The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

a reply to: Salander

You mean like the truth movement lie the towers fell at the rate of free fall through the path of greatest resistance. Still waiting for you to proved evidence from the collapse video of CD? Or audible detentions with the power to cut steel columns floor by floor for 80 to 90 stories?

Or your false narrative that debunkers do not recognize the fact the government was incompetent concerning 9/11 and tried to coverup up its incompetence.

Sorry you don’t know the difference between fabricated fantasy by charlatans of the truth movement and reality.

Do you want to address your pet fantasy that nuclear weapons brought down the towers?

originally posted by: neutronflux
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.

Look again...

The technology dubbed by researchers as Optical Trap Display allegedly manipulates unseen specks in the air to produce 3D images that are clearer and more realistic than holograms.

The process results in a three-dimensional image floating in free space. It displays with “a large colour gamut, fine detail, and low apparent speckle.”

“This platform, named the Optical Trap Display, is capable of producing image geometries that are currently unobtainable with holographic and light-field technologies, such as long-throw projections, tall sandtables and ‘wrap-around’ displays,” Smalley and his colleagues wrote in their paper.

Another advantage of Optical Trap Display over hologram is that its image points can be seen from nearly all angles. This is because no bounding aperture limits the radiation produced by the device.

...a free-space volumetric display can achieve a 360° in-plane viewing angle around every image point at any depth.

"If we make as much progress in the next four years as we made in the last, I think we will be successful making a display of useful size. Leia is on the way for real this time,” Smalley went on to say


edgylabs.com...


This is one of the technologies I'm referring to here. All you have left to believe is that this, and/or other technologies, are really 'not yet developed', as they claim...

Some interesting points from this article...

Who would actually say their precious technology is 'not yet developed'?

Someone who HAS developed it, or KNOWS it has been developed, already! Or an idiot.

From over 25 years in the high-tech medical device industry, talking about a project before it's developed, or in early stages, is rarely done, and even then, it's just for a 'puff-piece' (A promo article, with little info).

Competitors are everywhere. They'd love to hear all about your ideas, your R&D, your technologies...before they are developed, and promoted....

Not only is it helpful to know what is actually being developed by competitors...to know what competitors are even THINKING of developing can have implications.

I'm only mentioning this because I do not believe this technology, or a predecessor of it, is only in the early stages of development. Whether or not it's developed at a University, or in the private sector....matters not.


BYU is funded by the military, to develop such technologies, which is DARPA. Ergo, it makes sense they mention "tall sandtables", for example, which is 3d military mapping.


Do you think they'd reveal technology they are well-funded to develop, for the military?

That's fantasy-land.



Again, you are trying to avoid the issue. Anyone can see that this 'plane' is not a solid object. A 'ghost' plane sifts through the building, leaving no trace??!!

I suggest that you look at all the footage, frame by frame, of this 'plane', from initial 'impact', where the nose sinks in, where the wings sink in, where the entire plane has sunk into the building. See how the walls of the building are untouched, as if nothing ever hit it.

If you don't see that as utterly impossible, then you are in denial of reality.

a reply to: turbonium1

I am really sorry you cannot understand the difference between truth movement fantasy vs reality.

I asked you to provide evidence of current military units employing hologram technologies that are better than current stage production life sized holograms that utilize a Mylar screen on a dark stage?

The jets that hit the towers had radar returns.

I don’t have to look at the video. The physical evidence, radar, and eyewitness attest to large commercial jets hitting the towers. Which backs the grainy video of 2000’s vhs tape and CD recording technologies? The low def imperfect technologies of the 2000’s.

And you still have to explain:

Show where the technology you referenced could create a high speed image in broad daylight miles away from the projector. Through a city of high rise buildings. The projectors would have to be place above the highest building along the flight path. Where would that be?

How many projectors and spreakers used to create the fantasy image.

A light source that could out shine the sun, and what was the power source? Just plug the source in a 120 VAC outlet?

For the last stage, projectors would have had to be installed on and in the towers to complete the fantasy image.

Finally, charges would had to be placed on the front of the towers to blow the outer wall in.

The thousands of gallons of jet fuel and explosives that would have been placed in the towers to simulate a fireball from a jet carrying 8,000 gallons of fuel. About 25 tons of fuel. Impacts that created recorded seismic activity 25 miles away.

For the jet impact that had exit holes, the additional installation of explosives on the backside of the towers.

At least one jet had wreckage that went all the way through the tower. The wreckage ended up in the street as attested to by video, eyewitness, and physical evidence.

