Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: How?
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Hazzard,
I'm not sure it does. It encourages me to believe how clever are a very tiny minority!
Westlife are a tiny minority and they aren't clever.
However, we don't seem to be getting far with the debate concerning the supplied link - can someone actually make a point that can be addressed.
Proley - try to be constructive and make a statement instead of simply imitating a native American. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:05 pm Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
Proley - try to be constructive and make a statement instead of simply imitating a native American.
My point is, how the dickens does the front of the plane come through the other end of that building? That is the most far-fetched thing I ever did see. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:38 pm Post subject:
What is it that comes out the side of that building? Is it robust enough to smash through the entire south tower and then magically get lost in the fireball? Would'nt some visible debris from that item be seen to falll through the fireball? _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
The footage is most certainly the origin of the 'plane in-missile out' shot from webfairy. What's coming out of building is obviously not the nose of jet airplane of any sort, whether or not it had survived to that point. If it were a missile, it's obviously not to scale of known cruise varieties, huge in fact
Very odd footage and worth studying closely, it seems to show a very distorted image of a plane at the start. It's got that very bright element that I think Eric Hufschmidt described as some kind of uranium leader weapon dropping down from the building, it's got the strange shadowy ufo shooting diagonally down the screen which is remarked on by the author of this video at the end, which seems to be way nearer the camera in relation to the wtc, and also in the first run of the clip, it appears to briefly show an orb/helicopter in the top right quadrant of the shot _________________ http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Proley - try to be constructive and make a statement instead of simply imitating a native American.
My point is, how the dickens does the front of the plane come through the other end of that building? That is the most far-fetched thing I ever did see.
What makes you think it's the front? That would be massively unlikely (unless <groan> you assume first bit in must be first bit out? Please don't tell me you think that. Please, I beg you)
Engine or landing gear would be plausible. They're very hard and substantial. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:03 am Post subject:
dh wrote:
The footage is most certainly the origin of the 'plane in-missile out' shot from webfairy. What's coming out of building is obviously not the nose of jet airplane of any sort, whether or not it had survived to that point. If it were a missile, it's obviously not to scale of known cruise varieties, huge in fact
Very odd footage and worth studying closely, it seems to show a very distorted image of a plane at the start. It's got that very bright element that I think Eric Hufschmidt described as some kind of uranium leader weapon dropping down from the building, it's got the strange shadowy ufo shooting diagonally down the screen which is remarked on by the author of this video at the end, which seems to be way nearer the camera in relation to the wtc, and also in the first run of the clip, it appears to briefly show an orb/helicopter in the top right quadrant of the shot
It's definitely an orb. I must admit to be slightly puzzled by the fact the missile seems to disappear. The missile being shot into the north tower is actually doing just that, cloaked with a hologram. I personally expected the missile to be visible somehow, somewhere. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:13 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:10 am Post subject:
Ignatz wrote:
prole art threat wrote:
telecasterisation wrote:
Proley - try to be constructive and make a statement instead of simply imitating a native American.
My point is, how the dickens does the front of the plane come through the other end of that building? That is the most far-fetched thing I ever did see.
What makes you think it's the front? That would be massively unlikely (unless <groan> you assume first bit in must be first bit out? Please don't tell me you think that. Please, I beg you)
I personally realise it's the hologram. My second question I asked, Ignatz, is where the hell does the 'engine or landing gear go once it exits the fireball. I hope you <groan> dont think it has evaporated in the fireball. Please dont tell me you think that. Please, I beg you.
Engine or landing gear would be plausible. They're very hard and substantial.
I personally consider it to be the hologram. My second question I asked, Ignatz, is where the hell does this 'engine or landing gear' go, after it enters the fireball? I hope you <groan> dont think it has evaporated in the fireball. Please dont tell me you think that. Please, I beg you. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Agreed, not the nose section of the aircraft. The height between floors in the WTC being too narrow to allow it to pass through from one side of the building to the other. My guess is it has been added at a later stage - did it appear on the day that way?
