Why Did the Alleged Smoke Trail From Flt 77 Immediately Disappear From Both Videos?

posted by deltaboy
Tail fin too small? Look at the fin and compare it to the building from that distance on the camera. I guess the Pentagon building is small as well.

posted by deltaboy

Remember that the plane was coming at an angle prior to crashing.

Yes indeed, and your aircraft is more than halfway across the lawn and less than 300 feet from the wall. Perhaps you need to go do some study and figure out where on the Pentagon building the aircraft was supposed to impact.
(hint: not way back there and the Pentagon roof is 77 feet high and the cameras are not next to the wall)

That is why I measured the necessary tailfin height against the alleged turbofan engine heavy white smoke trail.



[edit on 11/19/08 by SPreston]

There are several problems with the images used in this thread, many of them are presented in JPEG format, which is not lossless. Many of these images are also taken from another compressed source, such as a screenshot of a Youtube video.

Compression which is not lossless will alter images in almost all cases and because of this I have attempted to find the highest quality source available.

Judicial Watch made FOIA requests to the FBI for the videos of Flight 77 from the Pentagon security booth. The results of their FOIA can be found here: www.judicialwatch.org... . These two videos show no signs of multiple stages of compression and appear to have the largest frame coverage with no visible alterations.

I have constructed a scaled image of 8 frames from this video using techniques to minimise any alterations to the image. They have not been smoothed in any way nor have I modified any saturation, contrast or brightness. I have simply aligned them as best possible (probably not really but there is quite a lot of camera motion, presumably from the explosion).

These 8 frames are also displayed as a video I will link below. As I mentioned above, compression modifies image. This is extremely true in the case of animated GIF files. They are limited to 256 colours over the entire animation as opposed to PNG which is limited to 16.7 million colours but does not (commonly) support animation.

For this reason this video is a 16x scaled series of 8 frames encoded in huffyuv format. This format is lossless and so (with the exception of colourspace conversion) preserves the information as accurately as possible. If your media player cannot play this file then the shots below will have to do (VLC seems to have issue but GStreamer and mplayer do not).

It is notable in these frames / the video that there is no evidence of strange distortion as the OP and similar posts claim [edit: posted in wrong thread, the thread regarding this is here: www.abovetopsecret.com... ]. There is also evidence of a colour change related to the object shown in frame #2. There is also evidence showing that the smoke trail lingered for some time and except in one frame is typically grey throughout this sequence rather than white.

I hope in future analysis can be done using these images or an equally high quality source as many of the other images provided were altered beyond original recognition using uncertain algorithms.

Video link: 911db.org...

Frames:


[edit on 19-11-2008 by exponent]

reply to post by exponent


The smoke trail is only your *opinion*, thank you.
We do not really know what we are looking at this is all “speculation”.
Until the original video can be taken to a lab, with out the (Government interfering) with the testing then we will know what we are really looking at. However none of us are qualify on ATS to be experts.

Originally posted by cashlink
The smoke trail is only your *opinion*, thank you.

It is the most likely theory, but I agree it is not definitely proven.

Until the original video can be taken to a lab, with out the (Government interfering) with the testing then we will know what we are really looking at. However none of us are qualify on ATS to be experts.

The original video appears to be available. Click the link in my post and send it to any lab you like. I am happy with my qualifications when it comes to investigating relatively simple artefacts within images. (No I am not going to release my name or personal details, many people have learned the hard way that is a bad idea).

Originally posted by Stillresearchn911

Originally posted by deltaboy
I still see the white smoke trailing long after the explosion. You have bad eyes or something. No disrespect.
[edit on 18-11-2008 by deltaboy]

Spreston, I do think you touch on one thing that has always bothered me.
How did Hani Hanjour fly a 757 jet (for the first time in his life were told) 2 feet off the ground?
If you think about it for one second.. This guy and his crew likely just killed a couple people. Now they are about to jump behind the controls of a giant 757 jet and fly it back to DC and crash it into the Pentagon. I think about the kinda stress this guy was dealing with , it must have been enormous. Then he comes up to his last three minutes of the flight. He has to make a large loop around a restricted air space all the while knowing that the WTC's have been hit by now and that he could be shot down. His heart must have been pounding out of his chest so loud he probably thought his hijacker friends next to him could hear it. But what does he do, he flies that jet like a pro 2 feet off the ground,after smacking into five light poles, all the while managing to evade every single camera within eye shot were told.

