Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,863 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 724,259
Pageviews Today: 916,623Threads Today: 228Posts Today: 3,523
08:15 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34519955
United States
03/04/2013 09:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
He's wrong. One of my friends watched as the 2nd plane flew into the WTC. He told me this in 2004 as we discussed 9/11 - he worked in Wall Street at the time and had heard about the first plane hitting and went to look at the building. As he was watching the first tower burning he said he saw the second plane fly in and hit the 2nd building.

Now I believe the planes could have been remote controlled planes. The towers certainly were brought down by explosives, perhaps even by the technology Judy Woods said was used. But planes did hit the towers since my friend had no reason to lie as I detailed above.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18713240


You're friend did see a plane or a hologram of one is what is being said here. Why are you people so dense? You argue about things that aren't being said.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26907730


No, what was being said is that NO ONE saw, on live TV, a second plane fly into the WTC. The claim was that those shots were only shown "later in the day". That claim is false.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34519955
United States
03/04/2013 09:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
It's amazing how attached people become to what they saw on TV and refuse to look at the evidence. Any dispassionate review of the evidence shows that what was seen on TV was impossible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35485888


"Attached"? Bullshit. I, for one, have looked at LOTS of supposed evidence of the kind you are apparently talking about. It's comprised of little more than wishful thinking and preconceived conclusions.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34519955
United States
03/04/2013 09:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
John Lear will be going live at 9:00 pm EST on Nsearch Radio with Stew Webb to go over his evidence that no planes hit the towers on 9/11

Instead holograms and conventional explosives were used to fool the masses. He also states that the "Death Ray" was used to bring down the towers which ties in perfectly with Stew Webb's Intel sources and the research of Judy Wood!

[link to www.project.nsearch.com]

[link to www.stewwebb.com]

Here's John's affidavit that no planes hit the towers.

[link to www.stewwebb.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19004725


He is wrong, planes did hit and one left an imprint in the glass
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8017901


what glass? I thought the heat melted the steel, so it didnt melt the glass?
 Quoting: MONSTER


Perfect example of a false, strawman, position being repeated, over and over again. The story is NOT that the steel was MELTED to bring the building down.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34519955
United States
03/04/2013 09:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
ok, how about you show me a screenshot of what you saw on LIVE tv that day that shows you definatively it was a large airliner.

Maybe you should look into the media fakery of that day! but that will take us back to my 'ego' point, and you're not going to study to prove yourself wrong are you?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Your other claim (beside the one where you falsely claim that shots of a plane hitting the 2nd tower were only shown "later in the day")is that I only saw something which was "blurry" and that my mind deciphered as an aircraft. That simply isn't true- what was shown needed no stretch in imagination to be identified as an aircraft.

So... what are you actually claiming, that NO live shot took place? That is incorrect- I saw the live shot, along with many others- IN REAL TIME. Is your claim that what was shown was too "blurry" to positively identify? Again, incorrect- what was certainly shaped like an aircraft. So now... apparently you are left with claiming that the shot(s) were "fake", is that it?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


NOTE: No response.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
NO LIVE footage of the plane impacting the towers!

Only four shots were aired LIVE when the plane hits the building.

NONE of those shots show the plane impacting and entering the building.

Those four shots show a blurry or shadowless image that resembles a plane.
-These images would be easy to add into the live footage as they were so basic and did not show the impact which would've made it a lot harder to do live.


Something made the holes in the building but we do not have any live footage of what it was.

Major news networks broadcasting the SAME live footage, so obviousy come through one network hub.



Then we have the footage released later in the day showing planes impacting and entering the towers.
These videos are very poor animations that show numerous anomalies and defying physics.




BUT WE SEEN IT ON THE TEEVEE! SO IT MUST BE TRUE!




.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
It's amazing how attached people become to what they saw on TV and refuse to look at the evidence. Any dispassionate review of the evidence shows that what was seen on TV was impossible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35485888


"Attached"? Bullshit. I, for one, have looked at LOTS of supposed evidence of the kind you are apparently talking about. It's comprised of little more than wishful thinking and preconceived conclusions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955


How can a 767 NOT decelerate when impacting a scyscraper?


