That's what I thought about mine...

__________________
I'm not evil.
An evil person would do the things I think up.

That little 2 framer shot shows something coming into the frame. Is this the "too pointed nose" David C speaks of? He is obviously seeing something I cannot. There was the "outlines " photo some time back where he showed a pointy "aircraft" (mainly due to the "whatever" being partly obsured by the top ig the gate box) and a "missile smoke trail".
All I see is something showing up then the explosion. Heck, maybe it was a UFO (tho I've seen clearer UFO shots than this "evidence").
Oh, and the damage shot, with the blue annotated "point of inpact". Considering the angle of inpact, and the slightly skewed position of the blue X, I still see a bunch of missing wall to the left (near side) of the "impact point"...right where the heaviest part of the wing/fuelload/engine would go in.

...for whatever it's worth...
Dave

Actually, you're right. Far from being so clear that anybody can tell what it is, that video is far less clear than some UFO or ghost videos I've seen.

Nice post, jt-3d.

Now, I'm color blind, so I may get the color description wrong.

David C, do you not see the bluish colored object that is immediately in front of the white blob?
Heck, above the front part of the white blob, I can see this structure sticking up. Appearently, your white fighter jet has a rather tall fin on it's nose!

Given that the anaylsis video showed what made the engine of the 757 start to smoke, the video here is consistent with the offical story (as you call it).

The case may be closed, but it is not in your favor.

Now, if you know any viewers that disagree with what we're saying, then they are by all means invited to share their ideas and present their evidence here.

I repeat a question for you:
Why do you not believe that terrorists would be responsible for 9/11?

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

Absolutely.

David C, I can not see how you can possible say that those photos are not blurry. If they were the ONLY evidence for a 757, I would agree, that we have not shown that a 757 hit the Pentagon. Frankly, from those photos, I couldn't tell you if it was a 757, a fighter plane, a flying saucer or a very big goose.

But the other evidence: wreckage, damage to the building and other structures (light poles), eyewitness accounts, human bodies with DNA evidence, ATC tracking of the plane, etc., is so overwhelming, that it is not even a question in my mind. If you want to dismiss it with your fantasy that it was all "planted", fine. I dismiss you - you are an alien sent to spread mistrust among humans - until you prove otherwise.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

this post by jt-3d shows it very well
911 pentagon
DavidC, how can you actually say that is clear? The edges are not distinct. Rather they seem to fade into the background. You can see though a difference from frame to frame in front of the white object corresponding to a where a very fast moving plane should be if the white is indeed smoke.
You can not definititively say the white is a plane or smoke or anything due to the scan rate of the camera which has already been explained to you multiple times. Smoke just happens to be the most likely conclusion give that the engine of the plane was likely damaged by the light it hit and the smoke would be moving slower than the plane and thus more likely to be visible on the video.
Your stubborn insistence that you can see something conclusive in the picture is laughable. Your inability to answer direct questions to you is trollish and your attitude sucks. Just because you think that "they could have planted it" is a viable alternative to the multitude of evidence presented does not in any way make it viable. Your insistence on relying on that tired phrase is the funniest thing here. Trust me. The vast majority if not everybody, including the lurkers or viewers as you call them, are laughing at you. I and others have only continued to watch you becaus eyou are mildly entertaining but frankly, you have become downright childish.

__________________
"Eternal vigilance is the price of supremacy"
------------Mark Twain

"Women are like Voltron. The more you can hook up, the better it gets."

Are you referring to the disinfo agents described in this link?
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums...pic.php?t=1222
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry that I don't have much time today. I can't deal with all of your questions until later.

Not only can it happen in any public forum, I can't think of one where it doesn't.

Estimating the apparent height of the Pentagon at a point "perpendicular to the location of the plane" (whatever that means) will not help determine the expected apparent length of the aircraft (or missile, or UFO, or whatever is in the picture). Rather, one needs to estimate the apparent height of the Pentagon at a point that is the same distance from the camera as the object, though this technique will not be perfectly accurate due to the distortion effect of the wide-angle lens. Here are some measurements that I made using Mike Wilson's Pentagon model. As mentioned previously, I have checked all of the important dimensions, and they are correct.

The impact point is approximately 640 ft from the camera; however, when the picture with the object behind the pillar was taken, the object was approximately 790 ft from the camera; an increase of about 25%. This will cause the aircraft to appear about 20% shorter than one would expect from estimating the height of the Pentagon at or near the impact point.

David C, please comment on your understanding of this analysis. Please also either stipulate that it is correct, or provide a real analysis of your own (not just eyeballing and free-hand sketches) proving that it is not.

