If you know how they did it, then explain it. The orb moves west to east, which supports the witnesses who said it circled. The cgi moved more northeast to make a more plausible path. It would be called some kind of overlay.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
9/11 No Planers who claim no planes struck the WTC, and think all the video is fake
- Thread starter Tinfoil Hater
- Start date
-
- Tags
- no planers
If you know how they did it, then explain it. The orb moves west to east, which supports the witnesses who said it circled. The cgi moved more northeast to make a more plausible path. It would be called some kind of overlay.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Why would I need to do that? You're the one saying you posted the proof of fakery. Show the originals or admit you're being deceptive.
Flight 175 impact was on video, and RADAR.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Rec_Radar_Data_Study_all_aircraft.pdf
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Radar_Data_Impact_Speed_Study--AA11,_UA175.pdf
You can't do video, and RADAR. You failed before you started.
RADAR, too technical for your nonsensical video interpretation skills?
Last edited:
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 11,278
The fake image they showed at 9:27 wasn't a plane, it was a silly cgi with no wings and dots for engines. The fake image could have never crashed into the southeast corner of T2 because it was north of it. T2 is south and east of T1. It's turn is consistent with it flying north and west of the towers.
[qimg]http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/wb-927-morph_h_GIFSoupcom.gif[/qimg]
Oh, my... look at the time stamp. No really 7 look at the time stamp. You might learn a bit about resolution.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
Putting your fingers in your ears and saying "I can't hear you" is not a debate tactic.
Prove your theory.
What ere the drones you assert hit the towers, and prove how CGI can be used in the open air in real time.
Planes hit the towers. Evidence recovered at the scene proves it. The folm footage proves it. Your (FSM only knows how far) compressed film doesn't prove anything.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
Could you english that up for me?
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
Why do you believe her to be irrefutable?
What happened to flight 11 and flight 175, the planes and the people, that day?
Why do you run like a rabbit from these and other questions?
No no no. It doesn't work that way. You are making the claims, so prove your said claims.
You have established that CGI effects were used during a live broadcast and I am asking how that's possible.
Certainly you have an idea of how video production works if you're claiming CGI fakery?
The technology back in 2001 only allowed for 3D CGI animation to be superimposed and edited for only seconds at a time. A good example of this would be to watch some of the extras included with the Star Wars I, II, and III series DVDs when they show how the animation is synced up to the film edits. You're only viewing maybe 5 seconds at a time and it's repeated over and over again.
That said, how were they able to pull this off on live TV?
And how did they know what was "supposed to be there"?
Yet you've only mentioned one witness. How many is "plenty"?
Tell me, what about all the photographs, many of which weren't displayed for years?
I'm not being deceptive at all. She first described it as what might be a police helicopter, confirming what I posted is what she saw when it aired. She starts calling it a plane which is bat crap looney tunes. A silly drone came from the west. That's what really happened and there are three other broadasts showing almost exactly the same thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obt-1d9POXM&list=PL1C1F97A9B8B8D8AE&index=121&feature=plpp_video
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2006
- Messages
- 11,278
Sure! Hands B a 6pack of Thomas Hardy's ale.
Drink this... 7s post will start to make sense.
What witnesses?
You basically said "it's some sort of CG!" but with more words, none of which actually answer the actual questions asked.
Because, Spell and her friend were watching it before, during, and after it happened. Plus, the drone footage showing something that had to literally circle the south tower in order to impact the southeast corner. They were real-time witnesses.
There are many witnesses who reported seeing something circle around but none are needed because video footage shows the drone.
Yeah, it's some sort of overlay! Yeah yeah, that's it!
Well, something is in this thread.
Her statement is not consistent (as eyewitness testimony often is), and she specifically contradicts your drone assertion.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
What "might" have been proves what exactly?
plague311
Great minds think...
So what about the hundreds of other eyewitness testimonies? You don't think those count because they don't work to your advantage? You quote mine, and cherry pick. You're a joke, just like the troll movement.
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
Why is she irrefutable and the hundreds of others who saw actual reality of planes hitting the towers, as confirmed by real time live television footage, you somehow think are refutable. Are you sure you mom has enough ventilation in her basement?
What drone footage would that be? You've posted footage of airplanes hitting the towers. Did you misplace some other footage?
plague311
Great minds think...
I thought you said the footage was faked and we couldn't believe it? Which is it little fella?