9/11 ABL - Smoking Gun - This Is It

Originally posted by TheBorg
Ok, I'll play along for a few. Lets say that you're right; that it is in fact an IR laser being used. The question has been posed several times already, and perhaps I've missed the answer, or you just felt it unnecessary to provide one: How do you know that there is an IR filter on while the filming is going on? The green in the top corner could be from anything. Why does it have to be from an IR filter?

UUUUUGGHHHH!!!! DON'T YOU PEOPLE READ?!?!?!!??!

This is getting lame explaining this stuff when I posted links about it ages ago!!!!!

LISTEN. ALL cameras come with an ICF. It's a filter that BLOCKS INFRARED LIGHTS. When a camera is set to "NightShot" or any type of "Night Assist", it takes the ICF out of the camera, and that allows ALL type of lights into the camera. That is bad.

Some ICF's that come on cameras don't block as much IR as others. There for, in some cameras you can see infrared lights from devices like wireless remote controls. When an ICF is completly out of a camera, the entire picture will turn white, unless you change the shutter speed and other settings, then you will get a pure green infrared night vision. You can turn ALL cameras into night vision cameras, simply by removing their ICF. ONCE AGAIN, SOME CAMERAS HAVE DIFFERENT STRENGTH ICF'S.

Originally posted by TheBorg
I thought it was much further away than that. It's actually within approximately 600 ft of the site. My apologies.

It wouldn't be the first time you were wrong on this thread.

Originally posted by TheBorg
And that's our main point of contention I'm afraid. You've failed to prove to me that this is in fact an IR piece of film. You base everything you see off of a green tint in the upper corner of the picture, which could have been there as a result of accidentally leaving a magnet next to it for a bit too long overnight once.

Wrong, a magnet wouldn't effect a camera lens.

It's simple. It's a known fact that cameras can pick up infrared lights, that human eyes can't. I already showed you proof of that...and you ignored it.
en.wikipedia.org...

This following picture was taken with a NORMAL camera. It can see the infrared that our eyes can't.
upload.wikimedia.org...

The camera in the video was doing the SAME THING. Except, it was a different type of infrared wavelength.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that.....

Originally posted by TheBorg
My TV, for instance, has a big yellow spot in the upper right corner because I left one of my stereo speakers there for a few years, not knowing what it was doing to it.

Stereo speakers have MAGNETS in them. When you put a magnet next to a CRT television, you get problems. Thats why CRT computer monitors have a "degauss" function.

READ THESE LINKS PLEASE:
www.madsci.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

The difference between you and I, is that I know how everything in this entire universe works.

Originally posted by TheBorg
There are other explanations for this, my friend. Please try to remain open-minded. What would you have said had there not been a green tint in the video?

I'm sick and tired of you close minded people telling me to be open-minded. If I wasn't open minded then how the hell did I become a "truther"????? If I wasn't open minded, I would believe the governments every word like most of you people do.

....continue.....

Originally posted by ANOK
Show me proof there was a C-130 over the pentagon and I'll believe the story.

No problem now thanks to this poster go to video 1 fast forward to 36 minutes into the clip (I do not want you to claim you see nothing the interview starts at about 37)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by TheBorg
I'm seeking the truth, just as everyone here is. When I see something that looks suspicious, I'm going to go looking for an answer. If that makes you feel queasy, perhaps it's you that should reconsider you're tenure here.

You aren't searching the truth, you are searching for something your brain can comprehend, which isn't much.

Originally posted by TheBorg
Now, just so everyone knows, I'm not suggesting that you should leave. I think you may be onto something, but I'm going to go through whatever I have to to prove this right or wrong. If my constantly questioning you're apparent omniscience upsets you, then I humbly apologize. I'm just doing what's required to rout out the truth. Please, try to have some decorum.

The only thing that upsets me is when people ask questions that have already been answered, or they could answer themselves, or when they ask the most stupid incomplete questions in the world. I'm supposed to be talking to smart people in this forum, but I come across lots of people who don't research, or even add 2+2. Some of the questions and replies on this thread are so not thought out that I feel personally that I'm talking to a bunch of pranksters perpously trying to pretend to be idiots.

