with some evidence placed thru all internet, I can conclude that the footage shown on TV was indeed have been altered. Dunno with controlled-demolition or missile theory, but its indeed been altered in that particular way to make us "believe" in their "truth".
Never trust any news INSTANTLY, but make sure that you are not blind or ignorant for the real truth.
O M G i saw the planes hit with my own EYES!!!!!!! i am from NY n i was in 8th grade and my classroom had a beautiful view of the towers. A kid in my class said oh shit a plane just hit it n we all ran to the window n then the second plane hit it i SAW IT. WTF
Hey, all you no-brain, no-planers, You may not be aware of this(or maybe you are), but a lot of other goofballs in the the twoofer cult are calling you people "paid disinfo agents." Most notably a YouTube user from Long Beach, New York named "ed11561."
I, on the other hand know that isn't true. I know that neither one of you twoofer factions are working for the feds and you're BOTH fucked-up in the heads!
I've seen all the footage, read all the reports and all the independent studies.
The world trade centre complex was a biomechanical holographonic direct data projection from the moon and an orbiting syzygy of four solid titanium photonic hyper-actualization satellites . There were no buildings. This is fact people!
@Mozartmostly you can hate the movement. So do I. I am against error and for truth. What happened, in truth, was a missile attack to push a terror industry and create a platform for the NWO all the while stripping our liberties away unto future bondage. This is happening subtly. you wont realize it if you worship you masters on TV.
I think I understand why ppl. are giving you a hard-time........Cuz then we'd have to question many things we're told. And discover we're lied to all the time. Not too good for the ego. I feel bad for ppl. that lost their lives that day; and in battles since. And all over what? The whole story doesnt add up. Planes or no planes. Another Nam...more lives doused out for greed. I hope you don't get into trouble for your exercising your rights. God bless.
Apparently you haven't figured this out, but t's not the brige that's moving here, muzickmaker2001. It's the helicopters that are shooting footage of the towers.
Shouldn't your question be how can I see a bridge this clearly that is 7 miles away? And you call me a moron? LOL. Try your luck on another 911 page, k?
Here's an example of a view of the Verrazzano bridge shown before 911...on a clear day from the top of the Towers..Isn't REAL evidence great to compare? And remember, direct evidence is always greater than an agenda.
I think it's funny how it's been proven time and again that seven of the hijackers were confirmed ALIVE after the whole thing went down. One was even attending college in europe when he supposedly "hijacked" the plane. That alone would raise so many red flags, you would think. But half the time people won't even believe you if you showed them a picture of the guy alive afterwards... they say "it must be doctored, or misdated..."
I think it's funny how you idiots are stupid enough to believe that any of the hijackers are alive, despite the fact that the people who have similar or the same names aren't even the same ages as the hijackers. I
Saeed Alghamdi, was identified by the FBI of being a hijacker of Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania. Alghamdi was "shocked and furious" to learn this three days after the attack, noting that his name, place of residence, date of birth, and occupation matched those described by the FBI. "You cannot imagine what it is like to be described as a terrorist - and a dead man - when you are innocent and alive," said Alghamdi, who considered legal action against the FBI
Al-Nami was identified by the FBI as one of the hijackers of Flight 93. Al-Nami said: "I'm still alive, as you can see. I was shocked to see my name mentioned by the American Justice Department. I had never even heard of Pennsylvania where the plane I was supposed to have hijacked."
The Al-Nami who is still alive was ten years older than the Al-Nami who was one of the hijackers. Wow, I posted this before and you nimrods deleted it. Just more evidence that you twoofers DON'T care about the truth after all.
@DTD110865 Man, you just simply need to do more homework before you bother trying to bash everyone. I understand it may be hard to believe, but it's all right there. More educated people have pretty much done the work for you and you STILL do not see what's right under your own nose. I'm sorry you think such a typical thing. You are just part of the herd, believing the most comfortable thing someone else tells you. I know life sucks for most, but please, wake the fuck up. Your being fed to lions
No, I don't need to do any homework, and you twoofers are NOT "educated." YOU are in fact the ones who believe the most comforable things people tell you, and claming I'm "part of the herd" doesn't make you people right.
@DTD110865 Wow man, sorry to see your still blind. What is it about the "pro-government" people are always so rude and hostile toward those that can see the wolf for what it is? Time to not be so nice I guess. The Pancake theory is bullshit, and your an idiot if you believe it can happen "naturally" to a steel and concrete buidling. Proof of use of Thermate is everywhere. SEVEN of the hijackers are alive, and not just another guy with the "same" name. DO YOUR MOTHERFUCKING HOMEWORK DOUCHEBAG!!!!
"Peoplle who can see the wolf for what it is?" That description doesn't fit you people. The so-called "proof of thermate/ite" is nothing more a farce. It came from welders who were cleaning up the wreckage of the towers! NONE of the hijackers are alive. If YOU had done your homework, you'd find that the hijackers you THINK are still alive DO have the same names!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This conclusion that the bridge 'took a walk' shows just how dumb you are. This is what happens when a moving helicopter zooms in on an object far away, with an object behind it even further away.
Uhh, because the bridge is 7 miles away. This is not that complicated..
watch?v=kL1B6p_99dM
Note how in the clip you posted, the perspective of the Towers (and ALL of the buildings in the area) changes with the "movement" of the camera. But, in the above clip, the perspective of the Towers/nearby buildings never changes? Builidng walking in frame 2:00?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The perspective on the towers and buildings in that area does change, only slightly. Totally possible if it's being filmed from 2 or more miles away. None of the footage i've seen has surprised me one bit.
You do see the lines drawn in showing how there's absolutely no movement from the Towers (WTC7/other buildings) as the bridge moves, right? And, you haven't commented on the fact that the bridge is 7 miles away from the Towers?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You mean the green dottet line? Yeah, I see them. The thing is, if you move the camera 10 meters, the perspective on the WTC and everything close to the WTC doesn't change that much, but something in the background (7 miles away) will shift more dramatically. I really don't see the problem here.
