UFOSeek Forum

Community for discussion of UFO, Paranormal and mysterious topics
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 2:17 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:01 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:03 am
Posts: 5766
Location: Foothills of Hollywood, CA
Now THAT'S more like the hole I saw ... and THAT looks like a missile, to me!

BTW, that section of the Pentagon had just finished being renovated; not all the offices were occupied, again yet, at the time of the tragedy--that's why more people weren't killed.

_________________
Some days are DIAMONDS; some days are STONES!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2008 1:37 am
Posts: 523
Location: Australia
Oh...I knew something had happened along those lines... just got it backwards... :D

_________________
I am no more than a grain of sand


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:24 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:50 pm
Posts: 4427
Location: Near Toronto, Ontario Canada
I watched that several times, pausing it at the mark you said.

That was no plane.

Tim

_________________
I have absolutely nothing clever to say......but I'm workin' on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
WB11's, wackadoodle coverage of a flying bomb and failed computer graphics

"A lot of ah, uncertainty right now as to what is happening, you can see there are choppers--I believe that could be a police helicopter that is co...oooh."

She only mentioned choppers being in the area after the drone came into frame. She was stunned and shocked when the tower exploded because what appeared on screen had no wings or propeller, which is the very reason she said it only might be a chopper. She used the smallest aircraft that most people would be familiar that fit closest in size to the unknown flying blob. She could have said it was a green concord, but its unknown status would remain for anyone dealing in reality.

"We just saw another (long pause because she did not describe a plane) live picture of, duhhh, what I believe, duhhh, was a plane that just hit another plane?" So, it went from an unidentifiable chopper, to, duh, what she knew had to be a plane, because that's what was supposed to happen, but didn't.

She first described it as what might be a police helicopter and after she realized it caused the explosion, changed her thoughts in that moment. These women literally got trapped in the twilight zone. If it wasn't a helicopter, (no propeller) it certainly could not have been a plane. She simply repeated what it was supposed to be, but the orb was shown at least six more times and was described as a plane or twin engine jet.

The first computer generated image was first shown only one minute after the last orb. You can see the time change to 9:27. The fake image is so poor that it has no wings and two dots for engines. Notice the bogey move directly east and cgi more left/north.

Image
Image
Image
Image

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKj0H2fCpo4&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIyGEDvG9KQ&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=34


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
Whomever Cloud turned his footage over to added a black blob. Clifton, did not hear nor see a plane. It would have been coming from his left. Clifton, debunks all video fakery shown on 911. Advance to 2:00 for his real-time account. He says it over and over and over and over. He didn't see a plane because there was no plane to see. The blob cannot be seen south of where it magically appeared. He was about a mile east of the towers and slightly north.

"I just caught the second explosion on videotape...No, a bomb, I saw it, no plane hit nothin', the building exploded from the other tower floors down."

Image

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2unTcZnY30&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=139&feature=plpp_video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTkzxaHAcNc


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
Using crap fuzzy very low quality heavily distorted badly compressed clips from youtube is not evidence of real boeings.

Why don't the plane idiots source the originals and go buy themselves some copies and make a short video showing something different than blurry black blobs with wings and engines misplaced that all support cgi planes? Because they know that all plane photographs and videos are easily proven fakes.

You have to admit if that happened and it showed real boeings, then honest thinking folks would have to rethink their conclusions that jackass fakery was used on 911. A real boeing banking left does not make the right engine appear closer to the fuselage, nor can the left wing be attached to air with the flap open on the front, instead of rear where it must be, but isn't, because it's a disasterous fake failure.

Image
Image

Image

The hinged control surfaces are used to steer and control the airplane. The flaps and ailerons are connected to the backside of the wings. The flaps slide back and down to increase the surface of the wing area. They also tilt down to increase the curve of the wing. The slats move out from the front of the wings to make the wing space larger. This helps to increase the lifting force of the wing at slower speeds like takeoff and landing. The ailerons are hinged on the wings and move downward to push the air down and make the wing tilt up. This moves the plane to the side and helps it turn during flight. After landing, the spoilers are used like air brakes to reduce any remaining lift and slow down the airplane.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
Techmac's digital attempt at computer generated imagery was assinine. Note that it has no right wing and the left wing and engine dislodge right after it gets below the copyright. It convienently zooms in preventing view of the faux image between the towers. WB11 didn't get its first plane morph until 9:27 and the similarities between the two are profound. Only a cgi could have a fake left wing and no right wing.

Image
Image
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... _g7X7WFSwg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
Mark, cryptically laughs at the end of his description, further proving that he was describing the slow moving drone, and falling short of confirming that it really wasn't a plane. It's no different than Jean Hill saying she saw the secret service shooting back, but falling short of fingering the driver. Of course it didn't belong in the area because it was a drone and not the boeing 767 it was supposed to be.

Eyewitness on 9/11 Mark Burnback was able to get a good view of the plane that hit the World Trade Center, because he said that the plane was flying very low. He explained to FOX News that the plane had no windows, a blue logo, and did not look like a commercial plane.

Fox NewsCaster: "Mark Burnback, a Fox employee, is on the phone with us. Mark witnessed this... Mark were you close enough to see any markings on the airplane?"

Mark Burnback: "Hi gentlemen. Yeah there was definitely a blue, circular logo on the front of the plane towards the front. It definitely did not look like a commercial plane. I did not see any windows on the side. It was definitely very low...

"Mark, if what you say is true, those could be cargo planes or something like that. You said you did not see any windows on the side?"

Mark Burnback: "I did not see any windows on the side. I saw the plane was flying low. I was probably a block away from the sub-way in Brooklyn and that plane came down very low, and again it was not a normal flight that I have ever seen at an airport. It was a plane with a blue logo on the front and it just looked like it did not belong in this area."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYUs9u1YwV0


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 6:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
I took the work from September Clues and transformed it into something more conclusive. Dick Oliver called the orb a remote controlled drone. He was on the ground and saw it floating just like it did in 4 live broadcasts. Dick was totally oblivious that his honest account completely destroyed the myth of a real plane impacting T2.

Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB-rwWeL7Sg&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=126&feature=plpp_video


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 6:21 pm
Posts: 33
I was able capture the bogey as it peeked out and then a quick edit occurs to well after the explosion. These guys did not see a plane and were confused as to how the south tower exploded. There's little doubt they made mention of the object and that audio would've been edited out too. There are countless videos with the impact edited out because they weren't going to insert fake plane images into all of them. You can see him pan to the right when that little bogey caught his eye.

Image
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHaVijMv ... plpp_video


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

cron
Powered by phpBB