Originally posted by TheBorg
You do know that you're talking about a busy NYC morning, just like any other, correct?

Correct.

Originally posted by TheBorg
Why would it be out of the ordinary for there to be LOTS of airplanes in the area at the time of the attacks?

No one said it would be out of the ordinary, actually that was just YOU jumping to conclusions.

Originally posted by TheBorg
They'd be coming in for landings. There's nothing odd about the presence of these planes at the time that this film was taken.

No one said anything about that, EVER. It's perfectly plausible all the aircraft in the air were normal aircraft. I still don't see your point, and you are making no sense what so ever. What does that have anything to do with the fact that you need to debunk each aircraft, and prove to me each one is NOT military.

Originally posted by TheBorg
Besides, you started by saying that that WAS the plane, and then backed out when it was shown that that couldn't possibly have been the one.

So, with that in mind, and the number of airplanes in NYC skies that fateful morning, you left yourself a wide open opportunity to prevent any further debunking of your theory by being able to pick any of the airplanes in the area. This is often a tactic used by people with no argument left. They try to distract by pointing at other things that could be the culprit, while they make a hasty retreat.

Man, you just don't get it, and its obvious you never will. My THEORY is that the laser dot thats on the building, came from a flying aircraft. That's it. I never said exactly what aircraft, EVER. I just merely linked the white jet that was flying over the Pentagon with it, as a CLUE, not as a FACT. The white jet in the laser video is just another CLUE, the white jet in the 3rd video is another CLUE. You must look at ALL THE CLUES.

"people with no argument left" LMAO!!!! The only people with no arguments left, are the ones that run crying when I show how many aircraft they have to debunk before this theory is dead.

Originally posted by TheBorg
Now, just so you know, I mean no offense by this, as it's simply an observation on the tactics used in this debate, which I have read very thoroughly by the way. It's disturbing to me that you would resort to such measures as this, as well as insulting other member's equally poignant theories, when you feel as if your view is being threatened.

Your quote above is why people get insulted. You jump to conclusions, don't know what your talking about, and you insult me by telling me im using "tactics" to help keep my theory alive.

When the truth is, you are giving up. My theory is that a a laser came from a jet. Now that you know how many jets, and aircraft, were in the sky, you are getting SCARED. Run to mommy. FEAR is the main reason nobody wants to believe the government did 911.

Originally posted by TheBorg
Might I recommend some moderation in your ATS diet? Take some time off, like a day or so, to relax, and refresh yourself. I think you can be a wonderful member here, but you've got to be able to handle yourself with a modest amount of decorum when hit with resounding ridicule. I've had my fair share, and it was hard to work through, but I did it. And so can you. One step at a time.

None of my theories see "ridicule" they only see blind ignorant quick to the chase rants. Not one person has ever researched my threads before they posted. ALL of the people just post from their uneducated mind, without first thinking. You see, if everyone knew how camera's work, I wouldn't even have to explain to you people how the camera saw the IR laser dot. IF all of you people knew how laser designators work, I wouldn't have to explain why the laser dot is moving. If all of you knew how twisted the government is, I wouldn't even be here.

Originally posted by TheBorg
And you, my friend, will have to provide more proof than a mere dot. What you've provided doesn't prove anything other than there's yet another anomaly at the site of the worst terrorist attack in American history. Tell me something that's NOT anomalous about it?

So you admit to the 1000000's of anomalous things with 911? I hope you would admit to the 100000000's of coincidences, and the 100's of classified video footage the government suppresses from us, and the 10000000000's of information they withhold. Oh there are a lot of things that should have instantly told people "inside job", but no, you people FEAR that.

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 27-8-2007 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Your entire theory was proven impossible by Speakeasy on page 6.

Actually no, he supported my theory by showing just how far this "bird" or "debris" traveled.



