Hologram Technology

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.
Locked
fbenario
Member
Posts: 2241
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Hologram Technology

Unread post by fbenario » Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:30 pm

Ugh. It's likely we are not being told how far along this technology has progressed. If used in future false flags it may make our job of exposing the fraud more difficult.
"Military One Step Closer to Battlefield Holograms

Optical scientist Nasser Peyghambarian and his teammates at the University of Arizona have demonstrated what The New York Times calls “actual moving holograms that are filmed in one spot and then projected and viewed in another spot.” The Times likens the holograms to the tiny image of Princess Leia that R2D2 showed Luke Skywalker in the beginning of Star Wars, only “a lot more haltingly, as the display changes only every two seconds.”

Peyghambarian’s hologram is created by a suite of 16 cameras that use lasers to record data on “smart” plastic some distance away that, when hit by a special light, project the image in solid-looking 3D. A partner team at Columbia University is studying ways to beam the holo-data via the Internet, to allow 3D video chats or instantaneous transmission of holographic maps, blueprints or medical scans. Peyghambarian said it might take a decade for the technology to become affordable and widespread. Weaponization would be much further behind (though we wouldn’t bet on today’s cash-strapped military to invest in a Face-of-Allah gun). Cost aside, it’s just not very PC."

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/12 ... holograms/

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:56 pm

You may have forgotten the research I did into holograms at the last forum.

In it, I discovered (to my own satisfaction anyway) that holograms existing out of nowhere isn't exactly something that will threaten human perceptions anytime soon.

Air is too chaotic and fluid to convincingly project an image on it that makes the 3-D convincing and the Star Wars reference is a bit hyperbolic considering they are still talking about the need for solid plastic as a light bender.

If you study it carefully, you may find holography is very much dependent on a screen.

The idea that a hologram could be projected into the air is a bit like saying you can set up a video projector and point it into empty space and command the light to stop in the middle of its journey from the light source out into the open air. It just doesn't happen that way.

The 'hologram' they are talking about here is merely an advanced sort of 3-D TV screen - not the simulation of a person visible from every walk-around angle.

Nothing in 9/11 was "a hologram" - seriously.

And if it were possible, you are talking about atomic-level mass manipulation of trilions of particles. Holograms would be the least of our worries.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2241
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by fbenario » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:18 am

Thanks. I now remember I found your research pretty convincing in its logic and application.

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by Dcopymope » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:49 am

You know there is a documentary about Project Bluebeam that goes into the evidence that is available to prove whether or not the technology itself actually exists, it seems to me like it definitely exists and is ready to go into action whenever the perps need it.

Project Blue Beam Documentary part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvOIJRUtzWg

Project Blue Beam Documentary part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcYG3ZVH ... re=related

When we're talking about Project Bluebeam, we're not talking about the crappy static transparent Holograms shown in the Star Wars movies as the article referenced, we’re talking about projected images that to us will look like perfect full on solid 3d objects, along with projected sound as the documentary also shows. If they are going to use this technology in whatever false flag event they have planned, then it has to be believable, and using the holograms in Star Wars as an example of what it may look like is erroneous at best, because it’s not at all a good example of a realistic looking or believable holographic projection and what is claimed Project Bluebeam can actually do. I don’t think we’ve seen a legit video showing Project Bluebeam in action, except in the video below from the closing ceremony of the 1984 Olympics of a UFO flying over the stadium and landing in the field. Notice the announcer on the speaker tells the audience to light their flashlights with the color blue as the UFO comes in. Could that be symbolic of Project Blubeam? It very well could have been Project Bluebeam in action, a test run you might say, and it did look like a real solid object, a lot better than that crappy holographic projection of Princess Leia in Star Wars.