Truly amazing to say the least.

And those kinds of simple basic common sense considerations/issues occur throughout the entire 9/11 conpiracy (theory) which are enough or should be enough for any court of law to convict just on the circumstancial evidence alone..

LOOK...

any objective logical and reasonable person with one ounce of intelligence thats done a reasonable amount of research and investigation should be able to see based on common sense alone, this conspiracy is BLATANT, hardly a theory and an INSIDE JOB.

and right now i'm gonna go one step further because those who continue to deny and defend this LIE in the face of so many obvious problems, flaws with the OS and pure irrefutable facts, are either braindead, in denial or connected to the perpetrators in one way or another. There's just no other way to assess or look at these individuals whose arguments have deteriorated into petty nit picking and continual denial of obvious facts, evidence and common sense.

So these debates and arguments with all the evidence and facts or even lack of, is IMO, beyond silly at this point

Its becoming more and more a total waste of time to argue about whether or not:

a) flight 77 hit the Pentagon (it didn't just based on the simple FACT the FBI would have released all the footage un-cut EOS or obvious discrepencies/unanswered problems such as the date on the tapes saying SEPT 12 would not be there DUH!!),

b) WTC 1, 2, and 7 were DEMOLISHED and covered up by our government and media (any fool can see the clear CD evidence and obvious MEDIA involvement from doctored footage, black outs, nose in nose out or the BBC's report 7 fell before it actually did),

c) wtc 1, 2 and 7 were hit by flight 11 and 175 (they weren't supported by mountains of evidence and unanswered questions etc too numerous to mention anymore),

OR

d) flight 93 crashed at all in shanksville (Didn't happen supported alone by the small FACT ce ce lyles drivers license etc being found in a plane that supposedly disintegrated LOL)

why again? because there's more than enough BASIC evidence, facts and common sense arguments established over and over ad naseum now that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt 9/11 was an inside job.

IF JUST ONE FACT CAN BE SHOWN CORRECT OR ONE PART OF THE OFFICIAL STORY IN ANY AREA OF THIS CT SHOWN TO BE OR AGREED TO BE FLAWED, UNANSWERED, EVADED, CHANGED, ETC ETC,.... THAT ALONE SHOULD BE MORE THAN ENOUGH PROOF THAT THE ENTIRE OS MOST LIKELY A LIE AT ITS HEART NO MATTER HOW MANY OTHER AREAS CANNOT BE FACTUALLY OR SCIENTIFICALLY DISPROVEN.

Am I wrong?? Can we bi-pass the BS petty bickering/debates for one moment and come to some REASONABLE AGREEMENT?

Originally posted by SPrestonJust another consideration. A 757 aircraft wing hung engine sits about 3 feet off the ground when sitting on its landing gear and the center of that engine is about 7 feet off the ground. At the same time, the top of the tail stabilizer sits 44 feet 6 inches off the ground. According to the official Pentagon Building Performance Report, the aircraft flew level across the lawn in the video and about 1 ft 11 inches above the ground. (top of fuselage 20 feet above ground which would put bottom of engines at level flight 1 foot 11 inches above ground level)
[edit on 11/19/08 by SPreston]

How about POPULAR MECHANIC davin coburn and his side kick claiming the landing gear created the HOLE/c ring etc... ROFL yeah right, I'm sure if 77 had actually been there, the hi jackers would obviously have engaged the landing gear to prepare a landing! are these people for real?

and my favorite... the term PULL IT is not a term used in Demolition. Lol

blatant willful lies and propoganda.... yet how many continue to point to their reporting and articles as credible debunking sources of 9/11 CT's ?

so i guess its this obvious pathetic attempt to hide the conspiracy that keeps us truthers from giving up....

posted by matrix911
And those kinds of simple basic common sense considerations/issues occur throughout the entire 9/11 conpiracy (theory) which are enough or should be enough for any court of law to convict just on the circumstancial evidence alone..

