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 closer look at the pentagon camera footage

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Ok, so I was getting tired of all the extremely low quality versions of the pentagon videos flying around. As a result, I began to do my research and discover where the heck they were. Naturally, the original FOIA page no longer contained them, so I did some wayback machine searching and found a version of the page that still had the files, and they were still quite downloadable.

Now, what I mainly wanted to see was the exact difference between the frame just before the plane becomes visible, and the frame right when the plane is "on-screen", though blocked mostly by the post. I screen-capped and magnified the image so you can see it right down to the pixels.



Now, what I notice right off the bat is that there is now a triangle-shaped thing in front of the white trail. (This will obviously be difficult for the brain to create a matrix of due to the magnification. The mind will add more detail when the image is smaller because it can fill in the information that is missing. Up close, the information simply isn't there)

Ok, now, I wanted to look closer at it, as I know there have been disputes about whether it should have been illuminated or not. Firstly, it is a different color than the trees in the background. In fact, it is lighter, more grayish blue.

Second, we need to remember the angle that the plane was probably coming in at. It was not necessarily going straight perpendicular to the camera, as you might be quick to imagine. More than likely, it is more angled, which would shorten the viewable plane body and change the light dynamics on the tail. Now, it just occurred to me that the upper part of the plane was likely painted dark blue, so even illuminated it may not be very visible. Still, the difference in color is highly discernible by this magnified image.

Thanks for reading. Offer your opinions and such on it. Let me know if I'm missing any details.




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
How about a better picture.




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Where are the pics?

edit: nm, they are up now.

edit on 12-10-2011 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Here're the originals:

Before:


After:



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
And here's a magnification plus originals of the other video. You'll notice in the pixels that blue appears. It appears to me that might indicate the blue from the airliner.



Before:


After:



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


That triangle is the vertical stabilizer of the 757.

Have you seen the simulation shown here? www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
reply to post by Varemia
 


That triangle is the vertical stabilizer of the 757.

Have you seen the simulation shown here? www.youtube.com...


I have. Just trying to do some independent investigating to see if I find anything new. So far, my findings are in favor of an airliner hitting the pentagon, but I could be corrected at some point.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Nobody can see anything on that video and to claim there is an airliner on that clip is moronic, wishful thinking.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALF88
Nobody can see anything on that video and to claim there is an airliner on that clip is moronic, wishful thinking.


You can clearly see specific non-fragment changes between the frames, indicating that there was an object. In the one video you can even see up close that the camera caught color.

If we're to embrace science here at ATS we need to be better than saying "it's impossible to find anything out using the videos."



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
If the government would just release all the security camera videos they confiscated showing the plane crashing into the Pentagon, maybe we could finally put this part of the 9/11 conspiracy to rest. The longer they keep those videos from the public, the more fuel is added to the on going conspiracy fire.

So what if these confiscated video shows a plane crashing into the Pentagon? It's not like we've never seen videos of planes crashing. I still say if the OS is true, what do they have to lose by releasing these other tapes?



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


If I look, I think that I still have copies of the 3D models and his animation files for SolidWorks. I played around with it a bit, but, that has been around for quite a while.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


What videos are you talking about specifically?



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
If the government would just release all the security camera videos they confiscated showing the plane crashing into the Pentagon, maybe we could finally put this part of the 9/11 conspiracy to rest. The longer they keep those videos from the public, the more fuel is added to the on going conspiracy fire.

So what if these confiscated video shows a plane crashing into the Pentagon? It's not like we've never seen videos of planes crashing. I still say if the OS is true, what do they have to lose by releasing these other tapes?


Well, until they are released, we can't know if they contained the plane at all. We don't even know which direction most were pointing in.

What I'd like to keep this focused on are the videos that were released.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


Even IF such a video as you claim exists, exists....would not stop the most arcane "conspiracy theorists" from positing all sorts of inane things.

But of course, the info used to base this assertion in your post is incorrect, anyhow:

"FBI 'hides' 84 Tapes


As you see in that information above, nothing is being "withheld" by any agency.



The FBI are talking about 85 videos, but this is just the result of an initial search that includes (for example) all videos obtained by the Washington Field Office. If we move on from that then the numbers begin to fall dramatically.

56 "of these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11."

Of the remaining 29 videotapes, 16 "did not show the Pentagon crash site and did not show the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon."

Of the 13 remaining tapes, 12 "only showed the Pentagon after the impact of Flight 77."

Only one tape showed the Pentagon impact: the Pentagon's own security camera footage, that would later be released.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Wasn't the maneuver supposedly made by this plane, physically impossible?



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by wWizard
 


No it wasn't impossible. It was pretty much like landing, except for the higher speed. It could have been done with the autopilot adjustment controls. There's a big long flat area there it might have been a landing field in the 40's.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by wWizard
Wasn't the maneuver supposedly made by this plane, physically impossible?


If air shows are anything to go by, they are actually highly maneuverable.






posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALF88
Nobody can see anything on that video and to claim there is an airliner on that clip is moronic, wishful thinking.
I agree doesnt look like a massive jetliner



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaya82

Originally posted by ALF88
Nobody can see anything on that video and to claim there is an airliner on that clip is moronic, wishful thinking.
I agree doesnt look like a massive jetliner


Well, duh. It's only part of it, and the video quality is low. Please contribute something to the thread.

Instead of saying, "doesn't look anything like a massive jetliner," try giving feedback on what it DOES look like. You know, actually apply some critical thinking skills and stuff. Tell me what is more likely. What has a triangle shaped object on it which points straight up? What has a blue exterior? What reason is there smoke behind it?



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 


It really doesn't look like *anything* - and that's kind of the point - there IS no photographic evidence. This however, does nothing to disprove the multitude of eyewitnesses to the actual plane impact on the building...


edit on 12-10-2011 by userid1 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join