| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Prince of Peace
New Poster
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 6
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:29 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| first time ive ever seen that angle, nice find. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prole art threat
Validated Poster
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:04 am Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
That is NOT a passenger airliner!
_________________
'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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:07 am Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| prole art threat wrote: |
That is NOT a passenger airliner! |
you see the laser  or was you just focused on the plane? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 10:45 am Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | prole art threat wrote: |
That is NOT a passenger airliner! |
you see the laser or was you just focused on the plane? |
Wind the footage to 6 seconds - the plane has completely entered the building without making a mark on the building - How do you explain that one - Snowy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pikey
Banned
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1491
Location: North Lancashire
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woodee
Moderate Poster
Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 159
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
you all were suckered into the laser thing then? Little bit of paper causes so much controversy:) Hasn't anyone worked out that searching for answers with lossy video is hopeless because of all the compression artificacts?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
commanderson
Minor Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 94
Location: Edinburgh
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I see here is good proof of a plane hitting the building, I wound it back to 6 secs and saw the explosion at that point, you can also see debris falling from the tower, I think the laserguidance thingy could be that, or a bird, best not place too much signifigance on vid stuff like that, kinda like the false lead of In Plane sight's pre impact explosion- maybe, maybe's no, best not hang too much on it.
Certainly the plane doesn't look like a passenger liner- thats another question for no planers- why would -if they were gonna use holograms or the like- they not make the images of American airliners? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| commanderson wrote: | What I see here is good proof of a plane hitting the building, I wound it back to 6 secs and saw the explosion at that point, you can also see debris falling from the tower, I think the laserguidance thingy could be that, or a bird, best not place too much signifigance on vid stuff like that, kinda like the false lead of In Plane sight's pre impact explosion- maybe, maybe's no, best not hang too much on it.
Certainly the plane doesn't look like a passenger liner- thats another question for no planers- why would -if they were gonna use holograms or the like- they not make the images of American airliners? |
What aircraft debris did you see? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Putting aside the 'no-planes at all' angle.
The world was focused upon this event - there is considerable footage of the aircraft that hit the second tower.
For those that keep saying the aircraft that hit the second tower does not not look like a commercial airliner, not the make and model we are told it was;
To fly a different model of aircraft onto the world's stage would be madness. The organisers would have no idea just how many high quality cameras would be present, their locations nor optical resolving power or magnification . Any number of cameras could have captured intimate detail of a replacement aircraft, no windows, the wrong insignia, the wrong type.
How can anyone say it is the 'wrong' type of aircraft? There are countless aviation experts, people who would know the make and model of an aircraft through a rolled up newspaper.
If this was the wrong type of aircraft - it would instantly be evident to an expert - we throw in our 'expert' knowledge, but if the wrong type of aircraft was substituted for the one we are told it was - how can this even be questioned - we have it on film and the world's Boeing experts would have long since put this to bed.
_________________
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fallious
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 762
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | Putting aside the 'no-planes at all' angle.
The world was focused upon this event - there is considerable footage of the aircraft that hit the second tower.
For those that keep saying the aircraft that hit the second tower does not not look like a commercial airliner, not the make and model we are told it was;
To fly a different model of aircraft onto the world's stage would be madness. The organisers would have no idea just how many high quality cameras would be present, their locations nor optical resolving power or magnification . Any number of cameras could have captured intimate detail of a replacement aircraft, no windows, the wrong insignia, the wrong type.
How can anyone say it is the 'wrong' type of aircraft? There are countless aviation experts, people who would know the make and model of an aircraft through a rolled up newspaper.
If this was the wrong type of aircraft - it would instantly be evident to an expert - we throw in our 'expert' knowledge, but if the wrong type of aircraft was substituted for the one we are told it was - how can this even be questioned - we have it on film and the world's Boeing experts would have long since put this to bed. |
WTF NO LOGIC HERE KTHX. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fallious sparingly responded;
| Quote: | | WTF NO LOGIC HERE KTHX. |
The problem with abbreviations and miniscule responses, they tend to get lost in translation. Far better you actually elaborate and define your response so everyone can at least have a crack at comprehending.
