The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

a reply to: turbonium1

They didn’t here anything?

Naudet brothers 9/11 Documentary - 1st plane hits North Tower

m.youtube.com...

Would you like to correct....

They don't hear anything, and that's why very few people even looked upward. Those who did said they heard NOTHING. Which is absolutely impossible with a real 757.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

The holographic plane idea cannot even be called a theory, it’s pure fantasy.

The images would have had 100s of projectors stationed to keep the seamless view of the jets sides, top, bottom, front, and back moving towards the towes. The countless speakers required for the sound. Then it’s impossible the holograms would hold up in daylight. If you could create a pressure difference in the air to use it as a “screen” the countless “force field” generators would have been stationed with the 100s of hologram projectors.

Imagines that created real time radar signatures?

Finally, holograms being projected would have had to be projected from the front of the towers and through the towers to create the illusion.

Then shape charges would have to be placed on the outside of the towers to blow into the interior with 1000s of gallons of fuel to create the fire ball.

You are supprized a jets going around 400 knotts and weighing 200,000 pounds penetrated the towers like a bullet? While there was jet wreckage ejected into the streets and other buildings?

I don't mean standard holographic technology available to the public. This is a far advanced, top secret projection technology on display. Unless you think they have never actually developed any sort of technologies in secret, which is provably false, we can assume they have developed advanced projection technology, which is far beyond what we have ever seen before. Same as DEW (laser) technology was. I believe that both of these technologies were used on 9/11.

We cannot go into black-op facilities and grab the evidence of it, of course. But we can certainly analyze what happened, and from that, we can determine whether or not these were real planes, or not.

They are now presenting 'current' projection technology that is advanced from standard holographic tech...

www.nature.com...

Of course, they say displays are 'tiny', at this point. But 'someday', they hope to advance the technology, for larger, sharper, displays.

If you are naive enough to believe that the military would not have developed any such technology, or that they would freely let any private company SHOW such technology, unless they have far more advanced tech at this point....then there is no point is going on further with this discussion. An idiot can see the SR-71 was developed 20 years before anyone knew it even existed. Stealth tech is another example, among many others.

We can easily see that these were NOT real, solid, physical objects that hit massive structures. Unless you really believe Wile E. Coyote ran through solid rock and left his outline, that is.

The impact zones covered several floors. Not empty office space on a floor, like is implied.

A 757 will not slice through steel and concrete floors like Wile E. Coyote slices through a rock.

Here's an actual example of what happens when a plane hits a highrise building...

en.wikipedia.org...#/media/File:Bomber_Crashed_into_Empire_State_Building_1945.jpg

Do you see the concrete floor in the impact area? It's right beside the remains of the pane that hit the building.

Concrete floors were in the towers, as well. Do you seriously believe that two planes could have sliced through concrete floors like Wile E. Coyote sliced through rock? Anyone with half a brain knows that this only happens in cartoon-land...sorry to be blunt.


The last hope for those who live in cartoon-land is to try and duplicate such amazing feats, that defy all physical reality. Rather than go 'experts say the planes sliced through the towers, and I accept the experts over you', I'd suggest you look for yourself, and understand why they CANNOT duplicate this. They go on and on about how it could happen, but NEVER actually PROVE it could happen. Same as the collapses can't be duplicated in the real world.

It is your choice to either use your own brain, and demand they replicate what occurred (both the plane impact and collapse), or hide behind their 'experts' who feed you cartoon simulation models, and convoluted scientific gobbledygook, instead of actual evidence from the debris, or actual demonstrations/replications, to support their claims.

When not ONE PIECE of steel reached temps high enough to cause collapse - which they admit, btw - then we also know that fires could not have led to the collapses.

But for some odd reason, they still concluded fires weakened steel to the point of collapse.

Why were they able to conclude that fires led to collapse when all of the steel they examined proved otherwise?

BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T COLLECT/EXAMINE ALL OF THE STEEL FROM THE COLLAPSE ZONES!!

THAT must be the steel which weakened to the point of collapse, right??

So they used computer models to 'prove' the collapses were from fire/damage. Even if they didn't show their data, it was accepted, all done.


Why would they not collect ALL the steel from the impact zones, and examine ALL that steel, to find the cause of collapse?

Because they did not WANT to find the true cause of collapse, obviously.

That way, they have an excuse - it was the OTHER steel, which we DIDN'T examine, which caused both collapses!!

