Originally posted by nwodeath
I never realized, for years, investigating 9-11 on my own, that there was a possibility that airplanes did not crash through the world trade
center.
That's because there isn't a possibility. Not even in the slightest.
Originally posted by nwodeath
To even think that would have been absurd.
Oh, it is. Very.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Further research indicated that many, if not all, the 9-11 videos were faked, and that computer animation was used PRIOR to 9-11 to make the videos we
saw on television.
Sorry, but no amount of "research" can definitively determine that. The only thing that can conclusively determine CGI once and for all would be to
obtain the original videos and have them professionally analyzed for fakery. Saying all videos are definitively CGI with no demonstrable proof is
disinfo.
Then there's the home video aspect. There's no possible way that private citizens could have faked their home videos before 9/11. And you will
never show any tangible proof to the contrary.
Originally posted by nwodeath
but we are saying, the Videos are definitely faked with CGI, not real, shot on the spot.
You can keep saying that all you want, but every time you do, you are peddling disinfo. You have no tangible, verifiable proof of CGI fakery in any
video. CGI fakery in the 9/11 videos isn't factual just because disinfo artists like Simon Shack/socialservice and Killtown
say the videos are
fake.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Instead, we'll just show a series of faked videos and people will believe, because they saw it live on television, that it really
happened.
Except you're forgetting the countless thousands of people standing outside looking at the towers who saw the second plane
with their own eyes
and not some fake CGI bs on a tv screen.
Originally posted by nwodeath
I recommend watching the video "September Clues". There will be people who will show up here and say it has been debunked. Poppycock! Do the
research for yourself. Nobody has debunked it.
Actually, it has been debunked and there is more than one debunking:
"September Clues: Busted!"
"Debunking September Clues - A Point-by-Point Analysis:"
truthaction.org...
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch the bridges float by in the background.
Oh, you mean like this?
What that is is a helicopter flying around the Statue of Liberty with the camera focused on the statue. When a camera focuses on an object nearby, the
background will appear to move faster than the foreground. On the opposite hand, if the camera were to focus on that bridge in the background, the
bridge would be nearly stationary and the statue would be flying by very fast.
You can try the same test at home with a video camera. Walk slowly around a tree near you while focusing on the tree and watch the background move by
quickly. Wow, that tree must be CGI!!!
This is simple camera 101 knowlege that I learned in middle school. Why didn't you? Why didn't you or any of the other no-plane disinfo artists try
these camera tests before peddling disinfo?
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch the bridge not appear in some videos while it is clearly there in the other ones.
Simple camera angles learned in middle school. And also another test you could've tried at home before peddling disinfo.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch how the videos that surfaced after 9-11 that supposedly came from amateur videographers, came from people who actually worked in film and
editing and multimedia.
Many, if not most professional photographers and videographers carry a camera around with them all the time. And it certainly isn't out of the
ordinary for them to work in the field they love. What a concept!
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch how the plane flies into the tower from several completely different angles as it approaches.
You already posted the answer, but twisted it and actually
created disinfo. There are 40+ different angles of the second impact. So yes,
different camera angles will cause different views of the plane or make the plane
appear to be approaching from different angles. Again, simple
camera knowledge from middle school.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch how people on the ground actually reported seeing a missile.
One or two people were reported as thinking they thought they saw a missle and it was relating to the
first plane, not the second plane that
was visible to countless thousands.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch how some observers never saw any airplane and watched the building the whole time after the first strike.
Yeah, every observer in "September Clues" was either in another building and had zero view of the plane, or were on the opposite side of the tower
and had no possibility of seeing the plane because it was out of view. Or some were simply not looking up and just heard the explosion.
Originally posted by nwodeath
Watch how aluminum is proven and shown to not be able to penetrate steel at any speed or velocity.
This is one of the key pieces of evidence that makes the NPT disinfo cult fall flat on it's face. The plane
did not penetrate or otherwise cut
the outer steel columns. The only parts of the plane that could have cut or severely damaged the outer columns or even the core columns would have
been the engines and landing gear. Let's take a look at how the columns were assembled:
The outer columns were assembled in sets at the factory. A set consisted of three columns wide by three storeys high welded together by three spandrel
plates and then assembled onto the building in a staggered formation:
The columns were then bolted together on the building:
You can look at any photo of the holes and see that bolts and welds are broke and that no column was severed. If you honestly think that a 300,000
pound object traveling circa 500mph can't break some bolts and welds, then you've got
serious issues to attend to.
Real research would've educated you on this fact so that we wouldn't have to constantly see the "no aluminum plane can penetrate steel" disinfo
BS. The planes didn't penetrate the steel, they penetrated the bolts and welds.
Originally posted by nwodeath
September Clues does not use the greatest videos in quality
DING DING DING!!! That should've been your first clue that the Simon Shack/socialservice/Killtown disinfo team were spreading disinfo. You can't
even come close to proving CGI fakery or any other type of fakery with poor-quality, compressed internet videos.
Just like UFO programs on TV obtain the original UFO footage from someone claiming to have filmed a real UFO. They obtain the originals and have them
professionally analyzed with professional equipment by professional people to determine CGI or other fakery.
Until the no-plane disinfo cult starts obtaining copies of the originals and has them professionally analyzed for fakery, there is
zero proof
of fakery and only opinions or theories, period.
Originally posted by nwodeath
there is such serious rabid denial of these things by that segment of the conspiracy world, that it makes me question the possibility
Or maybe that there's been so many people including myself and even some with PhD's that have extensively researched the no-plane claims and have
found that not only is there zero evidence of fakery, but that many of the very aspects of NPT are created by a few people. Hence the term "disinfo
artists". The people like Simon Shack/socialservice who create the no-plane disinfo and peddle it as fact and truth with no evidence.
Originally posted by nwodeath
I am not saying that all 9-11 truthers are covering this up.
No, but all 9/11 truthers think the topic of no-planes at the WTC is disinfo. That's why not a single 9/11 truth research organization supports NPT,
and some have went even further by banning the discussion on their forums. Why, you ask? Maybe because there's no evidence of fakery?
In fact, since the 9/11 movement disinfo forums are down or closed, besides ATS, Pilots is the only other forum you can peddle your disnfo on where
you can talk to yourselves or get support from the few cult members left in the 9/11 no-plane disinfo movement.
Originally posted by nwodeath
CNN Rector Street Video Comparison
Building Vs. No Building - What do you see? Or what do you NOT see?
Look MA, No Building!!!
Several people in this thread have already shown that the two shots are from two locations/angles. The NPT disinfo cult has many problems
understanding how photography and videography works, so naturally your conclusions aren't too surprising.
The NPT disinfo cult is all but gone. Only a few stragglers come and make a post about NPT now and then. But soon when NPT whithers away into
nothingness, we won't have to see the NPT disinfo anymore.
