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

Holographics, that is the reason why the 'wing' disappears...John Lear, famous pilot, who has posted in this forum, has said so and others. The whole planes charade flying inot the planes were holographics. Sound? do your resaerch and you will be amaze what holograpics can do in these days!

Sorry for the miss spelling..planes flying into the buildings I meant...

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
But the membership includes people like

Paul Welton Aerospace Manufacturing Engineer Companies Worked: Boeing 1981 to 1985 USAF Comments: I was a autopilot and instrument mechanic while in the USAF. I worked on the following aircraft; A-10, C-130, and F4's while in the military. After the military I went to college and got my AA in Electronics. I worked for Boeing from 1989 until 1996 both as a flight line electrician in 747 Delivery and as an manufacturing engineer. I have since started my own contract manufacturing engineering firm and have operated it for over 10 years. I've basically worked in on or around airplanes for almost 30 years.

and

Lionel A Smith Aircraft Artificer Engines and Airframes RN and Fleet Air Arm from July 1963 to July 1982 Five years of apprenticeship covering- fitting, welding, turning, brazing, sheet-metal work in light alloys, steels, titanium, workshop technologies and engineering drawing, non-destructive testing, thorough study of airframe and aero-engine mechanisms, structures and systems, aircraft finishes. Study to A level standard in Mathematics, Aeronautical Engineering Science, Applied Mechanics (Aircraft), Engineering Drawing (advanced level). Service experience: Sea Vixens FAW 1 and 2 - 766 Squadron and 893 Squadron including HMS Victorious. Hunter GA11, PR10/11, T8 and also Meteor T7 and NF11, Vampire T22, Sea Prince, Swordfish, Tiger Moth. Phantom F4K 892 Squadron and Ark Royal. Trials installation unit (9 years) including designing manufacturing fitting (using most skills learned under training) and documentation of role change modifications to Canberra T22, Hunters T8 and GA11 - PR10/11, Sea King, Sea Devon, Sea Heron, Wasp, Wessex, Lynx. Post RN - 4 year degree course BEd (Hons 2:1) in Maths and Science covering many aspects including calculus (again), Stats, functions and graphs, sets and modular arithmetic, computer architecture and BASIC programming (taken to machine code and assembler on own volition in spare time - skills learned used during a contract programming period 89-90, weather and climate, chemistry (varied aspects including crystallography) and quantum mechanics, other earth sciences, magnetism.

These are not people that would wreck their careers and reputation by putting their name to something that they couldn't back up.

What they are saying only confirms what I already thought. No way could these Hijackers have piloted a 767-200 past it's operating limites and aim with perfect accuracy to hit the twin towers... Yet they according to the OS did this twice... then again according to the OS for a third time into the pentagon...

all the evidence says it's impossible... the only evidence that says it happened was the media footage....


I wonder if the reason so many are still fooled is that they are scared to contemplate what it would mean if it was an inside job. That the American Government willingly allowed or actually committed mass murder on home ground.

Korg.

edit on 31-10-2010 by Korg Trinity because: Spelling

TIFFANYINLA schooled everyone in this thread for 60+ pages

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and left no doubt to anyone with a brain that the OS/oct is pure bull#.

GAME OVER for those claiming it was possible.

Ok, so to sum up this thread in full, we have:

Argument #1: The plane's wing disappears because it's a hologram. 'Nuff said. Look at all the doubt instilled by other posters of the idea that the planes are real. Now, the plane may not necessarily be completely a hologram. It can easily just be another kind of heavier duty plane holographically disguised, or the wing disappearing was a glitch in the video editing that was done on the spot on 9/11 and fed to the newscasters and... video cameras of every single person who caught it.
^-- now this is kind of like 2 completely different theories, but the argument is essentially the same. That the plane was faked/altered.

Argument #2: The plane's wing disappears because of the angle of the camera and the lighting of the sky against the plane as the wing lit up along with video processing of the camera footage or automatic codec filters. Evidenced by other videos showing wings clearly blending into the sky as they brightened, and showing in countless videos that the second plane on 9/11 does indeed brighten exactly where the wing disappears on the OP's video and in the couple other videos which show the plane once again silhouetted against the sky.

Rebuttal #1: No, it's obvious, look at all the evidence.

Rebuttal #2: No really. Many people here have experience with cameras. This stuff happens. Look at all the evidence.


It's obvious we're going to get nowhere here, as the respective posters are apparently quite adamant in their views and will not change their ideas.

