It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

A better look at what hit the pentagon (pics).

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I took these images from the govt' released videos of the alleged flight 77 impact. The methodology I used consisted of removing blocks of color from the images and replacing them to create a silhouette. Each color has its own hexadecimal number, for example red is #FF0000. Using GNU Image Manipulation Program, I removed 4 colors. I removed the shadows on the pentagon, the clouds on the horizon, and in the second image, the image of the plane and the smoke trail. I replaced them with colors that stand out. The important factor to understand is that I only edited the colors of the image, not the shapes.






The silhouette certainly does not look like flight 77.




[edit on 17-4-2010 by jprophet420]




posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
maybe it´s just me and if so, i apologize in advance..
but what am i supposed to be seeing here? (genuine question, not some lame disinfo propaganda)



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Yea, I'm struggling to see anything that means something. Could you perhaps give a bit more explanation of how to read these pictures.

Appreciate your efforts, just I'm not getting it.

Thanks



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
compare the red silhouette to a known planes. It does not have the proportions of tail to fuselage as a Boeing 757-223.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   
I made this a while ago. There is definitely a plane in the video. But whether it's real or not is anyone's guess:





posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
UM CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG PICTURES OF BLURRY STUFF ASIDE THERE WERE PEOPLE THERE WHO SAW THE PLANE?
THEY ARE ALL LIEING?



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio
UM CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG PICTURES OF BLURRY STUFF ASIDE THERE WERE PEOPLE THERE WHO SAW THE PLANE?
THEY ARE ALL LIEING?

At least 13 witnesses reported seeing a plane North of the Citgo station which contradicts the official story regardless if a plane hit the Pentagon or not.


Plus the "plane" int the security camera stills is shown flying low and parallel to the ground. That would be impossible since the plane allegedly knocked over light poles that sat high on a hill top, so the plane would had to have come down at an angle to hit the 1st floor of the Pentagon.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


The images from the parking lot security camera do NOT show a capture of the airplane, not even in the still frames. At least, not in the sense that everyone keeps seeing.

A little pareidolia at work, perhaps??

Try it, for yourselves. Take a picture of something moving at around 480 knots (or about 750-800 fps) and see if, firstly, you manage to capture it in frame (no fair using video, of course...that Pentagon camera was taking about one frame every second or two).

THEN, if you manage to get it in frame, see if it's blurred at all.


And, the light poles were NOT "high up on a hill". This one is the easiest for everyone to see, and be convinced, for themselves. Thanks to Google Maps.

Don't forget to use the "street view" feature too!

You can get an idea, with that tool. Unfortunately, it limits where you can, and cannot go....but look for yourselves. It's the next best thing to actually being here, and walking the area, and THEN seeing for yourselves.

BTW...WHEN you actually set foot here, and stand AT the "Citgo" (new name, now...is "NEX". Means "Naval Exchange". It is STILL not a public-use fuel station) ...when you actually stand there, and look around, you can see how "North of Citgo" is nonsense. The terrain to the West, as you look from that point, and looking North of the station, is much higher, where the Annex barracks building is, and in modern photos, the stainless-steel sculpture that represents the Air Force Memorial.

Compare to where the clover-leaf is, where the lightpoles were, that is where Columbia Pike (Rte. 244) meets Washingotn Blvd. (Rte 27).

Do not be confused by the small 'loop' where Columbia Pike curves North, around the gas station....the airplane followed the Columbia Pike for most of the way, and you can see how the angle fits perfectly, there, as it was South of the Annex barracks, but stayed just North of the I-395 freeway.

THAT portion, there...the freeway, IS elevated. Not much, just one level, so trucks can pass beneath, on S. Joyce St.

Rte. 27 also passes beneath I-395, but where the end of Rte. 244 passes under the clover-leaf is down lower, in a slight depression. Slightly lower than the Pentagon, actually. You can see that Rte. 27 is about level with the bottom of the Pentagon.

All very complex to describe, in words...the eye of the beholder does wonders for clarity, though.






[edit on 17 April 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
The images from the parking lot security camera do NOT show a capture of the airplane, not even in the still frames.

The plane is clearly visible in the animated image I made from the stills of the second camera.