Millions of people do not accept that claim, because it is pure BS.

Using your own brain is all it takes to know they are lying.

a reply to: turbonium1

You are an example of you cannot fight ignorance...

Did you totally ignore the part about jets had radar returns?

I don't mean standard holographic technology available to the public. This is a far advanced, top secret projection technology on display.

The event was over 15 years ago? Any developments in the private sector that points to this was possible technology. Or will you stick with the government has this magic thing?

You still would have to have projectors mounted on the front of the towers and through the towers to complete the illusion. And you would still need something that catches the image midair.

And you still would have to have projectors mounted from above, the bottom, the sides, and back to create the image visible from all directions.

Then you would have to have projectors with light elements powerful enough to outshine broad daylight. So each projector would need a power source to operate a light element that could out shine broad daylight.

Here's How Holograms On Stage Can Look So Real
m.youtube.com...

The most advanced stage holograms are projected on a mylar screen. In a controlled environment. In the dark. And only visitable to the front from the audience.

You can say what you want about military secrets. However, the actual physics behide the actual hardware is usually based off public research. Can you point to any current paper on holographic research that shows projecting a seamless 3D hologram traveling at 400 knots in broad thin air daylight with no type of screen was even possible over 15 years ago. Military secret hardware like nuclear reactors and aircraft propulsion usually become main stream in about 20 years with public knowledge of the physics known way before then.

It has been known how to make holograms since the 50s.

a reply to: turbonium1

You also ignored the explosives that had to be mounted on the front of the WTC with thousands of gallons of fuel to simulate the jets blowing the exterior of the tower into the interior that resulted in:

blogs.ei.columbia.edu...

The jet strikes generated seismic waves comparable to small earthquakes of magnitudes 0.9 and 0.7 respectively—probably only a small part of the total energy of the collisions. Kim believes most of it was released in fireballs and airborne shock waves.

How many tons of explosives and fuel would have hadto be smuggled and mounted on the towers to create the visible and seismic effects of jet impacts?

a reply to: turbonium1

The Empire State Building vs the WTC?

A B-25 vs a 767?

These two situations aren't entirely comparable.
www.911myths.com...

The maximum weight of a B-25 ranged from 27,100 lb to a limit of 41,800 lb, for instance (see www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/b25mitchell.html). A 767-200 ranges from 179,080 lbs (empty) to 395,000 lb (maximum takeoff load) (www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/b767), and FEMA said the 9/11 planes had “an estimated gross weight of 274000 pounds” ( www.fema.gov... ).

The maximum speed of a B-25 ranged from 275 mph to 315 mph, depending on which version it was, and as the B-25 pilot was trying to avoid the building it's unlikely he'd have reached that (cruising speed was 230 mph). On 9/11, "American Airlines Flight 11 crashes at a speed of roughly 470 mph" and "United Airlines Flight 175 crashes at a speed of about 590 mph" (channel.nationalgeographic.com...), a considerable difference when you factor in the extra mass as well.

The B-25 had a "normal total fuel load of 974 US gallons" (www.b25.net...); a proportion of this would have been used already in the plane’s flight. By comparison, "it has been estimated that both UA Flight 175 and AA Flight 11 were carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel when they impacted" (www.serendipity.li/wot/wtc_demolition_init.htm).

The end result of this was considerably less impact damage, as this photo shows.

The exterior of the Empire State Building.

The exterior of the Empire State Building is composed of 200,000 cubic feet of Indiana limestone
and granite, 10 million bricks and 730 tons of aluminum and stainless steel.

www.esbnyc.com...

The towers were wrapped in aluminum sheets. With the vertical columns having a wall/plate thickness where the jets hit of about a quarter of an inch thick? In buildings that minimized concrete usage and maximized space not available at the time of the Empire State Building’s construction.

The fires in the Empire State Building were extinguished in 40 minutes from less than 940 gallons of fuel.

How long did it take to extinguish the fires in the towers from the estimated 11,000 gallons of fuel from each jet?

Anymore false arguments?

a reply to: turbonium1

The short argument. Please point to any current company’s, individual’s, or University’s research into areal high speed large scale screen free long travel daylight holograms that can generate a radar return.

In other words, your narrative of no jets at the WTC is pure fantasy, especially for 16 years ago.

a reply to: turbonium1

I don't mean standard holographic technology available to the public. This is a far advanced, top secret projection technology on display.

