• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Pentagon video analysis

Somerandomguy

New Blood
S
Joined
Dec 18, 2006
Messages
18
Hi all! New to the forums. Recently I've been studying the claims of CT's and subsequent debunkings of their claims regarding 9/11... I'm forever a skeptic, though I remain unconviced either way about what actually happened.

I recently stumbled upon an analysis of the Pentagon security camera video, and it would be nice if someone attempted to debunk the analysis. I've searched the forums and found no reference to it.

The analysis is made by italian cinematographer Pier Paul Murru and he comes to the conclusion that the crucial frames have been tampered with. It is written in Italian but has been translated to English (though quite poorly).

He appears to be somewhat of a CT, though he declares his objectivity in the "Intent section". The analysis seems to me very credible and thorough, but it would be nice to get a second opinion.

Here it is. Add "www" in front of the address, as I can't yet post links...

Italian:
.immagine.it/pierpaolomurru/reportdod/site/

Translated english version:
.immagine.it/pierpaolomurru/reportdod/site/eng_version/
 
Somerandomguy said:
.. I'm forever a skeptic, though I remain unconviced either way about what actually happened.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum.

Interesting comment you make. Why are you unconvinced about the official account of events?

Oh and the sites you linked to have been commented on previously here. The search function may help you, but I seem to recall that the general opinion was that it was an exercise in over analysis of poor data and that the analyst should get a hobby.
 
Welcome to the forums, Somerandomguy. Do you believe that flight 77 hit the Pentagon?
 
Doctor Wood to the white courtesy phone, please. Doctor Wood to the white courtesy phone, please.


​
 
Interesting comment you make. Why are you unconvinced about the official account of events?
Click to expand...
Well, because of my sceptical nature, I suppose. The historical track-record of the US government when it comes to telling the truth, especially regarding events leading up to war, should make any self-respecting sceptic at least somewhat sceptical regarding the "official account of events" as well. However, that doesn't stop me from finding 95% of the claims I've heard from the CT crowd extremely unlikely.

Like I said, I HAVE used the search function and I cannot find any references to the analysis. I suppose it can be argued that it is indeed over analysis of poor data, but the fact that the two videos shows perfect consistency except in the crucial frames seems to me odd, and I don't think it should be brushed aside too easily.
 
Cool. Since flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, I don't see any reason for the USG to fake a video, do you?
 
Cool. Since flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, I don't see any reason for the USG to fake a video, do you?
Click to expand...
You didn't ask whether or not it hit the Pentagon, you asked whether I believed it. Me believing it doesn't make it true and me not seeing any reason for it being doctored doesn't mean there is no reason. I try looking at evidence without any preconceived notions.

Thanks Alt+F4! I'll have a look.
 
okay, with all the evidence that a plane did hit the Pentagon at the scene, do you believe it was Flight 77 or some other plane/missile/globalhawk/etc?
 
It's a fact that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. I was merely stating that. You're right that the USG could have doctored the video for reasons we can't guess. Then again, if they had something to hide they could simply have not released the videos. I'll leave the nitpicking over video frames for the experts. I have no reason to believe that the videos don't show flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.
 
Haha, this looks familiar:
approccio.gif


He didn't even give JDX credit for this! Thief!
 
You might want to consider what happens when an aircraft traveling several hundred miles per hour appears in the background of a low-quality security camera designed to capture the license plates of vehicles directly in front of it.
 
It's hard to tell if this guy knows what he's talking about and it comes off as gibberish because of the translation, or whether this is just pure gibberish. I'm going to give him the benfit of the doubt.

After having said that, and reading all of it, I barely even understand his point of view. More then half of the "pages" seem to support the official theory.

His claim (the only one I can identify, anyway) boils down to the fact that the two videos appear to be taking simultaenous frames, and therefore every frame should have identical content. He goes through alot of frames and alot of effort to show they have identical content. All of course, except this one:

compa20.jpg


So we have 90/91 identical frames, and we have this odd one. Most will instantly recognize this as the most important frame, and recognize the area as the most important area of the video.

Of course, his assumption that both cameras have identical content also carries with it another assumption that both cameras can capture the content identically. Unsuprisingly, the only difference between the two cameras happens to occur in only frame with an object moving over 20 mph (about 25 times faster, in fact).

His case of "proving" that all the photos are identical is comparing content moving slowly, like smoke. Yes, the smoke is all identical in every frame, but the smoke is evolving slowly. The plane, however, is not "evolving" slowly and the tiny time slip error in frame capture synchronity are likely the cause of the "extra" smoke in one angle, and not in the other.

I think it's safe to chalk this one up to CTists not understsanding error.
 
Last edited:
Brilliant Anti-sophist! That's the kind of stuff I requested. Yes, that appears to be the gist of his argument and I thought it a pretty convincing one seeing as the content of all but one frame appeared identical. What I hadn't considered, of course, was the speed of the aircraft in relation to the smoke and other moving things. Any expert on camera things around here to comment on the error this would display?
 
Somerandomguy said:
Brilliant Anti-sophist! That's the kind of stuff I requested. Yes, that appears to be the gist of his argument and I thought it a pretty convincing one seeing as the content of all but one frame appeared identical. What I hadn't considered, of course, was the speed of the aircraft in relation to the smoke and other moving things. Any expert on camera things around here to comment on the error this would display?
Click to expand...

Not without a datasheet and the schematics of the devices in question.

It's incorrect, always, to say that two things happen at the same time. Two cameras do not take pictures at the same time, ever. Any "sychronous" system will have some time-slip error built in. If the differences between the two cameras was 1 nanosecond, only objects moving at X speed would show a difference. If the error was 1 micro second, it'd be Y, with Y less than X.

Because the 20mph objects all appear identical, it puts an upper limit on the time error between the cameras. It says nothing, however, on how a 500 mph object should appear.
 
Right, so I suppose if we knew the speed with which it was flying and the approximate distance between the location of the plane in the frame in question, one could calculate how out of sync the time is in each frame? Do we know the speed of the plane?
 
Somerandomguy said:
Right, so I suppose if we knew the speed with which it was flying and the approximate distance between the location of the plane in the frame in question, one could calculate how out of sync the time is in each frame? Do we know the speed of the plane?
Click to expand...

yes
 
Somerandomguy said:
Right, so I suppose if we knew the speed with which it was flying and the approximate distance between the location of the plane in the frame in question, one could calculate how out of sync the time is in each frame? Do we know the speed of the plane?
Click to expand...

463KIAS 526 mph 771 fps 235 mps to (488 KIAS 554 mph 813 fps 247 mps missing data?)

From the FDR - 463 KIAS (526 mph) a second to 5 seconds before impact. If you are good at this use the ballpark of 463 - 488 KIAS. If you are real good you need the corrections or best guess from Boeing if these are the real speeds since the plane is well into overspeed condition at 100 feet MSL.

BTW the angle of the impact looks good from FDR.

You plane is going 771 to 800 feet per second when it hits the Pentagon.

Your camera is a half second or worse! Do you know?

The camera lens is real bad fisheye. Other sites have distances.
 
Last edited:
approx. 530 mph (777 fps)

ah, beachnut is on the ball. And he made a good point: we don't know how accurate that airspeed measurement is.

I believe the cameras are 1 frame per second.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom