With this one I rest my case. TV fakery at his best.

I am adding this part of the thread to explain a little easier my point.

I will make it as easier as possible please examine this evidence first:

THIS PART WAS ADDED LATER ON FOR debunkers OR CGI EXPERT

I will be as polite as possible with everyone and I will ask very very nicely to please PLEASE watch those 2 videos...
Its only 5 mins of your life.
First Video its one of the most famous one broad casted in every major media

The plane will come from the right...

After the first video PLEASE watch this one at around 30 second.
Now you can adjust it as much as you want with prospective but still It will come from the left maximum the center check the buildings around.
One of those 2 videos its obviously a fake but they were broad casted almost at the same time (check ABC raw footage).
Yes CGI was involved.

First Video: www.youtube.com...

second Video at 40 seconds and even more aligned with the above video at 5.25 at 10.15 gets hilarious when they cant find the plane:

www.archive.org...


To make it a little shorter:


IF YOU HAVE TO DEBUNK THOSE PLEASE DO IT IN A CONCRETE WAY!!!

DON'T SIMPLY SAY ITS IMPOSSIBLE OR WHY THERE WOULD BE A COVER UP.

THOSE ARE REAL FOOTAGE WITH NO PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATIONS.



As a warm up lets watch the Moving bridge on the Naudet documentary:

www.livevideo.com...

Later on lets go ahead with the real dessert...

Please before starting to debunk this time take some time to watch every videos on the site.

Now this is way to much if you ask me missing buildings different angles of impact weird planes and so much more.
Now in all honesty why would they go all the way to do those kind of things?.
Hey a simple plane hit so whats up with all those touch ups?
The most ridiculous one IMO its the plane coming from different angles.
but also the missing building its a good one.
Which one is your favorite?

www.coffinman.co.uk...


Last but not least an enlargement of the one of the cnn footage (there is also a thread here to discuss about other cnn video anomalies: www.abovetopsecret.com... )

WATCH THIS ONE LAST





[edit on 22-3-2007 by piacenza]

[edit on 22-3-2007 by piacenza]

[edit on 22-3-2007 by piacenza]

[edit on 22-3-2007 by piacenza]

So you're actually saying that major television news channels altered their feeds to comply with directives from the CIA?

If you "rest your case" on that then it'll be dismissed in Summary Judgement.

While I can't actually read the OP post (I ignored him weeks ago) -- Can I assume it's complete BS?

Originally posted by Smack
While I can't actually read the OP post (I ignored him weeks ago) -- Can I assume it's complete BS?

Hehehe.

While I do find your post to contain a certain amount of awesomeness, I don't think I can answer that question without violating several ATS laws.

Essedarius
I am not saying anything if you want to stay blind I don't care at all.
I did not doctored any videos but you news media agency did.
Now why did they do that?
I have no idea...
Do you?

Has anyone else noticed a sudden increase in people trying to get others to see CGI in the media footage?

Has anyone else noticed that the footage is largely always *PIXELATED* and there is often horrible quality footage?

Has anyone else noticed that youtube is the fav vehicle for this type of expression?

If anyone else is noticed this, then kindly ask these people to post high quality film clips in the future.

The challenge to these people from me. Post a high quality video clip and or point to the archive that has these clips, the original clips I might add.

The circumstantial is now destroying the CGI theory, in every case I have seen from the CGI group, it has always been a highly compressed awful quality video clip.

Hey Talisman so if I get you the original footage with the planes coming from different angles will you admit that CGI was used?

YES OR NO

will someone put this in the skunk works please.

Also a very nice analisis.
No one will bother to read it anyway but hey lets try.
More original footage coming soon I wish that more ppl that dont beleie in CGI first will post in here so I can hae my last blast on showing you the original footage which is aailble from an indeniable source...

Please again blame me a little bit more but do not be silent once the original Videos are out.
Also POINT ME WHICH VIDEO YOU MIGHT FIND NOT BEING REALLY BROADCASTED BY A MAJOR NEWS STATION.
There is only one I can't seem to find anyway.


911logic.blogspot.com...

why is this skunk work????
WHY ANSWER IT.
WHY?????

Go to this site

link

Plenty of good video from that day. Is it pride or a paycheck that will not allow some people to allow themselves to realize that REAL planes with REAL people hit the towers.

CLICK ON THE LINK

[edit on 22-3-2007 by esdad71]

This has all the footage from that day.

