Definitive 9.11 Pentagon EVIDENCE.

a reply to: WhatItIs

The conspiracy loons ignore the fact that there were 2 entry holes in the Pentagon E Ring wall

First one at ground level was measured at 96 ft, the distance of the thickest part of the wings , including the fuel tanks

Second hole measured at 17 ft was at 2 nd floor level and created by the fuselage

Kwakakev, I am now at page 40 of 177 of the interesting "Trying to resolve 9/11" thread, started by you, and I begin to understand what is going on, in there. Nice mix of pro and contra official theories adhering ATS members there. Lots of openly hate by the latter too.
Still 137 pages to go there, so do not expect me to hop in too this Pentagon attack EVIDENCE thread of mine too many times for the next few days.

I'll drop one highly advisable to read 2016 post in here now, for the overall boost of the global mistrust picture for ATS members, regarding most highest officials levels in all global and especially US governments over time.

It's especially for ATS member stonerwilliam and his lots of interesting posts in Kwakakev's June 15, 2019 started "Trying to resolve 9/11" huge, 178 pages by now, thread (cu-do's for you two, and lots of others, their stamina against all those well-known nudging ATS members who kept defending the official 9/11 story telling, well known for their hundreds of endlessly repeating posts), who thanked me in 2016, in his post then, just above my "All the proven US False Flags" post, at the bottom of page 118, in my huge thread named by me :
"WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved."

That post specifically should boost the reader's mistrust-levels regarding most Official Explanations.
Like these multiple US high and low level officials and their 21 years-long Pentagon attack explanations, about their now at last proven by me, David Chandler, Ken Jenkings and the used commercially available GIMP software package, to have been a totally bogus, (thus not) 45 degrees incoming AA77 flight attack path, incoming at a few meters above the Pentagon lawn, and their additionally offered 5 cut light-poles in that bogus flight-path, and their shown Pentagon ~45 degrees internal damage path formed by thermobaric explosives, all strengthening the totality of a huge 9/11 false flag operation :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Some highly advisable 121 other thread-pages there, for reading them in quiet moments, for any 9/11 Forum following ATS members, young and old alike.

After reading that one big post, that whole page 118 is a second must-read, loaded with my f.ex. J.P. Heidner stuff, that I laid out for you all, already in June 2016 :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

J.P. Heidner is the author of the "New 9/11 Commission Report, latest edition", where someone asked for in Kwakakev's "Trying to resolve 9/11" thread, in its page 5 or 7.
.

Go read my latest post In Kwakakev's huge 177 page thread, named "Trying to resolve 9/11" :

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: LaBTop
BernnieJGato on page 7 : img.abovetopsecret.com... ,those are all my 9/11 photos, I have posted (my avatar halfway that page) in my 24 years at this board and the UK bulletin board before that. After a 4 years sabbatical from 2018 on, I've become somewhat rusty, and have to get used to the T&C posting rules and posts setup again.
Very much obliged for that link.!

I tried that link. It takes me to my photo upload page. I am not sure how or if you can publicly link to this photo gallery. Maybe try logging out of ATS and go to your public profile page, might be a link in there somewhere?

It was indeed AA77...

I disagree. I do acknowledge there is a strong case for it with a lot of evidence behind it. This view is publicly acceptable in context of the other views around 9/11. A lot of the events around the Pentagon have been tightly controlled and mainly an in house affair.

There has been billions spent on the media manipulation and psychological control. It is bad too of lost the source of the pentagon gate video you base your premise on, been plenty of that over the years. Why is it different from the pentagon gate video I use?

Judicial Watch was part of the Freedom of Information Request that forced the pentagon to release the video. Once the media got their hands on it I saw all kinds of different objects and versions around. If it really did look like a plane that was in that video, then surly you should be able to find another source that matches what you proclaim?

If you really want to make a case on this, then the integrity of your evidence is critical. I know there is enough out there to put together some kind of flight AA77 argument. Parts kinda fit, some parts don't. At the end it comes down to what you want to believe, government or physics.

Despite what gate video we use, what is that bright flash as the object hits the wall. Why is there no such flash as the other planes hit WCT 1&2?

I will try and get onto that lens distortion soon.

Go read my CORRECTION of my Simple Math picture, in the "Trying to resolve 9/11" thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...
At the time that was made in Dec 2022, I was far too tired, I should have taken the time first, to reread and correct it then.

Here, this one, it saves the reader time and click-work :

CORRECTION :
[pic]gb5628d7bb.JPG[/pic ]


If you measure the blue SoC virtual Length, it's not 1.5 x H-Wall, (75 % of real plane length) but ~ 2/3rd x H-Wall (~ 66.66 %).
Thus, ~ 0.6666 x 155 ft is ~ 103.323 ft virtual length would have been recorded by each of the two DoD security cameras, each with their fat fish-eye lens, but corrected after that, by the GIMP software.