My theory is that the object is a laser. Laser can be pointed anywhere, at anything and can travel at the speed of light. If I was holding a hand held laser, I can point it at one side of New York, to the other side of New York, in less than a second. Actually I don't have a single clue what he was trying to prove, as a LASER is the only thing that CAN move from building to building with little to no force at all. A "bird" or "debris" though, THAT is what can't move from building to building.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
You repeatedly call the object a 'laser' with absolutely NO PROOF.

I have proven the object is only visible in the INFRARED SPECTRUM. Which pretty much narrows it down to a laser, or infrared light.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Your entire theory relies on the camera being over 8 years old, modified with a special IR lens, and on night mode, however you can't provide one example of a still shot or video that is even close.

Actually no, my entire theory relies on the FACT that some cameras see infrared lights better than others. No modified lens, no night mode, no nothing. I never said the camera absolutely needs the "night vision" I never said it needs to be "special" or "modified", although I am saying that it would help see the infrared object.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
You've gone from being 100% positive about the model of the plane and the type of weapon, to suggesting boats may now be involved.

Actually, I was never 100% positive. STOP LYING. My theory still stands, the laser object in the video is from a moving vehicle. Either a jet, or helicopter, or boat, or car, or anything. My THEORY, is based on the laser dot object in the video, nothing more.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Anytime someone mentions a point that doesn't jive with your theory, you either ignore it, or become childish and insulting. Stop telling people to do their research, THAT'S WHY THEY ARE HERE.

Actually, nobody has ever mentions "a point that doesn't jive with my theory". The only thing anyone has mentioned is "a point that doesn't jive with THE FACTS OF LIFE".

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Let's see if you can ignore this one: How can the laser be 12 feet tall? Lasers don't have divergence like this. A 12 foot tall laser dot at that distance would have to come from a HUGE laser. The picture of the ABL lens is big, but not even close to 12 feet.

LOL!!!!!!! That's your only question? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Seriously do this experiment, get a hand held laser and turn it on. Place it somewhere so that it is pointing very far away, and leave it there. Run to that place it is pointing, and then tell me how big the laser dot is. I guarantee you that the farther away the laser dot is, the bigger it is. Although lasers are supposed to be perfectly straight lines, over a distance, they DO cone out, and get bigger. Try it.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Don't get me wrong, I don't think for one second that I can change your mind.

The only way you can change my mind, is if you explain that "laser dot" in the video I provided is something else. So far there is only 2 explanations for the laser dot, and no matter what, its still an infrared light source.

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
It's just hard to sit here and watch you disrespect people over and over while presenting your half-baked opinions as facts.

First, you must know what is FACT and what is not, before you pretend to know WTF you are talking about..


Learn what infrared lights are.

Learn what a ICF does.

Learn what the different types of lasers are.

Learn the different types of laser designators.

Learn the different types of tracking algorithms.

Learn the different types of aircraft in this world.

Learn how birds fly.

Learn how debris fall.

Learn how camera's can see infrared and humans can't.

Learn how everything works.... THEN COME AND DEBUNK ME.

[edit on 27-8-2007 by 11 11]


Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory : Please Review This Link

[edit on 27-8-2007 by elevatedone]

[edit on 27-8-2007 by 11 11]

reply to post by 11 11


Well obviously a bird can be a lot closer to the camera than it looks. Aside from the size of an object you can't really tell where it is in a view of a 3D area on a screen.

reply to post by 11 11


Smoking gun, indeed.

Is rumfeld actually trying to incenuate that terrorist forces shot down the plane that supposedly crashed flight in penn? This was the FIRST I had heard that it was shot down, and no less that it was from the horses mouth.

Funny thing that I didnt heard his little speech until 3 years after, but nevertheless, this shouldn't passed unnoticed unless your heart is set on the most convenient explainations to obvious questions.

None if it matter, anyway, because we've already lost our country.

You want terrorists? They are having a grand ol' time laughing in your face.