Originally posted by Korg Trinity

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Video #1. Russ Wintenberg. Boy, I could tell you what I've heard about HIM, form other pilots in the industry. He's well known as a loud-mouthed troublemaker.

Of course anything to discredit the information I presented....

This is Captain Russ Wintenbergs credentials...

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time 707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188 Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet Aircraft Dispatcher Pan Am, United United States Air Force (ret) Over 100 Combat Missions Flown Command time in: - N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93) - N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

And you are calling him... "a loud-mouthed troublemaker"

If you are a real pilot like you claim to be... still no proof of that either... where is your respect for someone whom has actually flown the planes that were allegedly used on 911..

edit on 30-10-2010 by Korg Trinity because: Cause I rock!!

imo anything WW has to say here is now irrelevant and a waste of time for real seekers of truth to engage him in any intelligent discourse.

TiffanyinLA has already exposed Weedwacker as a liar... so he's lost any credibility he had left

He claims to be an authority but doesn't understand that his OPINION can in no way determine truth or disprove the facts that contradict him.

i used to use the ignore button to avoid seeing his insane long-winded rants... i couldn't spend that much time posting if i tried.

reply to post by Orion7911


Personal attacks mate, personal attacks. Debate the info, not the people.

Like I said, the people who believe there are no planes will see this wing disappearance as nothing more than absolute proof of no planes (or altered appearance planes).

The people who believe it is an easily explainable video error will continue to see it as such and move on.

Originally posted by MiMobs
More americans believe that they were PLANES.. not some CGI or hologram crap!! Wake up man.. You are brainwashed, period!!
I truely hope, one day, you wake up and see that this theory is absurd.

the only people who believe there were real planes, are the ones who haven't examined the evidence properly or at all.

you claim the theorys absurd, but fail to produce any counter-argument or evidence showing exactly how and where all the evidence supporting nrpt, is wrong.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Orion7911

 

Personal attacks mate, personal attacks. Debate the info, not the people.

Like I said, the people who believe there are no planes will see this wing disappearance as nothing more than absolute proof of no planes (or altered appearance planes).

The people who believe it is an easily explainable video error will continue to see it as such and move on.

Debate WHAT info? I'm debating personal attacks and showing why HIS PERSONAL ATTACKS don't disprove the facts and evidence.

and NO, there's far more evidence of no planes, than just the footage of wings disappearing.

as for those who believe the wings disappearing are explainable, NOT ONE has shown conclusive proof of planes, or conclusive proof the footage doesn't contain fakery.

Originally posted by Orion7911

and NO, there's far more evidence of no planes, than just the footage of wings disappearing.

OK show it I need a laugh its Monday morning lets see this evidence other than the fact that the video you rave about was low quality footage and videos from other angles show the wing doesn't disapear.

Originally posted by Varemia
Ok, so to sum up this thread in full, we have:

Argument #1: The plane's wing disappears because it's a hologram. 'Nuff said. Look at all the doubt instilled by other posters of the idea that the planes are real. Now, the plane may not necessarily be completely a hologram. It can easily just be another kind of heavier duty plane holographically disguised, or the wing disappearing was a glitch in the video editing that was done on the spot on 9/11 and fed to the newscasters and... video cameras of every single person who caught it.
^-- now this is kind of like 2 completely different theories, but the argument is essentially the same. That the plane was faked/altered.

You are totally missing the point of the thread and am a little confused as to why you think this.

Just to clarify....

I do not think the planes were Holograms....

I never said that they were holograms and really don't understand why you would sum up a thread about media maniplulation and say it's about holograms...

What I said I believe is that ALL the Video footage that is in the public domain has been post edited and manipulated to make it look like it was a 767-200 that stuck the WTC.

AS this was a planned event, there could easily be template shots that were already set up, and could easily be mapped to the real event very quickly. All the news feeds were directed to the pentagon and then altered, then fed back to the news networks.

In other words, using technologies like Augmented Reality and post/pre production editing to edit the video footage to cover whatever it was that hit the wtc.

This conclusion means that whatever hit the wtc was smaller than a 767-200 for them to choose that as the mask object.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


I know, I included that in the second half of my paragraph and then added a line explaining that the viewpoints in this thread were essentially two ideas, but it was the same basic thing about the plane not being a Boeing 767. I thought you might miss it and make a post about how you don't believe in the hologram theory, and I thought I had compensated. Apologies for not being clear enough.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

What they are saying only confirms what I already thought.

