The Hologram Theory is dead

Originally posted by anhinga
But how do you know they're NOT from the planes, they are, um, airplane parts....

Yes they are airplane parts but are the from the right planes? That is the question.

We do not know if they are from the planes that were supposed to have hit the towers.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Yes they are airplane parts but are the from the right planes? That is the question.

We do not know if they are from the planes that were supposed to have hit the towers.

I have to completely disagree with you here ULTIMA1, the question in this thread is "was it a hologram" not what type of plane parts were found.

Also if the NTSB and the FBI finally release their findings and they say the parts were from the exact aircraft that were registered as Flts 11, 175, 77 and of 93 will you finally be satisfied?

PS Please don't answer my question with another question, InfinityO'Reilly

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
not what type of plane parts were found.

Also if the NTSB and the FBI finally release their findings and they say the parts were from the exact aircraft that were registered as Flts 11, 175, 77 and of 93 will you finally be satisfied?

But if the parts found are not from the planes that were supposed to have hit the towers then we have more evidnece of a possable hologram or somethig else happening.

Yes i would believe the FBI and NTSB reports, i have been trying now for almost 2 years to get these reports, but as long as they refuse to release them along with the videos and photos then their are doubts to what happened on 9/11.



[edit on 18-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

But if the parts found are not from the planes that were supposed to have hit the towers then we have more evidnece of a possable hologram or somethig else happening.

[edit on 18-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

How does parts with the wrong serial #s = hologram? How does parts from an aircraft that is not AA or UA = not a 767 or 757? This where the hologram proponents like to hang their collective hats and I'm not buying in, sorry. I don't agree with the hologram possibility, as for something else happening I'm definitly keeping an open mind.

Thanks, Infinityoreilly

IMO...

If one accepts the basic premise that the military has technology, etc to make holograms, then a much simpler solution is remote controlled planes.

But it also raises the Q of if they're so advanced/capable, and their goal is to drop the Towers, why not use jumbos and knock it directly over with the plane hits. One would assume, using this mythical level of proficiency, that they would be able to figure out if that would work.

And with this mythical level of proficiency, you'd be able to concoct some back story that would eliminate all the Q's CTerz have - pilot ability, interception of flights, etc.....

Sorry, but the hologram is without merit. It may be theoretically possible if you assume mythical levels of technology and capability from the military, but at that point, other avenues exist that have a much higher probability of success.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
How does parts with the wrong serial #s = hologram?
Thanks, Infinityoreilly

Well if the parts are not from the planes that means the planes that were suppoed to have hit the towers did not, so a hologram could have been used.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well if the parts are not from the planes that means the planes that were suppoed to have hit the towers did not, so a hologram could have been used.

But if a hologram was indeed used, that means that your theory of melted aluminum from the plane wreckage causing thermite reactions is wrong.

Have you changed your theory of what happened on 9/11 then?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


If there was some type of projected image that floated over New York, that generated sound and was visible from 360 degrees it was not, by definition, a hologram! A new word needs to be developed for this type of senario.

Also the planting of the bombs and other evidence which has been resently discussed, would require large amounts of people involved, hence more people that would need to keep their collective mouths shut or be eliminated alltogether.

Originally posted by Disclosed
But if a hologram was indeed used, that means that your theory of melted aluminum from the plane wreckage causing thermite reactions is wrong.

Have you changed your theory of what happened on 9/11 then?

No, i have not changed my theory (which i have evidence for), i am just posting other facts and evidnece i find doing research to answer others questions.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
Also the planting of the bombs and other evidence which has been resently discussed, would require large amounts of people involved, .

Why would it take a lot more poeple? If it supposidly only took 19 terrorist to pull it off why coudn't a special ops team pull it off?




[edit on 19-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
How does parts with the wrong serial #s = hologram?
Thanks, Infinityoreilly

Well if the parts are not from the planes that means the planes that were suppoed to have hit the towers did not, so a hologram could have been used.

Or a more likely scenerio is that a different plane was used. Honestly, don't you think if John Lear or anyone else had the evidence they say they did, wouldn't they post it? We simply do not have the technological know how to pull of a perfect hologram as seen on camera and live in person.

Originally posted by jfj123
Or a more likely scenerio is that a different plane was used.

So now your stating the official story could be wrong?

Yes it is possable if the parts found do not match the flights that were supposed to have the buildings that other planes were used.

I am not so sure that you can say we do not have the technology, DARPA has some pretty advanced projects.



[edit on 19-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
Also the planting of the bombs and other evidence which has been resently discussed, would require large amounts of people involved, .

Why would it take a lot more poeple? If it supposidly only took 19 terrorist to pull it off why coudn't a special ops team pull it off?

[edit on 19-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Well you would need engineers to tell the explosives experts where to place the charges.
You would need explosives experts to place the charges.

Buildings that really are demo'd need weeks or months of prep work depending on size of building, location, structure, etc...

You would need vehicles and personnel to plant wreckage all over in the surrounding area WITHOUT ANY ONE OF THEM BEING SEEN.

