3292 replies to this topic

[lliqerty]

The Pentagon is 77 feet tall
Therefore I estimate that you can see about 308 feet in front of the building
The length of a Boeing 757 is 155 feet
308 + 155 = 463 feet

If the plane flies at 500 mph
it flies 0.139 miles per second
that is 733 feet per second
a camera typically takes at least 24 frames per second
it flies 30.5 feet per frame

463 divided by 30.5 = 15.1
According to my calculation the plane should be visible at least partially in as many as 15 frames

However, except for the very tip, the flying object does not appear in any pictures at all.

Who can explain this?

Edited by lliqerty, 06 July 2012 - 06:24 PM.

[booNyzarC]

The camera wasn't capturing 24 frames per second.  It was less than 10 frames per second (somewhere between 1 and 5 FPS I believe).  It was actually quite lucky that it picked up the plane on any frames.

Edited by booNyzarC, 06 July 2012 - 06:27 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

Whatever was captured by the camera, and it appears something was, it was NOT a 757

[Coffey]

I don't beleive it was a terrorist attack. Even Martin and Charlie Sheen questioned it and then Charlie goes nuts... Something not right there.

I jsut can't beleive a guy in a cave did it, I can't beleive passports cna be found when everything else is ash, i can't beleive jet fuel melted the structure supports when a few months before it was shown how this was impossible and that the twin towers could withstand planes being flown into them.

John lear said himself he couldn't fly a plane into those building on the first try.

I don't beleive the Taliban where even a threat, the CIA trained them and gave them weapans to fight the Russians years ago.

I've read endless information from both sides ont his and this is one conspiracy theory I think is true.

I feel sorry for every man and woman who serves in the forces and is being used. it's nto fair on good people who want to serve and protect their coutnry to be used like this. Veterans are laready throwing their medals back at the the people behind it.

Edited by Coffey, 06 July 2012 - 06:32 PM.

[booNyzarC]

Another baseless and UN-evidenced claim from BR.  Color me surprised.  

[booNyzarC]

Coffey, on 06 July 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

I don't beleive it was a terrorist attack. Even Martin and Charlie Sheen questioned it and then Charlie goes nuts... Something not right there.

I jsut can't beleive a guy in a cave did it, I can't beleive passports cna be found when everything else is ash, i can't beleive jet fuel melted the structure supports when a few months before it was shown how this was impossible and that the twin towers could withstand planes being flown into them.

John lear said himself he couldn't fly a plane into those building on the first try.

I don't beleive the Taliban where even a threat, the CIA trained them and gave them wepoans to fight the Russians years ago.

This is one conspiracy theory I think is true.

Argument from Incredulity.  Argument from Ignorance.

[Babe Ruth]

Are you blind Boo?  Are these posts made in Braille too, for the unsighted?

Are you saying that picture shows a 757 low level across the lawn?

[Coffey]

booNyzarC, on 06 July 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

Another baseless and UN-evidenced claim from BR.  Color me surprised.  

Honestly Boon, do you see any part of a 757? What i see has a thin tip... but I can't make anything out in that video, I've seen survalience footage form building in the UK that are pretty much HD. How the hel does the pentagon not have better cameras etc?! Well the fact is they do, that's common sense. So why won't they release proper footage?

booNyzarC, on 06 July 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

Argument from Incredulity.  Argument from Ignorance.

I'm trying to speka to you as a friend not in a debate.

I want your proper opinion and what you think and why?

Cause I've checked everything I can and you psot those links, I've checked as much from the Goverment etc as I cna and the problem is they withold loads of the information and evidence. Like video footage etc.

Edited by Coffey, 06 July 2012 - 06:36 PM.

[Babe Ruth]

Coffey, on 06 July 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

I don't beleive it was a terrorist attack. Even Martin and Charlie Sheen questioned it and then Charlie goes nuts... Something not right there.

I jsut can't beleive a guy in a cave did it, I can't beleive passports cna be found when everything else is ash, i can't beleive jet fuel melted the structure supports when a few months before it was shown how this was impossible and that the twin towers could withstand planes being flown into them.

John lear said himself he couldn't fly a plane into those building on the first try.

I don't beleive the Taliban where even a threat, the CIA trained them and gave them weapans to fight the Russians years ago.

I've read endless information from both sides ont his and this is one conspiracy theory I think is true.

I feel sorry for every man and woman who serves in the forces and is being used. it's nto fair on good people who want to serve and protect their coutnry to be used like this. Veterans are laready throwing their medals back at the the people behind it.

Amongst humans, conspiracies are perhaps more common than sexual relations.

Your suspicions are very well founded, for all the reasons you mention and more.  

[The New Richard Nixon]

This was in 2001, HD was not even invented lol

[The New Richard Nixon]

So what was it then? a car? a UFO? a balloon? A radio? A giant? A paper Plane? God? A flying stick insect?

[booNyzarC]

Coffey, on 06 July 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

Honestly Boon, do you see any part of a 757? What i see has a thin tip... but I can't make anything out in that video, I've seen survalience footage form building in the UK that are pretty much HD. How the hel does the pentagon not have better cameras etc?! Well the fact is they do, that's common sense. So why won't they release proper footage?




I'm trying to speka to you as a friend not in a debate.

I want your proper opinion and what you think and why?

Cause I've checked everything I can and you psot those links, I've checked as much from the Goverment etc as I cna and the problem is they withold loads of the information and evidence. Like video footage etc.

Yes, I see a plane in the footage.

booNyzarC, on 15 December 2011 - 05:45 AM, said:

Not to mention the videos...  one video in particular clearly shows an aircraft.  (I'm confident that you're aware of this Q24, but others may not be.)

Google search this text to find the video from 911datasets.org:
11094135.AVI

The link is currently unavailable, but I downloaded this a while back and here is a direct link:
http://911datasets.o...YOMJWMXLPMBPS2P

Hopefully it becomes available soon.  The file isn't very big, though the whole bit torrent was pretty large.

I'll upload two screen shots from that video, one from right before the airplane enters the frame and one from when it does enter the frame.  I haven't seen any good YouTube videos of this because the compression ruins what meager quality is there in the first place.  But if you get the original and view it on your own computer it is quite clear.
z-frame1_crop.jpg
z-frame2_crop.jpg

Save these images to the same folder and use any picture viewer to switch between the two and see how obvious the aircraft is.  Then compare it to actual images of AA77 available from airliners.net from before 911.  In particular, I found these two to be good comparisons:
compare 1
compare 2

I'm honestly surprised that there is anyone left on the planet who still thinks that there is any chance at all that an aircraft didn't hit the Pentagon on 911.

As for the supposed 'other footage', you might want to give this a gander.


(Edit: by the way, 911datasets.org is back up.  It was briefly down last December, but not for long.)

Edited by booNyzarC, 06 July 2012 - 06:42 PM.

[Coffey]

The New Richard Nixon, on 06 July 2012 - 06:36 PM, said:

This was in 2001, HD was not even invented lol

HD tv's yes, but HD NO. HD has been around since the 70's..

Studio Gear in the 80's was all HD.

Plus the military is usually 10+ years ahead of what civilians have.

You enver wondered how they can redo old films in HD? It's cause the original was HD.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 06 July 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

Whatever was captured by the camera, and it appears something was, it was NOT a 757

Actually, I can identify the vertical stabilizer of a B-757.

[Coffey]

Ok Boon, I can see it now. You can see the Tail and the whole body. I thought the white thing was supposed to tbe the plane, but it's the smoke/debris.

Still doesn't prove it wasn't an inside job though.