LOOK...

any objective logical and reasonable person with one ounce of intelligence thats done a reasonable amount of research and investigation should be able to see based on common sense alone, this conspiracy is BLATANT, hardly a theory and an INSIDE JOB.

and right now i'm gonna go one step further because those who continue to deny and defend this LIE in the face of so many obvious problems, flaws with the OS and pure irrefutable facts, are either braindead, in denial or connected to the perpetrators in one way or another. There's just no other way to assess or look at these individuals whose arguments have deteriorated into petty nit picking and continual denial of obvious facts, evidence and common sense.

I totally agree with you. The 9-11 Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) is filled with hundreds of contradictions, dozens of improbilities, and dozens of outright impossibilities. What these faithful defenders of the OCT insist on doing is to set everything else aside and focus on each individual circumstance as if that is the only contested piece of 9-11. They live in their little dream world, incessantly arguing their little point; meanwhile setting 99% of the contested 9-11 OCT aside as if it is of no consequence.

That is a hypocritical method of investigating any crime scene. These faithful defenders of the OCT also refuse to instigate que bono (who gains?). Who gains from a crime is a favored investigative tool used by professional investigators for hundreds of years. The desperate measures used by the Bush Regime to prevent investigations into 9-11 are totally ignored by these faithful defenders of the OCT. The innocent spilled blood of the 3000 victims of the 9-11 perpetrators cries out for vengence, and these hypocrites work night and day to deny them justice.

Originally posted by matrix911
How about POPULAR MECHANIC davin coburn and his side kick claiming the landing gear created the HOLE/c ring etc... ROFL yeah right, I'm sure if 77 had actually been there, the hi jackers would obviously have engaged the landing gear to prepare a landing! are these people for real?

Why would the landing gear have to be engaged to cause damage? It's still inside the plane even if the gear is up.

posted by matrix911
How about POPULAR MECHANIC davin coburn and his side kick claiming the landing gear created the HOLE/c ring etc... ROFL yeah right, I'm sure if 77 had actually been there, the hi jackers would obviously have engaged the landing gear to prepare a landing! are these people for real?

posted by Soloist
Why would the landing gear have to be engaged to cause damage? It's still inside the plane even if the gear is up.

Well that heavy white smoke trail causes me to seriously doubt that an aircraft was even there at the Pentagon alleged impact hole. But assuming that maybe there was for the moment and to address your question;

Perhaps because a plane would also be necessary, with the landing gear folded up inside? But we digress don't we? Wasn't that Official Exit Hole Fairy Tail #2? That was discarded long ago for newer fairy tales, wasn't it?

Let's see if I can keep this straight here; it is so complicated.

Fairy Tail #1: The nose cone of the fuselage was sticking out into the A&E Drive and it created the Exit Hole. What? Who said it was too flimsy to blast through all the reinforced columns and the reinforced outer wall and the A&E Drive brick wall? How dare you; Boy Scout honor and hope to die and all that.

Fairy Tail #2: No no, that nose cone did not happen because one of the heavy steel landing gears bounced through and created the Exit Hole. No we do not have any idea where the other two heavy steel landing gears went. They must have disintegrated into nothingness; fairy dust or something. Yeah yeah; my hope to die still stands.

Fairy Tail #3: Since there was no landing gear found in the A&E Drive near the Exit Hole, officially the turbofan jet engine smashed through there and blasted out the Exit Hole. What? There are supposed to be two turbofan jet engines on a 757? Are you sure? No, we have no idea where the other turbofan jet engine is. It must have disintegrated into nothingness; fairy dust or something.

