The Hologram Theory is dead

I'm sorry everybody but this is starting to drive me crazy. For some reason one person keeps trying to derail the discussion in this and other threads.

So I'm going to ask this question

Does anyone have any evidence that the hologram idea is correct?

Just trying to get us back on track.

I'm afraid if it gets derailed much further, we'll be discussing what caused the extinction of the dinosaurs

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
Why do you refuse to answer even one of my questions?

I guess the same reason you will not admit to the facts and evidence i post.

Riiiight.....Please point me to the facts and evidence you posted that I have not admitted to.

*Hint - There isn't any.

You fought pretty hard about this revision, so I'll give you one more chance. Do you have any clue what the revision to the NIST report is about? How does this support your point that the planes and fires were not responsible for the collapse?

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
*Hint - There isn't any.

I have posted lots of evidence and not just from NIST reports but lots of other reports.

You just do not want to admit to something that goes against what you believe.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by InnocentBystander
*Hint - There isn't any.

I have posted lots of evidence and not just from NIST reports but lots of other reports.

You just do not want to admit to something that goes against what you believe.

Do you have an opinion about the hologram idea?

This is a picture of the north tower with the NIST diagram of the Boeing 767 left wing and left stabilizer placed exactly in this photo enlargement.



The 14 x 14 steel columns are numbered arbitrarily from left (1) to right (15) beginning with left wingtip and extending inward.

You can see that the wing did not break or penetrate steel box columns 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and neither did the left horizontal stabilizer (bb) cut or penetrate steel box columns 12, 13, 14 and 15.

If you drop the wing to match the hole you have to explain why the left engine did not cut steel box columns 12 and 13. And of course then the fuselage wouldn’t fit. And neither would the right wing.

A, B, C, D, and E show were the wing should have penetrated columns 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 but as you can see there is no cut or penetration.

dd represents the extension of the wing if it had been theoretically lowered to match the holes in columns 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and inboard. However if the wing was lowered to match the holes, the fuselage would not match its hole.

cc represents the height of Edna Cintron assumed to be between 5 and 6 feet tall. That height is shown below the left horizontal stabilizer as the distance the stabilizer would have to be lowered to match the holes in columns 13, 14 and 15.

ee shows the precision cuts of columns 13, 14 and 15.

This picture clearly shows that no Boeing 767 penetrated the World Trade Center and if there had, indeed, been a crash, that the wing, stabilizer and other parts would have been found at the base of the towers having not been able to penetrate the tower.

Edna has just survived a fire that consumed 350,000 pounds of airplane and fuel. Actually it doesn't look like her pants are even dirty!

reply to post by InnocentBystander


InnocentBystander,

Your incredible patience and tenacity impress me. Somewhere I thought I'd read that ATS moderators will scold people who write one-line posts...

Seems your nemisis has gotten away with it a few times, while you tried your darnedness to shake a little sense into the discussion. If I was going to give out points, you win!

But, arguments aside, what is it about the hologram theory anyway? I'd like to see that discussed more.

Cheers!

Originally posted by jfj123

Do you have an opinion about the hologram idea?

Not yet. Still trying to find out more about what caused the builidngs to collapse.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


ULTIMA1, best regards...

You mentioned you were looking for information as to why the buildings collapsed. Could it be as simple as...several floors were weakened/distressed and the weight of the building above these floors was too much? Once the cascade began, I mean, the weakened areas let go, what was going to stop gravity from taking over?

I know, we've all seen controlled demolitions, in Las Vegas, in Madrid, all around the world. I've seen the videos. And they ALL show clearly, obvious explosions designed to bring down, or 'implode' the buildings, as per the concept. The many videos I have seen of the WTC towers, in my opinion, do not suggest in any way a controlled demolition. It is gravity, plain and simple. Sorry to be a wet blanket...

reply to post by johnlear


Regarding the plane not fitting in the hole.

I don't pretend to know much about airplanes however, I must wonder if the 767's wings flexed during the high speed angled flight as it was impacting the building? If so, the would raise the Fuselage back into the proper angle to match up with your picture.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
You mentioned you were looking for information as to why the buildings collapsed. Could it be as simple as...several floors were weakened/distressed and the weight of the building above these floors was too much? Once the cascade began, I mean, the weakened areas let go, what was going to stop gravity from taking over?

