I doubt Bush could even spell 'isolationist'... my opinion- he's a pawn. he does what he's told, and it's not his plan. I doubt he has many plans that extend beyond 'dinner'.warren said:
much like myself in fact...
Has Shayler Lost the Plot?
- Thread starter smokedout
- Start date
much like myself in fact...
editor
hiraethified
Help! Please! Someone stop Jazzz from making an even bigger twat of himself!Jazzz said:
That "US military manual" you refer to is all made up.
The "Airborne Holographic Projector" is a sci fi fantasy. It doesn't exist. It never has. It's all make-believe, just like the "Star Tek-Exploiting the Final Frontier: Counterspace Operations in 2025" article in the same ' "US military manual.'
Look at the date of the "manual" you refer to. Yes, that's right. It's 2025!
Next you'll be telling us Daleks exist because you've seen them on Dr Who.
Bwahahaha!
editor
hiraethified
I do. To create a fast moving, plane-sized hologram that would fool an entire city looking on from all angles and stand up to extremely close subsequent scrutiny from world aviation experts is a massively tall order (notwithstanding the thorny question of what happened to the original planes, the passengers, how they faked the callls etc etc etc).snouty warthog said:
Jazzz said:
"Welcome to Air Force 2025"
future study conducted 1995-1996 for the Air Force Chief of Staff
cover page/contents: http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/index.htm
Hardly a manual Jazzz
indeed. I don't know if they would have that level of technological advancement, which as you say would be a huge task. It does not seem the most likely scenario, and I am not sure where shayler is getting his facts from, but I think he's wrong in this instance.
However, I think it's likely that the military might be able to create say, a hologram of a tank that is fully convincing from one viewpoint...
Why don't you doubt it?snouty warthog said:
It doesn't exist as far as any known science goes. The hologram Jazzz has linked to are tiles which need to be viewed from one direction and with the correct lighting. Even then the images simply appear to be 3d objects within the frame of the tile. This is simply nothing like people seeing an object from all directions, or creating an image that is bigger than the frame which contains it. All the holograms are doing is creating an image of depth and a bit of parallax. They are no making objects appear in thin air.
You might as well say that you don't doubt that the US military has a time machine or an anti-gravity device. Saying stuff like this makes you look like a complete fucking idiot, and even saying "but it is possible" is no get out. The all the available evidence, an overwhealming body of facts, knowledge and scientific theory points towards the current non-existance of flying hologrammes (or anti-gravity boots or time machines). There is fuck all of evidence to the contrary. That it is possible that they will be invented in the future doesn't come into it.
editor
hiraethified
Sure, it may well be possible to create a full size hologram of a static object viewed from a single viewpoint that looks convincing under certain conditions.snouty warthog said:
But Shayler is insisting that "missiles surrounded by holograms" were what actually hit the WTC - and not a soul on the entire planet seems to have noticed the difference - except him and a handful of (ahem) 'truth-seekers,' of course.
Presumably they have extra secret powers to see the evidence that somehow eludes the rest of us.
Like I said: 100% bonkers!
well, 'may' is an important qualifier in my original sentence.TeeJay said:
see my above post. I am describing exactly that scenario, only on a larger scale.
I don't know about anti-grav, but I have heard that the military are exploring the invention of some kind of time-machine. Of course, I don't think they have succeeded in inventing one, nor will they.
holograms are possible. they could be used in warfare, like any other form of technology. that is also possible. that is all I am saying. I don't think that makes me an idiot.
at no point have I mentioned a belief in the possibility of flying holograms. straw man.
mikeinworthing
New Member
editor said:
That about sums it up for me, Shayler's claims are complete nonsense.
Not sure he's lost the plot, just making a buck directly or indirectly from his bullshit
*awaits book deal*
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Conspiracy theories by the shed load on George Galloway's chat show on talk-sport.
Here's an example from the first caller.