Fairy Tail #4: Since there was no turbofan jet engine found in the A&E Drive near the Exit Hole, officially a focused cone of pure energy from all that exploding jet fuel blasted a Exit Hole through the A&E Drive wall; sorta like a Klingon disrupter beam. No we cannot explain why the building debris in the A&E Drive was not all burned up nor why there was no damage to the B-Ring wall. There was a nice little tire sitting there though; sometimes. And once in a while a wheel popped into view. A 757 has 10 wheels and 10 tires? You must be teasing.

What? April Gallup said there was NO JET FUEL?

We ordered her not to say that. Can't she follow orders?

Guns and Butter broadcast with Dave von Kleist interviewing April Gallup. There was an explosion and she crawled out from E-Ring through the hole onto the Pentagon lawn. She saw no jet fuel and nobody burned with jet fuel. She and her baby boy were about 35-45 feet from the alleged impact hole and no jet fuel was splashed on them. What happened to the huge infernos and fuel-air explosions inside which allegedly incinerated all the aircraft parts and engines and wheel hubs and baggage and seats?

Guns and Butter - April Gallup - audio live testimony

[edit on 11/20/08 by SPreston]

Judicial Watch FOIA release May 2006

Pentagon Parking Lot Security Camera One



Still frames from camera 1 (plane, impact, impact2, impact3, impact4)



Large capture of Video1 plane



Large capture of Video1 impact



Large capture of Video1 impact2





Camera 1 catches up to camera 2 at 1:04

Pentagon Parking Lot Security Camera Two

reply to post by SPreston


EXACTLY... the Fairy tales and stories and the changes in stories are continually altered like a tennis match... its pure genius though since most people are too stupid or their attention span fails to keep up with watching the BALL so eventually most just GIVE UP and say ... DUH, OKAY, I GUESS IT MUST BE TRUE...

and then you have these DEFENDERS showing up arguing that common sense isn't PROOF of anything while they demand we can't prove a negative or wheres the scientific proof of their propoganda....

YADA YADA YADA ad naseum and this GAME goes on and on and on....

is anyone getting tired of these defenders circular logic and petty arguments nit picking we haven't proved or disproved the many different FAIRY TALES yet?

BOTTOM LINE I SAY... IF JUST ONE FACT OR QUESTION GOES UNANSWERED, IS CONTRADICTORY OR STONE-WALLED IN THIS CT, THEN THAT ALONE SHOULD BE ENOUGH TO SHOW THE ENTIRE STORY IS MOST LIKELY A LIE AND BEING GAGGED FOR A REASON THUS ANY PERSON WITH HALF A BRAIN SHOULD AGREE ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSERTIONS OF A CONSPIRACY IS VALID TO CONSIDER MORE THAN ANY CLAIM BY THOSE WHO DEFEND THE OFFICIAL STORY!

it can't be much more simple ... yet all i see are at best, rhetorical arguments from posters like throatyogurt, exponent?, jthomas et al arguing about why even the most obvious scenario's are bs and PROOF of nothing. LOL

when will this insanity end?

and its this insanity which fuels some of my posts dealing with the fact that things are to the point now where JUST THE FLAWS IN STORIES, STONE WALLING ETC should be enough PROOF on their own (ASIDE FROM ALL THE FACTUAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE PRESENTED that at the most BASIC level refutes the logic and rationale of the official government stories), that NO 757 COULD HAVE CRASHED AT THE PENTAGON, no 757-200 crashed in Shanksville etc etc etc...
killtown.911review.org...

and oh yeah, sure, we're supposed to believe a 757 crashed at the pentagon and people like april gallup were able to crawl out moments after, but at the WTC towers, the laws of physics resume to normal and the fires from the jet and fuel bs were able to destroy one of the most sophisticated structure in modern history and reinforced concrete can sheer off wings, engines, tail fins and leave no trace, where STEEL can't.

ROFLMAO!

I'm tellin ya, when the gallows get set up, those who kept defending the governments bs and make these insane arguments that defy common sense, should all be thrown in line with the perpetrators.

