It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

.83 Seconds of what hit WTC

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   
The following evidence that i am reveling is associated very closely with all the squabbling that is taking place. People become very un restful after continued "Military Industrial Complex" conditioning we are going through and it is creating all kinds of psychological problems in our American thread of cultural ism of peace and acceptance. So the following 9 jpeg video clips from .83 seconds of the most damaging and shock and awe evidence yet to be wittiness ed. So the first link is the video



This site is a compilation of 911 morning of all known video clips. this .83 seconds occurs on the video between the 29 and the 30th second of that film and if you are unable to double click fast enough to get the .83 seconds to stop quick enough and often enough then here are my isolated clips in a short 20 second display, if i only knew how to post my mpeg1 clip that can run on windows media player. Can i receive help to upload my 20 second creation so everyone can see the smoking gun bullet. thanks for all who read this. Ted

ps i have failed in putting this clip on youtube. is there anyway that these clips can be added to this forum? digitally frustrated...



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   
This has been discussed ad naseum here. I paused and saw what you are talking about: no wings on the airplane. Here is the problem: those videos are so compressed, a lot of data is lost. I've seen other videos of the 2nd plane hitting and there are obviously wings. So I think the logical explanation would be video compression.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   
This has been discussed ad naseum here.

Would you be kind enough to point me to the threads that outline the varsity of information regarding video compression? Have you actually cut and spliced the video with software? thanks for any reply.. Ted



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Firstly, forgive me for being lazy - I haven't yet watched the clips or viewed the images since I'm short of time.

If, as another contributor has suggested, this relates to the apparent disappearance of the wings (presumably of Flight 175), then surely there's a relatively straightforward way of addressing this, albeit not categorically. If the effect is caused by video compression, there must be other examples of footage showing 'wingless' planes out there, mustn't there?



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Indeed there is another footage clipping of this short no wing anomaly. To my knowledge there are two views of this via the video content of the above link. good approach in the thinking concerning dismissal via video compression.

ps does anyone know how to put jpegs on this post thread? thanks Ted..



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   
The video at 1:20 must be so hard to fake. Look at the plane fly right into the tower and see the outline of the plane on the building when it crashes in.. then an explosion come out the other side. I refuse to believe a hologram can cause this, it is too perfect.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 06:59 PM
link   
if you pause it at :29 saeconds like you say, and have a crappy computer monitor, then yes it looks like there are no wings..


HOWEVER!!!!!!


I assure you I paused it and played it and analyzed it and there are most definitely wings. That movie clip is from a french documentary they were making on NYC firefigheters when the attack happend and I have seen it several times. It is definitely a plane of some sort.

Don't post unless you have overwhelming evidence!!! You could be really hurting the movement by doing so.

Also do your research this has come up so many times.



posted on Oct, 14 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by I-on-beam
 



So .83 seconds out of a total record of 522 seconds of video is evidence to you that refutes the other 521 seconds. Just don't follow that .



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
It looks like the wings are semi-transparent, most likely do to the short distance in view and the high speed and loss of video clarity. But also the winds look stubby as fins on a missile would appear to be, but on the other hand there is streaking where the jet engines would be. It would be nice to see this in a high definition video to see if there is still this same effect or not.

Also, keep in mind those magicians Copperfield make the Statue of Liberty disappear (I think) and that other Gothic guy can levitate. Hollywood makes the impossible happen and it costs them much less then a 757 to achieve. The Day After Tomorrow they made it appear as if they flooded out NYC, X-files Fight the Future, they made a building blow up just like in the Oklahoma City Bombing and they even collapsed an underground alien base in the Antarctic! Just as a few examples.

[edit on 15-10-2007 by RexxCrow]



posted on Oct, 15 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Im happy to say that some people have eyes, for most Americans are blind in one eye and cant see out of the other. thanks for the replies..



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


At 2:09-2:11 of the video, you can clearly see the whole plane. The first tower is burning, so it has to be the second plane. The 2nd Plane came in rotated almost 90 degrees, wings being vertical, from the angle of the :29-:30 seconds of the video, you wouldn't see the wings out to the side.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Another clear view of no wings is between 4:13 and 4:15 this shows clearly the stub black wings. thanks again...



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by cdesignmaster
reply to post by pavil
 


At 2:09-2:11 of the video, you can clearly see the whole plane. The first tower is burning, so it has to be the second plane. The 2nd Plane came in rotated almost 90 degrees, wings being vertical, from the angle of the :29-:30 seconds of the video, you wouldn't see the wings out to the side.


I'm violating my own one post per 9/11 thread here. What is your point? are you contending that it was a missile that hit WTC 2 or just that the video evidence was manipulated that day? I'm sorry it just confuses me what you think actually occurred. Please spell it out for me.



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Are you clipping out the video and capturing frame by frame? If so the film to do this on is from 0:00 seconds (what the video opens up on without running it) to 00:03. Please evaluate these individual frames and tell me what you think? This is all evidence to open the minds and lift the veils. whats manipulation? inversely portion able to logic?



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Here are a few more clips from 06:48 to 06:51 and this one is interesting the wing length to body length at 04:13 to 04:15.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join