Earlier in the thread commanderson stated;
Certainly the plane doesn't look like a passenger liner
Well, based upon what exactly? Is he an expert on makes and models of Boeings? Which aviation expert has been consulted to give a definitive view either way?
Here we are five years post the event and despite having access to video footage of the aircraft in question, we still cannot decide what Boeing 7XX it is?
We have very little evidence of anything much connected to 9/11 and we can't even decide on a fairly clear image of an aircraft captured from numerous angles. Boeing experts would know instantly - how many have come forward to agree it is definitely not the aircraft in question?
Am I the only one who finds this strange?
_________________
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | Fallious sparingly responded;
| Quote: | | WTF NO LOGIC HERE KTHX. |
The problem with abbreviations and miniscule responses, they tend to get lost in translation. Far better you actually elaborate and define your response so everyone can at least have a crack at comprehending.
Earlier in the thread commanderson stated;
Certainly the plane doesn't look like a passenger liner
Well, based upon what exactly? Is he an expert on makes and models of Boeings? Which aviation expert has been consulted to give a definitive view either way?
Here we are five years post the event and despite having access to video footage of the aircraft in question, we still cannot decide what Boeing 7XX it is?
We have very little evidence of anything much connected to 9/11 and we can't even decide on a fairly clear image of an aircraft captured from numerous angles. Boeing experts would know instantly - how many have come forward to agree it is definitely not the aircraft in question?
Am I the only one who finds this strange? |
I used to live in Stockport which is right under the flight path of all planes coming in to land at Manchester Airport.
Me and my 9 year old pals had no problem in identifying any of the planes.
Of course if a black blob cartoon of a plane had flown over our street, I daresay we might have difficulty in identifying it --- Nuff said |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote;
| Quote: | used to live in Stockport which is right under the flight path of all planes coming in to land at Manchester Airport.
Me and my 9 year old pals had no problem in identifying any of the planes.
|
Are you sure they weren't holograms?
_________________
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peloloco
Banned
Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 94
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| telecasterisation wrote: | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote;
| Quote: | used to live in Stockport which is right under the flight path of all planes coming in to land at Manchester Airport.
Me and my 9 year old pals had no problem in identifying any of the planes.
|
Are you sure they weren't holograms? |
Funny. But have you ever seen a plane flying into a great big beautiful building before? Tell me what is so wrong with that please. I dont like to say much unless I have something to ask as that is the best we can do most of the time as none of us know the whole truth. I ask this as this seems like an issue we need to get past and I see NPT in many threads and now Mr Shayler having stormed into a great lead falls at the last in most spectacular fashion on Sky. Maybe he has a grand plan, who knows? Or has the 911truth movement uk put out a half theory?
Some of us are deadly serious and see the future of humanity at stake and are looking into the eyes and listening to the lives of the masses. I work among the peolple who use creativity to create illusion to induce people to buy all sorts of nonsense and many of them are among the most asleep.
Shouting out about NPT would be like giving someone a drink with a firehose.
Only together will we get even close to the truth so we must talk as one as often as we can or am I wrong?
_________________
You are standing on my happiness |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CB_Brooklyn
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 168
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:54 am Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
The "plane" in that video is a CGI, a cartoon. As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" If we were to believe that video to be real, we'd have to conclude that Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy can be violated in reality. However, they cannot. Not in reality. On TV fiction, yes. In computer games, yes. In reality? No. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:01 am Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| CB_Brooklyn wrote: |
The "plane" in that video is a CGI, a cartoon. As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" If we were to believe that video to be real, we'd have to conclude that Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy can be violated in reality. However, they cannot. Not in reality. On TV fiction, yes. In computer games, yes. In reality? No. |
The only thing your 'retired aero engineer' effectively shows is how little he knows about the structure of the WTC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CB_Brooklyn
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 168
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:00 pm Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | CB_Brooklyn wrote: |
The "plane" in that video is a CGI, a cartoon. As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" If we were to believe that video to be real, we'd have to conclude that Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy can be violated in reality. However, they cannot. Not in reality. On TV fiction, yes. In computer games, yes. In reality? No. |
The only thing your 'retired aero engineer' effectively shows is how little he knows about the structure of the WTC. |
The only thing chek effectively shows is how little he himself knows about the Laws of Physics. It was a CGI. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Patrick Brown wrote; | Quote: |
I can't see the laser on this clip |
How did this laser thing start - is there any footage of it whatsoever that people are supporting as being genuine?
