What could this Be?? 911 - Second Strike Footage... Wing Disapears

page: 6
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


After pausing the video a number of times, what you're seeing is the planes right wing is being hidden by a cloud of white smoke coming from the 1st tower fire. The angle of the planes wing went behind a cloud of smoke. It's an illusion caused by the white smoke blocking the thinner wing span of the plane.




posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 

Off the cuff:
Probably(possibly?) the under side of the wing became brighter (reflected the sun) as the aircraft banked slightly to the left. when its as bright as the background it "disappears"into the background...



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


More 9-11 footage, big deal, after all these years you would think people would get the message "There will be NO prosecutions related to the 9-11 murders" I think if GW himself went on TV and admitted with details all that really happened, there would be no attempts to arrest or charge anybody. They can murder us at will without any worries about any reaction from anyone. This is their way of telling us they can murder with impunity, whenever and wherever they want. If you cant see this take a critical look at the gulf.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
So either all the passengers on the planes didn't ever exist, and they used holograms/video-editing and explosives on the towers. But there were legitimate people on those planes who are missing. So we can rule out the passengers not existing.

So maybe the passengers did exist, and they were taken to a remote location and assassinated, then holograms/video-editing and explosives took out the towers. Which seems like more work than necessary.

Or the passengers did exist, and real planes hit the towers along with explosives to take the towers down, which seems most likely to me.

Or the passengers did exist, and real planes hit the towers and took them down without the help of explosives. Which is the official story.

This video seems to aim towards the first scenario, holographic planes or video-editing with explosives. I can't say there's a lot of evidence out there for me to buy into that. I'd explain the wing disappearing as just a crappy camera with low frames per second, differences in light or plane tilt, maybe pixelation as the craft approached the tower with such a low frames per second, or a post-production edit by someone who wants to propagate the holographic plane story to cast more doubt on the truth movement.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by cluckerspud
Low quality video, Bad resolution, Video artifacts and a wild imagination.
That's what I make of it.


I don't think so; there is no artefacts around the surrounding image. I don't think you need a wild imagination, its right there...

Here have a closer look...





Korg.


You asked me what I thought, and I told you.
I'm sorry you disagree, doesn't mean I wouldn't go bowling with you
or share my lunch.

A compressed video or jpg.is not sufficient enough evidence for you or myself to analyze.

Lets first except that neither of us are experts, can we agree on that?!




You know to play devil's advocate I will say this.... a plane of that size to pull those maneuvers is a bit much but twice hmmn... maybe, for blah blah's sake, the plane was a hologram and in all actuality was a cruise missile that was lazer guided with computer precison to hit a certain point of the building to start a chain reaction demolition event.... maybe a bit much I know but thats why we dont argue because ey you never know.... and what is reality and truth but sibjective opinions to what you are and are not prepared to accept?



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GlennCanady
Don't believe the government fairy tale. Notice how fake it looks when this plane supposedly strikes the outer shell of the building that has beams thicker than an M-1 tank! LOL It just penetrates it like magic! It's a joke, not once piece of wing or tail sheared off, NOTHING!


lol! You're completely right! The plane didn't "shatter" any windows upon impact. An object in motion doesn't stay in motion. Screw physics! A plane going 450+ mph can't cause damage to anything! After all, steel is harder than aluminum. No way bolts could come loose. The Trade Center was all powerful!

I'm ending my sarcasm now. Seriously, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that the plane smashed, not sliced, through the wall. You can literally see in a couple videos how the engines of the plane slide backward for a moment. That's because the wings were weaker and getting shredded through the steel before the engines impacted and helped push on through.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by demonseed
Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

I wonder if people on ATS were to see John Lithgow in public they would say; "Hey Phage"!!!



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by cluckerspud


I think what I saw that morning was a big old passenger plane.
Or was my brain hacked?!


I'm calling BS on this.

Please provide proof that you were there and witnessed it first hand. And Prove what you say you saw was what happened....

korg.


BS?! Wow.

I am a NJ Transit employee. Hoboken Terminal is a short 2 blocks (if that) walk from Pier A Park.
Which is where I viewed the 2nd plane hit.