Olympics Games Los Angeles 1984 Closing Ceremony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCYElo49dJI

As with all technology and science, I would agree with you that no we aren't being told the truth about how advanced this technology really is. Based on what we already know, they are atleast fifty to sixty years ahead of whatever is peddled to the public as "new" or "in development", to keep us living in the past.
Last edited by Dcopymope on Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:03 am

Dcopymope, my understanding is that the recent Chinese Olympics got in trouble for faking television graphics as real fireworks and special effects - not for revealing 3-D projection technology.

If you believe this 1984 video is a hologram, I am not really sure what to say to you. What makes you think it is? Do you have no other rational explanation for a sound and light show?

That documentary you link to I don't really have a comment on. It doesn't really play as "research" to me. More like more hyperbole. Focused sound and/or light technology does not a 3-D "beamed in" hologram make.

Now, where did you read that I said they have advanced hologram technology? Don't twist my words. I said if they had something like it, it would be so powerful it would have led to far more weaponized things than a mere hologram device. The point is - the technology doesn't exist because it is not physically possible using even our most advanced technology. It is like saying you have a magic wand that can turn someone into a frog. It simply doesn't exist.

Speculating that it will soon be possible doesn't make it easier for scientists to jump over the physical hurdles. And I am not saying you are saying that - but merely commenting that there seems to be a lot of people who want us to think it's possible based on the number of paranoid videos about it. We have proof of TV fakery - that is a pretty significant technology that fools more people quicker and cheaper than any sort of complex hologram set up.

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by Dcopymope » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:19 am

hoi.polloi wrote:Dcopymope, my understanding is that the recent Chinese Olympics got in trouble for faking television graphics as real fireworks and special effects - not for revealing 3-D projection technology.

If you believe this 1984 video is a hologram, I am not really sure what to say to you. What makes you think it is? Do you have no other rational explanation for a sound and light show?

That documentary you link to I don't really have a comment on.
The other two explanations that I typically see other than the one I've given for the 1984 video is it was either a real UFO or simply an object with fancy lights hanging from a silent helicopter (no helicopter was seen in sight of course). You can take your pick of what you personally think it was, I’m saying it may have been Project Bluebeam in action, but no I don't really have any other explanation for why I think it was could have been Project Bluebeam, at the moment at least.
hoi.polloi wrote:Now, where did you read that I said they have advanced hologram technology? Don't twist my words. I said if they had something like it, it would be so powerful it would have led to far more weaponized things than a mere hologram device.The point is - the technology doesn't exist because it is not physically possible using even our most advanced technology. It is like saying you have a magic wand that can turn someone into a frog. It simply doesn't exist.
I never said you did say it. And you believe the technology doesn't exist, but we really don't know what they have, and how advanced it really is, which is what I'm saying. Its important that they keep us in the dark about our true scientific technological development, so that when they stage their grand hoax, most will fall for it, because they'll believe that its all real.
Last edited by Dcopymope on Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by Dcopymope » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:00 am

On the subject of holographic projection, its existence, and its current state of development, the article below puts things in perspective for us about how we’re given a false perception of how advanced they really are in technology and science.
Old Technology Presented As Cutting Edge *
Wise Up Journal
15.03.2010
By Gabriel O’Hara

These two mainstream articles below highlight the fact that a false public perception is induced making them believe they know the cutting edge of technology when in fact we are kept in the dark with old technology presented as new. Even basic research is presented as new when in fact the technology has been in use for decades. The first article is from 2010 and the second more informative article was published in 2002 by one of the UK’s largest newspapers.
Press Association / Yahoo News
14.03.2010

“The claim was made by scientists unravelling the secrets of spider silk, which is stronger and less brittle than steel.

“They believe in future it may be possible to copy spider ingenuity to create new classes of materials that are both incredibly flexible and strong out of cheap, ordinary elements.

“Scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, US, studied the fundamental properties of spider silk using computer models to simulate its structure.”
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) are no dummies. They are a private re-search university that works with the United States Defense department. It gets multiple grants from the United States federal government and has one the largest endowment and annual research expenditures among universities in the world.

