Unseen Pentagon Footage?!!?! Wow

reply to post by crmanager


If they had clear video of a missle hitting the Pentagon you would call it a fake.

Hey, at least you can see the object in this video

...........................................................................................................

You people claiming this is fake! How would you expect footage to look like that is filmed from a helecopter (motion), video capture an object flying in at over 600 miles per hour (missle), and then reproduced from one camera to the web. Then the enhancements you are doing to enlarge it would cause pixelation. Anyone who wouldn't expect a grainy version and pixelation from a clip like this is crazy and/or stupid.

Its no fake.

The Pentagon/Government version shows nothing! No wreckage, no plane, no luggage, no shredded cloths or seat material, no body parts, no nothing.

Never in history have three buildings let alone one building free fallen from fires

Never in history has a passenger jet vaporized in a crash

But on 9/11 - we witnessed all four amazing occurences of disasters breaking the normal laws of physics in one day -wow, imagine that!



[edit on 19-11-2008 by arizonascott]

Originally posted by JipStix
That helicopter footage looks like a poorly-done fake. This is evidenced by the movement of the explosion (crappy tracking) as and after it hits the pentagon.

Yup, I have to admit - After watching the video repeatedly over the last hour, taking close-ups, analysing it etc, I believe the video may be fake. When the object hits the Pentagon, something doesn't look right as to when it explodes. It seems to be disjointed.. I'm not sure how to explain it, but it just doesn't look right somehow when you go frame by frame.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by JasonT]

reply to post by cashlink


Watch the slowmotion, do "missiles" pause to take a piss before deciding to continue on hitting the Pentagon??? Sheesh.

No, absolutely not. If they had a clear video of a missile hitting the Pentagon I think that would be some pretty damning evidence, but, this is not what we have.

What I see are blurry frames that look like they've been reproduced at least 5 times or altered using an embossing effect (I'm talking about the helicopter video, once again).


NOTE: I'm only talking about the helicopter video, the other video appears to be genuine.

Here are the reasons I say it's fake:

1. The explosion looks like a Red Alert 1 Explosion; it looks incredibly fake in its appearance, coloration, movement (jerking as well as blast propagation), and direction.

2. The distortion just as the object enters frame. Why, at the moment of the object entering the frame, is there distortion masking its entrance trajectory? I know from experience editing a lot of video that artifacts sometimes form on re-used tapes, but it seems a bit too much coincidental to me.

3. After watching the video about 100 times, there's just something that doesn't sit right about the object's tracking/speed and the resultant explosion. It's that feeling you get when you go to the movies and are able to pick out CGI from a normal set backdrop.

4. There are two frames where the explosion tracks with the movement of the video from right to left, and doesn't seem to be tracking with where it would be IF it were on a helicopter. It's as if the creator of the video missed the two frames when he was assigning tracking coordinates to the explosion.

5. Why did the object seem to "pause" as it crossed the Pentagon lawn? Do missiles pause for a while before they hit their targets?

I can understand why people want, and would like to think this is real, but I don't believe it to be. It would make sense because it would align with the other video, but we have to look at the evidence, we can't draw conclusions to fit what we want. It appears as if the helicopter video is fake, although I believe the other videos to be real.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by JipStix]

anyone reading I just wanted to point out this wasn't a fuselage, it appears to be a commonly spotted white ufo, I have personally witnessed them appear and disappear in the blink of the eye. this guy is spot on with the missing frames he's got some courage talking about this even though they know were all helpless. we should all be devoting energy to preventative measures to protect yourself and family from this imminent enemy, do not get angry about the past, it was planned probably before you started drinking coffee, though it is so disturbing, we are all about to encounter the evil relic that has only been blatantly mirrored in movies and books.

reply to post by deltaboy


Outside of video games have you ever seen a "real life" guided missle or military assault drone compensate or increase thrusters and optical gyros for maximum target impact and damage?

They usually increase thrusters within the last 50 feet, which is what it showed, which is the reason you saw a change in speed in that frame.

My guess is no, you act like the missle/drone stops which it does not.

The video presentation is done pretty well. This guy really believes he has something here and did great explaining his position.

The problem seems to be whether his video (helicopter video) is genuine or not because the Pentagon video is.................not either. According to him.

Definitive proof will never surface, but I like what they do with what they have.

The Pentagon video - Real footage, but edited.

Helicopter video - ?????????

Nice find.

reply to post by arizonascott


So Arizonascott, your argument is that before hitting its target, a missile would slow down for maximum impact??

reply to post by arizonascott


You mean you saw a missile that suddenly stops and then starts to move faster? Because that slow motion shows that the missile suddenly stopped.

reply to post by deltaboy


Insert( eye roll) where is you airplane? Do you see this magic airplane I don’t.
Do explain what is in the frames exactly?
You still have not answer my first question yet!

reply to post by cashlink


I see a "missile" at time 5:08 to 5:11 acting unusual. I said the video is a fake, you said prove it. Done. The end.

