Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

This is an obvious Missile!!!! watch!

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jaden_x
funny how you people think every ufo video/photo is CGI or a bird but believe the footage of these planes on that day were real.

im not here to prove anything but the image above does look like a missile.
each for their own i guess...


what is funny is how you get upset when people don't automatically jump on yopur conspiracy bandwagon no matter how ridiculous it may be...and yes, this one is ridiculous. (psst...in the "missile" picture you can see wings...blurry but they are there)




posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by josephus maximus
reply to post by DodgeG1
 

so what about the other videos (which are much clearer) of a plane hitting the same side of the same building and multiple cameras videoing it?
oh let me guess CGI.
must be since you are proposing this blurry still of half of a frame to prove your point. well thats it then, everyone can go home it was a missile, forget anything else you've seen, game over.

how absurd, we (ATS) lose credibility with every ridiculous thread like this one posted!


No mate, not at all, all I'm saying is that from this picture it doesn't look like a plane


And yes to be fair CGI could be used to super impose a plane over a missle, but I believe that is being discussed in another thread on here


If you watch the video yourself you've got to admit it really doesn't look like a plane. The rest of the video's clearly show a plane hitting the tower tho



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DodgeG1
 


i've watched the video and if you quit pausing it and just watch it out of the corner of your eye (FBI trick) you can clearly see the wings and tail rotor. try it, stare at the spot on the building where it impacts and just keep watching that spot until it hits.

(is someone actually discussing CGI on ALL those home made videos?) NOW THAT IS RIDICULOUS! this site has just dropped ten points in credibility.


[edit on 12-9-2007 by josephus maximus]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by DodgeG1
 


All you have to do to see that it was indeed a plane is to continue to watch the video...at right about the 1:00 mark you see the exact same impact from a different angle...and it is clearly a commercial jet.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Night Watchman
 


just trying to get them to "see it" in their own "conspiracy evidence" video
but yes you're right.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Alright calm down you two!

I'm just posting a pic of what the original poster was talking about.


But this video stands out from the rest of them, it could be down to the angle it was taken at?



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by DodgeG1
 


did you even try that trick i told you about?



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Hang about... there were plenty more videos of when the second tower was hit, which all showed a plane. Either this is a fake video, or it's just a dodgy angle. But it was a plane that hit both towers..



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:51 AM
link   
1/4 of a second of a plane going 500+mph and shot up close...so you get a blurry image of the plane and it debunks the hundreds of other videos that show planes hitting the WTC towers? No.


Obviously a missle? No.

[edit on 12/9/07 by Pfeil]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
thought i would try and see if i could make the frames a little more clear.
maybe this could be of some help to anyone...




original image:
img.photobucket.com...

[edit on 12-9-2007 by jaden_x]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Originally posted by jaden_x




thought i would try and see if i could make the frames a little more clear.
maybe this could be of some help to anyone...



Thanks for the post jaden. I assume this is a joke.
The wings are too far forward on the fuselage and the wrong sweep. What is that 'stinger' on the tail. Not the tail I hope! And with the attitude of the airplane as drawn how did it get a hundred feet to the left in several milleseconds without an angle of bank.

Just curious. Thanks for the post.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   
On the first pause I saw what you were talking about. The plane didn't appear to have wings, thus it had the appearance of a missle. But, that's one LARGE missle ... if it's so.

But, after several pauses later, I managed to get it just before entry into the WTC and enhanced the image:



Looks to me that the wings were tilted toward the sun giving them a lighter appearance that couldn't be discerned against the sky. When in front of the building , the wings become much more apparent.

It's all in the angle and the lighting.

[edit on 12-9-2007 by tyranny22]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 



Thanks for the reply. i put that plane there for you guys to have an idea of the wing span and how there was no wing impact on the building as the object entered.


[edit on 12-9-2007 by jaden_x]

[edit on 12-9-2007 by jaden_x]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:08 AM
link   
One can easily tell that the photos above are doctored.

I guess the 9/11 forums are not watched as closely as they should.

Posts like the above just add to the downfall of the 9/11 threads.


Only after the fact do you mention that you 'put the plane in there' without initially stating that. It's posts like the above which others will see and take as fact.

Maybe management should start clamping down on pure nonsense threads, like the blatant CGI attack of the Pentagon or posts with purposefully docotred photos without the poster stating that they have docotred them before presenting them as fact; though since Jaden is relatively new to the site, maybe he should review the posting guidelines.
[edit on 12-9-2007 by ferretman2]

[edit on 12-9-2007 by ferretman2]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ferretman2
 


To which photos are you referring?

If it's indeed my photo ... it's not a "doctored" photo. It's an enhanced photo.

Doctored would refer to manipulation to deceived. My above picture was only brightened and the levels were adjusted to enhance the visbility of the true object.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Okay, people, let's put on our critical thinking caps.

The video in the opening post is a 'compilation', which means it's a bunch of different videos thrown into one. There's a chance that quality was lost during the process of taking videos, putting them into another video, converting that to a video, then posting it on youtube. So what do we do? Look for the original video!

www.youtube.com...

About 45 seconds in, you'll see it's clearly a plane.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I think those two are planes. The two planes the official story tells us, well of that I'm not so sure.

I think this is more deception in order to make the missle hitting the Pentagon theory, which to me there's no doubt it was a missle, more unbelieveable.

Peace



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ferretman2
 


if you can't tell that the sample plane added to the image is fake then you shouldn't even be on here. i was just trying to help. those are still from the video posted on page 1.

i didn't make them!



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Speakeasy1981
 


thanks for the link to a clearer video.

the first video posted was extremely distorted. I'm not just talking about compression, but also squashed and tilted.

I re-created the clear video snapshot to the same distortion as the original and applied similar adjustments as the first pic I posted.

Clearly a plane:




posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Before lurking then eventually joining ats I was very much of the opinion that events surrounding 9/11 were as generally accepted; no conspiracy apart from that of the Arab terrorists.

I now concede that there maybe elements of a conspiracy surrounding WTC7. There may even be conspiracies surrounding whether the US government had forewarning, Flight 93 etc etc.

But one thing is certain; Muslim extremists hi-jacked two PLANES and flew them directly into the twin towers.
There maybe mysteries surrounding the before and after, the why's and the how's, but that is a fact.
No missiles, planes.
There may have been controlled demolitions afterwards, but any attempt to ignore the fact that hi-jacked planes flying into the towers were responsible for the initial explosions is detrimental to other conspiracy theories relating to 9/11.

I have deliberately refused to comment on 9/11 due to the emotiveness of the subject and the complexity of it, however, I don't understand why there is no new independant enquiry looking into all the new evidence and theories.
America deserves to know the truth and so does the rest of the world, whatever it maybe.









 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join