...when it is a animation, thats how.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
John Lear will be going live at 9:00 pm EST on Nsearch Radio with Stew Webb to go over his evidence that no planes hit the towers on 9/11

Instead holograms and conventional explosives were used to fool the masses. He also states that the "Death Ray" was used to bring down the towers which ties in perfectly with Stew Webb's Intel sources and the research of Judy Wood!

[link to www.project.nsearch.com]

[link to www.stewwebb.com]

Here's John's affidavit that no planes hit the towers.

[link to www.stewwebb.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19004725


He is wrong, planes did hit and one left an imprint in the glass
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8017901


what glass? I thought the heat melted the steel, so it didnt melt the glass?
 Quoting: MONSTER


Perfect example of a false, strawman, position being repeated, over and over again. The story is NOT that the steel was MELTED to bring the building down.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955



What caused the molten 'metal' under the debris of building 7?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Why is it when we stabilise the video footage of a plane flying into the tower something strange happens to this 'plane'......it starts jumping up and down and not a level flight path we see in the regular footage.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Why is there no plane debris falling from the impact location?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
How do 3 out of 4 huge titanium engines disappear?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
How does a landing gear wheel travel through the steel outer box columns, through concrete floors, through core columns and then become wedged in the outer box columns the other side but still have enough energy to propel a huge outer box column section which ways several tons overa huge distance.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
How come the only engine found is from a different plane?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 01:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I'll stop for now.


- Those buildings were ready rigged and coming down that day regardless.

- Real planes pose too many complications that could fail (remember those buildings had to comedown regardless)


Easy answer - fake planes
...and a hell of a lot of 'programming' from the mass deception device aka teevee.
ehecatl

User ID: 35447451
Mexico
03/04/2013 02:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Simply put, none of the 3 buildings in NY could have fallen vertical the way they did, according to any official story.

That is an indisputable fact of engineering.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
NO LIVE footage of the plane impacting the towers!

Only four shots were aired LIVE when the plane hits the building.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155



That's odd. The original post, to which I responded on this matter, claimed that NO live shots were aired.

NONE of those shots show the plane impacting and entering the building.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


So what then... they "faked" the footage, but didn't bother to do it convincingly? Why?

Those four shots show a blurry or shadowless image that resembles a plane.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


"Blurry"? Compared to what? You expect a distant shot from a news camera to have some extraordinary level of resolution, otherwise it is suspect? Why?

-These images would be easy to add into the live footage as they were so basic and did not show the impact which would've made it a lot harder to do live.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Right... once again, the massive conspiracy which is also technically inept. Right... Yawn.

Something made the holes in the building but we do not have any live footage of what it was.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Um.. so if "live" footage is 'fakeable', why worry about whether it was "live" or not? There is vid of the first plane hitting. I suppose that is "fake" too?

Major news networks broadcasting the SAME live footage, so obviousy come through one network hub.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Sorry? You said there were FOUR shots. Now you are claiming that they were all the SAME SHOT? I think they were not all the same shot.

Then we have the footage released later in the day showing planes impacting and entering the towers.
These videos are very poor animations that show numerous anomalies and defying physics.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


You mean you have taken admittedly average quality images and extrapolated various "anomalies" to mean what you want them to mean. Yawn.

BUT WE SEEN IT ON THE TEEVEE! SO IT MUST BE TRUE!


.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


You fall back on the false notion that everybody who doesn't believe YOU is a stupid sheep. Hardly the case. As I already said- analysis driven primarily by wishful thinking, reaching convenient conclusions. Yawn.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
It's amazing how attached people become to what they saw on TV and refuse to look at the evidence. Any dispassionate review of the evidence shows that what was seen on TV was impossible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35485888


"Attached"? Bullshit. I, for one, have looked at LOTS of supposed evidence of the kind you are apparently talking about. It's comprised of little more than wishful thinking and preconceived conclusions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955


How can a 767 NOT decelerate when impacting a scyscraper?


...when it is a animation, thats how.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Not decelerate? You mean between the moment of impact of the nose till when the tail arrives at the building?? You expect to analyse, with THAT degree of sophistication, from a poor resolution, distant video? Hilarious!

First of all, an aircraft of that type is made of the lightest structure which can hold the various components in place. It is NOT stiff or strong enough to cause the aft end of the plane to slow down simply due to the nose section being crushed at flight speeds. Is it THIS sort of nonsense upon which you base your conclusions and your "truth"? Truly fucking hilarious!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
...