-Shadow

[edit on 27-8-2007 by Knightshadowz]

[edit on 27-8-2007 by Knightshadowz]

Originally posted by apex
Well obviously a bird can be a lot closer to the camera than it looks. Aside from the size of an object you can't really tell where it is in a view of a 3D area on a screen.

Well if you watch the video closely, the "bird" comes from behind the WTC, on the left side. Don't forget about the "entrance" of this object.

Originally posted by gen.disaray
SMOKING GUN - THIS AIN'T IT !
This isn't even a a pop gun...So sorry to say that this is the same old , same old , same old .If you want the truth , find the program -
""The 911 Conspiracies - Fact or Fiction "" This is the only " Truth " there is . Here's ways to find it. Plus i'll tryto embed it ..

I didn't even finish the first 45 minutes of it before I got disgusted. If you think THAT is truth, then you are sleeping and dreaming.

That whole first part of the movie was talking about "Loose Change". Which makes me mad...

Loose Change was released in 2005. I have been researching 911 since 2001. The second the government found "a passport from the hijacker of the jet at ground zero", a flag in my mind said "YEAH RIGHT". Ever since I did background check on it, I have uncovered more and more LIES!

Go ahead, find out what happened to the "black boxs" from the jets that hit the WTC's. $10000 says you only get more questions when you search for that.


Loose Change was created by a bunch of people that didn't research as much as they "produced". When I watched Loose Change for the first time, I was mad at how much they missed, and how much the messed up. Actually, I was mad that they didn't even say anything I didn't already know for 3 years.

I'm just happy Loose Change got more people to look at 911 again, instead of staying asleep and take the Official conspiracy and live with it.


[edit on 27-8-2007 by 11 11]

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by apex
Well obviously a bird can be a lot closer to the camera than it looks. Aside from the size of an object you can't really tell where it is in a view of a 3D area on a screen.

Well if you watch the video closely, the "bird" comes from behind the WTC, on the left side. Don't forget about the "entrance" of this object.

Well The first one may be something, maybe a laser if it was bright enough it would look larger on this image than it actually was, but it may be something from WTC 1. The second bit, after the hit has no need to be there if it is a laser (in fact it could be switched off before the aircraft impact if it's there for guidance), and is likely new debris, or a bird that was closer and due to the angle was in shadow before.

Originally posted by 11 11

We all know, when you aim a gun's sights, you aim above the target so the barrel of the gun is pointed at the target. Maybe the "tracking laser" was aimed at the wing tip of the jet, so that the actual body of the jet would get hit by the laser?



[edit on 21-8-2007 by 11 11]

This wouldn't be neccessary when you consider laser is used as a targeting beam itself and the bullet goes where the red dot is reflecting off the intended target

Originally posted by 11 11


I'm just happy Loose Change got more people to look at 911 again, instead of staying asleep and take the Official conspiracy and live with it.


[edit on 27-8-2007 by 11 11]

Got to agree with that, Loose Change as flawed as much of it is DID inspire many of us to re-examine those first impressions we had that fateful day. My own instant impression as I saw the second plane hit live on TV was "Oh man this was NO accident" as they were reporting the first hit as perhaps pilot error. Then when they came crashing down in what seemd like an upside down inside out CD I thought that naturally who ever did this insured the dramatic statement they wanted to make with explosives finishing the job.

After that I began connecting the dots of what was the official report but but made no sense of the connections they made and only made me MORE suspicious. I was impressed with the video from an artistic standpoint and that they didn't have much experience making something like that. From a substantive aspect, as you know it was embellished and was misleading in areas I can't say for sure intentional or not but IT did offer a template for research and confirmed my own doubts that I was not alone that others were out there that felt as I did that day.

Many many others

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Let's see if you can ignore this one: How can the laser be 12 feet tall? Lasers don't have divergence like this. A 12 foot tall laser dot at that distance would have to come from a HUGE laser. The picture of the ABL lens is big, but not even close to 12 feet.