Reports and evidence have shown the buildings survived the planes impacts.

There had to be someting else (besides the fires) that caused the collapse.

Even NIST has changed thier story, they originally stated the floors panckaed now they have changed to say no pancaking.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker
You mentioned you were looking for information as to why the buildings collapsed. Could it be as simple as...several floors were weakened/distressed and the weight of the building above these floors was too much? Once the cascade began, I mean, the weakened areas let go, what was going to stop gravity from taking over?

Reports and evidence have shown the buildings survived the planes impacts.

NOPE

There had to be someting else (besides the fires) that caused the collapse.

NOPE

Even NIST has changed thier story, they originally stated the floors panckaed now they have changed to say no pancaking.

NOPE

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker
You mentioned you were looking for information as to why the buildings collapsed. Could it be as simple as...several floors were weakened/distressed and the weight of the building above these floors was too much? Once the cascade began, I mean, the weakened areas let go, what was going to stop gravity from taking over?

Reports and evidence have shown the buildings survived the planes impacts.

There had to be someting else (besides the fires) that caused the collapse.

Even NIST has changed thier story, they originally stated the floors panckaed now they have changed to say no pancaking.

Do you have an opinion about the hologram idea?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Let me ask you this.
You don't believe the official story. You have stated this.
You work for the government. You stated this.
If the government is covering up the real story, they are complicate to the crime.
You know they are complicate as they are pushing the official story which you do not believe.
Doesn't that mean you are also a conspirator? You are knowingly working for the enemy right?

Originally posted by jfj123
Let me ask you this.
You don't believe the official story. You have stated this.
You work for the government. You stated this.
If the government is covering up the real story, they are complicate to the crime.

I do not believe the official story due to education, experience, common sense, plus research done.

Evidence suggest that the government knew what was happening and might have left it happen. (like Pearl Harbor)

I am doing research to find out what really happened that day.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Let me ask you this.
You don't believe the official story. You have stated this.
You work for the government. You stated this.
If the government is covering up the real story, they are complicate to the crime.

I do not believe the official story due to education, experience, common sense, plus research done.

Evidence suggest that the government knew what was happening and might have left it happen. (like Pearl Harbor)

I am doing research to find out what really happened that day.

Don't you feel guilty working for the government knowing what you know? It's like working for a police department that looks the other way while innocent people are arrested.

Wait wait, wait, there’s only one true way to prove wether or not the plane was a hologram……..

If the plane was real, it would have made a lot of noise as it came over the buildings and then into the tower, if it was a hologram, it would’ve been noiseless. So did people claim to of heard the sounds of a low altitude plane flying in the sky just before the tower was hit, or not?

simple logic

Originally posted by jfj123
Don't you feel guilty working for the government knowing what you know? It's like working for a police department that looks the other way while innocent people are arrested.

Why should i feel quilty? The government has been doing things like this long before i was born and will being doing it long after i am gone.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Don't you feel guilty working for the government knowing what you know? It's like working for a police department that looks the other way while innocent people are arrested.

Why should i feel quilty? The government has been doing things like this long before i was born and will being doing it long after i am gone.

Because you work for them and know what they're doing. By providing security for them, you are enabling their activities which you have decided, are illegal. I was just curious how you justify it.
If what you say about the government is true, I liken it to a security guard at a nazi concentration camp. Just making an observation

Originally posted by jfj123
Because you work for them and know what they're doing. By providing security for them, you are enabling their activities which you have decided, are illegal.

Well i do not work for the part of the government that decides these things.

I work for an agency that collects data and does analysis. I do not work security anymore i am a data analyst.

My agency warned about something was going to happen. Its not my fault or my agencies fault if the warnings go unheeded or are used to thier advantage.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Back on topic though. Do you actually believe John Lear's hologram idea over SOME TYPE of real planes hitting the buildings? Does anyone but John Lear and Wizard in the Woods?