The dark fast moving blur/UFO is the stranger element though and it does appear by its rapid movement to be much closer to the camera - by its passage it would have landed in the street. It also does not seem to be ejected from the second tower to be hit as it does not cross the lighter area created by the tower behind.
Instead it seems to come from higher up from the other tower and adopts a very steep downward arc, steeper than you would expect if it had come from the second impact.
As for the engine aspect, didn't one land in Murray St and there are photos in existence? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
It's definitely an orb. I must admit to be slightly puzzled by the fact the missile seems to disappear. The missile being shot into the north tower is actually doing just that, cloaked with a hologram. I personally expected the missile to be visible somehow, somewhere.
I think possibly the orbs available on the various clips are key to the hologram theory. Recalling the Area 51 hovering device recorded by Anthony Hilder in the Secret Space movie, these could perhaps be platforms for the holograms _________________ http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:34 am Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
As for the engine aspect, didn't one land in Murray St and there are photos in existence?
Just because there are photos of an engine in Murray Street, doesnt mean it 'landed' there. I think the operative word, as always when discussing physical evidence of 9/11, is 'planted'. I wonder if they had one big truck full of all this bent 'evidence' and just randomly tossed it out the window whilst driving between 'crash' sites?
Your response still doesnt take account of the disappearing of the 'engine/landing gear' after it enters the fireball. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:35 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:35 am Post subject:
dh wrote:
prole art threat wrote:
It's definitely an orb. I must admit to be slightly puzzled by the fact the missile seems to disappear. The missile being shot into the north tower is actually doing just that, cloaked with a hologram. I personally expected the missile to be visible somehow, somewhere.
I think possibly the orbs available on the various clips are key to the hologram theory. Recalling the Area 51 hovering device recorded by Anthony Hilder in the Secret Space movie, these could perhaps be platforms for the holograms
Agreed. 100%. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:57 am Post subject:
Another orb, loitering and up to no good.
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
It's definitely an orb. I must admit to be slightly puzzled by the fact the missile seems to disappear. The missile being shot into the north tower is actually doing just that, cloaked with a hologram. I personally expected the missile to be visible somehow, somewhere.
I think possibly the orbs available on the various clips are key to the hologram theory. Recalling the Area 51 hovering device recorded by Anthony Hilder in the Secret Space movie, these could perhaps be platforms for the holograms
So it's a hologram? You know you just threw out all your witness's who didn't see any plane, right?
prole art threat - Another orb, loitering and up to no good.
We have already seen helicopters in the vicinity - how would one look hovering at a distance? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:47 am Post subject:
[quote="Fallious"]
dh wrote:
So it's a hologram? You know you just threw out all your witness's who didn't see any plane, right?
Er, they didnt see a plane...
The witnesses saw a missile cloaked in a 'holographic plane'. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
As for the engine aspect, didn't one land in Murray St and there are photos in existence?
Just because there are photos of an engine in Murray Street, doesnt mean it 'landed' there. I think the operative word, as always when discussing physical evidence of 9/11, is 'planted'. I wonder if they had one big truck full of all this bent 'evidence' and just randomly tossed it out the window whilst driving between 'crash' sites?
Your response still doesnt take account of the disappearing of the 'engine/landing gear' after it enters the fireball.
Just because there is a plethora of poor quality video about, doesn't mean that there ARE wings missing, or beam rope weapons discharging from helicopters, or witnesses who fail to respond because aircraft are simply not there either.
But to your points;
Agreed, it does not mean an aircraft jet engine landed there, I am sure that tossing it out of the window of a passing vehicle is one viable option for its unusual resting place. Although, given its weight, it is more likely that a small crane would be needed to achieve the swing needed to clear the top of the window and out of the driver’s window. Not to mention people passing or office cleaners watching from nearby windows who might notice an aircraft engine being thrown so forcibly from a car window that it smashes the pavement.