He is wrong, planes did hit and one left an imprint in the glass
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8017901


what glass? I thought the heat melted the steel, so it didnt melt the glass?
 Quoting: MONSTER


Perfect example of a false, strawman, position being repeated, over and over again. The story is NOT that the steel was MELTED to bring the building down.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955



What caused the molten 'metal' under the debris of building 7?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Oh, so now it's not that what brought down the buildings was "melted steel", it's melted metal under the "pile"? Do you have ANY idea of the kinetic energy involved in that many floors of a building, falling that far? Not to mention the amount of combustible material crammed into that hole.

I'm sure you will tell us what it really was, though.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Why is it when we stabilise the video footage of a plane flying into the tower something strange happens to this 'plane'......it starts jumping up and down and not a level flight path we see in the regular footage.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


It's marginal-quality video. You expect it to display some sort of high-resolution properties? Seriously? Once again... the mighty conspiracy has inserted this "fake" footage, but has done so in such a way that any amateur internet sleuth can see right through it. Right...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Why is there no plane debris falling from the impact location?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


You mean the "truthers" SAY no debris, at all, fell.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 02:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
How do 3 out of 4 huge titanium engines disappear?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


What is the percentage of mass and volume of those engines compared to the debris from the collapse of the WTC? Please show your work.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
I'll stop for now.


- Those buildings were ready rigged and coming down that day regardless.

- Real planes pose too many complications that could fail (remember those buildings had to comedown regardless)


Easy answer - fake planes
...and a hell of a lot of 'programming' from the mass deception device aka teevee.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Nope. Lots of people saw, with their OWN eyes, those planes hit the towers. Nothing to do with "TEEVEE".

Numerous unfounded pre-suppositions, above, leading to what YOU claim is the only possible conclusion. Yawn.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
How come the only engine found is from a different plane?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


You mean- "truthers" SAY that the only engine found was from a different plane. Sorry, but you don't get to ASSUME that anything said on the internet on this subject is automatically proven fact.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Simply put, none of the 3 buildings in NY could have fallen vertical the way they did, according to any official story.

That is an indisputable fact of engineering.
 Quoting: ehecatl


You mean, you SAY this is an indisputable fact of engineering.
By the way, one of the arguments by 911 "truthers" is that too much debris spewed out SIDEWAYS, so which is it- too vertical or too much sideways?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35569579
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 03:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Dude. It was obvious that planes did hit. There are many reports and amateur video of it.
 Quoting: #Geomagnetic_Storm#


i would have said the 2nd plane was a missle with holographic tech. you can see a flash of light as it hits the building from below the plane (middle?)
as the plane hits the physics isn't right. they would have expected the engine to fly out the other side.

may seem far fetched but TPTB are fucked in the head. also their tech is like 20 years ahead of what we are seeing now.

i could find a video if you wanted?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
ok, how about you show me a screenshot of what you saw on LIVE tv that day that shows you definatively it was a large airliner.

Maybe you should look into the media fakery of that day! but that will take us back to my 'ego' point, and you're not going to study to prove yourself wrong are you?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Your other claim (beside the one where you falsely claim that shots of a plane hitting the 2nd tower were only shown "later in the day")is that I only saw something which was "blurry" and that my mind deciphered as an aircraft. That simply isn't true- what was shown needed no stretch in imagination to be identified as an aircraft.

So... what are you actually claiming, that NO live shot took place? That is incorrect- I saw the live shot, along with many others- IN REAL TIME. Is your claim that what was shown was too "blurry" to positively identify? Again, incorrect- what was certainly shaped like an aircraft. So now... apparently you are left with claiming that the shot(s) were "fake", is that it?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


NOTE: No response.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955


NOTE: STILL no response from AC12731155 about his claim that NO LIVE FOOTAGE of the aircraft footage was aired that day that nothing like that was shown until "later in the day".
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
Dude. It was obvious that planes did hit. There are many reports and amateur video of it.
 Quoting: #Geomagnetic_Storm#


i would have said the 2nd plane was a missle with holographic tech. you can see a flash of light as it hits the building from below the plane (middle?)
as the plane hits the physics isn't right. they would have expected the engine to fly out the other side.

may seem far fetched but TPTB are fucked in the head. also their tech is like 20 years ahead of what we are seeing now.

i could find a video if you wanted?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35569579


So the argument from the "truthers" is BOTH that the engines couldn't have penetrated the structure of the building AND that they should have flown clear through and out the other side? How droll.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 35350153
United States
03/04/2013 03:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
He's wrong. One of my friends watched as the 2nd plane flew into the WTC. He told me this in 2004 as we discussed 9/11 - he worked in Wall Street at the time and had heard about the first plane hitting and went to look at the building. As he was watching the first tower burning he said he saw the second plane fly in and hit the 2nd building.