Without GIMP, in the original DoD frames, the plane's length looked even nearly 4 times shorter, 38.5 ft.
.

I have not forgotten, things are busy. I am going to need a good break to go through it. For now as a prelude:





These are not the same image. On a logic level, either one or both of them are wrong.

If it the same Ray Chandler that done the WTC7 fall analysis, he done great job there. He had solid, reliable date to work with then.

Looking at the tree line of the stretch you might be right? Was this lens distortion done right? It got two lines right, but at what cost for the rest of the image?

Knowing the depth of the object is going to help in finding it's true size. The North line looks rubbish as it took out the poles, lol. The South line is the more reasonable approach.

You got kinda close with the top view, will give my account when I can get into it soon.

The extended South line don't look good for the angle where a 737 slips into these numbers:

When first getting into this mess I had a dream some nights.

The first kept me strong. There is something looking for a better way,

With 9/11, there was a crew of us back in 2008. It's when it hit me. We found our way into the third ring:



It was like the French up against he Nazi in WW2, a tough fightl. Lot of puzzles as well. For me I found my first Yeti, next level freaky. Looking back he is hurt, getting that thorn out will help.

Kwakakev, you mix distorted, original DoD video frames with distortion corrected GIMP'ed ones, in your above post.!
Just compare the bended, and the straightened Pentagon roof lines in them.

originally posted by: kwakakev
I have not forgotten, things are busy. I am going to need a good break to go through it. (LT : much more info coming...)
For now as a prelude:

These are not the same image. On a logic level, either one or both of them are wrong.

If it is the same Ray (LT: ehh, David) Chandler that done the WTC7 fall analysis, he done a great job there. He had solid, reliable data to work with then.

Pay much more attention, please. This Pentagon Evidence is heavy, dangerous stuff for all involved.

My above first picture you posted, is a GIMP'ed, thus software corrected one, corrected from an original fish-eye lens 9/11 DoD camera picture frame.
Both those original DoD camera ones are full of bended lines, from the fish-eye lens effects.

Your picture posted below mine, is an original DoD video frame one, full of bended lines.
Those ones always show strongly shortened dimensions in the corners and to their 4 sides.
My, and thus also Davids GIMP'ed pictures, straighten and stretch those bended lines, and result there after, in a real world dimensions picture. Showing the real length of AA77.

In this important EVIDENCE case, the GIMP software stretches the DoD plane dimension from 77 ft up to a real plane length of 154 ft.

So, yes, of course, those are two very different pictures, luckily since the 2015 availability of the GIMP software pack, and the many other packs available after that year.

One of them is thus wrong. The DoD one, it needs GIMP correction to become a real world dimensions depicting picture, like my and David ones.
.

And when you have no active ATS user session open, then you get a white screen, instead of all your saved pictures at ATS, when using this address line :
img.abovetopsecret.com...

When you have any logged-in member page open, you get YOUR user repository, with all your saved pictures. Thus not from another member.
Try to change the /5/ to a smaller or bigger number, you may find back some suspected lost pictures and other material.
.

a reply to: LaBTop

This is more the picture I have a problem with



And how it does look more like this



When comparing this video frame with the one just before it, what does look like the tail section of the plane is the tree line.



Getting into it and it does look like we are both working with the same source material, that part is good.

As for how this lens distortion tool works and its limitations, it does look like the edge distortion is overrated from David Chandler. This causes the edge of the picture and where the object is to stretch and find a size estimate closer to a passenger plane. This can be identified by looking at the trees in the background in the frame before and how they have been more stretched along the horizontal line in this part of the picture.

I have tried out the lens distortion tool. It cannot take out all perspective issues, these optic issues get complicated.

It's not the integrity of my evidence, which is critical here.
That resides at David's and Ken's website and their links, which were fully operational in 2015 and until much later, halfway 2022, while I used them.

I agree, the two linked to sources with their DoD videos, on Davids site, are now empty. Did you try the WayBack website.? It takes 6 month before abandoned sites or any sites their recent activity turn up at their site. So, it could be that closing occurred only recently.
However, luckily those original links that David and Wayne Coste used, are on YouTube :

Out of : ""NEW: Wayne Coste's analysis of the security camera videos"", at the bottom of David Chandlers his 911Speakout.org page here :
911speakout.org...

And Wayne's YouTube video link :
www.youtube.com...


