RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.  THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.<br>
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added.  This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons. www.richplanet.net community built on miniBB / RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added. This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons.
/

HIDDEN TECHNOLOGY

 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  83  84  85  86  87  ...  97  98  »» 
quark1
Member
#1261 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 16:03
Reply 
On the basis that the only silly question is the one you don't ask.....is this possible?

Pls bear in mind I'm not that desperately technical in physics/engineering!

Could a Tomahawk - or its ilk - be kitted out with a new suit of clothes - a simplistic veneer - to take on the appearance of an aircraft and still retain all its manoeverability etc., and deadly finish.

I recall some shots of one 'plane' with some kind of canister beneath - could this be a clue to possible guidance control?
Sunburn
Member
#1262 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 16:09
Reply 
@ MK done - please read my post regarding radar Signature/returns .. what are your thoughts?

On the subject of 9/11 as a whole... The biggest problem I have with all of this is as follows.....

If you have the technology to project an image or object to look like something else and or you had the technology of directed energy weapons like Dr Judy would suggests, then why wouldn't you use it at any given chance? ... Iran/Syria/China are perfect targets for such incognito weaponry! weaponry that is now 12yrs more mature!

Why risk conventional warfare, sabotage, subversion and espionage when you can quite easily fake a natural event, or fly a missile dressed up like a stricken passenger jet into countries parliament?

The really left field theory's just don't stand up in my mind.
MK_DON
Guest
#1263 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 16:28 | Edited by: MK_DON
Reply 
Sunburn:
please read my post regarding radar Signature/returns .. what are your thoughts?

I can only say that I do not know enough to comment..... I mean I'd assume that military radar would be more accurate than civillian radar... but this is just a total assumption.
What I will say without doubt is that
IF as you suggest a Tomohawk hit the TT.. then they did something which made it look a plane to the witnesses and those who filmed it..
Sunburn:
or you had the technology of directed energy weapons like Dr Judy would suggests,

That they have these weapons is beyond doubt... This is but just one of many examples
MK_DON:
http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi91-401.pdf
A new U.S. Air Force Instruction establishes a safety program for directed energy weapons (DEW) in view of the fact that "DEW systems create unique hazards that are different from conventional and nuclear weapons

www.publicintelligence.net/u-s-air-force-safety-policy-for-directed-energy-weapons-de w/
What I think is that they are desperate to hide the use of a DEW because this PROVES that there was some kind of involvment from a few evil bastards who hold key positions in the US...
The same can however be said of the Pentagon.. which is why they went to the lengths to have th@ arsehole Hoffman infiltrate the TM with his WTC7 expose... and then try to persuade others within the TM that a passenger jet hit the Pentagon...
Sunburn
Member
#1264 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 16:57 | Edited by: Sunburn
Reply 
That paper is 6years on from 9/11! and the term DEW relates to many many applications from microwave crowd control to audio and sensory effects... I agree in the paper they mention material effecting energy weapon usage, but when has the US, UK, or any other equally advanced country cared or been concerned about its actions and effects on public and service men and women when 'a job' needs to be done? for matter when has a piece of paper stopped any country from attacking another? or prevented it from promoting its own ideological and political will?

Ultimately if such advanced weaponry is available, it would be used and continued to be used, and as per my previous post. Men with big sticks are more dangerous then those without! :)
MK_DON
Guest
#1265 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:00 | Edited by: MK_DON
Reply 
There are MANY types of DEW... but here we see how they propose a DEW can be fired from the nose of the right kinda modified plane.....
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html
High Energy Laser weapons have been progressively evolving since the 1960s, a path punctuated by a series of important scientific breakthroughs and engineering milestones.
Look at all those variations...
Now this is just the info. they share with us... IMAGINE what they have kept secret!
MK_DON
Guest
#1266 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:06 | Edited by: MK_DON
Reply 
Sunburn:
Ultimately if such advanced weaponry is available, it would be used and continued to be used, and as per my previous post

Is the purpose of war not to make money for the corporations that make the arms, tanks, fighter jets, bullets etc etc etc
Yes there is the control of resources = but if you were to just use a DEW then there would be no profit for the 'Defence' industry...
Also - 99% of the public who hear 'conspiracy theorists' talk about the use of a DEW on 911 scoff at the idea.. as they are too uninformed to know that these things not only exist.. but have been in existence for some time.
By using DEWs in open warfare you then alert the uninformed masses to the poss. they were used on 911
AllSpark
Member
#1267 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:26
Reply 
MK_DON:
Is the purpose of war not to make money for the corporations that make the arms, tanks, fighter jets, bullets etc etc etc
Yes there is the control of resources = but if you were to just use a DEW then there would be no profit for the 'Defence' industry...
Also - 99% of the public who hear 'conspiracy theorists' talk about the use of a DEW on 911 scoff at the idea.. as they are too uninformed to know that these things not only exist.. but have been in existence for some time.
By using DEWs in open warfare you then alert the uninformed masses to the poss. they were used on 911

yep.... i concur. Shame we don't have any footage of it in action................yet.
quark1
Member
#1268 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:31
Reply 
War can also be used as a useful distraction for problems 'at home' which are starting to boil over and cause a problem on home turf.

Better that the killing and destruction is going on elsewhere.

