New Footage 9/11 Second Tower Explosion Incredibly Clear Video From Helicopter - Where Is The Plane?

reply to post by burntheships


earlier I wanted to compare the first inpact, which is a huge plane shape, to the pentagon impact which is not, to the second wtc strike, and I couldn't find a good pic of the impact site for the second strike...
or a vid that showed it.
if any one has a clear pic of the second impact site ...or a link to one...

There are estimated to be lots more home video dlips,people are scared to reveal them though I guess,

Didnt Debbie Harry say she had one?

Hey ProudBird

I know how/what your response to me will be. I'm ready.

reply to post by Danbones


Thing is...all of the plane shapes are different, even the ones broadcast on
the "tele". How is that! (yeah we know )

Every video that should have the second impact does not, its cut out.
All but the few that have been boadcast on "news channels".

That is strange...my freind, strange. Every single video has the second
impact cut out.

And the Pentagon, well we have already come to that conclusion, they
confiscated all of the footage immediately.

Originally posted by Danbones
admittedly I am not a technical expert PB
I stated that early on in this thread

One of my specialties is in house security re data management and comparative analysis.

My job in that particular field is to determin how to prevent negative movement in the bottom line.

and taken in toto as such the OS does not add up.

If I were to see a credible investigation that showed it does I would certainly consider it,
I have several well qualified "bush" pilots in the family, and several military aviators in my immediate circle
they do not think the OS is possible

when I see calculations based on the OS like the one above I conclude something is out of whack.
if the OS were true
it would not be out of whack.
and the speed in ths calculation seems quite impossible...My first guess would be missing frames. not a super duper transonic warp drive ufo
why missing frames
because it wasn't the plane that was stated
it is a video that is similar in context to the likely obfuscated video in the OP

which lends weight to the arguement re missing wings and engin sizes
why not just release the definitive video?

Danbones, if you are being disingenuous please do me a great favor and say so I don't waste my time or further spoil your own fun. I am not an educator and it takes a fair amount of time and effort to rebut the myriad of technical fallacies that most of the "truther" argument is built on. If you sincerely believe what you are posting to be based on facts read on...

The bulk of public readership on a general forum like ATS do not have a functional command of basic physics, much less the specific knowledge of structural and aerodynamic principals required to demonstrate why so many of the conspiratorial claims are nonsense. Quite often even a laymen explanation requires quick general education "brushup" to preface the subject which requires a certain commitment on the part of the reader.

I am not terribly interested in the 9/11 conspiracy, I stumbled across ATS as part of my aviation hobby and only participate in the hope of helping provide the occasional reader with the facts and tools to judge the truth for themselves. I dont mind engaging anyone who has sincere questions regarding the 9/11 OS, conversations with folks such as yourself have prodded me to read documents like the NIST reports at length as well as personally verify the calculations presented in the OS (something that I don't see many of the followers of the "truther" movement doing for themselves.)

Aside from having actually read the available data for myself, I hold an advantage because I dont need someone else to interpret the relevance or meaning of what the data implies ( again, hucksters like PF911T, AE911T count on their readers being unknowledgeable on the subject matter and gullible enough to accept a classic appeal to authority without question).

I have both formal education in aeronautical engineering and earned my PPL in the 1980's with just over 400 hours of logged time (bugsmashers mind you) and probably an equal amount of time begging rides in the along in rightseat .Although aviation has been an interest for most of my life, I learned early that aviation did not pay and have spent the last 30 years building in the trades. I have successfully held positions from ditchdigger during school to project manager, including four years of catastrophic insurance restoration in the commercial sector (post Northridge earthquake).

After over three decades in the buisness, I happen know literally dozens of contractors and engineers, as well as a few architects, who have discussed this topic over the last few years. I don't recall anybody with the qualifications to understand what was going on ever disagreeing with the mechanisms as observed and reported when the subject was broached.

Coincidently, I also know literally dozens of pilots, current and ex from military to commercial and private. Unlike either of your or Burntheships claims of "dozens" who question the OS, I cant think of one.

Perhaps you could invite one of your bush pilot family members or one of the several military aviators in your immediate circle who do not believe the OS is possible to anonymously join the conversation and explain why they believe it impossible?? There is no need for them to provide any identifying credentials, it is really easy to tell who is the real deal, who has never been pilot in control beyond an X-box and who is lying.

You have cited retired Commander Ralph Kolstad's support a half dozen times in the last pages as somehow definitive. Other than you being impressed with his flight experience claims, what specific testimony or evidence does Cmdr. Ralph Kolstad provide in support of a conspiracy?