Originally posted by matrix911
any objective logical and reasonable person with one ounce of intelligence thats done a reasonable amount of research and investigation should be able to see based on common sense alone, this conspiracy is BLATANT, hardly a theory and an INSIDE JOB.

So anyone who does not agree with you is not "objective" or "logical" or "reasonable" right? That is what your statement means there. Which means that the only people who you can trust are the people who agree with you. Do you think this is a good way to investigate something? To assume those who disagree with you must be wrong simply by the virtue of disagreement?

and right now i'm gonna go one step further because those who continue to deny and defend this LIE in the face of so many obvious problems, flaws with the OS and pure irrefutable facts, are either braindead, in denial or connected to the perpetrators in one way or another.

Ok which am I?

IF JUST ONE FACT CAN BE SHOWN CORRECT OR ONE PART OF THE OFFICIAL STORY IN ANY AREA OF THIS CT SHOWN TO BE OR AGREED TO BE FLAWED, UNANSWERED, EVADED, CHANGED, ETC ETC,.... THAT ALONE SHOULD BE MORE THAN ENOUGH PROOF THAT THE ENTIRE OS MOST LIKELY A LIE AT ITS HEART NO MATTER HOW MANY OTHER AREAS CANNOT BE FACTUALLY OR SCIENTIFICALLY DISPROVEN.

Am I wrong??

Yes. In fact I should bold that to point out how wrong you are. Hell yes. You have set up such a ridiculous claim here I don't know how it's possible you don't see it. Let me explain by example:

According to you, if I am unable to tell you what the left forefinger of passenger #3 on flight 11 was doing 0.43 seconds into the impact with the WTC, then the entire official story is wrong right?

No of course not, that is absolutely ludicrous. If applied to any scientific theory whatsoever would fail entirely. We don't understand how black holes work, but we sure as hell know that there are black holes. We don't even have a reliable model for combustion inside cylinders. I suspect your car still works though, does it work because of magic as there are unanswered questions? No of course it doesn't.

and then you have these DEFENDERS showing up arguing that common sense isn't PROOF of anything while they demand we can't prove a negative or wheres the scientific proof of their propoganda....

Common sense does not prove anything, but it's also true you cannot prove a negative, so if someone has asked you to then at least in this case we agree you cannot. The rest of your post is the same complete ignorance though:

all i see are at best, rhetorical arguments from posters like throatyogurt, exponent?, jthomas et al arguing about why even the most obvious scenario's are bs and PROOF of nothing.

"Rhetorical arguments"? Please feel free to quote me, I would love to see what you think is rhetorical.

posted by exponent
Yes. In fact I should bold that to point out how wrong you are. Hell yes. You have set up such a ridiculous claim here I don't know how it's possible you don't see it. Let me explain by example:

According to you, if I am unable to tell you what the left forefinger of passenger #3 on flight 11 was doing 0.43 seconds into the impact with the WTC, then the entire official story is wrong right?

No of course not, that is absolutely ludicrous. If applied to any scientific theory whatsoever would fail entirely. We don't understand how black holes work, but we sure as hell know that there are black holes. We don't even have a reliable model for combustion inside cylinders. I suspect your car still works though, does it work because of magic as there are unanswered questions? No of course it doesn't.

That is ridiculous. Your pompous circular reasoning allowed you to entirely skate around every point matrix911 was making. My description above concerning the Official Exit Hole Fairy Tail periodic changes to the official story was just one of dozens of similar examples. Reasoning with characters like you and jthomas and Reheat is a complete waste of time and counter productive. You people are so transparent.

What do black holes and combustion engines and the left forefinger of passenger #3 have to do with a murderous criminal act committed against OUR own people by OUR own government? The INSIDE JOB nature of 9-11 is proven in a dozen different ways by combining the contradictions and impossibilities together, while you people insist on separating out infinitesimal parts of the whole, and ignoring and setting the remainder aside, not to be even considered in the debate. Common sense has no place in your arguments.

