Hologram dudes, how was it done?

I would think the easiest way would be to have the USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D cloaked above the city, then reverse the ion flux capacitor to modulate the amplification mode of the dillithium crystals so that the holodeck can be extended beyond the hull of the ship.

Thus the whole operation effectively took place in the holo deck which, as we known, can produce wholly realistic 'physical' holograms.

Either that or just use real aircraft ...

they didnt need some fancy hologram, they used wood, burlap and rubber.

www.npr.org...

no but seriously. i dont buy the "no plane" theroy. but tactics of this nature have been used to some extent in the past. i think its possible but not not very likely. im interested in seeing where this will go..

Wizard,

You're honestly telling me you believe that EVERYONE is lying? Honestly? That every person who was there watching it, including my friend's father, is just lying for the hell of it? Seriously, EVERYONE?

I just don't get it, Wizard, why? Why would they need to fake the planes? If they're going to nuke the whole thing, as you said you believe, what could possibly be the reason behind faking the planes???

And I don't know where you got the idea that the story about planes hitting the buildings was slow to develop because hundreds of thousands of people watched the second plane as it hit in real time.

You've really gotta be puttin me on Wizard, I don't believe that you believe this stuff for a second.

In fact, I don't believe any of these "no planers" really believe this crap. People like to argue, they like to feel important, they like attention. I do believe that some people are really attempting to discredit al of us with this and others are just along for the ride.

That is just the problem Shadow. I truly believe there exists a subversive group that purports things so preposterise it makes those with intelligent arguments against the official spin look like loonies.

wouldnt it just be easier to fly remote controled planes rather than make a giant hologram tht could quite easly glitch and even disappear im not saying it couldnt be but i doubt a hologram was used im sticking with remote planes its been done before they tested flying and landing remote planes and it works

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
However most of us no-planers insist that significant amounts of plane parts would have dropped down outside the building during ‘impact’.

No official NYC personnel observed anything of the kind. Which is why ‘stories’ of plane crashes were only developed gradually.

It almost seems as if you're talking over me as if I'm not 'here'.

Anyways explain how they did this, sign and all:

home.att.net...
That neato smoke effect dissapating from the engine is bigtime hollywood or what?



Honestly, if it's required that I post the rest of the images showing the engine fireball + smoke trail streamer and then the map where it landed lining up with the stream, then you clearly haven't seen enough about the event to make any real judgements.

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
All the film footage of 9-11 planes — in hindsight — is poorly produced garbage.

Ok, fine, I'll give you that one if you can answer this:
The Hologram Challenge:
What made the 'cartoon cutouts' in the steel side of the buildings? You can add to that the 'thermite'-corner: damage in the South Tower, as well as the 'zipper cut' along the wall leading to it.

Everyone feel free to use my code there to keep that challenge active in this thread or elsewhere until they can actually answer it.


[edit on 26-9-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

reply to post by jpm1602


Exactly. It's subversive disinfo in classic form. For example when I was trying to find engine images the first page with an desirable photo brought up a page that showed over a dozen images of it, abut when you actually read the page they somehow came to the conclusion that it didn't exist, without any actual evidence besides denial. Then the second page borught up a huge quote page of every quote of witnesses seeing the planes, bu tonce again it was a no-planer site using "plane hugger" labeling and rhetoric. The avaerge joe finally finding his way to some 911 sites will see these and say these people are crazy. The more sites like this the higher the odds of Joe ending up in one and being tainted potentially forever. Seeing how Wizard pretends that well established evidence doesn't exist, while talking over mine and others impossible to answer questions -in absolutist language- really makes me queston his motives. Or maybe I'm wrong and he's got all the answers up his sleeve but he's holding back to make us think we have an argument... or he's trying to discredit No-Planers as if they can't answer these questions... Maybe Killtown and his gang was too?

[edit on 26-9-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

[edit on 26-9-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Not flying at 500 mph+ they wouldn't. They'd burrow like a bunny in hole. Especially if they were 'helped' by a precharge or missile to open a hole from them funny do dads under their belly.