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

640 ft and 790 ft. Thats 195m and 241m.
So my estimation cannot be too far from reality.
When I assume the "fighter" to be at a distance of 241m it will be even bigger than my estimated 12 meters height....

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

Oh, that stuff.
Seen it before, same drivel.

Ironically, I've seen those techniques preformed by CTers, such as on "Loose Change".

Without knowing it, CTers made a mirror for themselves.

One difference I should mention between CTers and us, is that we have empircal evidence to support our claims.

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

BFG?

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Remember, all we have is mere 'evidence'. HE has absolute proof in the form if a single indistinct blurry photo.

I'm still waiting evidence of the people who planted evidence, or the lying eyewitnesses, or the surviving passengers on all four jets, or someone to step forward and say 'I was in on it, here is what happened...'

Of course, none of that will ever occur. He'll just post yet another link to his photo, and scream 'PROOF!', and dismiss everything else.

He's like a Parrot.

__________________
Don't believe everything you think.

And who doesn't like a big Christmas goose?

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

No David, not at all. A disinfo agent is somebody who spreads false info or keeps people from getting to the real info consciously.

Are you suggesting we know the information we share and the opinions we hold are false? Is that your way of removing the necessity to give any value to our arguments?

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Many of these sound more like your tactics David.
From the link:

5. Side-track opponents with name calling and ridicule.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Sounds like a CT Handbook.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

well, I'm not going to claim it as conclusive by any streach of the imagination, but I had a play with the two images. By grayscaling them, then using a negative of one and a positive of the other I have tried to pull out any changes in the image, then just enhanced it with contract and brightness to make the changes stand out a little more. The "smoke" is still obvious, things like the lens flare are mostly gone, but there is definately a change in the image ahead of the "smoke" What it is, is certainly inconclusive, but that a change occurs is undeniable.

I'll post an animated gif tonight, can't do so from work.

Attached Thumbnails

   

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

No matter what the outcome is, I appreciate the work you put into this PW.

Make sure not to perform any action that will result in stressing JPEG artifacts. Just B&W/negative and subtract seems to be on the safe side to me. Contrast/brightness already is something else. We must never forget we're working with a compressed image.

What I see from the second gif, is that it's at least not laughable to claim there may be something in front of the white.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

What I see from the second gif, is that it's at least not laughable to claim there may be something in front of the white.

That's about as far as I can go really with the software I have. That the processing shows a definate difference in the two images where we feel there is a plane is certainly evidence that something has been captured on the image. Of course what it is is still very open to debate I guess. It's a pity that the image software we see on TV and in the movies really doesn't exist, that stuff would have you able to read the tail number.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

For such software, that gets informations out of an image that are not there, we will have to wait a little longer I guess.
"Increase the upper right sector by 2000%. Sharpen. Get me that reflection on the tail. Locate window #14. Identify passenger behind window." :-)

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

Three of these software packages are readily available and called journalism, aura photography, and Hoagland.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

Yes--good eye (you, too, phunk ).

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

Unfortunately ...

By The Tiime we Get to That Level of Sophistication, IF we Get There at All ...

The Old Joke About Moving a Picture of a Cow, So One Can See The Face of The Farmer Behiind her, Wiill Not Be Quiite So Hard to Accomplish!

__________________
If you Ignore YOUR Rights, they Will go away.

Just being dusty, but it is factually impossible to get data that is not there in the first place, no matter how complex the machine. GIGO is true, NIGO and NINO complete that list. El Nino is completely unrelated.

__________________
To the regular visitor of internet bulletin boards it is clear that it's an excellent idea your parents get to choose your real name.

What about La Nina?

__________________
This is no fantasy. No careless product of wild imagination. - Jor-El

Godspeed, John Glenn. - Scott Carpenter

And these atomic bombs that science burst upon the world that night were strange even to the men that used them.
- H.G Wells, The World Set Free

To the conspiracy crowd, radiation is a big Boogey Man that inspires terror and death in all who encounter it. - JayUtah

Just being dusty, but it is factually impossible to get data that is not there in the first place, no matter how complex the machine.

Nonsense. I see it on CSI all the time.

Probably DavidC uses the same stuff to show the sharp image of a fighter jet he keeps talking about, which proves all those firefighters to be liars... Which reminds me - DavidC, my invitation still stands.

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

One day later...
Still no answer.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

He's off rounding up his next lot of videoes to drop into a post along with all the c&p's

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

David C, here's an experiment. Let's test out that eye of yours

With your amazing yet untrained powers of photo interpretation, tell me how far apart the two civilian airliners are in the picture attached.

Yes, it is from a certain website - I'm not claiming intellectual property, but I don't want to reveal from where before David C has a chance to put his deductive skills to work on a known example

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher