nosed out

[jfk]

nosed out


Link

[marky 54]

the one thing ive never understood about npt/fakery believers, and that is the need to spam the same piece of information in numerous threads rather than just starting a new thread and sticking to that one. or just posting in a thread which is dicussing the topic.

[jfk]

probably posted on one too many threads (3 in total), but still relevant to topic on each thread. no more i promise

[jfk]

and this one


Link

[marky 54]

an airplane silhoutette enters the picture

it APPEARS to pierce the tower and come out the other side with its nose intact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB81EtRaCvU

[fish5133]

Given the options outlined in the Northwoods document it isnt beyond the bounds of possibility that a special drone look alike plane with bunker busting type nose could have penetrated the walls of the WTCs and come out the other side just like the Pentagon holes in both facades

[Dallas]

Excellent point, fish. I personally saw the impact from 1/2mi away on the Brooklyn Bridge, and I assure you there was a plane. However, what you suggest does seem plausible on its face. I am not saying it's the truth, but that possiblity certainly deserves consideration IMHO.

[marky 54]

a nose out dos'nt appear in all footage. there are quite a few instances where the 'nose out' just appears as an explosion/dust/debris.

however from side on and for a split second it does appear to look like the nose passed through. going by other video evidence it is my opinon it is an optical illusion caused by the squib caused by the explosion and fast moving debris/dust from the impact.

'nost out'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFxx1o84dj4&feature=related

no 'nose out'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPtLxVGwAdQ

you'll find the same is true of every side on shot(nose out)

and the same is true of every shot that is not side on(no nose out)

conclusion is either tv fakery or simply optical illusion caused by dust and debris expantion coming through the opposite facade.

[marky 54]

http://img253.imageshack.us/slideshow/player.php?id=img253/9315/120116 3113r6z.smil

[slimpickins]

Three points about the nosed out theory.

The overlay comparison is only a superficial match, the two shapes aren't the exactly the same, which they should be.

Other shots, such as the ones taken from the angle shown in the slideshow above, show that while the image retains a superficial match in the vertical plane, it doesn't in any other.

Lastly and most importantly, the cgi artist hasn't made a fake plane pass through the building, he's edited it out gradually for the impact and then for some reason put it back in again a few frames later, which would be an inexplicable mistake.

[Micpsi]