|
|
|
11-05-2008, 08:09 PM
|
#1 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 360
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
What proof can you point to in supporting the use of planes? None of the video I watched convinced me of real planes. The plane holes on -both- buildings were located on the computer floors, ideal locations for the black op team to rig the exterior columns with explosives to create plane-shape cutouts. -feeler |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2008, 09:14 PM
|
#2 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 25
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
I seen people say that they saw the plane from the street and it was NOT a comercial airliner and had no windows on it's side etc, just a short moment after it happened. severall people who said the same thing.
BUT, If they did not use the planes, what happened to all the people in the planes?? where did they go?? I have been thinking about that alot. Many families are missing family members from the planes. |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2008, 09:16 PM
|
#3 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 288
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
A lot of info from Eddie NWO hope it helps brains get elasticity.
Good Luck Do you know of John Lear, the UFO investigator? You should really watch his entire interview by Project Camelot (4-part and prox 4 hours), he did mention about the planes being holographic and the whole explosion was an experiment to test the readiness of the coming NASA NSA 'Bluebeam Project', the new world order fake UFO attack that will subdue the whole world. Here is part one... its a very entertaining interview. also check out the site www. projectcamelot. org I did post a megapost about WTC being destroyed by direct energy weapons, because there were footages of laser beam pointed at the 2nd tower before it was hit... or maybe it was a autopilot GUIDANCE system because the maneuver was simply impossible for amateur cave dwelling terrorists. Here is my post if your interested. please retain my credit if you wish to repost Eddie NWO Censored LASER BEAM SPOTTED ON WTC BEFORE COLLISION Discovery Future Weapons - Direct Energy Weapon Direct Energy Weapons on Humans pt - 1/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZD__qb2uHA Direct Energy Weapons on Humans pt - 2/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak2j9x9Ts_k Direct Energy Weapons on Humans pt - 3/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKS9X-Keww4 Laser weapons used on 9-11? part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK5_H_tCbfo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrY2OrL6szw Laser weapons used on 9-11 part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CpWY71o6fg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yA_sf-exvA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMOAVAxtUP0 MILITARY TESTS PLANE WITH ANTI MISSILE LASER August 14, 2008 - A powerful laser designed to shoot ballistic missiles out of the sky has been successfully test-fired for the first time, It is destined to fly on board a modified Boeing 747 aeroplane as part of a US air defence fleet ************************************************** ******** Tactical Laser Could Work Like Long-Range Napalm ************************************************** ******** Wired. com By David Hambling September 06, 2008 http://blog. wired. com/defense/2008/09/tactial-laser-l. html In science fiction, it's one zap of a laser gun, and you're dead. But real-life energy weapons likely won't work that way Take the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) that U.S. Special Forces have begun to test-fire. Intended for "covert strikes," the ATL has been sold on its ability to blast away with pinpoint accuracy. A very rough estimate shows, however, that the effects when you target an individual are not quite what you might expect The ATL's laser beam is widely quoted as being ten centimeters wide at the target. It's exact power has never been stated, but it's somewhere in the hundred-kilowatt class. (The ATL has a single 12,000 lb laser module while the "megawatt class" Airborne Laser fourteen modules each of which is slightly larger, so a hundred kilowatts looks like a reasonable estimate. In addition a hundred kilowatts was the power of the original flying laser, the Airborne Laser Laboratory, and it's the target which new solid state lasers are aiming for, so it seems to be a sort of benchmark for weapons-grade lasers.) It may be somewhat higher (or lower). But by applying a little basic physics we can get a ballpark estimate of what this might do to flesh. For simplicity, I'll assume flesh has similar properties to water. The heat capacity of water is about 4.2 joules per gram per degree centigrade. The heat of vaporization (the energy needed to turn water at boiling point to steam) is 2261 joules per gram So if the beam stays on the same spot of the target for a full two seconds –- which is a very long time under the circumstances –- it would in theory boil off a disc around one centimeter deep. In real life, the laser would be much less effective, as smoke and steam would rapidly degrade the effectiveness of the beam. Also in real life, the energy is likely to be focused at the center of the beam. And flesh is not water. And nobody is going to hand around being lasered that long… But we're just trying to get a general idea of orders of magnitude here Bullets are lethal when they damage a vital organ (like the heart or the brain) or when they cause rapid blood loss. Most likely, a laser of this type would not easily be able to go deep enough to affect a vital organ. Plus, the laser would will be self-cauterizing, with the heat sealing off blood vessels. It's not going to kill you quickly While research in this area tends to be classified. But from what we know, the Air Force considers laser effects on eyes and skin, for the most