I call BS on your hokey story that a plane covered by a CGI plane hit the world trade center.

I know what I saw. FIRST HAND!!!!!

What did you see? A crap ass, compressed digital video.

Your theory is BS!



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


To me it looks like the plane is banking to right itself to the horizon from an angle that it came in. If we are to assume from the other video that was damn near right under it... that when the second tower was hit it came in at that angle... I think from the impact hole which looked rather similar... You can see the tailfin gets lighter as well...



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by demonseed
Your avatar tells me that you are a Nazi chicken under control by aliens who is friends with Phage(who is probably also under control by aliens).

I wonder if people on ATS were to see John Lithgow in public they would say; "Hey Phage"!!!


ish I would lmao



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
If you believe 911 was a cover-up and believe planes with people hit the towers, ask yourself:

Who the hell would volunteer to kill themselves crashing a plane into a tower. Those "planes" had no people in them. 4-5 different videos with the same dematerializing "wings" . Hmmmmm

No. You're right. It was Osama.I am a nut.
edit on 25-10-2010 by splint because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by splint
If you believe 911 was a cover-up and believe planes with people hit the towers, ask yourself:

Who the hell would volunteer to kill themselves crashing a plane into a tower. Those "planes" had no people in them. 4-5 different videos with the same dematerializing "wings" . Hmmmmm


Who would volunteer to strap a backpack bomb to themselves and walk it into a crowded cafe?
Who would volunteer to crash their plane into encroaching warships?


History is chock-full of martyrs; because martyrs are heroic.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I think it is ingenius that the believers of the official story and the ones that do not believe the official story cancel each other out and the criminals still remain AT LARGE.

Face it...you cannot touch immortals of ancent knowledge and technologies. They been at this well over 10,000 years
However...you do have a chance. You must not let them use the divide and conquer method. They think as one and the only way to defeat them is if you think as one.

( Im right and you are wrong = Genesis 3 verse 22.) Believe it or not that is the true meaning of Skull and Bones(322)

If you can shake that verse off..purge it from your heart mind and yes your DnA, most of you might survive and avoid what is to come.

Im not a prophet, savior, saint, Gods divine favorite, or know it all..I am simply giving you hints and information on how to win this thing.. Makes no difference to me on how you use it or judge it.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   
The plane in the video is CGI created by someone who flunked layering in video class; it looks just as cartoonish and fake as all the other videos of "planes" the media hoodwinked the public with on 9/11.

It would not have taken much to superimpose a cartoonish looking commercial airliner over, say, a missile. Especially considering the poor CGI work which is evident (airplane with unrealistic light reflection, sliding across the sky, wings disappearing, etc.). The clear blue sky also played a factor since it is a lot easier to paste a layer of a fake airplane on a solid color than (blue sky) than it is on a complex multi-colored background.

If a missile did strike the Towers, I would place my bets on a Lockheed Martin AGM-158 JASSM. It would have easily been capable of penetrating the exterior of the Towers (it actually went all the way through the second tower with a piece of the nose coming out the other side - remember the fade to black on the TV broadcast?), it flies at subsonic speed (up to 0.9 mach), it looks like a small plane (which many witnesses reported seeing) and it is air to surface so it could have been launched from any one of a number of military aircraft.

The AGM-158 also flies at low altitude and is dead on accurate. And one more thing: they were in very limited production at the time (according to information which has been released), so very few people (outside of military personnel) knew what they looked like at the time.

www.military.cz...

The use of real commercial aircraft for such a precise and complex operation would have been way too risky. A number of things could have gone wrong, since a commercial airliner would not have anywhere near the accuracy of a high-tech missile at the reported speed and altitude.

Sorry, but I prefer to go with common sense and good old analytical skills, instead of a disreputable media, an untruthful government, fake witnesses and unscrupulous debunkers.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   
The poster on YOUTUBE who uploaded the vids to YOUTUBE edited almost all of the videos to favor 9/11 conspiracy truth seekers and their quest to contaminate what they think may have happened.

I am still on the fence as to the true intentions of what happened and by whom on that unforgettable day.