Is it that hard to recognize all the evidence proves large commercial jets hit the towers. The most probable and statistically likely cause was large commercial jets vs using fantasy technologies and planting tons of explosives and fuel to simulate jet impacts.

a reply to: turbonium1

The short argument. You need to explain what you see in the video that is explained by imperfect video technologies of the 2000s produceding radar returns, eyewitness accounts, seismic activity, jet impacts, fire balls, exit holes, and jet wreckage in the streets.

The last I knew, holograms don’t produce radar returns, physical explosions, seismic activity, entrance and exit holes, and jet wreckage.

All from a military that you cannot provide one current example they have hologram technologies that supersedes stage hologram technologies that need a Mylar screen and a dark environment.

a reply to: turbonium1

You don’t even have one example of a hologram Humvee to trick enemy combatants to setting off IEDs before the real Humvees show up? Not one company doing the research?

Thought about this more? A multi million dollar image that could be outed by a cheap harbor freight infrared camera? Or just noticing the thing didn’t leave tracks. Or the image didn’t make a sound with a dipolar shift as it traveled?

a reply to: turbonium1

Or let’s put it this way. Jet impacts supports the evidence.

Holograms create more questions than answers.

What screen projected the high speed image over miles at altitude. Over tall buildings.

What lamp could create the stable image in daylight.

The power source for the hologram.

Position of the projectors.

The problem of audio.

What created the radar returns.

What created the seismic activity.

The planting of charges to blow in the exterior of the tower.

The problem of planting explosives to simulate wreckage exiting the backside of the tower.

The problem of creating a fire ball equal to 25 tons of fuel hitting the tower at over 400 mph in the direction of travel.

The problem of wreckage in the streets.

As fascinating as they may be, holographic techniques project light, not dark so the image created requires a dark background or at least a background or medium that's darker than the projected image. What that means is no part of the hologram can be darker than the ambient background so if you're seeing a partially dark aircraft moving against a blue daylight sky it simply can't be a hologram. A cardboard cutout would make more sense.

I thought the whole idea of holographic 9/11 planes had been thrown out a decade or more ago.

a reply to: Pilgrum

Pretty much has, but it does reappear from time to time. Repeated appearances, however, make it no less wrong.

a reply to: samkent

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

Real planes WERE flown into the buildings... The real planes were ALLOWED to fly into the buildings.

The entire WTC complex was planned to fail that day, and it did, all of it.

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: samkent

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

Real planes WERE flown into the buildings... The real planes were ALLOWED to fly into the buildings.

The entire WTC complex was planned to fail that day, and it did, all of it.

Not according to a person’s recent endless rant in this thread:
The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: kyleplatinum


Yes, real planes were flown into the buildings. For those interested in details when available, the only problem is that the planes that hit the towers were not flight 11 and flight 175.

a reply to: neutronflux

That post does not concern me... looks like they were "ranting" to you.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: kyleplatinum


Yes, real planes were flown into the buildings. For those interested in details when available, the only problem is that the planes that hit the towers were not flight 11 and flight 175.

Another truth movement “solution” that creates more problems than the simple truth.

Then what jets hit the buildings on 9/11?

Ever going to address the problems your false narrative creates? The logic holes you cannot answer to?

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 these 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? Unlogged? Unwitnessed? And avoided any radar tracking?

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?

You probably will not address anything because it’s about narrative for the truth movement, not truth? How ironic? What can be sold?

a reply to: Salander

Let me guess? I but instead of addressing the problems created by the swapped jet fantasy, you choose to make false accusations of individuals at ATS exonerating the government concerning its 9/11 failures and incompetence?

a reply to: Salander

So, you made claims you will not back?

Yesterday would have been your attempt to change the subject by making claims about people on ATS you will not back?

Today should be where you try to change the subject by trying to introduce innuendo that has nothing to do with the video, audio, seismic, radar data, and the DNA evidence? Like skyphones where being phased out?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

I am really sorry you cannot understand the difference between truth movement fantasy vs reality.

I asked you to provide evidence of current military units employing hologram technologies that are better than current stage production life sized holograms that utilize a Mylar screen on a dark stage?

The jets that hit the towers had radar returns.

I don’t have to look at the video. The physical evidence, radar, and eyewitness attest to large commercial jets hitting the towers. Which backs the grainy video of 2000’s vhs tape and CD recording technologies? The low def imperfect technologies of the 2000’s.

And you still have to explain:

Show where the technology you referenced could create a high speed image in broad daylight miles away from the projector. Through a city of high rise buildings. The projectors would have to be place above the highest building along the flight path. Where would that be?

How many projectors and spreakers used to create the fantasy image.

A light source that could out shine the sun, and what was the power source? Just plug the source in a 120 VAC outlet?

For the last stage, projectors would have had to be installed on and in the towers to complete the fantasy image.

Finally, charges would had to be placed on the front of the towers to blow the outer wall in.

The thousands of gallons of jet fuel and explosives that would have been placed in the towers to simulate a fireball from a jet carrying 8,000 gallons of fuel. About 25 tons of fuel. Impacts that created recorded seismic activity 25 miles away.

For the jet impact that had exit holes, the additional installation of explosives on the backside of the towers.

At least one jet had wreckage that went all the way through the tower. The wreckage ended up in the street as attested to by video, eyewitness, and physical evidence.

Is it that hard to recognize all the evidence proves large commercial jets hit the towers. The most probable and statistically likely cause was large commercial jets vs using fantasy technologies and planting tons of explosives and fuel to simulate jet impacts.

No evidence exists of planes.

In fact, most of the debris couldn't be identified at all - it's hard to identify dust particles as an object, or person, or whatever else it might have been, or parts of it, anyway....

And then you suggest they found parts of the 'planes' in the debris, while nobody ever mentioned this 'evidence' before, since they have only recently found all of that evidence, or that they have recently identified so-called 'plane parts', while their official investigation, at that time, had found no evidence of any plane...?

No evidence of fires causing steel to fail, right?

Right. They found no evidence of fires to cause any failure in any steel, and nothing matters but the actual evidence, right?

Apparently you can ignore all of the evidence if it doesn't fit your story, so here's another reminder to you that it doesn't matter how long you ignore it, or avoid it, we know the truth, and it is NOT found in the government story, as we know.

The evidence is clearly steel, which they know it was, by collecting all the steel as evidence. And studied the steel, as evidence.

Everyone here must be aware of this, or should be aware, and not fear the truth, anymore... stand up for yourself, for your families, for that is who matters here. Not the puppets who all pretend to be our government, our leaders, elected by the people, to support the people. The only problem is when people think they need to have someone above the people as a leader, who will support them, once in power, unlike their previous leaders, who were all dishonest, and total liars.

Of course! We had a bad government in power, that's all. We can elect a good government, now, and so let's go out and vote!!

All of our governments have taxed everyone who 'elected' them, who didn't vote because it will support all the same crooks as before, only a label change, etc.

Who would think that our own wages - the money earned by our labor - will stand up all these years, and would actually flourish?

Everyone seems to think we first allowed this tax to pay for the Great War - it was the war to end all wars, our whole planet was at war, and nobody even knew why they had to ship overseas and kill people they don't even know, for no reason, except they are told to kill them by their 'leaders', who say these people are enemies, of all the people here, including you. Would anyone of you simply stand by, and allow our enemy to win the war, going on in Europe? Are you aware that they want to rule Europe, and eventually plan to rule over the entire planet? All of them are evil, so we must stop them before they rule over all of Europe, so now we will fight in the name of freedom, for all people around the world, to stop the fascists, and communists, who hate freedom, of course!


All of the people willingly paid some of their own earnings, for supporting a family, and perhaps will bring about a more comfortable life for everyone, some day. As they earned more from working more, and this was good for people, who worked hard for their money.

Nothing we earn today is a tax for a war, which was also a grotesque lie, to begin with.

Taxing our earnings has never, ever, been intended to be for the benefit of people. It's outright theft, cleverly termed an 'income tax'.


Off-topic, so back to the issue now....

Avoiding the problem doesn't make it go away, if you still don't get the main point. Perhaps you simply hope that ignoring it might work out, some day.


There is no solid object that can dissolve itself into a building, without ever leaving behind a trace of actually entering the very same building!

It is completely absurd.

That is why we know it cannot be a real plane, right?

It is absolutely impossible. It cannot be duplicated in any way, with any objects, and never will be duplicated. Solid objects don't dissolve into solid walls, without a trace of it's entry.


That's the first point to understand here.

a reply to: turbonium1

Baby steps, let’s work with just this first.

In fact, most of the debris couldn't be identified at all - it's hard to identify dust particles as an object, or person, or whatever else it might have been, or parts of it, anyway....

So you are saying jet engines, identified personal effects, jet wreckage documented in the street after the impacts, and jet wreckage on top of buildings were not found?

Now your main undelying problem.
Either you remain willfully ignorant, or purposefully push false narratives. Why should I find anything you post as credibil? Especially when you been repeatedly debunked over and over again.

Especially when individuals in the threads you are part of, or can read through have posted pictures of jet wreckage from 9/11?

Especially when you post total falsehoods such as:

n fact, most of the debris couldn't be identified at all - it's hard to identify dust particles as an object, or person, or whatever else it might have been, or parts of it, anyway....

By the why, on WTC victim identification.
I never said ID from dust.......
How are bone fragments dust?
Any more false narratives by you?

Honor and memory: Identifying remains of 9/11 victims won’t cease


Mr. Johnson was the 1,642nd person to be identified out of the 2,753 killed at Ground Zero. The medical examiner’s office has pored through 22,000 remains to make the identifications it has so far. The remains are kept in a 2,500-square-foot repository — located “between the two footprints of the Twin Towers,” the medical examiner’s office says — at the 9/​11 Memorial & Museum. Family members may visit a private reflection room there.

Scientists are way past the point of identifying victims through fingerprints and dental records. Now, according to the Times, they’re working with bone fragments that don’t easily yield DNA clues. The office had made multiple attempts over the years to identify the remains now known to be Mr. Johnson’s, succeeding only when new technology allowed a better DNA extraction process and scientists multiplied the genetic material to create a profile that was matched to his toothbrush and his parents.

Wreckage flight 175

United Airlines Flight 175
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Piece of fuselage on the roof of 5 WTC.

Airplane engine parts from Flight 175

How far do you got to be in the rabbit hole to ignore jet engines and fuselage parts were recovered?

Remember, no rants, just baby steps? What single item do you want to cover next?

a reply to: turbonium1

More on very real and very documented aircraft wreckage at the WTC.

9/11 Aircraft Parts and Contents Recovered in NYC

sites.google.com...

Why should I find any credibility in the hologram fantasy? Because you push false narratives concerning grainy low def video technology from the early 2000’s? Because you completely ignore the physical evidence, eyewitnesses, and push technologies impossible for the 2000’s.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Baby steps, let’s work with just this first.

In fact, most of the debris couldn't be identified at all - it's hard to identify dust particles as an object, or person, or whatever else it might have been, or parts of it, anyway....

So you are saying jet engines, identified personal effects, jet wreckage documented in the street after the impacts, and jet wreckage on top of buildings were not found?

Now your main undelying problem.
Either you remain willfully ignorant, or purposefully push false narratives. Why should I find anything you post as credibil? Especially when you been repeatedly debunked over and over again.

Especially when individuals in the threads you are part of, or can read through have posted pictures of jet wreckage from 9/11?

Especially when you post total falsehoods such as:

n fact, most of the debris couldn't be identified at all - it's hard to identify dust particles as an object, or person, or whatever else it might have been, or parts of it, anyway....

By the why, on WTC victim identification.
I never said ID from dust.......
How are bone fragments dust?
Any more false narratives by you?

Honor and memory: Identifying remains of 9/11 victims won’t cease


Mr. Johnson was the 1,642nd person to be identified out of the 2,753 killed at Ground Zero. The medical examiner’s office has pored through 22,000 remains to make the identifications it has so far. The remains are kept in a 2,500-square-foot repository — located “between the two footprints of the Twin Towers,” the medical examiner’s office says — at the 9/​11 Memorial & Museum. Family members may visit a private reflection room there.

Scientists are way past the point of identifying victims through fingerprints and dental records. Now, according to the Times, they’re working with bone fragments that don’t easily yield DNA clues. The office had made multiple attempts over the years to identify the remains now known to be Mr. Johnson’s, succeeding only when new technology allowed a better DNA extraction process and scientists multiplied the genetic material to create a profile that was matched to his toothbrush and his parents.

Wreckage flight 175

United Airlines Flight 175
en.m.wikipedia.org...

Piece of fuselage on the roof of 5 WTC.

Airplane engine parts from Flight 175

How far do you got to be in the rabbit hole to ignore jet engines and fuselage parts were recovered?

Remember, no rants, just baby steps? What single item do you want to cover next?

No. They only claimed to find evidence of the planes. Just like they claimed to find a hijacker's passport, and claimed to find evidence in the trunk of a rental car, of a hijacker, and claimed to find evidence of a plane at Shanksville, and claimed to find evidence of a plane at the Pentagon....


Meanwhile, the actual evidence is collected, and studied, and when it didn't support their story, all the actual evidence was ignored, and they used bs computer models to support their fantasy.


And you still would believe that they have found evidence of planes, because....?


The actual footage, taken from various angles, from various sources, shows what happened here. As it happened.

I don't consider them credible in what they claim to have found at the scene. Because they have already PROVEN they are not the least bit credible. They deliberately ignored all of the ACTUAL evidence - not because the evidence wasn't collected, because it was. Not because they didn't study that evidence, because they did.

They ignored the evidence because it showed that fires didn't cause initial collapses of the towers.

If they were credible, they would have sought out the true cause of collapse. Isn't that the whole idea of an investigation?

I'm disgusted that some of you don't care about this treacherous behavior. Everybody should see this as a crime. A cover up. It is beyond dispute what is going on here.


But you'll merrily go along, believing they have only good intentions here.

Sad.