Milk is an ordinary item that can be produced on mass. The article below is from years earlier.
Telegraph
18.01.2002
By Roger Highfield

‘Spider-goats’ start work on wonder web

“A HERD of goats containing spider genes is about to be milked for the ingredients of spider silk to mass-produce one of nature’s most sought-after materials.

“Webster and Peter, genetically altered goats unveiled today by the Canadian company Nexia, are the founders of a GM herd whose offspring will produce spider silk protein in their milk that can be collected, purified and spun into the fibres. Females will begin mass-producing spider milk in the second quarter of this year for a variety of military and industrial uses.

“Dragline silk, which comprises the radiating spokes of a spider web, is stronger than the synthetic fibre Kevlar, stretches better than nylon and, weight for weight, is five times stronger than steel.

“spider yarn has been spun by the US Army and the company Nexia Biotechnologies of Montreal,”
Put your shock of spider-goats on hold for a moment to realise this technology is old-hat. They certainly do spin a good yarn when trying to make us believe old technology will be developed some day in the future. When we are told this or that technology is a new discovery and “it is believed one day in the future it may be possible to make it” we believe it because experts in that field said so. This 2002 public announcement was old technology at the time it was revealed too, the same as the 2010 so called discovery. There is a branch of the law called National Security which allows scientific knowledge by military to be kept classified away from the public. The military use billions and billions of the public’s money to do this. Some of these technologies, when obsolete, can be chosen by the publicly unelected higher ups in the military and revealed to us and used in public mission like the triangular F-117 stealth bomber in the late 1980s. Before that on classified test flights and classified missions around the world who knows what the public thought, that spotted triangular crafts in the sky, including other military pilots not in the know.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:37 pm

I see what you're saying about how they have advanced technology that they don't tell us about. I agree.

I am simply arguing that the technology they are threatening us with is not feasible. Explain the science of a 3-D hologram that is projected into the air, how it could theoretically work, and you will quickly understand how difficult it would have to be in real life. However, if you think you really understand the concept - I am not saying you should point to a patent number and explain the exact engineering science - but if you can just explain the scientific concept then we would all have a better reason to think that it is possible.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2241
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by fbenario » Sun Dec 12, 2010 2:41 am

Dcopymope wrote:The other two explanations that I typically see other than the one I've given for the 1984 video is it was either a real UFO or simply an object with fancy lights hanging from a silent helicopter (no helicopter was seen in sight of course).
There are times during that 1984 video where the 'penumbra/aura' above the UFO resembles the Goodyear blimp that hovers over many major American sporting events. And blimps are silent, unlike helicopters, not to mention invisible at night if cloaked in something that reflects no light.

Could the UFO be something attached to the bottom of a blimp?

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by Dcopymope » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:30 am

hoi.polloi wrote:I see what you're saying about how they have advanced technology that they don't tell us about. I agree.

I am simply arguing that the technology they are threatening us with is not feasible. Explain the science of a 3-D hologram that is projected into the air, how it could theoretically work, and you will quickly understand how difficult it would have to be in real life. However, if you think you really understand the concept - I am not saying you should point to a patent number and explain the exact engineering science - but if you can just explain the scientific concept then we would all have a better reason to think that it is possible.
Well, I’m actually fairly new to this Bluebeam stuff. You say that Holographic images are dependent on a screen, well, from my understanding of this tech so far, using Strontium Barium Niobate, which we know is a major ingredient of the chemtrail mixes would act as the screen for the image. I can’t really explain it any better, for now at least, because its mad complicated looking at the documents. It seems that the spraying of the sky has multiple purposes. So far, we know it has to do with weather modification, depopulation, holographic projections, and mind manipulation (psychotronic warfare). If this technology wasn't feasible then they wouldn’t have released any of these patents concerning this tech to the public to begin with, they would still be at the drawing board, and the military wouldn't even openly consider using it on the battlefield, as reported by the so called "mainstream" media itself. As the article I posted said, by the time they publish anything at all relating to science and technology, its already obsolete. For an event like 9/11 though, I don't see a reason at all for them to use this technology, there is simply no valid reason to believe that they did. But for staging something that is supposed to happen on a global scale, like a biblical event or an alien invasion, I can't think of any better way to do it then using holographic projections, along with the use of psychotronic weaponry that can beam images and sound right into your mind (mimics schizophrenia). We should all know that they are going to have to do a hell of lot more than just showing fake footage of ominous looking UFO's hovering over every major city; we would have to actually see it and hear it for ourselves.
fbenario wrote:
Dcopymope wrote:The other two explanations that I typically see other than the one I've given for the 1984 video is it was either a real UFO or simply an object with fancy lights hanging from a silent helicopter (no helicopter was seen in sight of course).
There are times during that 1984 video where the 'penumbra/aura' above the UFO resembles the Goodyear blimp that hovers over many major American sporting events. And blimps are silent, unlike helicopters, not to mention invisible at night if cloaked in something that reflects no light.