part. Skin damage is very much easier to achieve than penetration; simply raising skin temperature to (say) 80C/ 180 f to a depth of a couple of millimeters will cause serious blistering (second-third degree burns). If 40% of the body is burned in this way, then the target will be disabled and may die A rough calculation suggests that exposed skin would be blistered/burned in under a twentieth of a second, so the beam could play over the target at quite a high rate. It's unclear whether clothing would have much protective effect or whether it would simply ignite and cause secondary burns So instead of "zap-and-you're-dead" in normal science fiction style, with a hundred kilowatt laser, it's more a matter of spraying the target all over to ensure they're done. The description of the ATL as a "long range blow torch" is probably quite accurate Read The Rest HERE ************************************************** ********** Boeing Tests Entire Weapon System on Advanced Tactical Laser Aircraft ************************************************** ********** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5SDo0rH1Xo Boeing News ST. LOUIS, Aug. 13, 2008 http://www. boeing. com/news/releases/2008/q3/080813a_nr. html The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] has successfully completed the first ground test of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) aircraft, achieving a key milestone in the ATL Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program During the test Aug. 7 at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., the ATL aircraft, a C-130H, fired its high-energy chemical laser through its beam control system. The beam control system acquired a ground target and guided the laser beam to the target, as directed by ATL's battle management system. The laser passes through a rotating turret on the aircraft's belly "By firing the laser through the beam control system for the first time, the ATL team has begun to demonstrate the functionality of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the aircraft," said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems. "This is a major step toward providing the ultra-precision engagement capability that the warfighter needs to dramatically reduce collateral damage" After conducting additional tests on the ground and in the air, the program will demonstrate ATL's military utility by firing the laser in-flight at mission-representative ground targets later this year On May 13, the high-energy laser was fired aboard the ATL aircraft for the first time, demonstrating reliable operations previously achieved in a laboratory. During that test, an onboard calorimeter captured the laser beam before it left the aircraft ATL, which Boeing is developing for the U.S. Department of Defense, will destroy, damage or disable targets with little to no collateral damage, supporting missions on the battlefield and in urban operations. Boeing's ATL industry team includes L-3 Communications/Brashear, which made the laser turret, and HYTEC Inc., which made various structural elements of the weapon system Fox – Right Out Of Star Wars? New Airborne Laser Cannon Can Melt A Hole In A Tank From 5 Miles Away March 31, 2008 - Boeing released this promotional video for the YAL-1 Airborne Laser, a modified 747-400 that is being developed to shoot down ballistic missiles during the first few minutes of flight ************************************************** ********** Boeing Tests Entire Weapon System on Advanced Tactical Laser Aircraft ************************************************** ********** Boeing News ST LOUIS Aug. 13, 2008 http://www. boeing. com/news/releases/2008/q3/080813a_nr. html The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] has successfully completed the first ground test of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) aircraft, achieving a key milestone in the ATL Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program During the test Aug. 7 at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M., the ATL aircraft, a C-130H, fired its high-energy chemical laser through its beam control system. The beam control system acquired a ground target and guided the laser beam to the target, as directed by ATL's battle management system. The laser passes through a rotating turret on the aircraft's belly "By firing the laser through the beam control system for the first time, the ATL team has begun to demonstrate the functionality of the entire weapon system integrated aboard the aircraft," said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of Boeing Missile Defense Systems. "This is a major step toward providing the ultra-precision engagement capability that the warfighter needs to dramatically reduce collateral damage" After conducting additional tests on the ground and in the air, the program will demonstrate ATL's military utility by firing the laser in-flight at mission-representative ground targets later this year On May 13, the high-energy laser was fired aboard the ATL aircraft for the first time, demonstrating reliable operations previously achieved in a laboratory. During that test, an onboard calorimeter captured the laser beam before it left the aircraft ATL, which Boeing is developing for the U.S. Department of Defense, will destroy, damage or disable targets with little to no collateral damage, supporting missions on the battlefield and in urban operations. Boeing's ATL industry team includes L-3 Communications/Brashear, which made the laser turret, and HYTEC Inc., which made various structural elements of the weapon system AA flight forced to make emergency landing in LAX Los Angeles, smoke spewing out of plane - Aug 5, 2008 ************************************************** * Jet Evacuated After Emergency Landing at LAX ************************************************** * Passenger plane evacuated after emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport The Associated Press LOS ANGELES