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.
...do you know how much steel was in the wtc?? 200,000 tons of steel.... Where did the steel go???? It was turned to dust....
Originally posted by Varemia
This footage actually makes sense, somewhat. In every video of the second plane hitting in which a person is not seeing it silhouetted against the sky, just before the plane hits, it tilts and the right wing lights up bright white from the sun.
Ironically, a video I found that allows you to see the lighting change very clearly is also one that claims it was a hologram. :p Oh well, just focus on the lighting and compare the part that gets lit up to the part of the plane that disappears in the OP's video:
Originally posted by brainsandgravy
Originally posted by Varemia
This footage actually makes sense, somewhat. In every video of the second plane hitting in which a person is not seeing it silhouetted against the sky, just before the plane hits, it tilts and the right wing lights up bright white from the sun.
Ironically, a video I found that allows you to see the lighting change very clearly is also one that claims it was a hologram. :p Oh well, just focus on the lighting and compare the part that gets lit up to the part of the plane that disappears in the OP's video:
I believe this is correct, but there is one piece of info left out. In every clip showing a decent shot of the plane hitting the tower, you will see the plane enter the shadow of the thick smoke from tower one making it appear black against the skylight. However, just prior to impact as the plane is banking, it re-enters the sunlight. Because of the plane's tilted orientation, that right wing lights up with the sun's reflection. Depending on the type of camera being used and the exposure setting, that lit-up wing might just match the color and brightness of the sky. If this happens, the digital compression process (depending on how lossy it is) will interpret the wing as part of the sky and simply smear it out completely. This is especially common with lossy compression codecs, but can happen in-camera as well.
Originally posted by cluckerspud
Originally posted by nittin
Originally posted by nittin
Originally posted by waypastvne
How many times do the wings, horizontal stabilizers, and vertical stabilizers disappear in this video?
(pause it every second or so.)edit on 27-10-2010 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)
Why is it that in the video you posted; you can clearly see a transition of the wings going from solid to invisible, yet when in the video posted by the original poster the wing disappears within a millisecond, and no transition is seen? Not to mention I would think it would be more difficult to see a transition in the video you posted considering they are traveling and turning much faster than a normal airplane, yet I still see it morphing from visible to invisible, not disappearing..
No answers anybody?
yet I still see it morphing from visible to invisible, not disappearing.
Wouldn't the process of going from 'visible' to 'invisible' be considered disappearing?!
This statement is confusing. Transition time is irrelevant. Both videos show an illusion of disappearing wings.
Originally posted by waypastvne
Originally posted by nittin
Why is it that in the video you posted; you can clearly see a transition of the wings going from solid to invisible, yet when in the video posted by the original poster the wing disappears within a millisecond, and no transition is seen? Not to mention I would think it would be more difficult to see a transition in the video you posted considering they are traveling and turning much faster than a normal airplane, yet I still see it morphing from visible to invisible, not disappearing..
No answers anybody?
The answer to your question is simple and obvious. UA175 is traveling towards the WTC at 510 Knots. It comes out from under the shadow of the smoke into the light of the sun within a millisecond. The wing that was dark wile in the shadow is now in the light. A millisecond ago it was dark and now it's bright and very near the color, hue and shade of the sky behind it.
The low quality of this youtube video simply blends the wing with the back ground sky. Simple. Obvious.
In the Tina Cart video a similar effect is observed but the wing is still visible through the whole video
Wile we are on the subject of smoke and shadows lets see what kind of problems these would present someone wanting to fake a video or project a hologram.
These are the things that would need to be predicted before hand to make a convincing fake;
The direction the smoke travels.
The altitude of the smoke.
The thickness of the smoke
The color of the smoke.
The angle of the sun.
The speed of the plane
Correlate all of the above to decide on the time that the plane should emerge from the shadow, or if it should even be in a shadow and how much of a change in light there should be.
There are just to many unpredictable variables.
edit on 28-10-2010 by waypastvne because: Because I wanted to
You are not the first to conclude that the planes are just hologram. There is already a guy who made an analysis of it based on the videos produced by MSM. He is saying that what actually hit those towers is a spherical ball with a plane superimposed on it. That is why there is a thing that looks like a bomb at the bottom of the plane. That is the actual thing that didn't fit inside the hologram plane.
Originally posted by Anonymous Acorn
Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by Korg Trinity
So...I find most of these videos of OMG 9/11 PROOFS!!!111 to be really lame, but I am seeing exactly what you are seeing.
The plane goes in and then the wing "disappears". I don't know if it's an optical illusion or what, but it's there, then it "isn't"
Very interesting...
As crazy as this sounds... and saying it is against my better judgment... because I've never even heard anyone else mention this before... but is it possible that what we actually witnessed on 9/11 was a hologram portrayed as an attack just before the buildings fell under a controlled demolition??? Not saying that's what I believe... just wondering what others might suspect after watching this video???
Originally posted by nittin
That's at least how to fake a videoedit on 28-10-2010 by nittin because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by wavemaker
You are not the first to conclude that the planes are just hologram. There is already a guy who made an analysis of it based on the videos produced by MSM. He is saying that what actually hit those towers is a spherical ball with a plane superimposed on it. That is why there is a thing that looks like a bomb at the bottom of the plane. That is the actual thing that didn't fit inside the hologram plane.
Originally posted by Anonymous Acorn
Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by Korg Trinity
So...I find most of these videos of OMG 9/11 PROOFS!!!111 to be really lame, but I am seeing exactly what you are seeing.
The plane goes in and then the wing "disappears". I don't know if it's an optical illusion or what, but it's there, then it "isn't"
Very interesting...
As crazy as this sounds... and saying it is against my better judgment... because I've never even heard anyone else mention this before... but is it possible that what we actually witnessed on 9/11 was a hologram portrayed as an attack just before the buildings fell under a controlled demolition??? Not saying that's what I believe... just wondering what others might suspect after watching this video???
Originally posted by waypastvne
Originally posted by nittin
That's at least how to fake a videoedit on 28-10-2010 by nittin because: (no reason given)
Now how do you predict the unpredictable?
The direction the smoke travels.
The altitude of the smoke.
The thickness of the smoke
The color of the smoke.
The angle of the sun.
The speed of the plane
Correlate all of the above to decide on the time that the plane should emerge from the shadow, or if it should even be in a shadow and how much of a change in light there should be.
Originally posted by brainsandgravy
Can a hologram do this?
Originally posted by waypastvne
Originally posted by nittin
That's at least how to fake a videoedit on 28-10-2010 by nittin because: (no reason given)
Now how do you predict the unpredictable?
The direction the smoke travels.
The altitude of the smoke.
The thickness of the smoke
The color of the smoke.
The angle of the sun.
The speed of the plane
Correlate all of the above to decide on the time that the plane should emerge from the shadow, or if it should even be in a shadow and how much of a change in light there should be.
Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Originally posted by brainsandgravy
Can a hologram do this?
Nope.... But explosives can....
The icing on the cake there would be that it actually sounds like a bomb....
Korg.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by Korg Trinity
You get more and more desperate with each reply the plane was full of fuel what do you think it would sound like
pop
Originally posted by brainsandgravy
reply to post by Korg Trinity
Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Originally posted by brainsandgravy
Can a hologram do this?
Nope.... But explosives can....
The icing on the cake there would be that it actually sounds like a bomb....
Korg.
I disagree. Most of the debris is blowing out of the north side of the building. If this was caused by pre-planted bombs, it would swing (propel) the building primarily to the south as it blew. This is not the case. The building is clearly jolted to the north as if hit from the opposite side.
edit on 29-10-2010 by brainsandgravy because: (no reason given)