Click the below link, and there you see their two links to the original FOIA-freed DoD security camera videos, ( Update : now suddenly also obsolete) ever posted on YouTube :
youtu.be... :

files.abovetopsecret.com...
[pic]hp642ba6c0.jpg[/pic ]


Camera A :
www.youtube.com...
Camera B :
www.youtube.com...

Here, in the original video frame, with its distorted bended roof line, is the Heli-Pad Control Tower outlined in blue, the plane is situated just above the camera-2 pedestal and seems ~ 77 ft long, same as the West Wall's height compared there, at the milliseconds later impact point.
So, not its 2 x 77 ft = 155 ft real length as in a GIMP'ed version will turn up, but when GIMP'ed, its length stretches out to its real 154-155 ft. :

youtu.be...

.

In using the Lens Distortion tool in Gimp this is what I came up with,



The settings are:

Main: 30
Edge: -7
Zoom: 0
Shift X: 60
Shift Y:70

It is not possible to remove all the perspective issues with the Lens distortion tool. I have used this tool just focus on the region on the image that is in question, the highlighted part of the image. Using the tree line and road before anything starts helps in alignment.

The result is very different from the one David Chandler derived.

files.abovetopsecret.com...
[img]https://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/bu6422788f.gif[/img ]

Where did you find this above animated GIF.? It's very un-sharp.

The ones I use, are much sharper, from David Chandler's site :
911speakout.org...
And he does show blinked frame pairs, thus you see the plane much sharper.

Like this one :
911speakout.org...

Or above this text, from David Chandler :
""This is a zoomed and cropped view from Camera 2."" :
911speakout.org...

Or this one :
911speakout.org...

I can't get them visible at the moment, I really must go to sleep.
Can you produce and post, in the mean time, visible animated GIFs from the above links.?
Like your above one.? But then automatically much sharper.
With their much sharper plane in it, where you then will see its distinct tail.
.

originally posted by: kwakakev
In using the Lens Distortion tool in Gimp this is what I came up with,

The settings are:

Main: 30
Edge: -7
Zoom: 0
Shift X: 60
Shift Y:70

It is not possible to remove all the perspective issues with the Lens distortion tool. I have used this tool just focus on the region on the image that is in question, the highlighted part of the image. Using the tree line and road before anything starts helps in alignment.

The result is very different from the one David Chandler derived.

Because you use it so to see, totally wrong.
You have not straighten any pavement nor roof lines, you made a kind of wave form from them.
Try to compare your results first with his results, and ask yourself what you possibly do wrong.
Did you load the original DoD material, or what else.? I have no clue, honestly said.
Your sides looks warped. Not pin-cushioned at all.
It should look like the spread wings of a butterfly :
files.abovetopsecret.com...

.

a reply to: LaBTop

Where did you find this above animated GIF.? It's very un-sharp.

It is one I created myself from the Judicial Watch video on youtube. The best download quality available is 240p. I don't know just what degradation and reformatting has taken place from what the pentagon released.

The similar GIF file you link too is sharper, this is where I do question the source. They are different images as yours does show a tail to the object, while mine does not. They do look similar as well as the front part before the contrail does line up with the tree line.

If there is a good link somewhere to the source video the pentagon released I will check it out.

As for the lens distortion tool, I am still working it out. I know my analysis ain't perfect, as for trying to account for some of this distortion it is a start.



Done a good job and it does look nice getting those lines straight. The problem I had in following this method is what was happening to the horizontal distortion of the tree line on the left edge of the image. Is the width of the left most tree consistent with the next 3 - 5 trees in the tree line?

This is why I tried a different approach. I know parts of my lens distortion is wonky. I was looking to get the part of the image where the object shows up right. At least something closer so a more accurate measure can take place.

a reply to: kwakakev

what was happening to the horizontal distortion of the tree line on the left edge of the image.

I mean the tree line on the right side of the image. Already made a lot of wrong turns down this maze. The first ones hurt, kinda like it now.

In looking at it more, it does look like good video David got. There is a touch of that tail in the GIF I made. From all reports it did look like a passenger plane that hit. Was it a dressed up cruise missile or an actual passenger plane?

After seeing what one of these passenger planes do to a building an acre in size, yet cannot bust the first ring of the Pentagon, yet pops up 3 rings later with one hole. Makes about as much sense as a light pole hits a taxi with just a busted window.

I did get it wrong again, whatever hit did breach the first wall.



As for how that second ring avoided the jet fuel shredding fire? Then the inner side of the third ring, this is where the nose cone popped out



Looks more like a second assault on the internal Pentagon politics.

originally posted by: kwakakev

As for how that second ring avoided the jet fuel shredding fire?