Remote viewing the 911 attacks

originally posted by: svetlana84
EDIT/addition the 78 mile range (according to wiki) would be enough as well for the route chesakega bay to the pentagon. Puzzles pieces falling into place.

The deepest part of the bay is Annapolis at 174 feet deep. You really think someone could sneak a sub in there, without anyone noticing, then fire a missile, which has a significant launch signature, and not one person noticed it?

a reply to: Zaphod58

Good point, which i did not consider.
Subs is not really my expertise, unless we talk sandwiches :-)

So lets work in reverse here:
What would be the nearest submarine accessible point to the pentagon?
In front of Atlantic city?

How far is the launch signature visible?
And or detectable by whatever tech is used for detecting it?

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: svetlana84
EDIT/addition the 78 mile range (according to wiki) would be enough as well for the route chesakega bay to the pentagon. Puzzles pieces falling into place.

The deepest part of the bay is Annapolis at 174 feet deep. You really think someone could sneak a sub in there, without anyone noticing, then fire a missile, which has a significant launch signature, and not one person noticed it?

The Popeye Turbo has a range of 1,500 km. And it's this variant that experts believe has been adopted for submarine launch.

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: svetlana84
EDIT/addition the 78 mile range (according to wiki) would be enough as well for the route chesakega bay to the pentagon. Puzzles pieces falling into place.

The deepest part of the bay is Annapolis at 174 feet deep. You really think someone could sneak a sub in there, without anyone noticing, then fire a missile, which has a significant launch signature, and not one person noticed it?

The Popeye Turbo has a range of 1,500 km. And it's this variant that experts believe has been adopted for submarine launch.

They could hit it from the Atlantic if they had to. Or go in closer through the bay. Look at the map and distances.

a reply to: svetlana84

How far is the launch signature visible? And or detectable by whatever tech is used for detecting it?

How about using your eyes ?

Remember the waters around there have a lot of boat traffic.

Too bad the RV'ers didn't see an air liner because that's what eye witnesses saw.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: svetlana84
Fascinating!

I have not seen the whole video yet.
But up to minute 30 the guy is spot on:

- he sees skyscrapers
- clouds of debris and dust in an city environment

Just like millions of other people who saw it on tv.... the same as the people making up this "rv"!

- military type guys launching a missile type towards buildings

Well, they got that wrong, as there was no missile launched!

How do you know ?

Are you a remote viewer ????!!!

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I've read some controlled RV sessions that seem to prove it exists. As a psychology major, I have a good sense of how to set up a controlled experiment. So that is where I stand. I take remove viewing seriously.

So do all the worlds governments and many corporations.

Funny Sam and Bruce do not realize that!

a reply to: Moresby

a reply to: Doctor Smith

There are some fairly significant issues with launching from the Atlantic. Putting aside SOSUS, the missile would then have to fly past the radars on the east coast designed to watch for incoming aircraft and missiles, the ATC radars om the area, over populated areas without anyone looking up, and look with like a commercial aircraft to fool the witnesses at the Pentagon.

a reply to: svetlana84

Visually it would be pretty easy to hide. The Atlantic is home to SOSUS however. It was originally set up to detect Soviet subs coming into the Atlantic near Greenland and Iceland, and covers most of the Atlantic. A missile being launched has a fairly unique acoustic signature and would light SOSUS up like a Christmas tree. It can also be detected a long way underwater.

originally posted by: Doctor Smith

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: svetlana84
EDIT/addition the 78 mile range (according to wiki) would be enough as well for the route chesakega bay to the pentagon. Puzzles pieces falling into place.

The deepest part of the bay is Annapolis at 174 feet deep. You really think someone could sneak a sub in there, without anyone noticing, then fire a missile, which has a significant launch signature, and not one person noticed it?

The Popeye Turbo has a range of 1,500 km. And it's this variant that experts believe has been adopted for submarine launch.

They could hit it from the Atlantic if they had to. Or go in closer through the bay. Look at the map and distances.

Exactly. No one would see the launch. And they fly below radar. Although the turbo can carry a nuclear payload. The standard is a penetrator. Ideal to create the damage we see in the Pentagon.

a reply to: Moresby

Flying below radar only works until you're over the horizon. With all the radars around the area they'd pop up over the g horizon pretty quick as there is no terrain to hide them. And then there's the whole populated area problem. Not to mention SOSUS.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: svetlana84

Visually it would be pretty easy to hide. The Atlantic is home to SOSUS however. It was originally set up to detect Soviet subs coming into the Atlantic near Greenland and Iceland, and covers most of the Atlantic. A missile being launched has a fairly unique acoustic signature and would light SOSUS up like a Christmas tree. It can also be detected a long way underwater.

[SNIP] Why would a US operation care about US defenses? And there were ongoing war games to account for any one who was outside the loop.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Moresby

Flying below radar only works until you're over the horizon. With all the radars around the area they'd pop up over the g horizon pretty quick as there is no terrain to hide them. And then there's the whole populated area problem. Not to mention SOSUS.