I am Canadian, we just sent a ring leader to Jail today for 16 years after participating in a ring of terror that was dismantled before anything was able to happen, it reaffirmed the massive possibility that this kind of terrorism is possible by terrorists, and not by our governments. Especially when the chap they sent to jail admitted to it all without hesitation, like he was proud of his intentions and downtrodden actions that never took place.


by the way this American spell check application sucks: Its FAVOUR, not Favor. hehe. Have you guys reverted back to french fries yet? seriously....its like me waking up one day and telling the rest of canada to from now on call GREED....AMERICAN FAILURE.....ex: Johny, why must you insist on going after everything that isnt yours? Johny replies: Oh thats because I'm a prime example of what my country has bred me to be, just like my cousin down south...a human being bent on American Failure.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
im in winnipeg, where are you?

one other consideration about the "cgi overlay" theory or the hologram theory, are there any videos of the plane hitting the towers from "top down" perspective? no i dont think so. so the hologram wouldve been projected to only the lower 90 degrees of the horizon, from the plane-------->down. im just sayin'

so if there is "top down" footage of the plane strike, id say the hologram theory is incorrect. unless you could project a hologram from a sattelite? i have a headache
edit on 26-10-2010 by colonelblake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
The 911 event was an "Act of God". This might be one more impossible thing that couldn’t have happened -- that happened. That's what "Acts of God" are. Like three perfectly imploding buildings, due to fire, when no such buildings have ever imploded before due to fire? Like where did the energy come from to turn the building to "Dust"? Like where did the parts of the planes go? The list of impossible things that couldn't have happened, that happened goes on and on.

edit on 26-10-2010 by etcorngods because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Maybe the wing was never there. One hundred percent an issue. No explaining why that wing dissapears other than some sort of manipulation. The camera is stationary the view doesnt change.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by cluckerspud


I think what I saw that morning was a big old passenger plane.
Or was my brain hacked?!


I'm calling BS on this.

Please provide proof that you were there and witnessed it first hand. And Prove what you say you saw was what happened....

korg.


BS?! Wow.

I am a NJ Transit employee. Hoboken Terminal is a short 2 blocks (if that) walk from Pier A Park.
Which is where I viewed the 2nd plane hit.

I call BS on your hokey story that a plane covered by a CGI plane hit the world trade center.

I know what I saw. FIRST HAND!!!!!

What did you see? A crap ass, compressed digital video.

Your theory is BS!



did you hear any explosions before the plane hit? Please by all means give us an account of what you saw.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 01:16 AM
link   
OK, this seems to be going in circles...

Firstly, I like to think myself knowledgable in maters such as these...it was part of my post-secondary education. What I see when I look at both videos of the disappearing wing is exactly that: a vanishing wing. HOWEVER...such an occurance is explainable by lossy compression AND by the fact that the wing tilts upwards, catching the light of the sun. With a low-quality camera from such a distance away, the wing could appear to vanish without actually vanishing. This is FAR more believable than someone editing the plane in on the fly. Even a few frames would take hours of editing as far as I'm concerned.

So, time to get my theory out there. The truth is neither black nor white but a shade of grey.

9-11 was almost certainly (in my opinion) an inside job. BUT those passenger jet-liners did exist. And it was those planes that hit the WTC on that morning. The reason they were able to do so much damage was due to a few theories of my own. Firstly, they were loaded with something that could melt steel...not jet-fuel, but Government-grade Napalm. Secondly, there were exposives placed on alternating floors to allow for a controlled demolition in case the Napalm wasn't doing the trick. This would appear to be the case, as I have seen enough video evidence to support the controlled demolition theory.

Sorry...don't buy the hologram theory...don't think even TPTB are at that technological level yet. Maybe one day...certainly not a decade ago.

My main reason for believing 9-11 was an inside job? A while back I was cruising through some of the witness testimonies, and hit on one made by either a Police Officer or a Firefighter (can't remember whch...it was a couple of years ago now). Anyway, he claimed to have been inside WTC 1 and encountered a CIA agent inside...wonder what business the CIA had there that day. If required, I will try and find said testimony again...God that would take some hunting...


GtkP





new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join