LOL!!!!!!! That's your only question? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Seriously do this experiment, get a hand held laser and turn it on. Place it somewhere so that it is pointing very far away, and leave it there. Run to that place it is pointing, and then tell me how big the laser dot is. I guarantee you that the farther away the laser dot is, the bigger it is. Although lasers are supposed to be perfectly straight lines, over a distance, they DO cone out, and get bigger. Try it.

Yep got to agree with this aspect too, it does expand it's diameter 100 yards it is substantially larger then the ball point pen size diameter it starts out from. Have you considered however the postulate of lensflare?

as to the infrared or what you say the cam is picking up

OK 11 11,
I noticed once again you have ignored my posts.
This "1 story" object is not a laser. Targeting laser do not paint object anywhere near that large. It would be ineffective if it did. Targeting lasers work on a small precise beam. If you don't believe me, look it up yourself.

If I look it up, you won't believe me anyway.

I find your attitude absurd. You're condescending and insulting to many people simply asking questions.

The 12 foot laser beam is just your imagination.

Just to help prove against the whole giant laser theory. In the last few years, there have been a number of reports of green lasers being pointed at planes in pilots cabins. The beams were ground based and entered the windshield of the planes and bounced around the cabin. At great distance, the beam was still small and this wasn't even a military grade laser. Why would a substantially higher powered laser expand to 12 feet like that??? Well it wouldn't. SORRY.

Originally posted by jfj123
OK 11 11,
I noticed once again you have ignored my posts.

Actually, this is MY thread and I have replied to every single post in it. I have also read every single post in this thread, unlike you. If you would kindly point out the post that I supposedly ignored, maybe that will make me answer it AGAIN, so that YOU can ignore it, AGAIN.

Originally posted by jfj123
This "1 story" object is not a laser.

Then what is it? Since you seem to know, tell me.

Originally posted by jfj123
Targeting laser do not paint object anywhere near that large. It would be ineffective if it did. Targeting lasers work on a small precise beam. If you don't believe me, look it up yourself.

The "laser dot" that you see on the building is not 12 feet. Actually 12 feet was just a wild guess of the size that we see. You should have measured it yourself.

You know, since we see a reflection off of the building, we are not looking directly at the laser dot. The actual size of the laser dot on the building could be, maybe, an inch. But since the light bounces off the building, and travels a few MILES before it enters the camera, there is a LOT of room for the laser to expand before it reaches the camera.

We are looking at a reflection that is miles away, hence why the light would reflect and look so big, no matter what size.

Originally posted by jfj123
I find your attitude absurd. You're condescending and insulting to many people simply asking questions.

Because I don't debate anything unless it has an element of truth in it. You people are walking all over the truth with false information, so you might see how I get uncomfortable. The truth is, there IS a laser on the building. The part that I don't know about, is the rest of 911, just like millions of others.

Originally posted by jfj123
The 12 foot laser beam is just your imagination.

Just mine?? So you mean the 1000's of other people that have seen the laser video, including you, are all in my imagination? You do know, I am not the only one to notice this laser right?

Originally posted by jfj123
Just to help prove against the whole giant laser theory. In the last few years, there have been a number of reports of green lasers being pointed at planes in pilots cabins. The beams were ground based and entered the windshield of the planes and bounced around the cabin. At great distance, the beam was still small and this wasn't even a military grade laser. Why would a substantially higher powered laser expand to 12 feet like that??? Well it wouldn't. SORRY.

See now you are guessing. The size of the laser all depends on the type of lenses are used..

www.lasertoolsco.com...

Heck with the right lenses you can make shapes with lasers! They have "holography" tips for those hand held lasers, and they make pictures with one laser beam.



[edit on 27-8-2007 by 11 11]

The "laser dot" that you see on the building is not 12 feet. Actually 12 feet was just a wild guess of the size that we see. You should have measured it yourself.

First, you said it was one story and that you had already done the calculations. 1 story is approximately 12 ft. I don't need to measure it because you said you did and I tend to agree that it looks to be one story. My point is a targeting laser is not 12 ft or 1 STORY.