But, you see...that is NOT what they "all" say. Some people who put their names to these "XXXFor9/11Truth" lists do so for many, many different reasons...and they don't ALL pull in the same direction, nor agree about the various details in each case. SOME of them acknowledge, for instance, the reality of the hijacked airplanes, but have heartburn over the collapse of the WTC Towers, and what exactly initiated them. SO, they "sign up" for that reason. You cannot infer they agree with the slightly whacky John Lear, nor with the contingent of clowns over at "PilotsForTruth" (who, contrary to Orion's claims, did NOT "school" anyone in the other thread!! NO, their "representative", ATS member TiffanyInLA merely came in and kept repeating the same script, direct from "P4T" talking points memos...saying EXACTLY the same nonsense that they all have been trained to repeat, by "P4T" head honcho Rob Balsamo himself). In fact, that ATS member has almost exactly the same writing style as Balsamo. Weird, huh?

NO....only people "she" might have "convinced' were those who have NO IDEA how to fly an airplane in the first place, and want desperately for their fantasies, as already formed on the topic, to be "confirmed", no matter what! So, critical examination and thinking skills go out the window, in the quest to grasp on to any twig that will help keep them in their delusions.

No way could these Hijackers have piloted a 767-200 past it's operating limites and aim with perfect accuracy to hit the twin towers...

Yes, way!! Because, we all saw it. Some saw it with their OWN EYES!! Rest of the world, in case of United 175, live video. Air traffic controllers, and other professionals TRACKED on radar, and visually witnessed United 175 as well. OP keeps ignoring these inconvenient truths.

BTW....even over at "P4T" they do NOT dispute the facts of American 11!!! They can't have it both ways, and their (and OP's) imaginings are just too extraordinary and over-complicated for words.
Because, American 11 actually was flying right at, or very close to, its Vmo. United 175's hijacker pilot pushed it beyond, in the descent. He DID fly it into an area of its flight envelope that hadn't been flight tested previously (there is no point, in normal flight tests ,to do so) --- but, we saw that it COULD perform beyond any expectations --- which is really a testament to its design. And, to physics.

... then again according to the OS for a third time into the pentagon...

Oh, Gawd!!! We have been over and over this!! The Pentagon HAS THE FDR data!!!! It is conclusive, and only the most extreme denier won't accept it. Defies all logic, and common sense. AND, American 77's maneuvers, and speeds, were NOT outside the airplane's envelope, nor the abilities of even the most basic of aviating skills.

A Dutch TV show re-created, in a simulator, with a very low-time pilot (a student) THREE TIMES the Pentagon attack and impact profile, in response to the foolish "Loose Change" video. This relatively inexperienced pilot (less than Hani Hanjour) did it THREE times:



Watch the full segment, please. First five minutes lead up to the flight simulator portion of the program.

"Pilots For Truth" have an agenda...and it ISN'T 'truth".

...all the evidence says it's impossible...

Wanna rethink that? Because, "all" the evidence "says" no such thing.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

What they are saying only confirms what I already thought.

But, you see...that is NOT what they "all" say. Some people who put their names to these "XXXFor9/11Truth" lists do so for many, many different reasons...and they don't ALL pull in the same direction, nor agree about the various details in each case. SOME of them acknowledge, for instance, the reality of the hijacked airplanes, but have heartburn over the collapse of the WTC Towers, and what exactly initiated them. SO, they "sign up" for that reason.

Of course everyone has their own ideas and theories on what happened... But they all agree that it wasn't possible for hijacker newbie pilots to crash into the wtc using a 767. That is their interest as they are experienced experts in aviation!! It's unlikely they would sign up for p4t if they didn't think that there was something up with what happened pertaining to the flights...

If you want the people whom stand up about the collapses then you might want to try....

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Comprising some 1347 verified architectural and engineering professionals... All discussing the Collapse... They may have their own opinion on the actual strikes but as they are architectural experts they have their own site.

Yes, way!! Because, we all saw it. Some saw it with their OWN EYES!!

Do you believe that it's possible for a man to walk on water??



Or for the statue of liberty to disapear??



My point being, believing your eyes and the testimony of others does not equate to the truth, these days.

Rest of the world, in case of United 175, live video. Air traffic controllers, and other professionals TRACKED on radar, and visually witnessed United 175 as well. OP keeps ignoring these inconvenient truths.

Air traffic control was also tracking lots of ghost data from live military war games exercises of which the air traffic controllers were supposed to know were only exercises...