Twin towers blown up by US (bombs placed in the building), 9/11 aeroplanes hijacked taken to a US base and the passengers murdered and replaced by a drone.
You couldn't make it up. In this case it has been.
As Galloway pointed out these conspiracy theories are multiplying on the internet because of lack of trust in the powers that be and their lies over WMD's, Iraq etc.
http://www1.talksport.net/index.asp
Here's an example from the first caller.
Twin towers blown up by US (bombs placed in the building), 9/11 aeroplanes hijacked taken to a US base and the passengers murdered and replaced by a drone.
You couldn't make it up. In this case it has been.
As Galloway pointed out these conspiracy theories are multiplying on the internet because of lack of trust in the powers that be and their lies over WMD's, Iraq etc.
http://www1.talksport.net/index.asp
editor
hiraethified
Seeing as some of the finest minds on the planet working together are having immense trouble coming up with even a conceptual device that would definitely work for humans, I somehow doubt if the US military acting alone are going to be producing one any time soon, if ever.snouty warthog said:
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Evidently conspiraloons have never understood KISS.editor said:
Why waste time making a holographic projector when you could just use a real plane?
I think Philip K Dick makes the point that, if time travel is invented at any time, then it will exist at all times, as the technology to create it could be smuggled into different eras.
there's too many paradoxes involved in time-travel to make it feasible (IMO), at least in the traditional sci-fi form...
there's too many paradoxes involved in time-travel to make it feasible (IMO), at least in the traditional sci-fi form...
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Nah, split universes make it possible. Confusing but possible.
The best conceptual design for a time machine that I am aware of requires very large quanties of negative energy.
Negative energy is not a metaphor. It is not the kind generated by will-to-live-sapping loonspuds. It would be like the engergy conveyed an an electric wire, but negative.
Since no-one has ever seen a process on earth involving negative energy, let alone has the faintest idea how to generate any deliberately, time machines are going to be a way off. Indeed, it may turn out that negative energy is forbidden and that's the reason time travel doesn't happen and we aren't inundated with tourists from the future.
Time machines aren't an engineering problem, they're a physics problem. And you can't do physics in secret: without access to a worldwide community of physicists you won't get anywhere. So it's quite unlike the Stealth fighter, which was an engineering problem using 19th-century physics.
All this speculation about infinite military technology demonstrates a severe lack of grasp of reality. In some cases I hope it's caused by cannabis, but in others I'm unhappily sure it's organic.
Negative energy is not a metaphor. It is not the kind generated by will-to-live-sapping loonspuds. It would be like the engergy conveyed an an electric wire, but negative.
Since no-one has ever seen a process on earth involving negative energy, let alone has the faintest idea how to generate any deliberately, time machines are going to be a way off. Indeed, it may turn out that negative energy is forbidden and that's the reason time travel doesn't happen and we aren't inundated with tourists from the future.
Time machines aren't an engineering problem, they're a physics problem. And you can't do physics in secret: without access to a worldwide community of physicists you won't get anywhere. So it's quite unlike the Stealth fighter, which was an engineering problem using 19th-century physics.
All this speculation about infinite military technology demonstrates a severe lack of grasp of reality. In some cases I hope it's caused by cannabis, but in others I'm unhappily sure it's organic.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
@laptop- I don't know if anyone is speculating about infinite military tech. but I do think that whatever the cutting edge of technology is, it will be used in warfare. indeed, I believe that warfare drives various forms of technological advance- for instance the internet, which began as a military invention, from what I am told.
debunking the official story here:
www. infowars .com
www. infowars .com
posted slightly tongue in cheek... to balance the link to 911myths.com. I am sure most people in this debate are aware of both websites. cheers.
snouty warthog said:
But what those who say they "believe" the military has free-flying plate-free holograms, or time travel, or whatever, don't understand is the difference between physics and engineering.
It's physics that makes both bloody difficult. There's nothing to do engineering with until the physics is sorted - or rather unless it is sorted, because in the time-machine case I predict that sorting the physics will involve working out precisely why it can't be done.