Yes, it's 7 miles away, but on a clear day, and a good zoom, you are going to see whatever is there. I don't see the big issue with that.
This footage would not need to be faked even if it was an iside job. If it was an inside job then this "fake" footage risks further exposure for uneccessary reasons considering the buildings were, in fact, on fire anyway. Camera zooming in and out combined with helicopter movement explains this. WHY WOULD THEY FAKE FOOTAGE WHEN THE BUIDLINGS WERE REALLY ON FIRE ANYWAY, WOULDTHEY WANT YOU TO FIND OUT?
I'm not a mind reader and can't tell what they were thinking. The bridge should not be moving and it should not be visible. It is approx. 6 miles away from the Towers.
I guess I'm confused. How does the perspective from a chopper cause an object that's 6-7 miles away (Verrazzano Bridge) appear closer than it is and also cause it to move?
It seems we are on two different pages. I only examine the available evidence for inconsistencies. A logical explanation is not needed for that. Also, that would only be my theory or opinion.
No, this is only your theory, inconsistent and lacking of credible proof. This is what i've encountered by observing.
You, yourself have proven this, pointing me to a video with incomparable parameters, what should have been obvious to you if you'd acutally have any clue about this subject.
A logical explanation not needed? Of course not. Having no logic at all in your theory, why bothering with any further?
Q: Do you happen to know anything about geometric functions?
You are getting on tangents here. Question for you. Why do you believe that there were planes? Because you saw them on TV? Because that's what the government told you? Or based on evidence, facts, and logic? Or possibly, all of the above? But again, my conclusion that there were no planes is based on logic, science and common sense. I will save an interpretation of what happened for the court room in which I will not be involved.
I guess you failed to see the relevant connection in the clip. The clip that I posted showed that the Verrazzano bridge as it shown in this in this clip (distance from the Towers) is impossible. Therefore, all clips showing the bridge in that same perspective have been altered. For what reason? The bridge is also moving when the camera is static? How is this possible? You haven't commented on either of these issues (the main point of the video), but instead ask for my viewpoints.
"The bridge is also moving when the camera is static? "
Funny.
Why should they make the bridge (and other buildings) move around? Why should there be any need for this? ;D
You wondering why the bridge is moving while the camera seems to be static, is further evidence of your cluelessness.
It is in fact of major significance where the observer is located, the location of the focus and what the zoom level is. This is why i recommend to reconstruct, so you can see for yourself.
"Why should they make the bridge (and other buildings) move around"
That is a very good question. My cluelessnes? You recommend I reconstruct? Let me get on that as soon as I can. Yes, I'm sure we have two more 1350 ft Towers near the Verrazzano Bridge to recreate the same scenario. Ok, I'm heading to my chopper right now and I'll meet you there. That's pretty funny...Bottom line: The bridge first should not be visible and should not be moving if the camera is not moving also.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I told you what is necessary to recreate the same effect.
You certainly need no WTC Towers, not even the bridge. All you you need is the same equipment, comparable conditions and a good portion of mathematics.
The bottom line is, you don't have the faintest clue. If you'd had, you wouldn't have bothered with the 1350 ft. Towers near the Verrazzano. The NYC with all the highrise buildings should be more then sufficient.
I have an idea. Since I don't have the faintest clue, why don't you perform this reconstruction study and get back to me. I would like a photo of you sitting in a chopper waiting for a bridge to move. That would be entertaining. Also, I'm sure there are hundreds of videos of news choppers flying above city skylines. Since this might be a common occurence, there must be clips where structures move or get up and walk (frame 2:00). No comment on that either? RKOwens must have the answers..
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I don't need to, i know why it is moving. It is you who has to move up his a** and prove his theory. Now, if you think this theory should be debated in a court room some day, there is the need of striking evidence. Don't you agree?
"No comment on that either?"
I'm commenting on this subject all the time. You not realizing this = no clue... no clue at all.
I understand you dont feel like reconstructing the whole thing, but why dont you try to get in touch with 2 or 3 cameramen (preferably pros), and ask them their opinion. Make a few phonecalls, if thats what it takes.
Also, watch the tour the france in the summer. You will see the same effect in some helicopter shots.
Get Google Earth, Enable 3d... Setup your position at that spot. everything matches, the angle of the bridge and the wide movement far away with small movement of the chopper. And camera zooming explains why it's so big. The camera obvioulsy has the ability to zoom without loosing focus like all recent cameras do.
The moving bridge is approx. 6-7 miles away from the Towers. The bridge shouldn't be visible. Next, why is it moving around static objects? This proves that all pictures showing the moving bridge were manipulated. Next, insert a fake image of a plane into the mix....
No, the planes had already hit, even if the plane images were fake why would they continue to air fake footag ewhen the buidlings were already on fire.
Here we are 8 years and counting and despite OH SOOOO MUCH evidence of an inside job NO ONE has been dragged into a court room Larry Silverstein has "admitted" to destroying his own building with the "pull it" bullshit but there are no "Lawyers for 9/11 Toof" so he is still free
Why dont you te the airlines to court for being complicit in covering up the murder of 3k people? So far the right wing wackos have iled MULTIPLE lawsuits regarding his birth certificate WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?
@SWEP1TPMa1999 anyone with an IQ higher than cling wrap knows larry didn't pull wtc7, in fact all intelligent people know that there was no demo in any building on 911 and truthers are the modern version of the 3 stooges or inbred jerry lewis triplets.
