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.

 

It's A Shadowy World. (Skies Are Slippery Grey)

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   


Comments Welcome.





Now, does anyone care to comment on the discrepancies in shadows of the buildings in the background and the people in the foreground? The buildings yell that the sun is to the left. The people disagree and scream that the sun is to the right.

Maybe the Sun does lie. Or maybe there are two suns (betelgeuse blew early) and the conclusions are the results of my misundersanding and ignorance.

Oh I forgot. Maybe some 9/11 truthers got hold of the pictures and interfered with them in order to bolster their delusional notions that the official story is a crock of doggy doodoo.

If two photographs are faked, why not all?
edit on 21-2-2011 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
who done what in the what now?



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
I think I know where your getting at, and I'm literally about to jump out my seat, but I can't jump yet because I need a little more clarity. Whats this supposed to mean. (Even though I think I know, but still...)

*EDIT* : Sorry man, I didn't even scroll down and read the rest of your post before I replied.
edit on 21-2-2011 by Locked because: Left something out.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Locked
I think I know where your getting at, and I'm literally about to jump out my seat, but I can't jump yet because I need a little more clarity. Whats this supposed to mean. (Even though I think I know, but still...)


It means that this guy is so much in love with his conspiracy hypothesis that he wants them to be true, so he's willing to grasp at any straw however ludicrous that allows him to keep them alive.

This photo was taken from the NJ side facing east, so at the time of the collapse the sun would be southeast, in a position in the sky where the smoke clouds would have blocked the nearby buildings from the sun but not the buildings across the river. The rays drawn on the photo are false: The sun wouldn't be in that position until 12:00 or 1:00.

Which one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites did the OP get this from? It's obvious he didn't come up with this bit himself.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Which one of those damned fool conspiracy web sites did the OP get this from? It's obvious he didn't come up with this bit himself.


Its always obvious to YOU that anytime someone on this site, or any other most likely, comes up with a question regarding ANYTHING to do with contradicting the fallacy of the fairy tale brought forth from our beloved government, that they must have gotten it from one of those 'damned fool conspiracy' websites.

No one here is capable of rational and logical thinking, except for those who's mind has been either brainwashed from the propaganda machine our government dilutes us with or is a paid shill who defends the newest version of 'Bambi' told circa 2001.

Yeah, Dave...its OBVIOUS!



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
This photo was taken from the NJ side facing east, so at the time of the collapse the sun would be southeast, in a position in the sky where the smoke clouds would have blocked the nearby buildings from the sun but not the buildings across the river. The rays drawn on the photo are false: The sun wouldn't be in that position until 12:00 or 1:00.


We all, including Dave, agree that the photo is faked. The lines drawn are parallel to the shadows on the red brick building, foreground left.

Dave, look at the shadows on the red brick building, foreground left. The photo must have been taken in the morning, at least an hour before noon. Dude, geometry class. Do your homework. lol.

The question for me is why anyone would go to the trouble of faking these photos? It doesn't make any sense, unless there was a fear that the buildings on the other side of the river might show light flashing from detonations reflected in their window panes. Maybe that's it.
edit on 21-2-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit


The question for me is why anyone would go to the trouble of faking these photos? It doesn't make any sense, unless there was a fear that the buildings on the other side of the river might show light flashing from detonations reflected in their window panes. Maybe that's it.
edit on 21-2-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)


They must have shown something...or not shown something.
There is only one reason to fake pictures. And it depends what side faked them.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by DIDtm

Originally posted by ipsedixit


The question for me is why anyone would go to the trouble of faking these photos? It doesn't make any sense, unless there was a fear that the buildings on the other side of the river might show light flashing from detonations reflected in their window panes. Maybe that's it.
edit on 21-2-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)


They must have shown something...or not shown something.
There is only one reason to fake pictures. And it depends what side faked them.


First of all PROVE they are faked its that simple !!!



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   
The shadows prove that the photos are fake. full stop. bottom line. end of argument.
The last thing the government want to get out is the fact that what we thought were real-time genuine footage of the 9/11 detruction were in fact pre-prepared computer generated imagery, broadcast by a complicit media. no terrorists, no planes and few if any victims. just a whole bunch of virtual animation, videos and photographs. the whole official story is as faked as the above pictures. goodolddave is getting to be so very old and not so good, and the onus now is on you wmd and your likes to prove that the photos were not faked. thank you and good night.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 


LOL...

The shadows, dont prove a doggone thing. Other than that you are quite gullible. The only way you would have shadows at the same angle, was if the buildings were square with one another. The photos aren't faked, but they dont indicate some sort of conspiracy either.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   
From what I can see in the photo was taken from southern part of Jersey City (the clock is local landmark was
part of Colgate- Palmolive factory that once sat there) Time is about 10 am or shortly before. Location is
South East of WTC site directly across Hudson river, about 1 mile from scene, Picture taken from elevation

Will leave it to others more versed in photgraphy to interpet.....



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Map of general area

maps.google.com...,+NJ&cid=0,0,250 0058611694177509&ei=ByxjTYmFMc7UgAe9mJyBAg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQnwIwAA



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Try this again

maps.google.com...,+NJ&cid=0,0,2500058611694177 509&ei=sixjTaPRJ8zpgAe6gqX8AQ&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CB0QnwIwAA



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 





What's apparent is that the buildings along the shore of the west side of lower Manhattan were in the shadow of the giant smoke/dust cloud. You can tell from that picture taken from across the Hudson that the portion of smoke visible in that photograph is not in direct sunlight (nor are the buildings). Compare it to the smoke/dust cloud seen from other angles which show the portion of the cloud which IS in direct sunlight. Notice the difference in contrast of shadow vs. light.