These were the drills that were running on 9/11 a few of which include and I highlight... I have researched the validly and can report the following as accurate.

1) OPERATION NORTHERN VIGILANCE: This was planned months in advance of 9/11 and ensured that on the morning of 9/11, jet fighters were removed from patrolling the US east coast and sent to Alaska and Canada, therefore reducing the amount of fighter planes available to protect the east coast.

2) BIOWARFARE EXERCISE TRIPOD II: Alex Jones first reported on this back in May when Rudolph Giuliani let the details of it slip in his testimony to the 9/11 Commission. FEMA arrived in New York on September 10th to set up a command post located at Pier 29 under the auspices of a 'biowarfare exercise scheduled for September 12. This explains why Tom Kenney of FEMA's National Urban Search and Rescue Team, told Dan Rather of CBS News that FEMA had arrived in New York on the night of September 10th. This was originally dismissed as a slip of the tongue. Giuliani was to use this post as a command post on 9/11 after he evacuated WTC Building 7. As we reported back in January, Giuliani knew when to leave WTC 7 because he got advanced warning that the Trade Towers were about to collapse. "We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse," Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings of ABC News. How did Giuliani know the towers were about to collapse when no steel building in history had previously collapsed from fire damage?

3) OPERATION VIGILANT GUARDIAN: This exercise simulated hijacked planes in the north eastern sector and started to coincide with 9/11. Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, NORAD unit's airborne control and warning officer, was overseeing the exercise. At 8:40am she took a call from Boston Center which said it had a hijacked airliner. Her first words, as quoted by Newhouse News Service were, "It must be part of the exercise." This is another example of how the numerous drills on the morning of 9/11 deliberately distracted NORAD so that the real hijacked planes couldn't be intercepted in time.

4) OPERATION NORTHERN GUARDIAN: The details of this exercise are still scant but it is considered to be part of Vigilant Guardian, relating to simulating hijacked planes in the north eastern sector.

5) OPERATION VIGILANT WARRIOR: This was referenced in Richard Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies'. It is thought to have been the 'attack' component of the Vigilant Guardian exercise.

Source: - Wargames Were Cover For the Operational Execution of 9/11

BTW....even over at "P4T" they do NOT dispute the facts of American 11!!!

Seeing as that was the first strike and a surprise attack, there is very little data to go on, little data leads to little conclusions that cannot be verified very well... The 2nd strike however tell the story.

And you say you can't have it both way... so you agree if one event the is directly linked to the others can be shown to be fake there is a good chance they are all fake???.... if so check the pentagon evidence....

Oh, Gawd!!! We have been over and over this!! The Pentagon HAS THE FDR data!!!! It is conclusive, and only the most extreme denier won't accept it. [snip]

I have posted in this thread evidence surrounding the Pentagon... but as you have brought it up once more...









I could go on and on and on.... But I won't unless you want me too.

Korg...

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Perhaps you didn't look at the video weedwhacker posted. Those weren't even Americans, and they refuted just about every single claim made about the idea of the plane not hitting the pentagon (also, remember this thread isn't even ABOUT the pentagon. It's about that stupid wing disappearance.).

They DID say that someone with just flight simulator experience could do it. Something that directly contradicts your claim about "novices." Stop just parroting videos, and please, think about what you post from an UNBIASED perspective. This is very, very important. Don't ever hold a stance on an issue that is as debated as 9/11. If you hold a stance then you instantly harm your ability to look at evidence objectively, literally only seeing what you want to see.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Perhaps you didn't look at the video weedwhacker posted. Those weren't even Americans, and they refuted just about every single claim made about the idea of the plane not hitting the pentagon (also, remember this thread isn't even ABOUT the pentagon. It's about that stupid wing disappearance.).

The thread has a natural progression and I feel it logical to encompass all the strikes since I am stating that I do not believe 767's or any commercial flight was used in the 911 atrocities...

I did watch Weedwhackers vid and I had to re-watch it cause it was in German and wanted to absorb the translation. They didn't refute the evidence shown in loose change; they just kept saying you can't say it wasn't from a 757 but they also said you can’t say it was from a 757 either…. Which is a silly argument if you ask me, given the white elephant of physical dimensions of the damage and video anomalies.

In addition I might point you to the videos I posted above… even rolls Royce state that there are parts that they don’t recognise as coming from one of their engines…

I might also add though and this goes on both sides you can get anyone to say anything if you pay them well enough.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Again, more and more of the same EXACT BS that spews from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites, and the likes of Alex Jones and his despicable "Prison Planet" site. Falsely cited references, out of context and conflated improperly.