Oh my god how can you believe that ? how could you people believe that those planes were hologram! OF COURSE THEY CLASHED INTO THE WTC - BUT COULDN'T DESTROY IT - IT WAS AND INSIDE JOB
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Oh wow. You think we need super human vision to see 7 miles??? The Moon is 250,000 miles away, the Sun - 93,000,000 miles away and Alpha Centauri is 25,000,000,000,000 miles away. 7 miles is nothing. That is a weak, no, totally broken argument. The moving bridge however is strange as I have already said on one of your earlier vids.
Respective in relation to. Yes, the moon is visible to the naked eye, but it shouldn't appear to be as big as your car when looking right at your car. Frame 0:20 shows how the bridge should actually appear in relation to the Towers. Here's a better illustration of this:
I've always believed that the planes hitting the towers were real, however guys, why not try to keep an open mind? I've done minor camera work before and have to admit that the zooming shown here with the bridge appearing to change positional perspective from west to east in that stretch of distance isn't normal. The positional change should have only been a very short distance. Anyway, this interesting, whether one thinks its conspiracy or not.
*snore* same ol' response. sheep, goats, whatever it is you call us normal citizens. Sad actually. Whenever you can't come up with anything logical to say, you start yelling "sheep". You people are the ones following a mindless trail of fantasy. Sheep? Indeed!
Lack of a brain because Im not a mindless follower of worthless drivel that has been repeated over and over and over? I mean really people. If you're going to live in a fantasy world, at LEAST make up a new fantasy. This shit is old and tired. And, been debunked hundreds of times over. So, simple deduction would call YOU people mindless.
Ok, here goes. Godilocks and the other 18 hijackers make it past airport security, overthrow four planes all on the same day, fly planes with impossible maneuvers and speeds. Godilocks and Papa Bear crash into two Towers made of butter. Normal folks don't see them because they were flying Wonder Woman's invisible planes. But, through our magical mystical TV, we can see a bridge that is 6 miles away clearly and buildings with legs 2:00 that walk. Mindless follower? Yes, join your flock, sheep.
@seeknthetruth The only flaw is 'the buildings with legs that walk'. Because the other buildings change place too with the camera if you look closely. I think these are not identical shots.
Your big issues is the thousands that saw a plane, confirmed by video and independent photography. Not one photo of a missle - how could thousands watch the event and NO ONE take a photo? Not one video of a missle .. why is that, was all of NY part of the conspiracy?
That means that what actualy hit the building was moving wast, wasn't as big as a jet plane, and only made loud noise just before it hit which is a characteristic of a missile, you hear it coming just before it hits, cause of it's speed.
THe reason they had to lie about a jet flying over 500 mph was that what people saw moved very fast.
That is impossible for a jet plane on that altitude.
What tangible proof of bombs? There is absolutely no physical evidence and not one witness to the event. People hearing explosions are not proof of bombs, things explose that are not explosives.
But since you are a no planar, you obviously believe in the impossible.
Dude, get a life, 'cause, in case you haven't noticed, most people with things called "lives" know that planes hit. All news footage is live, you just can't seem to get that through your thick head. Go back you your mental institution.
If the helicopter (camera) is moving, the Tower's perspective MUST change (move also). Also, the Verrazzano bridge is approx 7 miles away from the Towers. Unless we all have super human vision, we shouldn't see it at all. Duh?
retarded. at the end you demonstrate your own capability to doctor the video so who's to say that its not a edit done by you??? there's no end to paranoia and conspiracy
Simple. Before making accusations, first prove that I doctored the video. Otherwise, your accusations are empty. When debunkers have nothing else to go with, they start making up lies. Classic debuking..
The bridge is 7 miles away from the Towers. You shouldn't even be able to see it. The helicopter is moving, but the Tower's perspective never changes. Duh!! Did you even watch the video. You're the idiot.
Why do you think the rest of the world hates us, its cause when food riots and civil war breaks out, the rest of the world will rejoice. The Romans didn't get conquered, they destroyed themselves. But i guess we have mp3 players and plasma TV's that tell us it won't happen, so it won't. I guess you have to be a mexican now to sneak past N.O.R.A.D.
I just can't wait till i die. I just hope they let me save my game on x-box first, cause jesus will want to see my high scores.
fuck off you self centered cunt. you can say your not hiding if it makes you feel better but the truth is your just trying to cover up for the fact your a fucking pussy. piss off.
I'm scared of people like you. You know thick brow, communicates with hand signals and grunts, has trouble walking when not on all fours. You should join the armed forces and go to Iraq if you are so behind your country's decisions. Go kill some brown people who talk different then you. Or you could go police your borders cause the Mexicans are taking all of your jobs ,,,right.
Im not "coming to get you" Or calling you. I don't care what you believe that much. I just think it is in YOUR best interest to look at some of the FACTS surrounding 9/11, Iraq, False Flag Operations, CIA and Osama. Just doesn't add up to what we have been told. It is not the first time and it will not be the last.
Yea we are all idiots. I think you sir are in denial about what is really happening. Why is USA in Iraq? To liberate them? Terrorists? Why don't they fix your own country? Oh ya they are 700 billion to fix wallstreet while homeowners with no jobs are left to rot. No Iraqi was involved with 9/11. Why are they not in Saudi Arabia where all the terrorist were from? Go look for some of your own answers and stop believing everything FOX news tells you.
So it appears that you (muzicmaker) have most of the people disagreeing with you, that you are not correct.
You need to become more responsible before posting theories, and learn about camera angles, perspective, parallax, etc.
I understand how these shots can look confusing to people with no camera or perspective experience.....but it is your job as someone seeking the truth, to investigate before posting "evidence" that you do not fully understand.
Explain it to me. Obviously, the camera is not rotating around the Towers because the Tower's perspective never changes. And a telephoto lens that only magnifies the bridge in the background which is 7 miles away. Educate me.....
Google search "telephoto lense makes distant objects appear larger" The same chopper also captured both tower collapses, it was also 5 miles away above 79th street, though I suppose some gullible people actually believe the entire attack was animated, riiiiight.... These claims are designed to willfully discredit anyone asking real questions about 9/11, on purpose, the video's author Simon Shack is well aware of it, he's laughing at you.