Originally posted by jfj123
The 12 foot laser beam is just your imagination.


Just mine?? So you mean the 1000's of other people that have seen the laser video, including you, are all in my imagination? You do know, I am not the only one to notice this laser right?

I would like to see anyone say it's conclusively a laser based on scientific evidence. For the record, I have seen the video multiple times and have yet to see the laser. I see an unidentified object in the video.

Finally,
A question I have asked over and over and have yet to receive an answer.
You have mentioned that the "laser" where it hits the building becomes visible because it encounters a solid object. You go on to say that you don't see the beam itself because it doesn't encounter anything solid. Well it does encounter something solid. The dust/debris. Following your rule of why it's seen on the building, the beam would also be seen. Again, your rules. No beam, no laser based on your own testimony. So how do you explain that?

Originally posted by 11 11
UUUUUGGHHHH!!!! DON'T YOU PEOPLE READ?!?!?!!??!

Don't you know how to discuss something in a civil manner?
[

Originally posted by TheBorg
I thought it was much further away than that. It's actually within approximately 600 ft of the site. My apologies.

It wouldn't be the first time you were wrong on this thread.

The difference between you and I, is that I know how everything in this entire universe works.

I seriously doubt that, as a matter of fact you're showing just how much you know, with your actions in this thread.

I'm sick and tired of you close minded people telling me to be open-minded. If I wasn't open minded then how the hell did I become a "truther"????? If I wasn't open minded, I would believe the governments every word like most of you people do.

I'm sick and tired of you're superior attitude in this thread.

This will be my last warning to EVERYONE... cool it now!

Originally posted by 11 11

Originally posted by InnocentBystander

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Let's see if you can ignore this one: How can the laser be 12 feet tall? Lasers don't have divergence like this. A 12 foot tall laser dot at that distance would have to come from a HUGE laser. The picture of the ABL lens is big, but not even close to 12 feet.

LOL!!!!!!! That's your only question? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Seriously do this experiment, get a hand held laser and turn it on. Place it somewhere so that it is pointing very far away, and leave it there. Run to that place it is pointing, and then tell me how big the laser dot is. I guarantee you that the farther away the laser dot is, the bigger it is. Although lasers are supposed to be perfectly straight lines, over a distance, they DO cone out, and get bigger. Try it.

I don't think that's correct. Obviously the hand held laser is not as focused as a COIL, it's not designed to take down a missile. According to this link, the ABL actually narrows as the distance grows. It says: "When the beam leaves the aircraft it is about five feet in diameter; by the time it reaches the target, it is about the size of a basketball."

So...it sounds like to me that it never gets anywhere near that big. Unfortunately I don't have time to check out the other stuff you said I should learn, 'how birds fly,' etc.

I'm not even going to respond, okay I'll throw a tiny bone but that's it, is the laser an attempt to forget about the hijacker terrorists that trained in piloting classes near where I live, a laser in no way shape or form no matter how much dope you smoke could've possibly replaced the hijacker terrorists who in reality did live and murder. Aside from that this 'smoking gun' is as sensical as using the teletubbies as the key for who assassinated JFK.

Razimus, prove to me that there were terrorists on the jets, on another thread. I dare you.

Originally posted by shots
I have never insisted there was a C130 and I clearly stated I may have been mistaken when I used the term C130

LOL you are so confused. Yes you did say it was a C-130 and no you weren't mistaken. The official claim made is it was a C-130. I thought I already verified your claim, can you read? I just want proof of that C-130. It has nothing to do with my reading skills. Nice try at backing out...

Just what part of "its all part of the game do you not understand?" In order to play the conpiracy game you need two sides one for sane people and one for kooks (your term not mine)

It's not a game to me buddy, this is not a competition. If you think it is maybe you should pick a less controversial subject to play with.
Another post with nothing to offer but a lame attempt at ridicule...

When you have something to actually debate I'll take you off ignore.

[edit on 28/8/2007 by ANOK]