I'm only referring to civilian radar. Which is all they needed to worry about. They would be unlikely to spot it.

a reply to: Moresby

Civilian radar works exactly the same way as military radar. But there are military radars in the DC area designed to look for incoming threats that would see it. Several of the civilian radars would have seen it too, including the radar at National, right next to the Pentagon.

a reply to: Moresby

So how are you going to keep anyone from simply looking up and seeing the missile fly by. They don't fire missiles over populated cities.

And you just added everyone at SOSUS to the conspiracy, because they'd be told of a launch beforehand to keep them from alerting higher. Unless you're going to claim NORAD and the missile warning centers were in on it too.

Scientology & CIA: Remote Viewing Timeline

I urge all of you to come to your own conclusions after viewing the contents of that link.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Moresby

So how are you going to keep anyone from simply looking up and seeing the missile fly by. They don't fire missiles over populated cities. And you want to talk clueless, you have no idea how radar works, or a number of other things here except what Google told you, do you. And you just added everyone at SOSUS to the conspiracy, because they'd be told of a launch beforehand to keep them from alerting higher. Unless you're going to claim NORAD and the missile warning centers were in on it too.

As you may recall, the war games placed so many false targets on radar that it actually confused certain civilian air traffic controllers. That's part of the official record. As for NORAD, they acted very strangely on 9/11, leading to the suggestion that they had been given a stand down order. And there are statements made by Cheney which some have interpreted as referring to such an order.

I know you're very excited to show off the new acronym you learned today (SOSUS), but you might have done a refresher on the events of 9/11 while you were at it.

Anyway, you're welcome to continue to make your snide comments. Personally, I'm more interested in dealing with the RV info, than debating with debunkers. I'm sure there are others who are happy to fill you evening with such conversations. I will no longer be one of them.

SOSUS, by the way, is an out-dated problematic system that's extremely difficult to upgrade. And, since the RVers are suggesting a US led operation, completely irrelevant.

Screw it. As usual there's no point.

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: svetlana84

Visually it would be pretty easy to hide. The Atlantic is home to SOSUS however. It was originally set up to detect Soviet subs coming into the Atlantic near Greenland and Iceland, and covers most of the Atlantic. A missile being launched has a fairly unique acoustic signature and would light SOSUS up like a Christmas tree. It can also be detected a long way underwater.

You're a bit clueless aren't you. Why would a US operation care about US defenses? And there were ongoing war games to account for any one who was outside the loop.

Because the conspirators don't want thousands of personnel in on the conspiracy. Zaphod makes valid points regarding radar and hydrophone detection of submarine launched missiles and you have no response-- maybe because you have no knowledge of the technologies involved.
The RV stuff sometimes fails, like it did here with missiles and demolitions. These are the same old theories being regurgitated in a new wrapper. Do you think that claiming RV "seeing" missiles and demolitions will make it so?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

IRREFUTABLE REMOTE VIEWING PROOF

Even though the research project was met with early success, the CIA would regularly send independent analysts to test the remote viewing team. After the declassification of the program, during a presentation at the Arlington Institute, Hal Puthoff remarked that, “The CIA was not happy seeing us achieve good results. Their hope was to prove that the research the Russians were doing was simply nonsense. So every time we got excited about a good result the CIA would get more depressed.”

In one instance, a validation target was chosen by a figurehead at the CIA, and he opted to see whether or not the remote viewing team would be able to accurately describe his friend’s vacation cabin in West Virginia. To ensure no collusion could occur within the research project, none of the team members, including the physicists, were told the designated remote viewing target.

Pat Price and Ingo Swann were the two remote viewers who worked on the project. Ingo described that there really wasn’t much going on at the target site, simply some woods and a few cabins. However, unbeknownst to the project tasker, just over the ridge from his friend’s cabin was a top-secret NSA research facility. During the remote viewing session, Ingo quickly picked up on this hidden complex and began to describe it, figuring that it was the intended target since there wasn’t much going on near the original coordinates that were provided. Additionally, it was later discovered that the greater the effort expended to hide a person, place, or thing, the brighter it shines and stands out to a remote viewer.

When Pat Price viewed the validation target, he also picked up on this facility. Being slightly more adventurous than Ingo, he decided to move his mental perception down into the underground hallways and recite the name tags of people walking around in the building. He also stumbled across a room that contained a locked safe with documents inside, and was able to describe what was written within.

After the remote viewing team completed the project and passed the information back to the CIA, the entire intelligence apparatus of the country, including law enforcement, showed up at SRI’s doorstep demanding answers. The NSA facility did actually exist, and the remote viewing report was so accurate that the team was interrogated on the premise of national security.

www.thestateofreality.com...

The reason I posted this, I just wanted to share that remote viewing is very real and when done professionally in a controlled environment the results can be staggering.