Could the UFO be something attached to the bottom of a blimp?
It could be a blimp, I don't know what else to say about it to be honest with you, except to say that UFO's are also supposed to be fairly silent aircraft.

SmokingGunII
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by SmokingGunII » Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:05 am

It looks like a blimp with a lighting rig attached. Certainly it is tethered. It's not a hologram.

Not sure why we are discussing holograms on here - absolute bull and nothing but disinformation when applied to the 9/11 narrative.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6954
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by simonshack » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:09 pm

SmokingGunII wrote: Not sure why we are discussing holograms on here - absolute bull and nothing but disinformation when applied to the 9/11 narrative.
Yes, SG

I am also worried about discussing holograms here, for the very reason that you mention: the hologram conjectures applied to 9/11 were, IMHO, definitely churned out as a (ridiculous) way of getting the newsmedia off the hook. It's an absurd stretch, of course, yet one could imagine the TV networks going:

"Well, we just filmed what there was to see! Oh? Were they holograms? Ok, but our broadcast footage is absolutely real and legit - heh !"

Therefore, may I ask the author of this thread and everyone else to understand why I wish to delete this topic? May I do this without causing an uproar? Of course, hologram technology exists and is being constantly developed. I just feel we can do without this debate right here - at this time - since it is directly related to 9/11 disinformation. I'll consider any objections to this in the next 24 hours. Failing any compelling reason to leave it up, it will be jettisoned from our information-ship.

Dcopymope
Banned
Posts: 670
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:59 am
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by Dcopymope » Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:55 pm

simonshack wrote:
SmokingGunII wrote: Not sure why we are discussing holograms on here - absolute bull and nothing but disinformation when applied to the 9/11 narrative.
Yes, SG

I am also worried about discussing holograms here, for the very reason that you mention: the hologram conjectures applied to 9/11 were, IMHO, definitely churned out as a (ridiculous) way of getting the newsmedia off the hook. It's an absurd stretch, of course, yet one could imagine the TV networks going:

"Well, we just filmed what there was to see! Oh? Were they holograms? Ok, but our broadcast footage is absolutely real and legit - heh !"

Therefore, may I ask the author of this thread and everyone else to understand why I wish to delete this topic? May I do this without causing an uproar? Of course, hologram technology exists and is being constantly developed. I just feel we can do without this debate right here - at this time - since it is directly related to 9/11 disinformation. I'll consider any objections to this in the next 24 hours. Failing any compelling reason to leave it up, it will be jettisoned from our information-ship.
Why delete it? In case this subject of Hologram tech becomes relevant in future false flag attacks such as the kind I mentioned, why not just lock the thread instead until that time comes? This thread could serve as the hub for anything having to do with Hologram technology or Project Bluebeam in the future.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6954
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: Hologram Technology

Unread post by simonshack » Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:47 pm

Okydoky.

Done. :)

Locked