That is exactly why millions of people just know that 9-11 was an INSIDE JOB Attack on America by OUR own government along with certain historical enemies of OUR people, without committing to the years of intensive research that some of us have endured. Looking at the entire 9-11 scenario, they can simply say;

"Of course 9-11 was an INSIDE JOB; isn't it obvious? Why else was George Dubya Bush hiding out in Florida and why else did George Dubya Bush desperately fight to prevent any and all investigations into 9-11? Why else did Congress state the US Military was lying to them and do nothing about it? Why else were senior responsible officers and politicians promoted and not one single responsible person punished for 9-11? Why else could 19 incompetent boobs who could not even fly Cessnas well nor stay out of girlie bars nor keep their big mouths shut nor refrain from leaving important documents behind and with stolen identities of their own, all the while under the supposed leadership of a dying eccentric hiding out in a cave on the opposite side of the planet, get the blame for 9-11 against the most technical multi-trillion dollar defense system ever? Isn't it obvious?"





[edit on 11/21/08 by SPreston]

Originally posted by SPreston
That is ridiculous. Your pompous circular reasoning allowed you to entirely skate around every point matrix911 was making.

Then please elaborate on them. All I saw was a tirade of ridiculous claims about how it is so obvious that 911 was an "inside job". If this is the case then why is the "official story" still considered correct by international engineering organisations for example?

My description above concerning the Official Exit Hole Fairy Tail periodic changes to the official story was just one of dozens of similar examples.

This is simply because in this context, "official story" means "anything speculated upon by any member of any governmental branch or related organisation".

Lets list your examples for context

• 1. Nose cone created exit hole
  The source for this claim is not specified but sounds similar to statements by Lt Kevin Shaeffer and Victor Correa. These statements however said nothing about the cause of the exit hole and they are not in any way part of an "Official Story". It may also be from a spokesman for the renovation program. Again this would not be part of any "Official Story".
  
• 2. Landing gear created exit hole
  This claim is from Popular Mechanics, and while they reference the ASCE, the ASCE does not make any such conclusion in the Building Performance Report. Again, this is not part of any "Official Story".
  
• 3. Engine created exit hole
  This claim appears to be from a commentary located here: web.archive.org...://www.mdw.army.mil/news/Commentary-Remembering_the_honored_dead.html
  Again this is not part of any "Official Story"
  
• 4. Engine created by pressure wave from exploding fuel
  This claim is from National Geographic. This is also not part of any "Official Story"

As you can see, none of the claims you presented were ever put forward as any sort of "Official Story", they are simply various statements and speculations put forward by various people at different times including media organisations.

By redefining words and making false claims you may be able to put forward a superficial appearance of some sort of "inside job" scenario but with a trivial amount of research it is easy to see that you are distorting the truth to fit your agenda.

Reasoning with characters like you and jthomas and Reheat is a complete waste of time and counter productive. You people are so transparent.

If I am so transparent, what is my motivation?

What do black holes and combustion engines and the left forefinger of passenger #3 have to do with a murderous criminal act committed against OUR own people by OUR own government?

I thought I explained it quite well, if matrix911 was correct and a single unanswered question gives cause to believe in an inside job, what is wrong with that unanswered question? Why does he not believe that we are being lied to about black holes, or about how your car works? There are unanswered questions everywhere, I will never be able to tell you what happened to specific items in the WTC impacts and many other things, because we do not have enough data to be able to predict or extrapolate this.

The INSIDE JOB nature of 9-11 is proven in a dozen different ways by combining the contradictions and impossibilities together, while you people insist on separating out infinitesimal parts of the whole, and ignoring and setting the remainder aside, not too be even considered in the debate. Common sense has no place in your arguments.

Common sense is an incredibly weak argument as it is not based on any evidence other than "I feel this way". You may claim it's common sense that time travels at the same rate on the surface of the earth and out in space, but you would be wrong. There are many unintuitive things that happen and this is why common sense is not reliable.

That is exactly why millions of people just know that 9-11 was an INSIDE JOB Attack on America by OUR own government along with certain historical enemies of OUR people, without committing to the years of intensive research that some of us have endured.