I will gladly address in detail and sourced appropriately any salient point you make. The physics and math are universal value's, they are not affected by subjective interpretation. If you are dealing in fact rather than conjecture his commentary, specifically regarding aeronautics, should be unimpeachable.

What part of the "official investigation" do you find fault in not adding up? Again, please be so kind to post specific examples and take note that most of what you have referenced thus far has been factually refuted by other posters whether you choose to recognize them or not. You mention that you are familiar with comparative analysis, which uses binary logic rather than statistics, correct? As such, you should understand there are rules to logical argumentation, correct? Do you believe you are correctly applying those rules and that the logic underpinning your argument is sound? If your previously incorrect use and context of the straw man fallacy is any hint....

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by huh2142
reply to post by Danbones

 

The calculation is based on the assumption that the camera was recording at 30 fps. That is very unreasonable assumption to make. If it wasn't a plane, then I'm assuming it was a missile. What missile flies at 12+ mach?

well
do the math with the various fram rates it might be
either its going ufo speed or there are frames missing
hhhmm
why not just publish the video complete?

Have you figured out the answer or do you still believe there are frames missing ( or are you the type who just anonymously posts argumentative nonsense on internet message boards because your mother gives you less attention now that you moved into the basement? Fair question?)

You have also used some form of the word obfuscate 21 times in 42 posts, primarily to incorrectly denigrate other ATS members after you have been shown to be wrong, while erroneously posting 19 separate attempts in the last 10 pages to introduce misdirecting subject matter ranging from Dick Cheney to dancing Israeli's to your best guess Bob and Doug McKenzie's reaction to the free-fall of WTC 1 and 2.

ob·fus·cate   [ob-fuh-skeyt, ob-fuhs-keyt]
verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing.
1.to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.
2.to make obscure or unclear: to obfuscate a problem with extraneous information.
3.to darken.

Dictionary.com/obfuscate

I read back through the last pages. Yourself, Burntheships and Anunaki10 are not just the only posters guilty of obfuscating the topic ,you are all three muddying the waters inbetween the dullwitted sophmoric ad-homs every time another contributor proves you wrong (which between the three of you is nearly every post) as well as posting idiot ad-homs.

Do you think nobody notices? Truthers my arse, Liars is much closer to the reality.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


I could agree with everything you said, however I dont think
that just ordinary planes could have brought about the damage to the towers,
(fuel from the aircraft responsible for the magnitude of the fire, heat)
let alone cut through them like butter in impact.

Not to mention that many people who were witness first hand account
saw "explosions" ...commented that they saw "no plane" either that or "a military plane".

I dont know what your thoughts are on the "planes" and the towers.
?

However, there is eveidence, which I have not even begun to address that
practically proves North Tower, South Tower, and Bldg 7 were controlled demolition.

reply to post by Drunkenparrot

You did not address your post to me, but specifically named me in it several times.
So I feel the need to comment.

You posted nothing of substance, only your negative opinion of myself,
and others who are defending the "truther" investigation of 9/11.

That speaks for itself.

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

I could agree with everything you said, however I dont think
that just ordinary planes could have brought about the damage to the towers,
let alone cut through them like butter in impact.

I dont know what your thoughts are on the "planes" and the towers.
?

I think that focusing on the planes is a well crafted diversion and tar pit for anyone investigating 911.

I would recommend researching all the events beginning seconds prior to the first plane even touching the tower to 1993. Investigate the Israeli connection with spies in the u.s living next to if not training these terrorists for the biggest sham in recent history. Investigate Ptech, amdocs, Daniel Lewin, 911 wargames, Amalgam virgo. Then get back to me

If you are serious about 911 then do what i recommend other wise carry on.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


I am interested in everything that can be proven and even properly theorized up
to the event of 9/11.

Feel free to present your evidence....the more substance the better.

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


man
go read the posts
you just rambled off an non answer to every question never asked on this thread

relevent sections of kolstads opinion are posted
deal with them...as are links to the other relevent experts
also posted is a link to where there are several calculations of velocity based on the various standard frame rates...
and you haven't delt with the pilots we already have referenced,,and you want more?
wow...