[edit on 22-3-2007 by esdad71]

piacenza

I have an open mind to anything, but show some real evidence.

Now you have to sit down and take a film course and work with reflections. You keep forgetting 2 dimensional depth perception, and you keep posting film clips that are highly compressed and pixelated which prove absolutely nothing.

I have a pretty good idea on how illusions work. I have already pointed out in another thread the illusion of water on a highway. ARe you now going to think that is a "HOLOGRAM" or "CGI"?

Go to this link and see what just 'blurring' an image does to the face
www.michaelbach.de...

go to the following links-there are many illusions you can look at there, once you know what to look for it will clear up most of what your asking.

www.scientificpsychic.com...

www.michaelbach.de...

The above links will give you some clue as to how *DECEPTIVE* your vision and your depth perception can be.

Film works the same way, I know exactly what is happening in the clip you posted but when you post something that has higher quality it will be much easier to see.

There has been nothing so far in anything the CGI people have presented that is convincing, I have seen most of what they have had to offer.

But, I want OTHER people to view the things your posting in HIGH QUALITY, posting it in low quality is deceptive imho.





[edit on 22-3-2007 by talisman]

piacenza

look no plane at all in this one





[edit on 22-3-2007 by tombangelta]

If you ignored him weeks ago, why are you even going to his threads?

I also find his posts without merit but he is not rude and he is not a trouble maker. I dont even know what point hes trying to make with these disappearing wing videos etc. holograms? i dont know. i have no doubts a plane hit both towers. Were they the same planes that had taken off? were they guided via remote control? I dont know but i do know they were planes.
Everybody is entitled to their opinions though and if you dont agree, just bypass his threads.

Originally posted by Smack
While I can't actually read the OP post (I ignored him weeks ago) -- Can I assume it's complete BS?

Originally posted by piacenza
I did not doctored any videos but you news media agency did.
Now why did they do that?
I have no idea...
Do you?

No. I have no idea why they would possibly do that.

In fact, the idea that every news agency in the world would band together and succumb to the pressure of the U.S. Government in unison is absurd.

A better question might be...say..."How did these videos you're presenting get so mangled?"

Calling on the principles of Occam's Razor, here's my answer:

YOU.

Originally posted by tombangelta
piacenza

look no plane at all in this one

[edit on 22-3-2007 by tombangelta]

ok... why is there no plane???
is this an edited footage or what is it?

omg you've already posted this video and it's been discussed for like 1000000 pages and no one cared!

And calling people 'blind' doesn't make you right!

I was just going to say the same thing...why are you bringing up this video and topic again when it's been discussed to death in the other thread?

Originally posted by Smack
While I can't actually read the OP post (I ignored him weeks ago) -- Can I assume it's complete BS?

Great response!

At least you didn't waste your time reading it!

OP - Please do not read this thinking it is a flame!!

You say you don't want to hear any debunking without concrete proof. Well, thats a revolving door my friend. You cannot make a post and say that its undeniable evidence if you yourself do not have concrete proof.

You have started a couple threads about these topics.

"Plane Missing a wing?"
"Plane in front AND behind building"
"Media video touch-ups"

etc.

And the only proof you can provide is certainly not the most credible. You cannot post a YouTube video with anomalies in it, and say its proof. YouTube, Google, etc, all compress their videos heavily, and are displayed at low resolutions. I have a very hard time believing that the wing is missing, etc., from these videos. Looks to me like compression could easily be the cause of the anomalies. You can even see the compression in the form of blocks that appear around the plane during the entire video.

You also state that the media has been editing the video, which explains some anomalous video. Have you thought that maybe, just maybe, people that post these videos could have edited it themselves for a jolly? Think a bit broader. Things aren't always what they seem. Don't be so quick to accept an idea from random sources.

I hate to sound so condescending, but I feel I must since we have told you many times in many threads that you need to provide more reliable evidence to make such bold claims. If you continue to make these grandious statements without better documentation and proof, many people here will start to ignore what you have to say.

So, again, work on your sources, get a DVD and look at that, and be careful not to get 100% behind an idea that you don't have conclusive evidence for. We aren't here to "push" anything on anyone - we are here to meticulously analyze things. Jamming a concept down our throats isn't going to cut it.

I am not your enemy. However, I do not support any claims that are not thoroughly researched and backed up with credible sources. I just hope that you can understand what I, and many others, are trying to tell you.