Magically Healing Columns

[Ace Baker]

OK. Years have passed since people noticed this problem, but I still haven't heard an explanation for Ghostplane. If the wings are already inside, why do we see no damage to the wall? The official answer is that the resolution is too poor. This gif sequence disproves that. This was taken from CNN America Remembers DVD. The final frame was enlarged slightly more than the rest of it.

Clearly there is 20 times more resolution than needed to see the large gaping dark hole. If the passage of the "airplane" cause the hole, why do we not see it in the second to the last frame?

I was just banned at Loose Change for posting this very same problem. No answers, just banning.

[marky 54]

some of the damage in the last frame was caused by the explosion also, have you accounted for that on top of the plane entering?

[Roadrunner]

Brilliant !

And the answer they give to your question Ace, is ?

........ (still waiting) !

LOL

[gruts]

well mr multiple personality - this is what the south tower impact zone should look like.



compare that with its appearance in Ace's low quality clip that has been compressed and magnified. despite what he says, the resolution is so poor that you can't even see the individual columns and windows. as you should know, the external facade of the world trade centre had a "ridged" appearance of aluminium clad steel columns with glass in between them (as in the photo above).

but in Ace's clip, the plane, the building and the impact zone have all been reduced to a flat grey tone, making it very difficult to discern between the three elements with so much of the detail and definition missing.

if the image doesn't even have enough resolution to show the columns and windows at all, I don't think you can credibly expect to see a clear picture of the impact hole forming.

(edited because misinformation agents of the evil jesuit order were preventing the image from displaying properly)

[chek]

Which as gruts says, is about all that can be said about the video footage.

Poor source material that can only be speculated on and drooled over by the fact-free alternative universe heads of Indubroadadelphia and his like.

And oh how they like to do that, mindless dupes that they are.

[gruts]

not only does the clip fail to prove anything, it also begs all kinds of questions which I've been waiting years for Ace and his buddies to answer, but so far there's just a deafening silence.

for example, if there was no plane impact, then the observed impact damage must have been created in some other way.

I have yet to see a single credible explanation of how the impact damage, fireballs etc could have been created by the perps in the absence of a plane - despite trying to get an explanation from the very vocal npt believers on this forum any number of times.

any ideas mr roadrunner?

[Stefan]

You got there first gruts - the thing is, they're just going to ignore that and then say "see no one can answer!" I can imagine this is exactly what happened at the Loose Change forum: EVERYONE answered, and he ignored them all.

So maybe I'll make it harder by repeating the point:

Ace,
Why is it just the plane you are concerned about - why not campaign on the fact that on 9/11, whenever a camera was pointed at the WTC, the aluminium cladding, the glass windows and the stell beams all diseappeared to be replaced by a mottled, flat, grey entity?

Surley compared to a small object like a plane the morphing of the whole WTC into something unrecognisable is the bigger story?

It’s simple, Ace, really it is -

* If you look at a crisp photo of the ST just before impact with the plane in view - you will note that one half of the plane (incorporating all parts which appear to fade or vanish when passing the building front) and the building face of the ST are exactly the same tone.

* This tone is actually a dark shadow as the sun is so bright

* The hole in the building would be a similar tone

* As the video is compressed and reduced in detail, all three elements are represented by the same flat grey tone -

Hence -

No (or faded) wing and other parts of the plane in shadow.

No hole

No ridges in the WTC

But you guys never seem to mention the "no ridges" but - what have you got against NoRidgeTheory (NRT) you Ridge Hugger?

[Stephen]

The left wing is see through! I have Paused this same clip on my DVD player and I could see the lines in the building through the left wing.

[truthseeker john]

[telecasterisation]

tj

The shade of the tail logo is virtually the same as that of the building - they effectively cancel each other out making a portion of the tail appear to vanish.

[truthseeker john]

[telecasterisation]

[Ace Baker]

First, the copy of Ghostplane is from the CNN DVD. It is compressed for DVD, but that is not "heavily" compressed at all. Nothing compared to for example YouTube.

But this is beside the point.

The point is that the picture of the gaping dark hole was taken from the same video sequence, and had to be enlarged slightly more than the rest of it. Therefore it was originally of slightly worse resolution than the plane.

If the resolution is too poor and compression too heavy to see the hole after the wings have gone in, then why do we see the hole in the last frame?

Here's another problem.

The bottom of that airplane is supposed to be blue. It's in full sunlight. Compression does not turn blue into gray, the colors on that DVD are fine. Look at the sky blue. It is fine.

I challenge anyone to demonstrate how the color of this video could have been lost. You could compress a blue airplane way, way more than this, and it will still be blue.

[truthseeker john]

[telecasterisation]

[chek]

[Ace Baker]

I would challenge anyone to create a control case for color loss then.

1. Record on DV format a moving object which is blue against a gray background, at least 50 pixels by 10 pixels.
2. Make sure the blue object is in sunlight.
3. Make sure the apparent motion of the blue object is slow enough so from frame to frame, the blue object overlaps itself by at least 80%.
4. Make sure to also record some blue sky and some green trees or bushes.
5. Compress the video with MPEG-2, keeping size at 720 x 480, as in DVD production. Do not deinterlace.
6. Import the MPEG-2 into a graphics program. Use line doubling on deinterlace, do not allow any frame blending.
7. Demonstrate that moving blue object is now gray, while the blue sky and green trees have retained their original color.

Good luck.

[gruts]

[telecasterisation]

[John White]

[Ace Baker]

[Ace Baker]

Another problem with the "killer kerosene" theory is that the kerosene explosion is orange, turning to black smoke.

What we observe are white explosions that look far more like the disintegrating steel observed later during the demolitions. These white explosions define the plane shaped hole.

The orange kerosene-type explosion comes from the middle of the building, it comes much later in time.

A kerosene explosion could not cut steel box columns even if it were in direct contact with it, and here the explosion takes place some distance away.

Kerosene did it. Ha.

[Ace Baker]

Camcorders record DV at 720 x 480, uncompressed.

According to NIST, the shot was taken from Battery Park, not from a ferry boat. Micheal Hezarkhani is playing no-talkie.

[chek]

[telecasterisation]

[Ace Baker]

I never said anything about film, or Ellen anybody.

Perhaps someone can respond to the challenge, or admit I'm right.

The force of a kerosene explosion cannot possibly come anywhere near cutting steel. You have provided no evidence that the kerosene explosion had any effect on the wall of WTC2. None.

Are you suggesting that the airplane cut through all the steel, but that the steel was still sitting in place, only to be then blown outwards by the blast of the kerosene explosion? Is there any evidence for this, like for instance the box columns lying on the concrete at the foot of the tower?

Or what?

[chek]

[marky 54]

[marky 54]

also, anything left intact around the hole that had'nt quite fell away was then compromised ferther by the ensueing fireball pushing outward for example: cladding etc etc.

thus makeing the hole appear slighty bigger than when the plane entered.

[Killtown]