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.
originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: wmd_2008
I'm no expert, but what you say would be true IF this were 1945. But of course it is not 1945, it is half a century later.
How much more sophisticated, do you suppose, is today's nuclear technology than it was in 1945?
originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: MALBOSIA
It's conspiracy theorists that flood it with nonsense
So if someone claims that nukes were used and there was no plane, only a hologram, that would be sufficient for you to discredit "conspiracy theorists" as a whole?
originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: MALBOSIA
So if someone claims that nukes were used and there was no plane, only a hologram, that would be sufficient for you to discredit "conspiracy theorists" as a whole?
The short answer is yes.
But the longer answer is that some people/groups come up with some 'way out there' explanation for one event in the 911 story.
But they don't have any explanation for the what, who, how for the bigger picture of their 'out there'.
We can use the nukes as an example.
There is no such thing as a silent nuke. We all know that.
But somehow through the magic of their imagination a nuke in the basement leaves no trace.
So to us who do not believe in a direct 911 conspiracy lump nukes into the nut job theories.
The same goes for hologram airplanes.
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
2,340 Vs The World.