That's because they don't actually want to understand anything. They just want to defend their "right" to sit around making shit up... what if... what if the military had a teleporter? A free energy device? A chocolate factory?
indeed. which, to drag the topic back to david shayler, I am not sure why he has taken such a unique and unusual stance (a holographic plane hiding a missile), despite the lack of evidence for the technology, let alone lack of evidence that it was used on the day. he has stuck to facts that can be backed up on previous occasions, either with his own experience, or with evidence.laptop said:
as far as I can see, there are 4 possible conclusions-
a) he has been fed a line, doesn't understand the physics, but likes the concept.
b) he is spreading disinformation.
c) he didn't actually say that, and the journalist lied.
d) it went down exactly like he said it did (so unlikely, in my opinion, that I am merely including this as a vague theoretical possibility. this is certainly not my opinion, let me be clear)
as I think he has a very sharp intelligent mind, and is clearly not 'bonkers', this comment of his has left me with a few question marks... I think it's between 'b' and 'c'...
OK, fair enough - it makes Shayler and any other twat who agrees with him a complete fucking idiot then.snouty warthog said:
As for fake tanks - they were used in WW2 - for example made out of wood and canvas and mounted on trucks in north africa, to confuse the enemy about tank numbers and positions. Somehow I'd think that even basic mock-ups like these are going to do a better job than a flat tile with a hologram of a tank that can only be seen from a certain angle and under certain lighting conditions.
The fact that we are even discussing this with reference to 9/11 shows what a brain-rotting pile of turd the Shayler and 9-11 "truth movement" produce and why its negative effects - on u75 and elsewhere - go far beyond some people being a little bit silly.
first time I have ever had a link censored... yr very keen ed. so people can post a link to 911myths, but not a website promoting an alternative view?editor said:
I agree that some people have overdone links in the past- myself, that is the first time ever that I have linked to infowars. and purely in the context of balance. ah well, your website
I think you can kind of lump those two together...laptop said:
but actually, you are correct. it is a possibilty, that I dismissed out of hand as I didn't think it was true according to my own judgement. by which criteria, I should have left out (d) as well... ok, amended list
a) he has been fed a line, doesn't understand the physics, but likes the concept.
b) he is spreading disinformation.
c) he didn't actually say that, and the journalist lied.
d) it went down exactly like he said it did
e) Shayler's logical thinking was impaired for at least the duration of the interview
Having a sharp mind doesn't preclude paranoia or delusions - in fact the sharper and more imaginative the mind the bigger the potential for it to go off on tangents.snouty warthog said:
I remember him being interviewed a few years ago at his house (out on an island in the thames estuary somewhere?) and he started going on about how there were helicopters watching him (a remark prompted when one flew nearby while the reporter was there). I also seem to remember him saying how he was using a lot of cannabis to 'steady his nerves' because of the stress of the trials etc.
"Losing the plot" doesn't mean becoming a gibbering idiot - while delusions can manifest as very set beliefs that diverge from reality and which are not amenible to normal types of evidence or rationality, the same person can still exhibit 'rationality' about a whole range of other things and otherwise behave normally.
ps, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's bored to buggery of discussing david shayler and non-existent holograms... I'll be back to this later... maybe... in the meantime, the five options might make a good poll, if the O/P can be bothered...
editor
hiraethified
You're as bad as Shayler.snouty warthog said:
It hasn't been "censored" at all. It's still there. Everyone can see it.
All I've done is remove the live link, and that's because a site as busy as urban is likely to show up in their logs.
And if that happens, there's an increased likelihood of more fruitloops crawling over here and guess what - I don't fancy having to deal with them. And yes. My site, my fucking extra hard work.
I don't think it's even remotely likely we're going to be bothered by posters from 911myths.com because - thankfully - most normal people don't act like conspiraloons on these boards.snouty warthog said:
Similar threads