Now I believe the planes could have been remote controlled planes. The towers certainly were brought down by explosives, perhaps even by the technology Judy Woods said was used. But planes did hit the towers since my friend had no reason to lie as I detailed above.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18713240


My ex-husband worked right there and he and everyone in his office saw the second plane hit - like your friend. There were definitely explosives. There were also definitely planes. Sorry to hear Lear come out with this.
 Quoting: Girl Genius




"saw the second plane hit"

You are familiar with what a hologram is, right?

But if they used holograms, why didn't they use the right airplane? You know, one with windows like a regular passenger 757?
When they launched the 727 engine out to the street, why didn't they use a 757 engine?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1502752
United States
03/04/2013 03:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
He's wrong. One of my friends watched as the 2nd plane flew into the WTC. He told me this in 2004 as we discussed 9/11 - he worked in Wall Street at the time and had heard about the first plane hitting and went to look at the building. As he was watching the first tower burning he said he saw the second plane fly in and hit the 2nd building.

Now I believe the planes could have been remote controlled planes. The towers certainly were brought down by explosives, perhaps even by the technology Judy Woods said was used. But planes did hit the towers since my friend had no reason to lie as I detailed above.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18713240


My ex-husband worked right there and he and everyone in his office saw the second plane hit - like your friend. There were definitely explosives. There were also definitely planes. Sorry to hear Lear come out with this.
 Quoting: Girl Genius




"saw the second plane hit"

You are familiar with what a hologram is, right?

But if they used holograms, why didn't they use the right airplane? You know, one with windows like a regular passenger 757?
When they launched the 727 engine out to the street, why didn't they use a 757 engine?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 35350153


Once again, taking marginal-quality video and extrapolating details beyond its capability. Someone SAID it was the wrong engine, and you pass it along as proven fact, from that point forward.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12731155
United Kingdom
03/04/2013 03:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
ok, how about you show me a screenshot of what you saw on LIVE tv that day that shows you definatively it was a large airliner.

Maybe you should look into the media fakery of that day! but that will take us back to my 'ego' point, and you're not going to study to prove yourself wrong are you?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12731155


Your other claim (beside the one where you falsely claim that shots of a plane hitting the 2nd tower were only shown "later in the day")is that I only saw something which was "blurry" and that my mind deciphered as an aircraft. That simply isn't true- what was shown needed no stretch in imagination to be identified as an aircraft.

So... what are you actually claiming, that NO live shot took place? That is incorrect- I saw the live shot, along with many others- IN REAL TIME. Is your claim that what was shown was too "blurry" to positively identify? Again, incorrect- what was certainly shaped like an aircraft. So now... apparently you are left with claiming that the shot(s) were "fake", is that it?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 636186


NOTE: No response.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34519955


NOTE: STILL no response from AC12731155 about his claim that NO LIVE FOOTAGE of the aircraft footage was aired that day that nothing like that was shown until "later in the day".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1502752


Dude you are not worth responding too, I'm sure the readers will be able to see through your pseudo science bullshit.

You keep bringing up the above but if you read for what it is and not what you want to see the maybe you will see what I said the first time I mentioned it.
"another misconception,

You DID NOT see any planes crashing into the towers LIVE on tv! the movies of planes entering the towers came later in the day."



I saw you typed "and please show your work"

I honestly laughed! from jref by chance? funny how sheep follow sheep!

I bet you can't even got to the shops without a peer reviewed shopping list lol.


So like I said, I shan't be responding to your BS as I've been there many times before going round in circles. I say it was black you will say it was dark grey.



ps education does NOT equal intelligence.
st.just
User ID: 26480516
United States
03/04/2013 03:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: John Lear - No Planes Hit Towers on 911
oscillating (?) rays and holograms programs sound sophisticated. anyone you know mr. lear who has or had the operational capabilities, the ability to contain broad media, and the prior experience to achieve their or the perps' objectives of the day using those means?

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!