Some individuals, primarily internet, have made the claim that no hijacked airliners hit the World Trade Center towers 'No Plane Theories'). Supporters of this claim have been described as "no-planers," by members of the 9/11 truth movement who generally maintain that the claim is a case of poisoning the well — an effort which is intended to broadly discredit the more credible theories.
The movement of the bridge is because the camera is moving (on a helicopter). I don't know what I think about you're "no plane" theory, but this moving bridge thing is not at all relevant. Also the video links you put here show it from the shoreline, not the sky line... big difference... impossible to compare the main video with the two examples.
lol , the camera is moving, but there is no way the bridge angle difference could be that DRASTIC, and the WTC angle remains unchanged (look at the both sides of it)
I still fail to understand this "camera is moving" theory when explaining the moving bridge. See fullfist's explanation. And this video is very relevant to the no plane theory as it shows how the NYC skyline was controlled and manipulated.
This is due to foreshortening from viewing the tower through a telephoto lens with extreme magnification. They were miles north of the towers, so the bridge was enlarged also.
You see this same effect with people in front of sunsets (like at the end of Indiana Jones and the Holy Grail).
911 was in inside job, but focusing your efforts on fanatical details just gives people reason to ignore the truth.
You show them all this SUPER STRETCHED evidence and they will never believe that the real evidence is also not STRETCHED TRUTH.
Tell Simple truth is enough, when you fallow the money, the training, and the organization. Let alone the project for a new American century and the teachings of Leon Strauss father of neo-cons like Paul Wolfawitz, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney.
A couple of questions. First, can you post a link to another video example of this? Also, can you explain why other objects near the bridge are not also magnified to the same degree? Or other objects before the brdge? Why is just the bridge magnified?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I don't exist either. I am a figment of your imagination! 9/11 never happened! The moon landings never happened! America was never discovered! Dogs love cats! Humans never evolved! McDonalds fake their big macs (they are actually Burger King Whoppers and the whole planet except you is paid to pretend otherwise). Woooooooaaaggghhhrrrrrr! The sky is green! haha! he he! they're coming to take me away!!... Nurse!! Nuuuuurse!!
First problem here. The bridge is 7 miles away from the Tower. You shouldn't even see it. Parllax doesn't explain that. Next, the Tower's perspective never changes, so parallax can't be applied here. There is no rotating view or angle. Pure CGI.
I work in the World Financial Center, right next to the WTC, and I can see the narrows bridge out my window on any given day...you're obviously a complete idiot
I grew up on the Bklyn side of the V-bridge, in Bay Ridge. I now live across the river from where the WTC stood, Carrol Gardens, about 6 miles away.
For the V Bridge 2 appear as it does here, the bridge would hav 2 connect Red Hook Bklyn 2 Staten Island!
4 perspective, the Bklyn Bridge connects 2 Brooklyn Hts, the next community south is Carroll Gardens, & then Red hook - 6miles away from Red Hook is Bay Ridge where the V-Bridge takes off 2 Staten Island.
with some evidence placed thru all internet, I can conclude that the footage shown on TV was indeed have been altered. Dunno with controlled-demolition or missile theory, but its indeed been altered in that particular way to make us "believe" in their "truth".
Never trust any news INSTANTLY, but make sure that you are not blind or ignorant for the real truth.
VladiSSius 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
O M G i saw the planes hit with my own EYES!!!!!!! i am from NY n i was in 8th grade and my classroom had a beautiful view of the towers. A kid in my class said oh shit a plane just hit it n we all ran to the window n then the second plane hit it i SAW IT. WTF
rico010589 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
megamogx 5 months ago
Sure, the planes were fake but were they real fake planes??
rockyonemambo 6 months ago
this has more parts than a model kit, bloody hell!
lsteer100 9 months ago
Great video, great evidence. Btw, this is off-topic, but what's the song that's used during the 0:40 second mark?
Grunwald55 1 year ago
Hey, all you no-brain, no-planers, You may not be aware of this(or maybe you are), but a lot of other goofballs in the the twoofer cult are calling you people "paid disinfo agents." Most notably a YouTube user from Long Beach, New York named "ed11561."
I, on the other hand know that isn't true. I know that neither one of you twoofer factions are working for the feds and you're BOTH fucked-up in the heads!
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Yes, you know we couldn't be paid disinfo agents because we would have seen you at the meetings, right?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago 5
@muzicmaker2001
Since I don't go to such meetings(assuming they even exist), no. Now you should go tell those who have accused you of being agents. I dare you.
DTD110865 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DTD110865 NO BUILDINGS THEORY....
I've seen all the footage, read all the reports and all the independent studies.
The world trade centre complex was a biomechanical holographonic direct data projection from the moon and an orbiting syzygy of four solid titanium photonic hyper-actualization satellites . There were no buildings. This is fact people!
rockyonemambo 6 months ago
@DTD110865 You must really hate the truth. That or you are willingly ignorant and or blind.
Mozartmostly 5 months ago
@Mozartmostly
No, but YOU hate the truth and are ignorant and blind. What I hate is the so-called "truth movement," because it's not really about the truth.
DTD110865 5 months ago
@Mozartmostly you can hate the movement. So do I. I am against error and for truth. What happened, in truth, was a missile attack to push a terror industry and create a platform for the NWO all the while stripping our liberties away unto future bondage. This is happening subtly. you wont realize it if you worship you masters on TV.
Mozartmostly 5 months ago
@Mozartmostly
Sorry moron, but that ISN'T what happened. No missiles ANYWHERE!!
