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.

 

9/11, Possibility Of No windows on the Plane.

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 08:58 PM
link   
This video suggests that there were no windows on the plane.



I'm sure many of you have heard of this before but, it's something that seems to be over looked by some people who still thinks 911 was done by hijacked passenger planes.

Whatever it was, it supposedly had no windows.

This also explains why there are some hijackers reported to be still alive. (No hijackings took place)

Could this have been a specially designed mock plane? A hologram? Whatever it was, it was not a passenger plane.

Edit: Fixed title at author's request.

[edit on 9-6-2007 by intrepid]



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I suggest you look deeper into this witness. He was TWO MILES from the towers when he saw the plane.


Why did a FOX News employee, who witnessed the second tower attack, report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner? Why did another eyewitness report that United Airlines Flight 175 was not a commercial airliner? What kind of plane hit the second tower?



ANSWER: As FOX employee Marc Birnbach states in DVK's original IPS, he saw the plane from a subway station in Brooklyn, and it turns out that this subway stop was about two miles from the crash, which he did not see. Birnbach’s distance from the plane would make it impossible to see the windows of a plane silhouetted against the morning sky. I suspect that the other eyewitness is the hysterical woman separated from Manhattan by a very long bridge screaming, "That is not an American airline!" You don't have to be a genius to know that other closer eyewitnesses saw a commercial airline, and that other photos show the plane with UA markings, and that debris found in the WTC wreckage is of a commercial airliner with windows. But Dave's job is to keep those nonsensical questions in the mix.

911research.wtc7.net...

I've posted pictures of United Airlines planes where the person taking the picture was less than a QUARTER mile, the plane was barely moving, the side was facing directly at the camera, and you could STILL barely see the windows.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Well I must say that in the multiple videos I have seen, there were no windows.

No windows in the images I have seen either.

Maybe you know of a video or a photo of 911 that shows passenger windows?


Edit: By the way, saying that he was 2 miles away is not a good argument considering that a plane travels and this means he could have seen the plane right above him and then make it's way to the towers.

In fact, he could have seen it 2 miles in advance and then over his head and then 2 miles towards the world trade center.

Example, I can see a car pass by and identify it and 2 miles down the road if there is an accident, I was a witness of the car that crashed.




[edit on 8-6-2007 by selfless]



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Ok, so what makes you think that me saying I've seen pictures of United planes at less than a quarter mile where you can barely see windows, means you're going to be able to see them in a low quality compressed video? You don't see windows, because you're looking for something that's all of 12 inches tall on the side of the plane, from a couple of miles away.


Also note the spacing difference between the windows themselves. The spacing between the passenger windows appears to be more than double the space between the cockpit windows.

So, what does this mean to me? First, the smaller passenger windows will obviously be more difficult to see from a distance and more suceptable to masking via image distortion than the cockpit windows would. Second, windows that are closer together are more likely to appear as a long line, pointing out their location from a distance, even if you can't make out the details. The passenger windows with the greater space between them will be less likely to appear as a line, making their location harder to pin point.

Now go back and take a look at the UA175 port side picture above and look closely at the cockpit windows. What do you see? I see a thin black line, barely visible. I do not see windows seperated with spacer bars like you do on the a.net photos. Now try and hunt for the half-sized passenger windows in the UA175 picture. Do you think you could spot them in these pictures given how hard it is to see the larger cockpit windows?

Ok, now I'll briefly touch on the starboard side view. This picture is not a good choice for backing up the 'no windows' theory. Just look at the angle of the plane. The passenger windows are on the top half of the fuselage.... the grey strip that you see. The fuselage is round, so as the plane banks at the sharp angle that we see, we would not see (if we could see them) the windows in a parallel fashion. They are tilted away from the camera at this angle.

911wideopen.com...

There is NO WAY that you're going to be able to see windows on the plane. They're tiny to begin with.

Look at this picture. You are MUCH closer, MUCH higher resolution, and MUCH slower speed. But yet, it's still hard to see the windows. So you're telling me that you honestly think you're going to be able to see them from over a mile away, at a steep angle looking up at the plane, in shadow? No WAY.




IT DOESN'T MATTER if the plane went right over him. I've had planes go over me at 500 feet, and I STILL couldn't see the windows. And that was under MUCH better conditions than that day.

[edit on 6/8/2007 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I'v seen planes at low altitudes like the world trade center hight before and yes, I was able to see the windows.

Here's a high def video of the second plane hit.

www.youtube.com...

Sure, that doesn't mean there were no windows for sure but still I can't see them.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Research camera resolution. Use your own eye and try to spot a bug on a tree from 100 feet away. That is basically what you're asking for. 9/11 happend before the days of every feild camera being even remotley "Hi-Def". There are quality still digital camera shots that show the planes shadow, as well as tiny reflections of light from the windows and some colors on the plane.

Why wouldn't windows be on the planes? Those cameras couldn't pick up that kind of detail over such a long distance. Even pictures from the imediate area of the tower would have a tough time picking up sensitive details like windows because it was happening so fast.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Well there are witnesses who said they saw planes with out windows.

If you think these witnesses are not credible then you can't say the witnesses who saw planes are credible either.

That's a double standard.

Therefor, it's possible that these were planes with out windows.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:16 PM
link   
So, we're dragging out this old canard again? It's like 2002 all over again...


Originally posted by selfless
I'v seen planes at low altitudes like the world trade center hight before and yes, I was able to see the windows.


That's nice. Meaningless, but nice.



Here's a high def video of the second plane hit.


There's no such thing as "high def video" on YouTube.



Sure, that doesn't mean there were no windows for sure but still I can't see them.


You really think you could make-out an airliner window in that video? Really?


Here's a supposed picture of UA 175 wreckage. If you even believe in its authenticity, maybe you can find windows here...

Click me

Can you post a pic/vid cap of UA 175 where you think windows should be visible but aren't? Thanks.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:18 PM
link   
There was debris with windows. I'm sure this was planted though.... right?



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I have been very interested in the 9/11 conspiracy since last december.
That was the first time I had ever heard of it, found it by chance while researching.
All the info on 9/11 is spread out and confusing on ATS. For newbies its a little diffucult to catch up and jump on the discussion.
You probably would give me a link to a thread and tell me to catch up, but to me thats a little boring.
Maybe a new thread starting from the beginning and covering everything again. A newbie might pick up on something previously missed.
And why are almost all the videos from youtube or whatever else that use such poor quality always used. Where are the good clear videos?

As for this thread. Are there any pictures or video anywhere clear enough to see the plane to be able to tell if it does have windows or not.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Hey selfless, could you please go through that video point by point...I just don't feel like waiting for it to load on my computer.

If you could tell me if it would be worth it for me to watch.

Cause I don't wantta watch anything that might not be friggin awsome,dude!

Thanks in Advance.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by IAttackPeople
So, we're dragging out this old canard again? It's like 2002 all over again...


Originally posted by selfless
I'v seen planes at low altitudes like the world trade center hight before and yes, I was able to see the windows.


That's nice. Meaningless, but nice.


No, your reply saying it's meaningless is meaningless and not nice.



Originally posted by IAttackPeople
There's no such thing as "high def video" on YouTube.


Watch the video and you will notice the very high quality and compression.


Originally posted by IAttackPeople
You really think you could make-out an airliner window in that video? Really?



Probably not no, but that doesn't mean there were or there were not windows.


Originally posted by IAttackPeople
Can you post a pic/vid cap of UA 175 where you think windows should be visible but aren't? Thanks.


If I find it, I would show it.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by earth2
As for this thread. Are there any pictures or video anywhere clear enough to see the plane to be able to tell if it does have windows or not.


No, because that's the point. An airplane window is 10"x15". There's NO POSSIBLE WAY that a video taken from over a mile away or farther is going to show something that small. Look at the picture I posted earlier. That's a MUCH closer, MUCH higher resolution, and it's STILL difficult to see the windows in it. And that plane was at take off speed, so it was probably around 180mph. Flight 175 was at 500+.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by selfless
Well there are witnesses who said they saw planes with out windows.

If you think these witnesses are not credible then you can't say the witnesses who saw planes are credible either.

That's a double standard.

Therefor, it's possible that these were planes with out windows.



Witnesses who said they saw the plane but did NOT see the windows affirm only one thing: they saw a plane. What they did NOT see is not evidence of anything.

I saw a car drive by me tonight but I did not see the driver. Does that mean there was no driver?

I saw a firetruck drive by me on the way to a fire tonight but I couldn't make out the letters and numbers on the license plate. Does that mean the firetruck had nothing on it's license plate?

I saw a guy in Starbucks today reading the NY Times but I didn't couldn't read the headline from across the coffee shop. Does that mean they printed the NY Times today without a headline?

I read a post on ATS tonight that didn't seem to have any point whatsoever. Does that mean.... uh... nevermind. Bad example.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   
What video camera have you heard of that can film the windows of an airplane, miles high in the air, flying at hundreds of feet per second? keep in mind you can't even say that "hi-def" cameras can do it, because 9/11 was before the age of hi-def.

Even if we got some "hi def" cameras"and saw some "hi def" footage, HD resolution isn't THAT great. Yes we have clearer picture and more pixels but you are still asking the cameras shutter to take photos at nearly the speed of light, to be able to see that kind of detail on a video.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

No, because that's the point. An airplane window is 10"x15". There's NO POSSIBLE WAY that a video taken from over a mile away or farther is going to show something that small. Look at the picture I posted earlier. That's a MUCH closer, MUCH higher resolution, and it's STILL difficult to see the windows in it. And that plane was at take off speed, so it was probably around 180mph. Flight 175 was at 500+.


So the people who say they didnt see any windows are probably telling the truth.

How close would a person or camera have to be to see the windows?



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Yes, they probably are. But as Nick said, it doesn't prove anything. I can't give you an exact distance, but you'd have to be pretty close to get windows on video with the resolution they were using in most of the videos from 9/11.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoomX
There was debris with windows. I'm sure this was planted though.... right?


From the photo you posted it looks more like windows from a business jet not a large passenger jet.



posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 11:11 PM
link   
The windows on airliners are pretty tiny to begin with. Look at the pic below, it give you some perspective on just how small they are. They would be almost impossible to see unless you are pretty darned close to them, especially at the speed they were travelling.





posted on Jun, 8 2007 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by DoomX
There was debris with windows. I'm sure this was planted though.... right?


From the photo you posted it looks more like windows from a business jet not a large passenger jet.


Actually, I believe the windows in a buissiness jet and a passenger jet are pretty close in size...might even be exactly the same size.




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join