Regarding your question as to how 19 hijackers could pull it off but 19 government agents could not. This question comes up a lot. The answer is simple. 19 hijackers did not do it alone. They had a lot of help.

The world wide terrorist organization leader came up or approved the plan from one of his many advisers.
Those advisers then starting working on the specifics of the plan.
Finances were obtained to carry out the plan.
Once the advisers had a specific plan, they needed personnel to carry it out.
Those advisers contacted there officers who then went about finding individuals who would do the actual work.
Once the officers found the individuals, they were sent to the US.
At that point the 19 individuals went about setting up their temporary lives.

It wasn't 19 guys planning it over a few beers and pizza on a saturday night. From beginning to end, thousands of terrorists were involved.

Originally posted by jfj123
Buildings that really are demo'd need weeks or months of prep work depending on size of building, location, structure, etc...

You would need vehicles and personnel to plant wreckage all over in the surrounding area WITHOUT ANY ONE OF THEM BEING SEEN.

From beginning to end, thousands of terrorists were involved.

1. it only takes weeks to prep a builidng for demo if you are worried about buildings around it, if you are not worried about the other buildings it would not take long to set up some beam cutters.

2. You mean like when there is a lot choas and people runing not looking around, and vehicles running all over the place.

3. I love it how people can state it would take thousands. I guess you do not understand how a terrorist cell or a special ops unit works.

reply to post by ULTIMA1

3. I love it how people can state it would take thousands. I guess you do not understand how a terrorist cell or a special ops unit works.

By your statement, it's more then obvious that you do not know how a terrorist cell works.

All cells are attached but in a limited way so it's very difficult to trace everything back to it's origin. We know the 19 terrorists received their orders from someone, who received their orders from someone else and so on.

reply to post by ULTIMA1

1. it only takes weeks to prep a builidng for demo if you are worried about buildings around it, if you are not worried about the other buildings it would not take long to set up some beam cutters.

But didn't the buildings fall straight down? So there are only 2 options that would have made that happen.
1. Gravity collapse
2. Controlled implosion with PRECISELY set charges that were meant to drop it STRAIGHT DOWN so if it was a controlled demo, then they most definitely DID care about the other buildings or something in the surrounding area.

2. You mean like when there is a lot choas and people runing not looking around, and vehicles running all over the place.

Do you honestly think that nobody would have seen groups of trucks full of personnel and pieces of debris rumbling through the city, personnel jumping out the back and throwing heavy pieces of debris about? Not a reasonable assumption.

Originally posted by jfj123
But didn't the buildings fall straight down? So there are only 2 options that would have made that happen.
1. Gravity collapse
2. Controlled implosion with PRECISELY set charges that were meant to drop it STRAIGHT DOWN so if it was a controlled demo, then they most definitely DID care about the other buildings or something in the surrounding area.

I guess you did not see the photos of the damage to the other buildings, like buildings 5 and 6. So they did not care about the other buildings.

Would you like me to post photos of the other buildings?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
But didn't the buildings fall straight down? So there are only 2 options that would have made that happen.
1. Gravity collapse
2. Controlled implosion with PRECISELY set charges that were meant to drop it STRAIGHT DOWN so if it was a controlled demo, then they most definitely DID care about the other buildings or something in the surrounding area.

I guess you did not see the photos of the damage to the other buildings, like buildings 5 and 6. So they did not care about the other buildings.

Would you like me to post photos of the other buildings?

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. When I was referring to the buildings, I meant the ones that were hit by planes.
You do however bring up an interesting point. You say the other buildings DIDN'T fall straight down but the 2 towers did. Why would they care about dropping the 2 towers straight down but not the other buildings? That is another item that doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by jfj123
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. When I was referring to the buildings, I meant the ones that were hit by planes.

No, my point was that if the towers (hit by planes) were brounght down by demolition, the people doing it did not care about the other builidngs because the other buildings were severly damaged a lot of debris.

The other buildings like builidings 5 and 6 had to be brought down because of the amount of damage down to it by debrios from the towers.

But also no other steel builidng has ever collapsed from fires and stuctural damage like the towers and builidng 7.






[edit on 20-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

But also no other steel builidng has ever collapsed from fires and stuctural damage like the towers and builidng 7.

No other steel building building has had a 767 airliner slam into it at 490mph.

No other steel building has had a 110-story building fall onto it creating a 20-story hole in the lower section of the building, causing a subsequent 7-hour-fire.


[edit on 20-11-2007 by nicepants]

Originally posted by nicepants
No other steel building building has had a 767 airliner slam into it at 490mph.

No other steel building has had a 110-story building fall onto it creating a 20-story hole in the lower section of the building, causing a subsequent 7-hour-fire.

But both NIST and FEMA reports conclude the buildings withstood the planes impacts and would have kept standing.

As for builidng 7, firemen reported some damage to 10 floors on the south side of the building. The majority of fire wasonthis side

Also there have been builidngs with longer lasting fires and as much or more sturctural damge as the 3 WTC buildings and they did not collapse.