Your link doesn't show anything close to what would have been needed on 911.
Never mind the 17 year difference in tech advances.

Basically you believe in magic.

I don't understand how people cannot accept that real planes were flown into the buildings.
It's brilliantly simple.

I worry about a LNG tanker being hijacked and sailed into port and detonated.

a reply to: samkent


They were real airplanes Sam, but they were NOT AA11 and UA175. Ditto, more or less, the pentagon. It was likely struck by some sort of aircraft, but it was NOT AA77.

a reply to: Salander

Then what large commercial jets went missing from those produced vs flee inventories? What large jets maintenance schedules went dark, or are not being tracked by the FAA and the manufacturer?

Then what did air traffic controllers log taking off, witness taking off, and tracked by radar? Where did the jets land.

What inventory were Your imagined planes from, what about their maintenance schedules, where were they fueled, and what air strip did they launch from?

Then what DNA was recovered at the sites.

Are the lab technicians and coroners lying? Created criminally fraudulent death records?

What jet crashed into the pentagon leaving the 90 foot wide hole in the pentagon? With a vertical gash almost, if not, two stories tall? And what did leave the wreckage of a 757, personal effects from flight 77, and the remains of the passengers and crew of flight 77 as attested to by recovery personnel, lab techs, coroners, and death records. Or what large commercial jet was witnessed by a 100 plus witnesses crashing in to the pentagon?

a reply to: Salander

How about your game. What proof do you have of any wreckage at the sites?

a reply to: neutronflux


The people who pulled this off were very much "practiced at the art of deception". Being an inside job, deception is their mantra.

False records can be generated, like the FDR files showed.

Incriminating records can be destroyed. New identities can be easily generated. The possibilities are endless, when one is on the inside.

a reply to: neutronflux

You have a superhuman amount of patience to continue to debunk these guys year after year. It's always the same stuff too. I thank you for your work.

a reply to: neutronflux

How many tons of explosives and fuel would have hadto be smuggled and mounted on the towers to create the visible and seismic effects of jet impacts?

You'd think somebody would have noticed the fleet of trucks required to bring this about...

Not to mention the number of workers required to wire the building... Somebody would have seen it, lots of somebodies, yet, nothing.

originally posted by: seagull

You'd think somebody would have noticed the fleet of trucks required to bring this about...

Not to mention the number of workers required to wire the building... Somebody would have seen it, lots of somebodies, yet, nothing.

Problem with that is your whole argument gets derailed at "You'd think", if you're discussing this with a tin foil hat. I've always loved the chemtrails thing, which is a conspiracy of all the major airlines, around the world, the military, airplane mechanics and maintenance workers, companies designing, manufacturing and selling all the chemicals and equipment they're squirting us with, a cast of tens of thousands, working the dark side: you got to hand it to them, how they keep a lid on all that chemtrail "truth" getting out. Of course, they couldn't keep a handful of Watergate burglers under wraps, or Iran-Contra, if you want to know what's going on at the CIA or NSA, buy a Washington Post. Yes, it all makes sense to me, too.

Also I have to note the irony of the thread title.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You are an example of you cannot fight ignorance...

Did you totally ignore the part about jets had radar returns?

I don't mean standard holographic technology available to the public. This is a far advanced, top secret projection technology on display.

The event was over 15 years ago? Any developments in the private sector that points to this was possible technology. Or will you stick with the government has this magic thing?

You still would have to have projectors mounted on the front of the towers and through the towers to complete the illusion. And you would still need something that catches the image midair.

And you still would have to have projectors mounted from above, the bottom, the sides, and back to create the image visible from all directions.

Then you would have to have projectors with light elements powerful enough to outshine broad daylight. So each projector would need a power source to operate a light element that could out shine broad daylight.

Here's How Holograms On Stage Can Look So Real
m.youtube.com...

The most advanced stage holograms are projected on a mylar screen. In a controlled environment. In the dark. And only visitable to the front from the audience.

You can say what you want about military secrets. However, the actual physics behide the actual hardware is usually based off public research. Can you point to any current paper on holographic research that shows projecting a seamless 3D hologram traveling at 400 knots in broad thin air daylight with no type of screen was even possible over 15 years ago. Military secret hardware like nuclear reactors and aircraft propulsion usually become main stream in about 20 years with public knowledge of the physics known way before then.

It has been known how to make holograms since the 50s.

Why would they make everything public after 20 years?