August 5, 2008 (AP) Passengers are being evacuated by inflatable chutes from an American Airlines jetliner after an emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R_iTx6niQw Discovery Future Weapons - Boeing ABL anti-missile laser ************************************************** **************************** Boeing Airborne Laser Team Begins Testing Laser with Chemical Fuel ************************************************** **************************** Monday, Jul 28, 2008 http://www. yourdefencenews. com/news_item. php?newsID=8381 ST LOUIS, July 28, 2008 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA], industry teammates and the U.S Missile Defense Agency have completed installing the high-energy laser aboard the Airborne Laser (ABL) aircraft and have begun testing the laser with its chemical fuel at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif The tests involve flowing the laser's chemicals through the laser to confirm sequencing and control Once these tests are completed, the test team will fire the laser aboard the aircraft on the ground for the first time "The Airborne Laser team has done a great job preparing the high-energy laser for these fuel tests, which will lead the way toward achieving 'first light' of the laser aboard the aircraft," said Mike Rinn, Boeing vice president and ABL program director "Once again, we made and demonstrated enormous progress toward ushering in a new age of directed-energy weapons" Repeated laser firings aboard the aircraft will demonstrate lasing duration and power at levels suitable for the destruction of multiple classes of ballistic missiles. The laser will then be fired through the aircraft's beam control/fire control system, including the nose-mounted turret. This will be followed by functional check flights of the entire ABL weapon system The test campaign will start with the first airborne intercept of a ballistic missile in 2009 The ABL aircraft consists of a modified Boeing 747-400F whose back half holds the high-energy laser, designed and built by Northrop Grumman. Before being installed, the high-energy laser completed rigorous ground testing in a laboratory at Edwards The aircraft's front half contains the beam control/fire control system, developed by Lockheed Martin, and the battle management system, provided by Boeing Boeing is the prime contractor for ABL, which will provide speed-of-light capability to destroy all classes of ballistic missiles in their boost phase of flight ************************************************** ***** American Airlines Testing Anti-Missile Technology ************************************************** ***** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WasIoFGRbHU CBS News Jul 16, 2008 http://wbztv. com/local/airplane. safety. boston. 2. 772779. html BOSTON (WBZ) ― You can almost touch the planes as they roar over Point Shirley in Winthrop on their way to Logan Airport. The passengers were checked for explosives before they got on, however, a growing concern is what could happen away from the airport: Terrorist firing a shoulder launched-missile just outside the airport's property The light weight weapons are becoming and more available on the black market, as many as 150,000 are believed to be in circulation and can easily bring down a plane But now American Airlines is flying with new defensive technology on some of its New York to Los Angeles flights Developed in New Hampshire by defense contractor, BAE Systems, the cross country passenger jets are now equipped with a laser deterrent system mounted on the plane's belly. It can identify and misdirect an incoming missile It's being tested for Homeland Security Laurie Nuzzo is the Program manager for BAE Systems in Nashua New Hampshire where technology was developed. "Over several years we have been testing and validating the system So now it is really great to see us now at this point on an in service passenger aircraft" American Airlines is not using the technology on any Boston-based flights. At $1 million per plane, the missile defense system is expensive Nonetheless passenger we spoke to like the idea "No one is going to catch you by surprise now, maybe it will save lives," said one traveler BAE Systems is one of two defense contractors hoping to win a government contract Congress will decide the future of this technology before next summer Experts say as many as 27 different terrorists organizations have the shoulder missile weapons They sell for as little as $10,000 Feds adding ANTI EXPLOSION DEVICES on American airlines 7-16-08 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJ8fHeRaGGI ************************************************** *** Beleaguered American cancels 900 more flights ************************************************** *** Carrier inspects wiring on MD-80s; estimated 250,000 travelers affected Associated Press 4-10-08 http://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/24029455/ DALLAS - American Airlines canceled more than 900 flights Thursday to fix faulty wiring in hundreds of jets, marking the third straight day of mass groundings as company executives offered profuse apologies and travel vouchers to calm angry customers American, the nation’s largest carrier, has now scrubbed more than 2,400 flights since Tuesday, when federal regulators warned that nearly half its planes could violate a safety regulation designed to prevent fires That’s more than one in three flights canceled over the last three days Daniel Garton, an executive vice president of American, said cancellations could extend into Friday Slow process A return to normal operations depends on how quickly mechanics can inspect and fix the wire bundles Airline spokesman Tim Wagner said late Wednesday afternoon that 60 planes had been cleared to fly, 119 were being worked on, and 121 planes had not yet been inspected The fallout could be seen at airport ticket counters, where frustrated customers bickered with American employees, and on the