's just too laughable. To post something that says it is "thought" the device "could" do anything, is not any evidence at all. It's pointless in this context.

Evidence would be an actual lol-o-gram projector picture or video, or witness of it or the massive sound systems needed to simulate the jet that the lol-o-gram is projecting. Saying things "might" or "could" mean nothing.

Sorry.

Oh yah, one more thing... how in the world does a lol-o-gram make a hole the shape of a commercial jet into a skyscraper?

Are there any other no-planers here on ATS besides John (the god) Lear and myself?
If so, please speak up. Even if you don’t believe holograms were used. Let antsi and all of us know if you think the plane crashes were faked on 9-11.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 11/14/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods

This is why the hologram idea and no planes concept will never spread beyond the intellectual elite.

Intellectual elite?

Name me a single member of the "intellectual elite", or in fact any other kind of elite, who doesn't believe planes were used?

You don't even sincerely believe it yourself, it's just something you've decided to do for effect - you just take that position so you can be a rebel and a (very) minor celebrity on ATS.

Originally posted by Soloist
You accusing someone else of trolling makes me laugh.

What is funny and a little sad is that people that beleive the official story keep asking for evidence but can never post any evidence, they are still living in a media fed fantasy world and can only troll.

I can post evidence all day and no matter what it is they cannot leave there fantasy world to accept it, and they are afraid to do any real research becasue they are afraid of reallty.

I have not seen 1 bit of evidence to debate anything i have posted or to support the official story,, keep on trolling guys.







[edit on 14-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
You don't even sincerely believe it yourself, it's just something you've decided to do for effect...

Luke, FatherLukeDuke, I actually do entirely, wholeheartedly, undoubtedly believe there were no planes on 9-11.

But I would never take the issue to court the way Morgan Reynolds did, because too many of our supreme justices are nefarious. Even if he wins at lower levels he’ll still lose once his case has drifted to those ‘robes’ at the highest echelon. He is a great patriot for trying.

Greetings.
The Wizard In The Woods