the dictionary definition re "obfuscation" you posted is the only thing that actually makes any sense in the context of this thread.
at least you referenced something

it is interesting to note the relevent video where the frame rates are calculated from which was billed by the government as diffinitive evidence of the plane that hit the pentagon doesn't show the plane clearly enough to identify it.
like the way the gov said the vid of Osama shows him admitting to doing 911 when he quite clearly states he didn't do it..
Obfuscation indeed
like that rambling post of yours
please address some issues that are relevant
like all the ones you skipped in your haste to obfuscate

as Shadow Herder notes for example
all this focus on the plane(s) is an obfuscation

derailing the thread instead of the examination of the "dissapearance" of the plane in the video is just an obfuscation of an obfuscation
youL osers would like to turn every 911 thread into that..
well guess what
there are many threads about planes planes planes... go there if you want to talk planes planes planes
ive yet to see the Osers deal with threal expperts opinions

if you even read the thread title you'ld know

we are talking about a missing plane....a video that is an Obfuscation.
and how it is likely a tactic of the Osers

this thread is an examination of the "disapearance" of information in a video and the aspect of obfuscation as a tool to prevent examination discussion and conclusions re the actual events surrounding the murder of a few thousand Americans and untold others around the world,a nd the loss of OUR freedoms here at home.

like the underwear bomber put on the plane without a passport....

we know the dancing Israelis had a nice angle on the whole scene ...
where is that vid I wonder?
where are they?
why so many edited vids?
why so many missing vids from cameras satalites and radars
why don't the OSers deal with the opinions of experts like the topguns and heads of Military intelligence?
you denigrate people who are credentialled while having no proof of your own

simple the OS is wrong and so are its perpetrators
if the OS wasn't wrong this would be a non existant thread

through deception thou shalt create war

I read back through the last pages. Yourself, Burntheships and Anunaki10 are not just the only posters guilty of obfuscating the topic ,you are all three muddying the waters inbetween the dullwitted sophmoric ad-homs every time another contributor proves you wrong (which between the three of you is nearly every post) as well as posting idiot ad-homs.

Do you think nobody notices? Truthers my arse, Liars is much closer to the reality.

aww
an adhominem attack using the word ad hominem
thats BRILLIANT!
instead of obfuscate maybe you should have looked the word reference
up in the Rs ection of your dictionary

we'll still be around when you get back, and we will happily deal with what ever valid arguements you might make then...if you make any

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Danbones

 

Thing is...all of the plane shapes are different, even the ones broadcast on
the "tele". How is that! (yeah we know )

Every video that should have the second impact does not, its cut out.
All but the few that have been boadcast on "news channels".

That is strange...my freind, strange. Every single video has the second
impact cut out.

And the Pentagon, well we have already come to that conclusion, they
confiscated all of the footage immediately.

im guessing if anyone posts the ones showing the second aircraft hitting the south tower are posting ones that have been digitally altered and shown live on news channels already, so those ones cant be counted amirite?

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Drunkenparrot

 

You did not address your post to me, but specifically named me in it several times.
So I feel the need to comment.

You posted nothing of substance, only your negative opinion of myself,
and others who are defending the "truther" investigation of 9/11.

That speaks for itself.

Burntheships, I don't have an opinion of you negative or positive.

As far as I know we have never met and don't know one another.

I am familiar with your ATS forum name and although I recall reading your posts in the past I don't recall any specifics regarding your opinions either way.


You state that I have posted nothing of substance huh? I guess if your definition of substance is rumor, misrepresentation and fallacy as the posts which seem to meet your standard throughout this thread have been you would be correct, I have posted nothing of substance.

Or is it closer to the truth that somebody's background and qualifications are only pertinent when they are in agreement or you deem them necessary? (calling ATS member Proudbird out sure backfired for you with though, didn't it?)

I referenced you twice in the aforementioned post, once that my own experiences among the (relatively small) aviation community with regards to support for 9/11 conspiracy theories are in total contradiction to similar assertions by yourself and Danbones where you both claim to know dozens of military and commercial rated pilots who "do not think the OS is possible" and "all know beyond a doubt that 9/11 is a monstrous lie".

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot....Coincidentally, I also know literally dozens of pilots, current and ex from military to commercial and private. Unlike either of your or Burntheships claims of "dozens" who question the OS, I cant think of one.

Originally posted by Danbones
If I were to see a credible investigation that showed it does I would certainly consider it,
I have several well qualified "bush" pilots in the family, and several military aviators in my immediate circle
they do not think the OS is possible

Originally posted by burntheships
* Oh I suppose you want us to think the landing gear was up ? *
> A feat of flying no pilot I personally know says is possible <
> every pilot I know has said it is physically impossible <

followed by...

Originally posted by burntheships

Originally posted by ProudBird

"every pilot you know"? How many? What are their qualifications??
There was nothing "impossible" about any of the flights of 9/11. Not one thing.