DTD110865 1 month ago
great series muzicmaker. you might want to update it though as i just found this vid showing thatno plane or missile !! hit the south tower
h?v=SONqKnDFfsk
keep up the good work
terminalphase1 1 year ago
I think I understand why ppl. are giving you a hard-time........Cuz then we'd have to question many things we're told. And discover we're lied to all the time. Not too good for the ego. I feel bad for ppl. that lost their lives that day; and in battles since. And all over what? The whole story doesnt add up. Planes or no planes. Another Nam...more lives doused out for greed. I hope you don't get into trouble for your exercising your rights. God bless.
peace.
translationwiz 1 year ago
pathetic
ThePantychrist 1 year ago
what the fuck was he trying to accomplish tho? just move objects?...to make it more look deceiving?
concussedcarneous 1 year ago
Apparently you haven't figured this out, but t's not the brige that's moving here, muzickmaker2001. It's the helicopters that are shooting footage of the towers.
Unbelievable what you twoofers come up with!
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Uhh, Einstein. The bridge is 6-7 miles away from Towers. It should even be visible. I'm always shocked at how desperate you 911 trolls are...
watch?v=sT6d7LVvIUg
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001
That doesn't mean the bridge MOVED, moron!
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Shouldn't your question be how can I see a bridge this clearly that is 7 miles away? And you call me a moron? LOL. Try your luck on another 911 page, k?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001
No, it was a clear day. ANYBODY could've seen that bridge.
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Here's an example of a view of the Verrazzano bridge shown before 911...on a clear day from the top of the Towers..Isn't REAL evidence great to compare? And remember, direct evidence is always greater than an agenda.
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
jhgjhygjhgjhgjh
terminalphase1 1 year ago
ur a freaking genius!!! man must appreciate ur work...may Almighty God bless u and help u and protect u for shedding truth...!
(still watching other parts) i am really getting into this no plane theory...Thank you..
meerfuture93 1 year ago
I think it's funny how it's been proven time and again that seven of the hijackers were confirmed ALIVE after the whole thing went down. One was even attending college in europe when he supposedly "hijacked" the plane. That alone would raise so many red flags, you would think. But half the time people won't even believe you if you showed them a picture of the guy alive afterwards... they say "it must be doctored, or misdated..."
EnkiSvohden 1 year ago
@EnkiSvohden
I think it's funny how you idiots are stupid enough to believe that any of the hijackers are alive, despite the fact that the people who have similar or the same names aren't even the same ages as the hijackers. I
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Saeed Alghamdi, was identified by the FBI of being a hijacker of Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania. Alghamdi was "shocked and furious" to learn this three days after the attack, noting that his name, place of residence, date of birth, and occupation matched those described by the FBI. "You cannot imagine what it is like to be described as a terrorist - and a dead man - when you are innocent and alive," said Alghamdi, who considered legal action against the FBI
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001
Not the same perosn as the hijacker.
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865
Al-Nami was identified by the FBI as one of the hijackers of Flight 93. Al-Nami said: "I'm still alive, as you can see. I was shocked to see my name mentioned by the American Justice Department. I had never even heard of Pennsylvania where the plane I was supposed to have hijacked."
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001
The Al-Nami who is still alive was ten years older than the Al-Nami who was one of the hijackers. Wow, I posted this before and you nimrods deleted it. Just more evidence that you twoofers DON'T care about the truth after all.
DTD110865 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001
Not the same "Al-Nami."
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865 Man, you just simply need to do more homework before you bother trying to bash everyone. I understand it may be hard to believe, but it's all right there. More educated people have pretty much done the work for you and you STILL do not see what's right under your own nose. I'm sorry you think such a typical thing. You are just part of the herd, believing the most comfortable thing someone else tells you. I know life sucks for most, but please, wake the fuck up. Your being fed to lions
EnkiSvohden 1 year ago
@EnkiSvohden
No, I don't need to do any homework, and you twoofers are NOT "educated." YOU are in fact the ones who believe the most comforable things people tell you, and claming I'm "part of the herd" doesn't make you people right.
DTD110865 1 year ago
@EnkiSvohden
If anybody is part of a herd, it's you idiot twoofers! You're not "educated." You're simply indoctrinated.
DTD110865 1 year ago
@DTD110865 Wow man, sorry to see your still blind. What is it about the "pro-government" people are always so rude and hostile toward those that can see the wolf for what it is? Time to not be so nice I guess. The Pancake theory is bullshit, and your an idiot if you believe it can happen "naturally" to a steel and concrete buidling. Proof of use of Thermate is everywhere. SEVEN of the hijackers are alive, and not just another guy with the "same" name. DO YOUR MOTHERFUCKING HOMEWORK DOUCHEBAG!!!!
EnkiSvohden 1 year ago
@EnkiSvohden
"Peoplle who can see the wolf for what it is?" That description doesn't fit you people. The so-called "proof of thermate/ite" is nothing more a farce. It came from welders who were cleaning up the wreckage of the towers! NONE of the hijackers are alive. If YOU had done your homework, you'd find that the hijackers you THINK are still alive DO have the same names!
DTD110865 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This conclusion that the bridge 'took a walk' shows just how dumb you are. This is what happens when a moving helicopter zooms in on an object far away, with an object behind it even further away.
jnoort 2 years ago
First, if the camera is moving, the Tower's perspective should change with the bridge's perspective.
Next, the bridge should even be visible...
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why should it not be visible?
watch?v=kL1B6p_99dM
Looks perfectly possible to me.
jnoort 2 years ago
Uhh, because the bridge is 7 miles away. This is not that complicated..
watch?v=kL1B6p_99dM
Note how in the clip you posted, the perspective of the Towers (and ALL of the buildings in the area) changes with the "movement" of the camera. But, in the above clip, the perspective of the Towers/nearby buildings never changes? Builidng walking in frame 2:00?