Originally posted by weedwhacker
when you actually stand there, and look around, you can see how "North of Citgo" is nonsense.

I would tend to believe police officers. They were very adamant about which side of the Citgo the plane flew by. But it is easier to call them liars instead of consider their testimony, I guess.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


the plane is only clearly visible in your image when you overlay the picture of a 737 before that its nothing but a big blur of various indestinguishable colors.

that note aside yes there were eyewitnesses that actually saw the plane who said it did not look like an american airlines airliner and took a different flight path than the official story and a few of them say that after they got up from ducking for cover and looked back they saw the plane nose up over the pentagon and then the explosion. my theory is a missle was attached to the plane and was made to look like the plane was on a collision course and at the last second the plane nosed up and released either a missle or a bomb of some sort.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


This guy's theory is it was a A-3 that actually fired a missle first which would explain the smoke/plume/explosion before the main object impacts.

www.supremelaw.org...

Its quite an interesting read.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   
To Mitsuskitzo :
You're the only one who ever said this on this forum, so I am asking you for reliable links, and esp. names :


a few of them say that after they got up from ducking for cover and looked back they saw the plane nose up over the pentagon and then the explosion.




To the O.P. , jprophet420 :
This side view of a Boeing 757 200 looks similar to that red blur you caught there with your clever idea of sifting out certain colors.

Yours is the first image I have seen since 911, which makes some sense :





I would like a link to that software you used, and some directions for its use, so we can see if we can reproduce your image, or even fine tune it. Thanks in advance.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mitsuskitzo
the plane is only clearly visible in your image when you overlay the picture of a 737 before that its nothing but a big blur of various indestinguishable colors.

Mind you, I'm on a 28" HD LCD monitor. I can see the port wing, the port engine, the tail section and most of the fuselage. Yes, it's blurry. But it's there.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
To Mitsuskitzo :
You're the only one who ever said this on this forum, so I am asking you for reliable links, and esp. names :


a few of them say that after they got up from ducking for cover and looked back they saw the plane nose up over the pentagon and then the explosion.




To the O.P. , jprophet420 :
This side view of a Boeing 757 200 looks similar to that red blur you caught there with your clever idea of sifting out certain colors.

Yours is the first image I have seen since 911, which makes some sense :





I would like a link to that software you used, and some directions for its use, so we can see if we can reproduce your image, or even fine tune it. Thanks in advance.

no problem.
www.gimp.org...
Bear in mind you probably wont be able to run that on a Microsoft Windows based computer.
The wikipedia page on flight 77 has a similar picture where the plane silhouette was taken from an actual boeing, it looks nothing like this.



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

The images from the parking lot security camera do NOT show a capture of the airplane, not even in the still frames. At least, not in the sense that everyone keeps seeing.

Anyone else find it funny that the skeptics don't even believe they official story?!



posted on Apr, 18 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
[delete]




[edit on 18 April 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


So what about the other witnesses this plane didnt sneak up it was seen ?

angles and light poles aside...



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

I would tend to believe police officers. They were very adamant about which side of the Citgo the plane flew by. But it is easier to call them liars instead of consider their testimony, I guess.



SO let's believe them then.

They say the plane hit the building.

It's a fact that NoC and impact are incompatible.

The "os" has physical evidence to back it up, along with eyewitness testimony.

The NoCers have just their testimony.

WHich side do you stand on?

Witness accounts that have zero physical evidence to corroborate them?

Or eyewitness accounts that do?



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
I removed the shadows on the pentagon, the clouds on the horizon, and in the second image, the image of the plane and the smoke trail.


i was not aware that there even WAS a picture of the plane hitting the pentagon!!!

if there actually IS such a photo, please please please

POST IT HERE,

i want to see it because i've heard the 'official' story that a plane hit the pentagon, but never seen proof




posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


i have never seen this photo, or video, before

i do not beleive a plane hit the pentagon, but i would like to inquire more about the photo you posted...

was it taken by a pentagon security camera? can you post links to any reliable sources that could identify the picture as 'real' or 'unmodified'

not trying to be too mean here, but i have really actually NEVER seen any proof of a plane hitting the pentagon, this picture flies in the face of my beleif, so if you could back up that picture it would be muchly appreciated by myself, thanks

indigo



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join