ATP Commercial Rating, more than the fingers on my two hands,
and I am not an alien, so that would be...nvmd....let me do the math for you...

fingers on my hand (left) = 5
fingers on my hand (right) =5

5+5 = 10

so I personally know more than 10 pilots. And then a few.

They all know beyond a doubt that 9/11 is a monstrous lie.

The second mention was to correct Danbones groundless accusations that other posters, specifically those providing counterpoints to 9/11 conspiracy claims, were intentionally confusing the discussion. I truthfully and correctly made note that Yourself, Danbones and Anunaki10 have been the only contributors whose post content and behavior match the definition of the word obfuscate.

Yourself, Burntheships and Anunaki10 are not just the only posters guilty of obfuscating the topic ,you are all three muddying the waters inbetween the dullwitted sophomoric ad-homs every time another contributor proves you wrong (which between the three of you is nearly every post) as well as posting idiot ad-homs.

I did not specifically address you in my last post because after posting a legitimate question...

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
Burntheships, I don't understand your reasoning.

Would you mind quickly summarizing these "truths" contributed by Mr. Ferguson, because the commentary I read was nothing but fallacy and obfuscation which was in-arguably refuted?

I don't think you are intentionally being obtuse but arguing just for the sake of arguing is trolling. While we are all entitled to our own opinions, we are not entitled to our own facts.

What do you have to say about CFerguson/Balsamo's incorrect statement regarding operating limitations or the photo of the APU rotor being portrayed as a main engine component?

your reply was...

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Drunkenparrot

 

DP, I have followed you since day one.
My opinion of Mr. Fersguson is formed from off board interaction.

Good bye.

I don't understand what you mean by having "followed" me "since day one"?

I did not ask for your opinion of banned ATS poster CFerguson and have no idea what possible bearing your "off board interaction" has to do with my "on board" question to you asking which part you thought was true after everything pertinent presented by CFerguson was proven to be false and misleading?

(If you would like to know your response above is another example obfuscation )

The last post I addressed to you was to correct your mistaken assumption attacking what you thought was Proudbirds credibility regarding pilot log book keeping which you didn't even have the grace to redress. I should have let you continue, I was getting a good chuckle and I am sure I wasn't alone.

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
I wouldn't be so quick to jump on Proudbirds earlier statement that he doesn't know an exact grand total of hours flown, you are only further proving that you don't know much on the subject.

The FAA requires that you log your flight hours and that you maintain a certain amount of time at the controls within a given time-frame to stay current with a specific aircraft type.

Have you ever even seen a pilots logbook? Its not like there is a "grand total" box at the bottom of the page.

It is common for high time pilots to only have an approximate idea of total hours flown off the top of their heads.

You are trying to insult the guy based on your own ignorance, who is the fool there?

Originally posted by burntheships
Wow, blatant disinformation tactics.

So, it was normal, but it was not normal.

Kind of like YOU Proudwacker.
(YOU know, kind of like keeping YOUR 'pilot" "log book" you got tired of keeping.

)

Originally posted by burntheships
That from a quasi pilot who does not keep a proper log book...
In which case the FAA would make sure your not a pilot for long....

I suggest you straighten your shirt tail.

And stop your masquerade.

Originally posted by burntheships

Speaking of Con Artists...what was your answer about your log book?

Every pilot I know, and as I said you would be shocked, knows
that the log book is an official record, not just some sloppy "book"
of scrawls.

Originally posted by burntheships
Really? You grew tired of keeping your log books?

Your aware that would not stand up under scrutiny.

Further, you could cause a huge mess by doing such sloppy work.
You could risk the scrutiny of the FAA by doing such a sloppy thing.

Not to mention the integrity of the aircraft you have flown.

:shk:

Well....I dont know what else to say, thats not a good thing to admit.

Any questions?

Yeah, do you fly your loved ones around? THEY trust you?

ETA: Well at least you would not Qual for Solar Radiation Management Flights...
Every flight must be entered, you know the drill.

ETA: You could have your license pulled by the FAA.

Rules:

All log books must be precise. The time of flight, at the time of the flight
to be recorded. Date, time, airport, hours, tail numbers.

Weather.... you know! You risk losing your pilots license!
To save space in your log book?

Save space for what, the blank space after your license is revoked?

Now that it has been established that your pedestrian assumptions were incorrect, does any part of you feel that you owe ATS member Proudbird an apology or is the above acceptable behavior to you?

For posterity's sake, I would also be remiss to not point out that trying to discredit the validity of the facts by attacking something inane like logbook keeping meets the definition of obfuscatory.