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The perspective on the towers and buildings in that area does change, only slightly. Totally possible if it's being filmed from 2 or more miles away. None of the footage i've seen has surprised me one bit.
jnoort 2 years ago
You do see the lines drawn in showing how there's absolutely no movement from the Towers (WTC7/other buildings) as the bridge moves, right? And, you haven't commented on the fact that the bridge is 7 miles away from the Towers?
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You mean the green dottet line? Yeah, I see them. The thing is, if you move the camera 10 meters, the perspective on the WTC and everything close to the WTC doesn't change that much, but something in the background (7 miles away) will shift more dramatically. I really don't see the problem here.
Yes, it's 7 miles away, but on a clear day, and a good zoom, you are going to see whatever is there. I don't see the big issue with that.
jnoort 2 years ago
" I don't see the big issue with that."
(and)
"I really don't see the problem here"
Ohhhh now, I see who you are. This makes sense now.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
Oh yeah, those are obvious signs that I am under control by brainwashing being done by the media, right?
jnoort 2 years ago
Here's a direct comparison. This is footage on 911 of the bridge VS. footage taken from a helicopter in 1996.
watch?v=sT6d7LVvIUg
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This footage would not need to be faked even if it was an iside job. If it was an inside job then this "fake" footage risks further exposure for uneccessary reasons considering the buildings were, in fact, on fire anyway. Camera zooming in and out combined with helicopter movement explains this. WHY WOULD THEY FAKE FOOTAGE WHEN THE BUIDLINGS WERE REALLY ON FIRE ANYWAY, WOULDTHEY WANT YOU TO FIND OUT?
MrYahoost 2 years ago
I'm not a mind reader and can't tell what they were thinking. The bridge should not be moving and it should not be visible. It is approx. 6 miles away from the Towers.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
@muzicmaker2001
I tell you what. Get a chopper and the same camera equipment and prove your claim. It shouldn't be as hard as it sounds.
palasta 2 years ago
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
@muzicmaker2001
I've said, a chopper and the SAME or equivalent camera system. The same distance, view angle, zoom level aso.
Do you copy ?
palasta 2 years ago
I guess I'm confused. How does the perspective from a chopper cause an object that's 6-7 miles away (Verrazzano Bridge) appear closer than it is and also cause it to move?
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
@muzicmaker2001
When you want to reconstruct an accident, is it appropriate to use different parameters? I guess not...
This all i'm saying... just like you're telling people that there is something wrong.
Difference is, without a logical explanation. Have you even thought about one?
palasta 2 years ago
palasta,
It seems we are on two different pages. I only examine the available evidence for inconsistencies. A logical explanation is not needed for that. Also, that would only be my theory or opinion.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
@muzicmaker2001
No, this is only your theory, inconsistent and lacking of credible proof. This is what i've encountered by observing.
You, yourself have proven this, pointing me to a video with incomparable parameters, what should have been obvious to you if you'd acutally have any clue about this subject.
A logical explanation not needed? Of course not. Having no logic at all in your theory, why bothering with any further?
Q: Do you happen to know anything about geometric functions?
palasta 2 years ago
You are getting on tangents here. Question for you. Why do you believe that there were planes? Because you saw them on TV? Because that's what the government told you? Or based on evidence, facts, and logic? Or possibly, all of the above? But again, my conclusion that there were no planes is based on logic, science and common sense. I will save an interpretation of what happened for the court room in which I will not be involved.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
To get things straight:
I don't believe the official version of the event.
Common sense you say. The human common sense is hardly a reliable factor. Quite the opposite. It's pretty untrusty.
"I will save an interpretation of what happened for the court room in which I will not be involved. "
Lol, c'mon, do you truly believe this is ever going to happen in any case?
palasta 2 years ago
And good luck to you with your agenda. I'm sure I will see you again on another 911 CT page.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
I guess you failed to see the relevant connection in the clip. The clip that I posted showed that the Verrazzano bridge as it shown in this in this clip (distance from the Towers) is impossible. Therefore, all clips showing the bridge in that same perspective have been altered. For what reason? The bridge is also moving when the camera is static? How is this possible? You haven't commented on either of these issues (the main point of the video), but instead ask for my viewpoints.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
"The bridge is also moving when the camera is static? "
Funny.
Why should they make the bridge (and other buildings) move around? Why should there be any need for this? ;D
You wondering why the bridge is moving while the camera seems to be static, is further evidence of your cluelessness.
It is in fact of major significance where the observer is located, the location of the focus and what the zoom level is. This is why i recommend to reconstruct, so you can see for yourself.
palasta 2 years ago
"Why should they make the bridge (and other buildings) move around"
That is a very good question. My cluelessnes? You recommend I reconstruct? Let me get on that as soon as I can. Yes, I'm sure we have two more 1350 ft Towers near the Verrazzano Bridge to recreate the same scenario. Ok, I'm heading to my chopper right now and I'll meet you there. That's pretty funny...Bottom line: The bridge first should not be visible and should not be moving if the camera is not moving also.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I told you what is necessary to recreate the same effect.
You certainly need no WTC Towers, not even the bridge. All you you need is the same equipment, comparable conditions and a good portion of mathematics.
The bottom line is, you don't have the faintest clue. If you'd had, you wouldn't have bothered with the 1350 ft. Towers near the Verrazzano. The NYC with all the highrise buildings should be more then sufficient.
palasta 2 years ago
I have an idea. Since I don't have the faintest clue, why don't you perform this reconstruction study and get back to me. I would like a photo of you sitting in a chopper waiting for a bridge to move. That would be entertaining. Also, I'm sure there are hundreds of videos of news choppers flying above city skylines. Since this might be a common occurence, there must be clips where structures move or get up and walk (frame 2:00). No comment on that either? RKOwens must have the answers..
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't need to, i know why it is moving. It is you who has to move up his a** and prove his theory. Now, if you think this theory should be debated in a court room some day, there is the need of striking evidence. Don't you agree?
"No comment on that either?"