As for the 'engine/landing gear' disappearing into the fireball, I have not said I agree with this hypothesis, in fact I do not accept that the object in question is either of those items. Assuming the object that emerges is genuine and not merely ‘added’ later to enhance the effect or confuse, it hardly resembles landing gear or an engine – besides which, the ratio is completely wrong for either objects you mention. It is far too big for either.
I am unable to give any opinion as to what it is and consequently, cannot comment on why the fireball eats it up. I repeat, it is not the nosecone for obvious reasons, 'engine/landing gear' – far too small/wrong shape. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:50 am Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
how would one look hovering at a distance?
At home with the orbs...
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:51 am; edited 1 time in total
The witnesses saw a missile cloaked in a 'holographic plane'.
No Prole - recent threads are riddled with you supplying links to witnesses who saw NO plane. You seem to be genuinely getting confused. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:56 am Post subject:
[quote="telecasterisation"]
prole art threat wrote:
Fallious wrote:
dh wrote:
So it's a hologram? You know you just threw out all your witness's who didn't see any plane, right?
Er, they didnt see a plane...
The witnesses saw a missile cloaked in a 'holographic plane'.
No Prole - recent threads are riddled with you supplying links to witnesses who saw NO plane. You seem to be genuinely getting confused.
Tele, the fact that some people didnt is as credible as some people seeing them. This would largely depend on their vantage point, remember we are dealing with projected 3D images here. As long as some people saw them and they were captured on film, then everyone is gonna go with the flow, whether they saw a plane or not. _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Last edited by prole art threat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:58 am; edited 1 time in total
The question is clear - you love avoiding specific points by supplying unrelated nonsense.
How would a helicopter look hovering at a distance? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Tele, the fact that some people didnt is as credible as some people seeing them. This would largely depend on their vantage point, remember we are dealing with projected 3D images here. As long as some people saw them and they were captured on film, then everyone is gonna go with the flow, whether they saw a plane or not.
There are countless witnesses who saw many kinds of variations to the official story, no plane, a commercial plane, a military plane etc - everyone does not 'go with the flow' in any way whatsoever. You supplied links, highlighting people saw NO plane - your story changes and fluctuates more than the men in blackcat's life! _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:09 am Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
prole wrote
Quote:
Tele, the fact that some people didnt is as credible as some people seeing them. This would largely depend on their vantage point, remember we are dealing with projected 3D images here. As long as some people saw them and they were captured on film, then everyone is gonna go with the flow, whether they saw a plane or not.
There are countless witnesses who saw many kinds of variations to the official story, no plane, a commercial plane, a military plane etc - everyone does not 'go with the flow' in any way whatsoever. You supplied links, highlighting people saw NO plane - your story changes and fluctuates more than the men in blackcat's life!
LOL
People saw planes or they didnt. That is what I'm saying, anyway, come and have a look at this.
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:17 am Post subject:
Now look out for the orbs at the lefthand side of the south tower.
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
The 'orbs' are pieces of paper from the other tower. You can see the direction of travel by the way the wind is blowing the smoke - it is fluttering paper, not orbs.
There is no question of this whatsoever. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:29 am Post subject:
telecasterisation wrote:
The 'orbs' are pieces of paper from the other tower. You can see the direction of travel by the way the wind is blowing the smoke - it is fluttering paper, not orbs.
There is no question of this whatsoever.
Our first impressions allow us to think this but realistically paper isnt going to hover and dance over a huge flaming fireball without at least blackening. Is it? _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:30 am Post subject:
Hold on, which clip are you referring to? Look at the right hand side of the southtower in this clip.
Link _________________ 'Maybe if I can show some lurking kids that this is all a pack of lies, then maybe I can make a difference. I don't plan on converting any of you because you're all mad.'
-Johnny Pixels
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