Of course if a government wants such a distraction they have to take the population with them and what better vehicle than the 'convincer' of an attack by a foreign power or terrorist group on an iconic landmark?
nordsee220
Member
#1269 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:38 | Edited by: nordsee220
Reply 
AllSpark:
however there is still the problem of the inward bent metal on the outside of the building cut in the shape of a large plane

Just to throw a spanner in the works...
Are the images of the 'Wheatchex" (Shreddies to us Brits) bent inwards real or have they been doctored?
Are the images of the plane shaped holes real or have they been doctored?

Perhaps we'll never know but some things are certain.

1) If a plane is propelled by engines which are tougher than the plane's fuselage and that plane hits a wall, the engines will continue FORWARDS until stopped as they are the driving force. (Pentacon anomaly)

2) If the wall the plane's fuselage hits caves in from the impact of said fuselage then the engines, which will continue forwards as in 1 above, being tougher than the fuselage will punch holes in the wall more effectively. (Pentacon anomaly)

3) If the engines are mounted on the plane's wings then the engines are propelling the wings forwards, effectively dragging the fuselage along with them. If the fuselage then hits a wall and begins immediate deceleration then the wings will continue forwards and not fold back. (Pentacon anomaly)

4) If no-one saw the plane hit the Pentacon and none of the 86 security cameras were working, how can the Pentacon investigators state as fact that the plane's wings folded backwards and against physical laws. Again, nobody saw it. (Pentacon anomaly)

5) How on earth did the tailplane, being some 40 odd feet high PLUS flight altitude (4 feet nudge wink) not manage to damage any masonary above the 16 feet diameter fuselage hole? (Pentacon anomaly)

6) If a plane flies because the wing design causes higher pressure below than above, enough for fresh air to lift 100 tonnes, thereby forming an invisible bouncy cushion underneath, why weren't the wings forced upwards by the enormous air pressure with nowhere to go as the ground was in the way as they snapped off and the mass of the plane holding them down was removed? (Pentacon anomaly)
AllSpark
Member
#1270 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 17:58
Reply 
nordsee220:
Are the images of the plane shaped holes real or have they been doctored?

They look real to me....


Joe
Member
#1271 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 18:35
Reply 
Joe:
Forget the "holographic trick"; I hope most people can see through that lie, by now.

MK_DON:
I am yet to see any evidence which convinces me that Richards interp. of the holographic theory can be dismissed -

What I meant to say was, the "holographic trick" put out by the media etc, in order to convince everyone that ordinary aircrafts can do so much damage in bringing down two of the tallest buildings in the world...
nordsee220
Member
#1272 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 19:45
Reply 
Joe:
in order to convince everyone that ordinary aircrafts can do so much damage in bringing down two of the tallest buildings in the world...

...and another they didn't even get to touch...
wensam
Member
#1273 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 21:10
Reply 
The outline of the planes (the cat splat) cut through the buildings could have been a separate set of explosions rigged to trigger on impact, either by the projectile object or by a separate control device- what was the flash for, seen just before impact?

Did anyone hear anything? If a plane is flying at that level through a city, surely people will look around. The footage i saw of the impact revealed that there was no immediate noise to alert of such an event- perhaps New York is too noisy? I asked Richard this during his tour and he said that Andrew J is looking into it. Im not up to scratch, but I remember my initial responses when it happened which were, that it was unreal.
Planettraveller
Member
#1274 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 21:37
Reply 
quark1:
Pls bear in mind I'm not that desperately technical in physics/engineering!

Could a Tomahawk - or its ilk - be kitted out with a new suit of clothes - a simplistic veneer - to take on the appearance of an aircraft and still retain all its manoeverability etc., and deadly finish.

Eureaka!!!! A man that talks my kind of physics.I deffo think it was a missile dressed up like a jet.A jet would have hit,caused huge huge damage but most of the debris would have fell to the ground.
I think they were both missiles in fancy dress,both carrying devices that would later explode causing the buildings to fall.
The pentagon I think was more of a missile because it dodged street lamps and only a small hole and hardly any reckage.
Cant see it being a hologram on any really.
Planettraveller
Member
#1275 | Posted: 8 Aug 2012 21:43
Reply 
wensam:
Did anyone hear anything? If a plane is flying at that level through a city, surely people will look around. The footage i saw of the impact revealed that there was no immediate noise to alert of such an event- perhaps New York is too noisy?

wensam-Hi How are you? Yes yr correct about the noise.I live near an Royal Marine Airbase and when any aircraft go over the noise is totally deafening.Even in New York it would be bad.I use to live in Mancs and the noise when a jet went over was unreal and I was 14 miles from airport.
 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  83  84  85  86  87  ...  97  98  »» 
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Image Link  URL Link 

   
» Username  » Password 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please enter your login/password details upon posting a message, or sign up first
TO JOIN THIS FORUM: WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
We may be considering adding new members on a "block basis". We will collect new member requests and then introduce a new batch. The new memebrs will be identifiable by a prefix in their username as a "new member". Anyone considered to be trolling or causing trouble will be immedialtey removed. To be put on the list please email richard@richplanet.net AND GIVE YOUR US NAME, A USERNAME, PASSWORD. I would imagine a new batch of new members will be added in January 2012.
 

Forums are powered by miniBB®