Again, feel free to correct any point you feel is in error.

Perhaps If you are troubled that others perception of you is negative then perhaps you should reconsider your online behavior and debate etiquette?

I can't believe in 2012 questions like "where is the plane" are still being asked and People are still wasting time and energy responding to them, and it seems to me that it's all too easy for People to spend their focus on ridiculous issues such as trying to refute eyewitness and video evidence, (bare in mind there are a lot of eyewitnesses and plenty of video footage showing the second plane hit) than getting to the core argument of who knew, and it's because All Roads Lead To Israel and the fear of being labeled an "anti semite" that real questions such as who knew and why was allowed to happen will never get as much attention as the ridiculously stupid and easily refutable questions that threads like this that keep the whole 9/11 issue going round and round and round.

It's become embarrassing to even be the slightest bit associated to the 9/11 "truth movement", as it clearly can't handle "the Truth".

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
I am not terribly interested in the 9/11 conspiracy,

That's bullsh!t, if you were NOT terribly interested in the 911 conspiracy you would NOT be posting all your nonense here...

Originally posted by Caidema
You typed all that for nothing bro, Yeh I said my family are pro Bush, I did not say that I was. both my posts were about me believing the inside job theory. what I dont believe is that the video posted in this thread is real, it is def edited to appear there is no plane. Thats just ridiculous. I cant stand Bush. He is an evil asshole and I'm already aware of everything you posted.

Sorry, i think i misunderstood your post, bro. Yeah, there is definitely something wrong with Bush, no doubt about that, he said things that does not add up at all, and there is strange mystery surrounding Bush family.

Originally posted by huh2142
April Gallop sued the government twice. The military intimidation really worked well.

So April Gallop sued the Government TWICE??? COOL!!! You see, some "Whisteblowers" / former employees / former military personnel / witnesses are brave enough to come forward, despite risking their health and lives, while others are too scared and prefer to keep their mouth shut. If you take a look at this NASA Files TV documentary, Part 2 from about 6:10 into this interview former NASA employee Donna Hare explained that some Shadow Government agent looking dudes came and told her that it was not a good idea for her to talk openly about what she knows, and she also said that her phone was tapped and that she was followed by these Shadow Government agent looking dudes...
If you take a look at this TV documentary about Cliff Stone and Bob Dean, and there Cliff Stone explained that a Shadow Government agent looking dude came and threatened Cliff Stone by pointing a gun at Cliff Stone's head saying >>Look, we can make it look like a training accident if you don't keep your mouth shut!What are you gonna say in there?>I'M GONNA SAY A LOT!!!Oh, some of these socalled witnesses are dead, while the rest of the witnesses are still alive! What the heck is going on here??? Why the heck are the rest of the witnesses still alive??? It doesn't make sense!!!<

The strategies for dealing with those former servicemen, corporate employees or witnesses brave or ‘foolish’ enough to come forward to reveal classified information is to intimidate, silence, eliminate or discredit these individuals

The strategies for dealing with those former servicemen, corporate employees or witnesses brave or ‘foolish’ enough to come forward to reveal classified information is to intimidate, silence, eliminate or discredit these individuals. This policy involves such strategies as removing all public records of former military service men or corporate employees, forcing individuals to make retractions, deliberately distorting statements of individuals, or discrediting individuals.

Didn't read entire thread sorry to long but I looked at that and what you are missing is the four objects in the video located in different positions. Watch the sky not the buildings.

Two coming in from the left (different times) into the black smoke one on the upper right and one well you see if you can spot the last one..........I say UFO were observing this event and recording it.

reply to post by Anunaki10


Do you not see the illogicality of citing people who have self-evidently said what they want, indeed have gone public over it, in support of the proposition that there are secret shadow government killers going around threatening death ?

Originally posted by Neo-V™
I can't believe in 2012 questions like "where is the plane" are still being asked and People are still wasting time and energy responding to them, and it seems to me that it's all too easy for People to spend their focus on ridiculous issues such as trying to refute eyewitness and video evidence, (bare in mind there are a lot of eyewitnesses and plenty of video footage showing the second plane hit) than getting to the core argument of who knew, and it's because All Roads Lead To Israel and the fear of being labeled an "anti semite" that real questions such as who knew and why was allowed to happen will never get as much attention as the ridiculously stupid and easily refutable questions that threads like this that keep the whole 9/11 issue going round and round and round.

It's become embarrassing to even be the slightest bit associated to the 9/11 "truth movement", as it clearly can't handle "the Truth".

link please