I'll grant you that millions of people probably do believe this, but the majority are in countries that despise America. Iran has a relatively healthy truther population from what I understand.

Regardless, you have yet to take any substantive action to bring people to justice, every minor court case or legal challenge has failed and you yourself seem content to post on internet forums rather than putting together evidence for a prosecution. Why do you think this is?

[edit on 21-11-2008 by exponent]

Question: Do you see the plane? Answer: Yes, and I have outlined it:




What happened to the smoke trail? Answer: the thermal blast which extends much further than just the visible blast evaporated and dispersed the smoke trail.

This thread has now convinced me more than ever that it was a commercial airliner flown by demented terrorists that attacked the Pentagon.

posted by Nicolas Flamel
Question: Do you see the plane? Answer: Yes, and I have outlined it:

What happened to the smoke trail? Answer: the thermal blast which extends much further than just the visible blast evaporated and dispersed the smoke trail.

This thread has now convinced me more than ever that it was a commercial airliner flown by demented terrorists that attacked the Pentagon.

I see YOUR cute little green line; but I sure do not see YOUR aircraft there, especially not a 757 with a 44 foot 6 inch tall tail stabilizer. If you look carefully, what you are designating part of YOUR aircraft is still there in the background in the second image below (impact), when YOUR aircraft is supposed to be inside the fireball designating YOUR aircraft explosion. So YOUR aircraft surrounded by YOUR cute little green line is largely in YOUR imagination; correct?

Furthermore, if you look carefully you can see some more of that heavy white smoke trail on the lefthand side of the 2nd image (impact) below and on the right side of the full image ( impact (center) here ) and you can see that at least that portion of the supposed heavy white smoke trail has not been blown away by YOUR thermal blast, and it is much closer to YOUR thermal blast than the original heavy white smoke trail on the far right of the 1st image (plane). In addition the tail is much too short to be a 757 tail stabilizer and it seems oddly to have an engine appendage looking much more like a wide-body Lockheed L-1011. That tail stabilizer is definitely much too short to be a L-1011 wouldn't you agree? There is little doubt that the original heavy white smoke trail in Frame 1 (plane), was drawn in by the graphics artist much too clearly for an el cheapo parking lot gate camera several hundred yards away across the lawn. Do you agree?

Frame 1 (plane) zoomed in to 5000 x 3325 resolution



Frame 2 (impact) zoomed in to 5000 x 3325 resolution



Frame Two (impact) showing missing heavy white smoke trail



Frame Two (impact) Center showing initial high explosive like explosion - not jet fuel

Frame One (plane) crop Right side showing heavy white smoke trail




[edit on 11/21/08 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


Please stop using smoothed images with pixel interpolation. This diminishes the accuracy of the image you're presenting. Unless you have a higher quality source video than I linked to, these are the best quality images you can use without modifying them:

edit: my 1000th point post!





[edit on 21-11-2008 by exponent]

Attention!

I see you have got back on topic, but would like to remind everyone to stay on topic and leave out the insults, even if they are indirect. Discuss the topic and not each other.

posted by exponent
Please stop using smoothed images with pixel interpolation. This diminishes the accuracy of the image you're presenting. Unless you have a higher quality source video than I linked to, these are the best quality images you can use without modifying them:

Your images are useless. I have modified nothing; just magnified them and added text.

That is what the heavy white smoke trail looks like on the original video.

You don't even keep track of them. Are they deliberately blurred and pixelated and blocky?






[edit on 11/22/08 by SPreston]

From a legal perspective, though I'm not a lawyer, I'm confident that an attempt by the government to use the pentagon video footage, dated Sept. 12th as proof of anything that happened on Sept. 11th. would be thrown out of court. We need more of the video that the government has withheld from the public.

I find it difficult to believe that the date on this camera was innocently set incorrectly on the 11th. or that it had been set incorrectly for a while preceding the 11th. Security video is expected to meet legal requirements required in court cases, after all.