From the presentation, yes, the missile does stop.

That's his whole point. They removed numerous frames from the video that's why the missile/fuselage appears to remain still as he hits his arrow button forward. Time/video appears to move forward but the object does not.

They needed to coordinate the "explosion" in the Pentagon with the impact of the object.

I'm a visual effects artist with years of experience.

the Helicopter footage is clearly a fake. Bad 3d tracking. Laughable smudge of an explosion.

The Pentagon only released 3 frames from it's security camera at the gate.. a tad unhelpful, and damning maybe. But what that fellow in the video was "analyzing" was a cross-fade between the 3 frames done by the news company. they showed it in "real-time" 1 frame a second as well.

If it was a missile, not a plane, it would hover in the air for half a second before it plowed into the building? really?

reply to post by cashlink


I would like to reiterate that I'm talking about the helicopter video, which I believe to be a poor-quality fake. No I don't see an airplane. If the video was genuine (I believe its fake) it would probably resemble a missile more than an airplane.

What do you mean explain what is in the frames? Just watch the helicopter video and see what I'm talking about.

I would like to say again that I believe the other videos to be genuine, and I'm not a "9/11 truther" or "9/11 truth denier," I am someone who looks at facts and draws conclusions.

reply to post by JipStix


The missle would "not slow down."

I explained that above if you read - at the point of increased speed, the speed before that increase would look slower would it not, right.

I know what you are trying to do and it will not work this time Lord Vader

Within the set target range a missle will attempt a slight manuever called optical gyro sequencing to bring it more on target and into target center, then once that has been done the thrusters kick into overdrive (which would explain the vapor/smoke trail) just before impact.

It may only take 9/10ths of a second, but if you were watching it, especially at a slower speed in video you would notice the adjustment and kick from both the optical gyro and the thrusters kicking in - ever done a fish tail on a bike when you were a kid, how would it look at 4-600 miles per hour.

Thats all.

reply to post by deltaboy



You proved the video is a fake HOW?

reply to post by matrix911


This is going to be really hard to determine without the original video. But I can tell you that it is quite normal for video workstations to interpolate between frames when slowing down a clip. I know that windows movie maker does this automatically. Besides, some video compression artifacts can result in portions of a frame trailing into a subsequent frame.

The result of interpolation creates the "fade in" effect of the second frame as it comes in, which would explain the flames fading in.

The fact that the airplane appears to jump from one frame to the next would be nothing but the result of the framerate not being quick enough to keep up with the pace of the action. There are 60 fields per second on full motion video (assuming this is even full motion)... Each field comprises half of the frame, either even or odd lines. how much do you think a plane travels in 16.66666 miliseconds? certainly quite a ways when traveling at about 500mph. About four meters. that would be about 12 feet right? if we have the framerate wrong and it is in fact 30fps, depending on the format, then we are talking about 24 feet.

Hopefully somebody who understands security cameras and typical framerates (I know that very low framerates are very common to conserve storage) can do the math as to whether the airplane is moving at the correct speed for the framerate.

It is very possible that the video simply looks like that because of the means to record and edit and not because some guy pushed a button precisely before the airplane hit.

Besides, even if this footage was somehow fake and the crash didn't happen, it would not explain other footage where the firefighters are shown extinguishing flames from what would appear to be the pentagon.

-rrr

reply to post by arizonascott


Right...

So you're saying when the missile slows down, and then speeds up again from a speed slower than the initial speed its gyro thrusters are kicking in?

Initial Speed \_/ Impact Speed

Your conclusion still doesn't make sense. Aren't gyro thrusters used to correct lateral and vertical orientation? How would gyro thrusters firing nearly bring a missile to a complete slow down and then speed it up again?

They wouldn't. Gyro thrusters correct the trajectory of the missile so it hits its target with maximum impact. Again, how would correcting the missile's vertical and lateral orientation cause the missile to slow down from cruising speed and then increase to impact speed?

You said, "The missile would 'not slow down,'" but that's exactly what you can see in the video. The missile does slow down.

Here's what happens:

Initial Speed \_/ Impact Speed

The first backslash is the initial speed, then the underline is the slowdown, and then it SPEEDS UP again before impacting. If you were to plot the speed on a chart, It would look like a valley 'Lord Vader.'

reply to post by rickyrrr


Ricky I think that security cameras have a slightly lower framerate than 29.99. It might be somewhere around half that, but I'm not entirely sure...

Does anyone know?

reply to post by JipStix



Thank you, the one I was talking about was not the one by the helicopter I agree with you on your statement. As far as the helicopter video, I am not going to make an opinion until I can find out were it came from and who the true authors are.