It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Computer graphic used on 911 video at 8.25

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 01:20 PM
I am not a digital expert but that video on the left sure as hell (at least for me) looks almost like a video game...
Skip the entire Video and watch at 8.25.

Now arent those digital images? If yes than what happened really that day?

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 01:28 PM
Look more like cheap cameras, then the supposed sophisticated hi tech manipulation. The audio sucks as well. But then I've seen worse by news organizations, it never runs smoothly.

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 01:31 PM
I am sorry but I do not think you watched the video at 8.25 when the camera changes to a new one you are refering to the previous shot which looks cheap.
At 8.25 only for a few seconds you will see a much clearer video that is the one I am refering.
Please watch at 8.25

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by piacenza

Don't assume anything piacenza, I know what you are referring to, unless you think that some static for a few seconds going to prove that it must be some consipiracy and the girl from the Ring is coming out, this ain't going to persuade me.

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 02:42 PM
Nice find!

I have noticed quite a few of these videos on Youtube and who knows, they may well have found some abnormalities in the footages shown on that day. What we have to remember is that there was a lot of confusion going off that day, even the major networks would have been kept busy trying to cover it and other events as they unfolded that day. While they may not publicly admit it, I'm sure they had to ad lib with some of the footages shown that day just to keep their viewers up-to date. Mistakes in 'live feeds', hastily written .notes for the 'on the spot reporters', newsmen etc would also be happening in all this confusion. Naturally, the networks would prefer not to admit they made mistakes.

Anyone seen the footage of female BBC reporter informing everyone on 'live tv' that the WTC 7 had collapsed, yet it could still be seen from the window behind her..

A conspiracy? An honest accident? Perhaps what was suppose to happen was that she was told/informed WTC 7 was almost certain to collapse and in order to get the news out as fast as possible she would have her 'announcement' recorded and then have it played 'as live' if and when the building had collapsed.

*Shrugs* just my two pence worth.

posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 06:45 PM
The biggest conspiracy of the humanity.

posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:54 PM
Good video, I had never heard of it but I enjoyed it very much. I agree with most of what you have to say here on the 9/11 board and I appreciate you taking the time out to post all these interesting videos.

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 12:10 AM
good video.

the very last scene with the 'what the ...?' shot of the two towers with nothing but BLACK on the showing sides TOTALLY smacks of CGI.

i do have to disagree with the 'there were no planes on this side' comment, because of the angle. you wouldn't see a plane there, if there was one(which there probably wasn't).

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 01:56 AM
I would have to say that those few seconds alone isn't enough to convince me. The models of the buildings would have to be very good, which I'm sure they would be if someone did make them for a conspiracy purpose, but the smoke looks excellent, at least as far as I can tell in the low resolution. I don't think you could produce smoke that good.

Really, to me it doesn't look at all fake. It's just a different camera from a different angle with perhaps different contrast, brightness, etc.

[edit on 20-12-2007 by avingard]

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 03:15 AM
well, .avi 'n' guard(couldn't resist, please don't get mad), it seems to me like the footage is real, but the blacked out part is prepared for an inserted layer.

but, that's just me sticking my "nose out".


log in