stock market, where shares of American’s parent company tumbled more than 11 percent Wednesday American estimates that more than 100 passengers would have been on each of those canceled flights That means a quarter-million people have been inconvenienced this week Airline executives said they thought they had fixed the wiring two weeks ago, when they canceled more than 400 flights to inspect and in some cases fix the shielding around the wires in their MD-80 aircraft But this week, Federal Aviation Administration inspectors (FAA), who have been conducting stepped-up surveys of airline compliance with safety rules called airworthiness directives, said 15 of 19 American jets they examined flunked That left the airline no choice but to ground all 300 of its MD-80s, the most common jet in American’s 655-plane fleet “We have obviously failed to complete the airworthiness directive to the precise standards that the FAA requires, and I take full responsibility for that,” Gerard Arpey, American’s chairman and chief executive, said at an industry event in California The FAA's second wave of audits will go on until June 30, The New York Times reported on Thursday, so the misery for flyers could go on for months American VP apologizes Back at American’s headquarters in Fort Worth, Garton apologized for the snafu and vowed the airline would fix the problem this time “We simply cannot put our customers through this again,” he said Garton added that for American, “this certainly couldn’t have come at a worse time” The airline faces record fuel prices and fear of a recession, and analysts forecast that its parent, AMR Corp, lost more than $300 million in the first three months of the year American declined to say how much it would spend on $500 travel vouchers and hotel rooms for stranded travelers and overtime for mechanics, or how much revenue it would lose by putting some displaced customers on other airlines But Garton said it would be “significant” Perhaps worried about that cost, investors on Wednesday sent AMR shares down $115 to $917 American’s problem — and Alaska Airlines’ cancellation of 14 flights Wednesday to inspect its nine MD-80s — stems from an FAA order in 2006 covering the bundling of wires in the backup power system for the fuel pump of the MD-80 The FAA says improperly bundled wires could rub, leading to an electrical short or even fire American officials said the safety of their planes was never jeopardized, and the FAA said no serious incidents have been blamed on poorly bundled wires ‘We’re a little skeptical’ Some passengers took a jaundiced view toward American’s promise to fix the problems Kathy Neer of Santa Fe, N.M., was caught up in both waves of cancellations to and from a vacation in Paris She and her husband were stranded in Dallas on Tuesday on the final leg of their journey home American gave the Neers a voucher for a hotel room and seats on another flight home Wednesday “They say our flight is leaving at 3:55 p.m, but do you think we trust them?” Neer said “After being burned twice, we’re a little skeptical” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9z15bgkoy4 .. Anti-missile lasers installed on American Airline flights ABL or BAE laser SPOTTED ON WTC 2nd tower during 9-11 - remote guidance systems? |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2008, 09:25 PM
|
#4 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 288
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2008, 11:35 PM
|
#5 | |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
Hey feeler, thanks for responding to my comment. Like I said before, I am open to many things, and perhaps there were no planes, but as of now,there is more evidence suggesting that the planes were real and that explosives were used to bring down the towers. Just wondering, do you believe that space beams brought the towers down or that explosives brought the tower down? Quite a lot of people who believe that there were no planes also believe that high energy space beams were used in the towers' destruction. I think it is obvious that there are a lot of disinfo people out there, but hopefully with good efforts and research we can become a part of the solution (figuring out what really happened) and not a part of the problem (blindly following what certain persons may say without investigation). It can be intimidating learning of or meeting people who have different "knowledge" of what did or didn't happen, but hopefully we can make it through. |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2008, 11:56 PM
|
#6 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 360
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
If you go to Dr. Judy Woods' web site, you will find charts that reflect the magnetic shift at the times of the plane impacts and "collapses." Particle beam weapons could have been situated on the ground, inside nearby buildings, or on top of nearby buildings (therefore the term "space beam" might not be entirely accurate). Explosives were used to give the impression of a gravity collapse, but the primary method of destruction was the directed energy weapons that disintegrated the concrete and softened the steel. Recent earthquakes in other parts of the world also raised attention to the HAARP technology that the government has developed. Frequent bridge collapses in recent years also increased speculation on the possible use of directed energy weapons. -feeler |
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 12:19 AM
|
#7 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Holograms can't be tracked or give a radar return like planes do.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/14583 http://www.communitycurrency.org/robin.html |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 12:47 AM
|
#8 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 288
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Radar deception through phantom track generation. But again this is academic.