I'm commenting on this subject all the time. You not realizing this = no clue... no clue at all.
palasta 2 years ago
I'm good with my theory. Thanx though. You're welcome to refute it with provided data..
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Lol, i don't need to refute it, it's inane, besides that, it has been already disproven. Accept it or not, it doesn't make any difference.
Good luck in the court room. It will dearly need it.... even to get there.
palasta 2 years ago
@muzicmaker2001
I understand you dont feel like reconstructing the whole thing, but why dont you try to get in touch with 2 or 3 cameramen (preferably pros), and ask them their opinion. Make a few phonecalls, if thats what it takes.
Also, watch the tour the france in the summer. You will see the same effect in some helicopter shots.
jnoort 2 years ago
No need. I can understand the simple logic that a bridge 6-7 miles away from the Towers should not appear that large in relation to the Towers...
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
Get Google Earth, Enable 3d... Setup your position at that spot. everything matches, the angle of the bridge and the wide movement far away with small movement of the chopper. And camera zooming explains why it's so big. The camera obvioulsy has the ability to zoom without loosing focus like all recent cameras do.
iamufreak 2 years ago
complete bs. the bridge is 6-7 miles away. why isn't it visible in this shot?
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
seeknthetruth 2 years ago 6
Weird btu I don't get what this is proving because the plane had already hit anyway.
MrYahoost 2 years ago
The moving bridge is approx. 6-7 miles away from the Towers. The bridge shouldn't be visible. Next, why is it moving around static objects? This proves that all pictures showing the moving bridge were manipulated. Next, insert a fake image of a plane into the mix....
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
Comment removed
MrYahoost 2 years ago
No, the planes had already hit, even if the plane images were fake why would they continue to air fake footag ewhen the buidlings were already on fire.
MrYahoost 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is really fukin weird, but no way.
One military grey jet hit WTC, this is sure.
Fuck despunkers
matti1080 2 years ago
of course
N1DE0N 2 years ago
Here we are 8 years and counting and despite OH SOOOO MUCH evidence of an inside job NO ONE has been dragged into a court room Larry Silverstein has "admitted" to destroying his own building with the "pull it" bullshit but there are no "Lawyers for 9/11 Toof" so he is still free
Why dont you te the airlines to court for being complicit in covering up the murder of 3k people? So far the right wing wackos have iled MULTIPLE lawsuits regarding his birth certificate WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?
SWEP1TPMa1999 2 years ago
explain urself cause I didnt get it...
matti1080 2 years ago
Yes, during a conspiracy involving the government, media, etc, taking the perps to court makes alot of sense. Sounds like a winner to me. Idiot!!!
seeknthetruth 2 years ago
@SWEP1TPMa1999 anyone with an IQ higher than cling wrap knows larry didn't pull wtc7, in fact all intelligent people know that there was no demo in any building on 911 and truthers are the modern version of the 3 stooges or inbred jerry lewis triplets.
911TRUTHINATOR 1 year ago
great info and yeah no plane hit WTC
sodasoap 2 years ago 6
Oh my god how can you believe that ? how could you people believe that those planes were hologram! OF COURSE THEY CLASHED INTO THE WTC - BUT COULDN'T DESTROY IT - IT WAS AND INSIDE JOB
N1DE0N 2 years ago
Comment removed
N1DE0N 2 years ago
Brige went robo style! X-D
Mesina2 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oh wow. You think we need super human vision to see 7 miles??? The Moon is 250,000 miles away, the Sun - 93,000,000 miles away and Alpha Centauri is 25,000,000,000,000 miles away. 7 miles is nothing. That is a weak, no, totally broken argument. The moving bridge however is strange as I have already said on one of your earlier vids.
sillybuttons44 2 years ago
Respective in relation to. Yes, the moon is visible to the naked eye, but it shouldn't appear to be as big as your car when looking right at your car. Frame 0:20 shows how the bridge should actually appear in relation to the Towers. Here's a better illustration of this:
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Musicmaker 2001, you are full of shit! :)
silverfuck77jpm 2 years ago
The inconsistencies are deliberate.
Whom ever was on the inside, left these clues behind for people to know the truth.
aHeavenscent 3 years ago 24
It's a big club, and you ain't in it.
leonardo2468 3 years ago
Check my video in response to yours. I believe 3d computer scenarios were used, not image layering.
fresniak 3 years ago
I've always believed that the planes hitting the towers were real, however guys, why not try to keep an open mind? I've done minor camera work before and have to admit that the zooming shown here with the bridge appearing to change positional perspective from west to east in that stretch of distance isn't normal. The positional change should have only been a very short distance. Anyway, this interesting, whether one thinks its conspiracy or not.
ACLTony 3 years ago 11
*snore* same ol' response. sheep, goats, whatever it is you call us normal citizens. Sad actually. Whenever you can't come up with anything logical to say, you start yelling "sheep". You people are the ones following a mindless trail of fantasy. Sheep? Indeed!
DSM10471 3 years ago
Lack of a brain because Im not a mindless follower of worthless drivel that has been repeated over and over and over? I mean really people. If you're going to live in a fantasy world, at LEAST make up a new fantasy. This shit is old and tired. And, been debunked hundreds of times over. So, simple deduction would call YOU people mindless.
DSM10471 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
wow, that was good. now tell us all the one about Goldilocks and the Three Bears.
DSM10471 3 years ago
Ok, here goes. Godilocks and the other 18 hijackers make it past airport security, overthrow four planes all on the same day, fly planes with impossible maneuvers and speeds. Godilocks and Papa Bear crash into two Towers made of butter. Normal folks don't see them because they were flying Wonder Woman's invisible planes. But, through our magical mystical TV, we can see a bridge that is 6 miles away clearly and buildings with legs 2:00 that walk. Mindless follower? Yes, join your flock, sheep.