These "fakery" proponents see something they don't understand and them automatically deem it "irrefutable proof" of fakery. Pretty lame.



posted on Feb, 21 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
The first photo posted by the OP is taken from the West South West of the domed building closer to the river than the WTC. That building (referred to as WFC (World Financial Center) 2 in the schematic below) is on a closer orientation to north, south, east and west than the WTC, which is oriented North North East. Here is the compass orientation of the site:

www.european911citizensjury.com...



Here is a photo, taken in March of 2001, in the morning, that provides a very good comparison with the OP's original photo. (Note: the inclination of the planet to the sun in March is very analogous to the inclination in September, each month being three months from the summer solstice on June 21.)

en.wikipedia.org...:Wtc_arial_march2001.jpg



This shows without a doubt that the photo first posted by the OP is a fake. The photo looks like a screenshot from a video. The only reason I can think of for faking the photo would be to hide detonation flashes which were visible in window glass as reflections, in the original video, before it was masked by darkening the south sides of the buildings.

I think a lot of the fakery had to be done on the very morning of 9/11. That's why so much of it is amateurish. It was a rush job. They didn't have time to alter each explosive flash in each window in each building while leaving the right amount of light on the appropriate side of the building, so they just darkened the whole side of the building and crossed their fingers.
edit on 21-2-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

You ignore the giant smoke cloud casting a shadow. The sun is in a south easterly position, casting a north-westerly shadow. The buildings west of the towers are in shadow. In the first picture I posted, you can see the shadow of the smoke being cast onto the water. The photo is not fake.
edit on 22-2-2011 by brainsandgravy because: Clarified statement.



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by brainsandgravy
 

The problem with the photo the OP first posted is that there are dark shadows on the south faces of the World Financial Center buildings, while the south face of the red brick building in the foreground of his picture is sunlit as it should be.

Your first photo is taken later in the collapse than the OP's first photo and from a vantage point too far north of the WFC site to show the relevant sides of those buildings. If you look at WFC3 (the building with the pyramid on top) in that photo, you will see that it's west face is much darker than its north face, as it should be. Undoubtedly some reflected light is brightening the north face of that building.

I do see the large smoke cloud, but the idea that it would make the south face of the building darker than the side that is getting no direct sunlight at all is rediculous.

The shadows of the smoke on the water in your second photo are what one would expect to see both in the water and on the west faces of the WFC buildings, created by light basically coming from the south east. There is no way that those shadows are relvant to the anomally that the OP has pointed out, ie, the almost blackened out south faces of the WFC buildings.

The clincher is the southernmost of the WFC buildings (WFC1). What cloud of black smoke is darkening its south face? That photo is a clumsy, obvious forgery.
edit on 22-2-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

This is so stupid. You're wrong. Those shore-line buildings are in shadow. They look nothing like the buildings in direct sunlight. The west faces are lit not by direct sun-light, but by ambient light, i.e., light reflecting off of the water, New Jersey, and the western sky. The south faces are mostly facing other near-by buildings--not receiving as much ambient light.




edit on 22-2-2011 by brainsandgravy because: corrected photo



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
This photo was taken from the NJ side facing east, so at the time of the collapse the sun would be southeast, in a position in the sky where the smoke clouds would have blocked the nearby buildings from the sun but not the buildings across the river. The rays drawn on the photo are false: The sun wouldn't be in that position until 12:00 or 1:00.


We all, including Dave, agree that the photo is faked. The lines drawn are parallel to the shadows on the red brick building, foreground left.


No, YOU think the photo is fake, apparently because you believe the sun is only about a mile up in the sky and would be capable of these angles shown by the arrows on the photo. To the rest of the planet, the sun is a monstrously gigantic fireball a bazillion miles in space, meaning that the angle of the shadow on the building in the foreground is EXACTLY the same angle of any shadows that'd be on the buildings across the river, and you can see right away the line of sight angle on those buildings are being blocked by the smoke cloud.

I would go into more detail, but brainsandgravy already explained it with his photo montage betetr than I could.


Dave, look at the shadows on the red brick building, foreground left. The photo must have been taken in the morning, at least an hour before noon. Dude, geometry class. Do your homework. lol.


Are you flipping kidding me? The south building is missing in the photo which means it was taken when the north building collapsed, at 10:28 on September 11. How the heck can you claim you're a truther and NOT know that? At that point in time the sun will be in the southeast, meaning that from the angle of the shadows on the photo we're looking east or northeast, which we already know because this was taken from the New Jersey side.

"Do your homework" is right. Sheesh, some people.


The question for me is why anyone would go to the trouble of faking these photos? It doesn't make any sense, unless there was a fear that the buildings on the other side of the river might show light flashing from detonations reflected in their window panes. Maybe that's it.


It makes perfect sense, and I already posted why it my last post- these people WANT there to be a sinister conspiracy afoot so they're grasp onto any idiotic thing regardless of how preposterous it is as long as it helps keep these conspiracy stories alive. It's the whole reason why they go to those damned fool conspiracy web sites for all their information to begin with.

If someone has to resort to going through photos looking for hidden discrepencies of shadows to "prove" conspiracy, this ain't research; it's a mark of desperation from not having even a microbe of tangible proof to back up their claims. You know that and so do I.
edit on 22-2-2011 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit


I do see the large smoke cloud, but the idea that it would make the south face of the building darker than the side that is getting no direct sunlight at all is rediculous.




So the office building with lots of WINDOWS wouldn't show a reflection of the dust cloud


edit on 22-2-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join