https://labs.tdl.org/tdl/handle/1969.1/3169 |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 12:52 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 02:23 AM
|
#10 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
Last edited by dataeast; 11-06-2008 at 02:24 AM. Reason: grammar |
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 10:11 AM
|
#11 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: England
Posts: 79
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Sweet lord of mercy people really will latch on to anything regardless of how ludicrous it is.
"What proof can you point to in supporting the use of planes? None of the video I watched convinced me of real planes. The plane holes on -both- buildings were located on the computer floors, ideal locations for the black op team to rig the exterior columns with explosives to create plane-shape cutouts." Honestly the single most ridiculous thing i have read on here, and perhaps, anywhere, ever. It boggles my mind that people think this. The planes were tracked independantly via radar, there are thousands of eyewitneses, the physical evidence from the vids/pics/wreckage of the towers supports the inclusion of the planes. Agreed, the manner of collapse and explanation that it was the planes that caused the actual collapses is highly suspect, but to think people would make light and fantastic claims over a serious world shattering event like this makes me not only deeply concerned but horrified and sickened. The beliefs/views i have on the 9/11 event do not try to trivialize it in any way, they do not try to make it into some fantastical magical mystery of lights and sound. Its deception over the truth of the manner of collapse, and the evidence of who was really behind it. Lest not you forget that hundreds of people, people with families, some of which may be present on this very forum, died onboard those planes and thousands more in the buildings. I cannot countenance anyone making claims that trivialize the pain and misery brought upon the victims families on that day. You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves, and get back on track with the disclosure of the real issues. |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 10:23 AM
|
#12 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hartlepool England But Moving Shortly to Fauldhouse Scotland
Posts: 172
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
"Honestly the single most ridiculous thing i have read on here, and perhaps, anywhere, ever.
It boggles my mind that people think this. The planes were tracked independantly via radar, there are thousands of eyewitneses, the physical evidence from the vids/pics/wreckage of the towers supports the inclusion of the planes." Wake up and Believe ;0 can you please point me to the wreckage pics of the plane - the engine was from a different type of plane altogether - the piece with the windows intact when everything else shredded to fine dust - come on - open your eyes to the truth |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 10:54 AM
|
#13 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: England
Posts: 79
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
My eyes are open, and what kind of proof can you offer me otherwise?
Open your eyes, if i'm the one that needs "convincing", convince me. Trouble is you can't, don't decry my not believing this toss because my eyes are closed, thats weak and not even a valid arguement. Point me to the proof that they were holographic, point me to the proof that they didnt exist, point me to the thing that, in your bent view, explains what happened to the people aboard those planes. The real problem here is your looking further and further into things looking to make an even bigger demon out of the USA gov't. I'm from the UK, i am seeing this from the outside, and all i can see is closed minds belonging to those that claim to be open. Your looking for mystery beyond conspiracy beyond lies. Its not there, wake up. Ever heard of Occam's Razor? good rule of thumb, here i'll show you... "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything" attb. William Occam (nay Okham) |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 02:07 PM
|
#14 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 288
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Callidon,
Im speculating about the possilbility of holograms to further understand the matrix im in. And please dont use the people who died at 911 to validate your frustrated emotions of not knowing what reality is. Cheers |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 02:34 PM
|
#15 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: England
Posts: 79
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
I think you'll find that i'm not "using the people" the plain simple fact is you seem to all be glossing over the horror of that day.