Oh man we must have hit some raw nerve to shut down site like that for 15 mins. I was just about to post this thing it still a red hot potato after eight yrs. Americans do not want to believe they were lied to by there own gov. Ready to take the bait and chant USA USA ready to kick the first ass dangled in front of them. Iraq.

For those of you out there who believe 100% that airplanes did strike the towers, perhaps you should take a look at this video...

live video link

Ever since after I watched this video, I now believe that it was not planes that hit the tower but missiles. It clearly shows that all the footages from news broadcasters of airplanes flying into the towers were all FAKE. One clip even shows a glimpse image of the missile that hit the tower. As for all the witnesses there probably mistaken the missile for a plane. Its not like every day you see missiles flying over your head. Anything of that size, people would probably assume that it was a plane. They probably had no idea what was going on, until they heard from the officials saying that they indeed were planes.



[edit on 26-9-2007 by balon0]

Oh sorry, I forgot the perfectly preserved unburnt passport found of Ahmed whoever. My bad.

Man! Are these guys rich or what! I just have to laugh, unfortunately it is no laughing matter.

Originally posted by balon0
For those of you out there who believe 100% that airplanes did strike the towers, perhaps you should take a look at this video...

live video link

that just convinced me.. some no name made a short film on how a plane didnt hit twc. that settles it there was no plane.

i must say. it may be possible to fake such a thing, but at best all the evidence you can muster is a handfull of people that throw this lie out there with the main goal of turning you aginst our government. im not just talking bush here but everyone...

I'm not sure of your comment here Dale. Could you please expand upon it.
Thanks
John

Thats true, this video probably isn't the most reliable evidence out there but do please take the time and watch all the parts. The person who made it shows some really really interesting things he discovered about the broad casted news footages. He proves that many of the clips indeed have been edited significantly. There was a thread on ATS about this video but I can't seem to find it at the moment.

I'll take the word of thousands of NY's over any video any day any time. Were they AA jets? Doubtful. Especially the woman screaming running 'that was not an American Airlines jet'. For us to be having this discussion is lunacy. The planes were a prop. Whatever fragged those towers reduced them to dust. Very little debris field. A half a keyboard biggest item found. The shear enormity of believability of such an event is beyond comprehension. Although it did indeed transpire.

reply to post by DaleGribble


And in that thread that video's trickery was picked apart.

But I'll answer the first clip example:
The "fade to black" is actually the camera's switch. Then the video maker adds extra black frames to make it stand out. You're watching doctored footage. Blank frames between live camera changes isn't something to extraoridinary. Here you can see the same thing with almost exactly the same cameras:


Don't fall for their TV Trickery.

But even if they were playing with black screens t doesn't prove that planes didn't hit, it could easily mean that it was intentional seeds of disinfo for later use. Meaning the 'perps' could have remotely done some sort of interference to do that effect, then later on if 9/11 COnspiracies gained any ground they could break out a massive disinfo operation as we're seeing happen today, which is doing MAJOR harm to the movement. I have an entire thesis of this intentional diversionary disinfo tactic and many examples, although I don't even use this TV trickery as it isn't solid and believe me I'm looking for all of the choice examples I can get:
www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Flashy screens don't prove planes weren't used. People should shart answering my challenge, and my and others other questions etc before determining anything on thsi matter otherwise it's completely irrational and counterproductive.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

NWO to self, damn them new fangled phone cameras and well positioned tourists with them their dag dog digital recorders.

If it was the Enterprise, then quite possibly they used a photon torpedo with a holographic field generated around it. Quite easy with 25th century technology.

A disrupter beam could have then triggered the final collapse.

I think I have it all solved

(Well, no more far fetched than some of the other nonsense being bandied about!)

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Essan]

Them their cam phones sure didn't help at Aboo Gabbi either. Leading Iraqi's around on dog chains. Dag, there should be a law.