You really, really need to get OUT of the house, and go to a Library and start reading some books, instead of the garbage (and lies and misstatements) that are copied/pasted and self-licking that infest the Internets.

Your last four videos, especially the jerk narrating that refers to the "National Geographic animation" merely employs the "strawman" approach. NatGeo's animation WAS incorrect, and ignorant, showing the wings "breaking off". It was something THEY did (poorly), and has no relevance to reality, nor to physics. They are not the final arbiter. Same jerk also paints a false impression of the engines --- and YOU have been shown already the reality of their construction, which you dismissed out of hand --- and the engines' many separate components, and TRUE dimensions (not just he exterior of the cowlings (nacelles).

But, back to where I started...the "wargames":

Air traffic control was also tracking lots of ghost data from live military war games exercises of which the air traffic controllers were supposed to know were only exercises...

ABSOLUTELY false, and still another of the many ways those creeps at "Prison Planet" (and elsewhere) smear the lines of truth,and reality, regarding the actual events that morning. READ a book, I suggest "Touching History" for starters. Written by an airline pilot, and as factual as can get, author having interviewed many, many who were directly involved and experienced the events.

THIS video tells, from the ACTUAL air traffic controllers mouths, what they saw and did....no "ghost data" made up BS!!!!:

Google Video Link

These were the drills that were running on 9/11 a few of which include and I highlight... I have researched the validly and can report the following as accurate.

Yes. Pay close attention to their DETAILS, and to the reactions when actual hi-jackings were confirmed, and how the "games" were immediately TERMINATED. The "confusion" of real world versus "game" was VERY brief!! Get your head out of those stupid one-sided sites!!


This thread demonstrates quite clearly the problem with amateurs, sitting in an armchair and Googling to unverified sites with unverified and blatantly WRONG "information", being led to horribly flawed and terribly ill-informed conclusions. There is SO MUCH you have yet to learn, it seems....and it starts at the very beginning, the premise of your OP --- you have to LEARN about the limitations and vagaries of digital photography. This has been kindly presented to you, by many people. Ignoring facts won't make them disappear.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A more cogent discussion of the actual "wargames", and the truth. AND the responses. WITHOUT the crap and twist and spin from the likes of Alex Jones (who, you know, does that crap for RATINGS!!!)

Originally posted by Orion7911
TIFFANYINLA schooled everyone in this thread for 60+ pages

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and left no doubt to anyone with a brain that the OS/oct is pure bull#.

GAME OVER for those claiming it was possible.

Oh dear. If you think Tiffany "schooled" anyone in that thread you're obviously desperate for it to be true.

You also seem to have forgotten that even Tiffany only thinks that one of the wtc flights was impossible.

And that's leaving aside her terrible logic, made-up tables, invented evidence and appeals to authority.

It's such a shame this kind of thread/garbage gets so much attention whilst more informative, fact based and intelligent discussions about the the possible 911 truth goes on elsewhere. largely unnoticed.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

S

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Again, more and more of the same EXACT BS that spews from the "9/11 conspiracy" sites, and the likes of Alex Jones and his despicable "Prison Planet" site. Falsely cited references, out of context and conflated improperly.

I could say the same about your ANTI-TRUTH perspective.

Look there is a wealth of evidence that suggests what I and about 33% of the public think may actually be correct. If there was 100% proof that this happened the way you state then explain exatly why so many high profile people are willing to stand up and say no way!?

If this was as black and white as you seem to think then there would be no way and no doubt about what happened.

But since thier clearly is plenty of evidence to suggest that the OS is bull, that must mean that whether you like it or not that there is a conspiracy a foot.

Do we agree that at least the OS is bull??

Korg.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Oh dear. If you think Tiffany "schooled" anyone in that thread you're obviously desperate for it to be true.

You also seem to have forgotten that even Tiffany only thinks that one of the wtc flights was impossible.

And that's leaving aside her terrible logic, made-up tables, invented evidence and appeals to authority.

This is the kind of flawed logic I just can't believe intelligent people swallow...

Have you heard yourself... Only one of the flights was impossible!!

If it was impossible then it shouldn't have happened and couldn't have happened... now since it was reported as happening and shown happening in the media that must mean using deduction that the media must be telling lies.... If they are telling lies then all bets are off on all media presented on all events as all events are linked to the impossible one.

Simple logic really...

Korg.