In my opinion i have a far stronger grasp on what reality is, reality is my partner and kids, my job, my family, the way my dog looks at me when i pick up his lead, the wind in the tree's and the rain. Reality is not looking for explanations to things which require no explanation, just the details fleshing out. I believe whole heartedly that we have all been decieved as to what really went on on that september morning. We still don't really know who was behind it, or how the jet fuel on board the planes, which would have burnt rapidly, managed to bring the towers down (in my opinion, by controlled means). I don't believe for one second that it was all smoke and mirrors. You all preach, yes preach, freedom of mind and voice, but your constant decrying of anyone that doesn't share your veiws is startlingly oppressive. Every single thread on here started, or replied to in a manner that does not support the OP or the communities beliefs gets shot down with moralistic arguements like "And please dont use the people who died at 911 to validate your frustrated emotions of not knowing what reality is." I have no frustrated emotions. You believe that you know my state of mind and feelings better than i know them myself? I am merely speaking out against something that i happen to believe is the biggest pile of **** around about the 9/11 incedent, and that i personally find to be ridiculously unfeasable. I can give you a garauntee that i am not the only person on this forum that believes such. I'm not trying to get personal with anyone, so don't come over all high station that its just my emotions, or that your moral view is more valid. Everyones opinion is valid, this threads opinion is that it was smoke and mirrors, mine, as you can see, is quite strongly opposed to that theory, that does not mean i think your opinion is not valid. You want me to wake up and smell the arabica beans? Open my eyes to the light? Show me. 100% undeniably. And i'll take it all back. |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 03:40 PM
|
#16 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Would like to put my two bob’s worth in if I may.
It has always intrigued me how an aircraft could just ‘bury’ itself into a building. Maybe there is someone out there who could explain this to me. I have a long history working with heavy earthmoving machinery, including manufacture of ground engaging components, steel rakes and timber handling equipment for bulldozers etc. So I do have a little bit of an idea of metal construction though do not have any engineering qualifications. I have absolutely no knowledge of aircraft construction / manufacture, maybe there is someone out there who could enlighten me in this matter. I assume, aircraft wings, and tail for that matter, are manufactured of a lightweight material, maybe aluminium. The documentary’s I’ve seen on telly, re the construction of the towers, have shown how the steel beams ‘failed’ due to the impact of the aircraft and subsequent explosion. My main interest here is: the buildings were constructed with steel beams in a recognised / accepted / proven engineering manner, which had never failed prior to 9 /11, so they say, a very strong and stable construction. I understand how the villosity of impact could amount to an aircraft being able to penetrate the buildings to a certain degree, but I don’t understand how it could be completely ‘buried’ into the building. I can’t see how the wing tips would penetrate a steel construction let alone the tail section doing the same thing, disappearing into the building that is. I think, someone help me out here, the tail of these aircraft, that reportedly hit the towers, stands quite a bit higher than the fuselage of the craft, would not the tail section of the aircraft be travelling at quite a reduced speed than the nose of the craft on impact, making it just about impossible to have enough villosity to enter the building, acknowledging the impact area of the tail is quite higher than the hole in the building where the fuselage entered. Would not the tail be left on the outside of the building? I realise the explosion prevents us seeing much of what happens when the aircraft impacts the tower, maybe there is someone out there who is skilled enough to be able to ‘slow’ the film down so as to be able to see the wings and tail section enter the building. My thoughts are, these lightweight sections of the aircraft would have to break away from the fuselage on impact, not disappear into the building. Maybe I have all this wrong, just a thought. (no thoughts on hologram’s, that stuff is way beyond me) |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 04:24 PM
|
#17 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: England
Posts: 79
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Basically, the speed at which the aircraft were travelling at the time, coupled with the lightwieght materials and inherant flexibility of the wing design means that as the wings meet the outer structure of the tower, they kinda fold back, therefore not penetrating in the horizontal manner i think you imagine.