You seem to think if they have made something public after 20 years, they will make everything public after 20 years!?!?

Yikes!

a reply to: Scrutinizing

Of course, they couldn't keep a handful of Watergate burglers under wraps, or Iran-Contra, if you want to know what's going on at the CIA or NSA, buy a Washington Post.

Plus the head of the CIA couldn't even keep an affair a secret.
The POTUS couldn't get a BJ in the oval office without being ratted out.

These grandiose conspiracies require hundreds to thousands to keep quiet.
Yea right.

originally posted by: Scrutinizing

originally posted by: seagull

You'd think somebody would have noticed the fleet of trucks required to bring this about...

Not to mention the number of workers required to wire the building... Somebody would have seen it, lots of somebodies, yet, nothing.

Problem with that is your whole argument gets derailed at "You'd think", if you're discussing this with a tin foil hat. I've always loved the chemtrails thing, which is a conspiracy of all the major airlines, around the world, the military, airplane mechanics and maintenance workers, companies designing, manufacturing and selling all the chemicals and equipment they're squirting us with, a cast of tens of thousands, working the dark side: you got to hand it to them, how they keep a lid on all that chemtrail "truth" getting out. Of course, they couldn't keep a handful of Watergate burglers under wraps, or Iran-Contra, if you want to know what's going on at the CIA or NSA, buy a Washington Post. Yes, it all makes sense to me, too.

Since they have always exposed conspiracies that occur, since nobody could ever keep such secrets, for some reason...

A bigger conspiracy is not possible, since they can't keep a smaller secret, like Watergate.

That's what happens with conspiracies, they will always expose them!!

Sure, of course!


It's not about the size of conspiracies, or how many people would need to be involved, or being impossible to keep massive conspiracies a secret, yadda, yadda...

Evidence, or lack of it, is all that matters here...as it must..and nothing else means s^%*.

Nobody cares what method(s) were used on 9/11. It must be established as a NON-RANDOM event, first of all!!

We cannot know who was involved, or what method(s) used, or a motive(s), until we know - without doubt - as being a deliberate act of mass murder.

We know fire didn't cause steel to fail, from their own tests!

Anyone who thinks the actual evidence - which they collected as evidence, which they tested as evidence, which is why they collected and studied it, in THE FIRST PLACE.... is thrown away after it didn't support a fire-caused collapse, let alone two of them!!

All of us know this, of course.

Denial of this evidence will not save you from the very same consequences, we all face...if allowed to happen..


It's not an illusion. 9/11 was evil, planned and executed by evil people, and the evidence was ignored, allowing evil people to maintain power, just as before.

9/11 took a cartoon story, so idiotic, a 4th grade child would know it's a fantasy-land.

Plane smashes 85th-92nd floors of a skyscraper, which creates a giant-sized flame-ball outside the tower, as the plane sinks into the structure, causing more damage, within the tower, slicing it, and stops at about 2/3 through.

But a passport of a passenger, inside the plane, flies out of the flaming wreckage, and gently floats to the ground, far below. And it is a passport of one of the fanatical terrorists, wow!

Another building collapses, since it's near enough to the other two, which collapsed earlier on.

The towers that collapsed without a reason shot debris into the untouched building, and somehow this also caused intense fires in a THIRD hi-rise, too!

And it also collapsed, naturally!



This story has planes that sinks into buildings, without a trace of damage, while a moment later, causes a huge fireball outside of the building, which leaves an outline of the plane!

Obviously, this requires advanced technologies.

That's the main point here, no?

a reply to: turbonium1

Again. The theory behind the hardware is usually known throughout the academic world long before the hardware is developed. And in numerous cases, their is usually a consumer based product designed in parallel? Did the military have radios 20 years before civilians? Telephones? TV’s? Please state how the military is even using hologram technology that approaches the civilian stage holograms?

Again. What medium was the fantasy hologram projected onto for your 9/11 fantasy?

Again. Where were the 100’s of projectors and speakers placed to give your fantasy a snowball’s chance in hell.

Again. Where was the thousands of pounds of explosives and fuel placed to simulate the jet strikes.

What lamp would create a bright hologram in sunlight? What would it’s power source be?

The list goes on and on and on.......

And your fantasies, your pseudoscience, and impossible narratives keep piling up like.

a reply to: turbonium1


More than it required special technology, the official story requires very gullible humans to consume it and to believe it.

Curious and open-minded individuals cannot accept the story because all the facts work against the story.