_________________
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| CB_Brooklyn wrote: | | chek wrote: | | CB_Brooklyn wrote: |
The "plane" in that video is a CGI, a cartoon. As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" If we were to believe that video to be real, we'd have to conclude that Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy can be violated in reality. However, they cannot. Not in reality. On TV fiction, yes. In computer games, yes. In reality? No. |
The only thing your 'retired aero engineer' effectively shows is how little he knows about the structure of the WTC. |
The only thing chek effectively shows is how little he himself knows about the Laws of Physics. It was a CGI. |
You can only speculate that, cos there's no evidence for it.
Just the way the NWO likes their conspiracy theorists.
Your engineer has to show how an aircraft crashes 'against' a steel and glass grid (no concrete structure involved - that's how well informed he is).
Try and at least have your quoters to get their facts straight.
Oh - and show how it was a CGI while you're at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:53 pm Post subject: Re: Laser guided/remote controled planes hit WTC? See the vi |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | CB_Brooklyn wrote: | | chek wrote: | | CB_Brooklyn wrote: |
The "plane" in that video is a CGI, a cartoon. As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" If we were to believe that video to be real, we'd have to conclude that Newton's Laws of Motion and Conservation of Energy can be violated in reality. However, they cannot. Not in reality. On TV fiction, yes. In computer games, yes. In reality? No. |
The only thing your 'retired aero engineer' effectively shows is how little he knows about the structure of the WTC. |
The only thing chek effectively shows is how little he himself knows about the Laws of Physics. It was a CGI. |
You can only speculate that, cos there's no evidence for it.
Just the way the NWO likes their conspiracy theorists.
Your engineer has to show how an aircraft crashes 'against' a steel and glass grid (no concrete structure involved - that's how well informed he is).
Try and at least have your quoters to get their facts straight.
Oh - and show how it was a CGI while you're at it. |
WTF are you on about Chek "no concrete structure involved" - which building are you referring to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Do you guys not know anything about the construction of WTC 1&2? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
commanderson
Minor Poster
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 94
Location: Edinburgh
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the more I read these threads about NPT, I realise how its stalling an scuppering action on the real issues we all agree on, the important one, that it was an inside job and the official version is nonsense.
I personally would like to prove to everyone that these were certainly jetliners, and that the most probable explanation is remote control (origonals or drones), and put this NPT stuff to bed as distracting disinfo,
but I realise now that this is highly unlikely, so I might call for people to drop the differences on this, agree to disagree, and accept we will probably never know the truth for sure, and get on with the real issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leiff
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 509
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!" |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| commanderson wrote: | the more I read these threads about NPT, I realise how its stalling an scuppering action on the real issues we all agree on, the important one, that it was an inside job and the official version is nonsense.
I personally would like to prove to everyone that these were certainly jetliners, and that the most probable explanation is remote control (origonals or drones), and put this NPT stuff to bed as distracting disinfo,
but I realise now that this is highly unlikely, so I might call for people to drop the differences on this, agree to disagree, and accept we will probably never know the truth for sure, and get on with the real issues. |
Why is the most probable explanation remote control - please give your reasons for saying that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyb
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^ Global Hawk
anyway, what you doing hanging around with 9 year old mates? You'll get in trouble for that 
_________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| andyb wrote: | ^ Global Hawk
anyway, what you doing hanging around with 9 year old mates? You'll get in trouble for that |
What's up didn't you have any friends when you were nine?
Just saying Global Hawk is no explanation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andyb
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1025
Location: SW London
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was seeing whether you could research anything yourself that wasn't on web fairy and the obvious answer is no. Unmanned aircraft in a nutshell.
http://www.wikipedia.org/search-redirect.php?search=global+hawk&langua ge=en&go=Go
You didn't state when you were hanging round with yopur 9 year old friends, I was just employing your powers of assumption
_________________
"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.” Martin Luther King |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No I haven't done any research other than use my common sense - something you are clearly in short supply of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