As for the tail sction the same is true there. The "fin" itself folds down when it impacts. It helps if you can imagine the mechanics of an arrow with a feather flight. the main shaft, or fuselage, of the arrow is a semi-rigid construct, it can crumple as they did on 9/11, but essentially they pierce the body(tower) they impact. Then imagine the flights as the wings, they are lighweight in nature and will fold back to the body of the arrow allowing them to pass thorugh the body(tower) without having to create their own channel with which to pass through. This means that you won't see the wings/tail section make extra holes or damage as they are essentially folding back to pass through the hole made by the main fuselage section. Hope this clears up you question, if not, i'll be glad to help |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 04:28 PM
|
#18 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Puyallup, Washington state
Posts: 138
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
This has been a healthy discussion and I thank you all on the topic, but I will state simply not all the numbers add up here.
1 aircraft penatrating a building wing tips and all? I live in Seattle and have watched boeing do speed test on the tail of aircraft and watch them rip off due to high speed, and the impact on a building would send at least parts of it to the street, and the wing tips are thinner and and more prone to damage. A fuel truck on the ground so much as touches the wing and it does 10's of thousands of $$ of damage. 2 If the aircraft and people are gone they are gone, but if it was a show then the aircraft that the paperwork says was distroyed wasn't distroyed and there is proof somewhere on this planet. 3 If the aircraft were distroyed like the gov says John Lear is a liar. If the aircraft and people were not distroyed and John lear is telling the truth then there is proof somewhere to back it up. The implications are huge. Not even our gov. can keep a secret this big and get it right. It would take the co-operation of hundreds if not thousands of people to pull this off, and somebody would talk. |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 04:57 PM
|
#19 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: England
Posts: 79
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Oh of course sam, if they did the big bad then somewhere out there is a peice of paper waiting to prove it.
As for the aircraft penetrating the building, the outer walls were not as of the same solid construction of most skyscrapers of the era, the buildings strength came from the rigid central core construction, so it's entirely feasable for the whole aircraft to penetrate it. |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 05:04 PM
|
#20 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Puyallup, Washington state
Posts: 138
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
What I am saying is you can't have it both ways...either some terrrorist crashed planes into the buildings...or...there is a trail to follow proving they didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 08:21 PM
|
#21 | ||||
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
 The facade is designed for lateral strength, so an object, such as a plane at ninety degrees flying into it is hitting at it's weakest design point, particularly if it was in the middle of the adjacent floors. I guess a different story if it had directly hit the plane of the floor.  The plane was flying at around 500 mph (805 kph) and it's mass and velocity carried enough kinetic energy to sheer the latticework of the skin. Once inside and between the floors the fuel onboard ignited and produced an explosion whilst sandwiched between them, so contained and deflected the blast back upon itself further disintegrating the pieces that initially survived sheering/shredding through the facade. Quote:
I would not equate a dollar value to damages by a truck to a plane. It would not be the correct comparison because we are talking about quality standards and damages to control surfaces which affect the flight worthiness of the plane. It's like when you have a car accident and it no longer meets roadworthy standards and you get the bill from an accredited repairer.  Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 08:34 PM
|
#22 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Puyallup, Washington state
Posts: 138
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Dataeast I like the way you think. I have never heard anyone state that aircraft parts hit the roofs of other buildings... I would love a link to where you got that info...
Thanks Be at peace |
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 09:18 PM
|
#23 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 114
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
 A piece of the lattice/facade with a wheel embedded into it:  The link with more debris images: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/aircraftpartsnyc911 Ground Zero: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/grou...lssortingopera The main page "Links for 9/11 Research": http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home |
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 11:04 PM
|
#24 | |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 360
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
Quote:
"A piece of the lattice/facade with a wheel embedded into it:" Only at WTC 1, but not at WTC 2, how convenient. When/if a reinvestigation takes place, this piece of a plane should be examined to see if the part number on it is consistent with the alleged hijacked jetliner. -feeler |
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2008, 11:24 PM
|
#25 |
|
Avalon Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Puyallup, Washington state
Posts: 138
|
Re: Holographic planes vs the real thing?
thank you for putting this information up, a picture is worth a thousand words. So what does all this say about John Lear? His holograms seem to have wheels.
The truth is always provable and silly lies need to be dispelled. WE SHOULD POINT AND SHOUT AT A LIAR AND LET THE WORLD KNOW. Be at Peace |
|
|
|
 |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Hybrid Mode
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:50 AM.