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 28
@seeknthetruth greatest comment ive ever seen in my life
bamfan151 1 year ago
@seeknthetruth The only flaw is 'the buildings with legs that walk'. Because the other buildings change place too with the camera if you look closely. I think these are not identical shots.
LithuanianGuitar 1 year ago
@seeknthetruth AHMEN!
TPBXDRicky420 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Obviously the maker of this video needs a job and a sexual partner. What fucking lunacy.
DSM10471 3 years ago
It seems you're the one with some issues, starting with the lack of a brain.
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 5
wrong video
youzurk 3 years ago
what's the song called in the beginning?
Brugality 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Where you there on 9/11? Didn't think so, get a life idiot.
Turbofanjetmech 3 years ago
With thousands of witnesses on the ground, how can anyone doubt planes hit the towers? You may as well argue with a wall.
Denierbud11 3 years ago
media can easily create the impression, "everybody saw it"
fullfist 3 years ago
Everyone did see it. Have you spoken with anyone from NY since 911? Or do you just stay in your room and buy into every conspiracy theory around?
Denierbud11 3 years ago
a missile can easily be arranged to seem like a plane, but an everage person could barely catch even a glimpse of it since it is moving very fast.
It would certanly make a noise, and you can hear in some of the videos that it DOESN'T sound like a jet plane.
A plane flying that low would ECHO across the city, yet the people in the footage seem oblivious to the BIG, LOUD "plane" before it hits the building.
fullfist 3 years ago 2
Your big issues is the thousands that saw a plane, confirmed by video and independent photography. Not one photo of a missle - how could thousands watch the event and NO ONE take a photo? Not one video of a missle .. why is that, was all of NY part of the conspiracy?
Denierbud11 3 years ago
That means that what actualy hit the building was moving wast, wasn't as big as a jet plane, and only made loud noise just before it hit which is a characteristic of a missile, you hear it coming just before it hits, cause of it's speed.
THe reason they had to lie about a jet flying over 500 mph was that what people saw moved very fast.
That is impossible for a jet plane on that altitude.
fullfist 3 years ago 2
You have to take into consideration that peoples judgment is very clouded by the large buildings, ambiental noise, and alas media.
Some of the strongest evidences are:
- no shadow casting by the plane, and on the wing altho it entered a shadow
- editing mistake by the media
-incorrect physical information on the performance of the plane, proved by non government experts
-proof of bombs planted, noises that couldn't have been made by jet fuel exploding
-proof in the chemical elments in debris
fullfist 3 years ago
What tangible proof of bombs? There is absolutely no physical evidence and not one witness to the event. People hearing explosions are not proof of bombs, things explose that are not explosives.
But since you are a no planar, you obviously believe in the impossible.
Denierbud11 3 years ago
Dude, get a life, 'cause, in case you haven't noticed, most people with things called "lives" know that planes hit. All news footage is live, you just can't seem to get that through your thick head. Go back you your mental institution.
MarioParty4evur 3 years ago
Nice explanation.
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
Do you think this theory is valid? Yes or no will suffice for now.
Denierbud11 3 years ago
I think there's no logical explanation for this. Yes.
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
the helicopter shooting it is moving. duh. get a life.
MarioParty4evur 3 years ago
If the helicopter (camera) is moving, the Tower's perspective MUST change (move also). Also, the Verrazzano bridge is approx 7 miles away from the Towers. Unless we all have super human vision, we shouldn't see it at all. Duh?
More on this:
watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
WOW THAT WAS REALLY AMAZING! I want to see more! let's see if there is a part 15!
gordonfreemannr2 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's going to take a hell of a lot more to convince me that 9/11 was a conspriacy than this bullshit video.
Taraalcar 3 years ago
Get fucked you sad cunt and get back to wanking off to gay porn.....you are good at that you cunt
bellendbellend1 3 years ago
Ah, another well thought-out rebuttal from one of the world's smartest group.
Taraalcar 3 years ago
Thanks alot.....glad to see you agree.......you lame cunt.
bellendbellend1 3 years ago
rofl
Taraalcar 3 years ago
retarded. at the end you demonstrate your own capability to doctor the video so who's to say that its not a edit done by you??? there's no end to paranoia and conspiracy
BAH46 3 years ago
Simple. Before making accusations, first prove that I doctored the video. Otherwise, your accusations are empty. When debunkers have nothing else to go with, they start making up lies. Classic debuking..
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
did u ever think that the helicopter was moving ? thats why the bridge moved ? Idiot
MasonsRevenge 3 years ago
The bridge is 7 miles away from the Towers. You shouldn't even be able to see it. The helicopter is moving, but the Tower's perspective never changes. Duh!! Did you even watch the video. You're the idiot.
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 9
i dont get it what happened about the bridge?
CrimeSlunkScene 3 years ago
Why do you think the rest of the world hates us, its cause when food riots and civil war breaks out, the rest of the world will rejoice. The Romans didn't get conquered, they destroyed themselves. But i guess we have mp3 players and plasma TV's that tell us it won't happen, so it won't. I guess you have to be a mexican now to sneak past N.O.R.A.D.
I just can't wait till i die. I just hope they let me save my game on x-box first, cause jesus will want to see my high scores.
NWOwrotethebible 3 years ago
fuck off you self centered cunt. you can say your not hiding if it makes you feel better but the truth is your just trying to cover up for the fact your a fucking pussy. piss off.
ledzeppguy32 3 years ago
I'm scared of people like you. You know thick brow, communicates with hand signals and grunts, has trouble walking when not on all fours. You should join the armed forces and go to Iraq if you are so behind your country's decisions. Go kill some brown people who talk different then you. Or you could go police your borders cause the Mexicans are taking all of your jobs ,,,right.
gangsterdrester 3 years ago
Im not "coming to get you" Or calling you. I don't care what you believe that much. I just think it is in YOUR best interest to look at some of the FACTS surrounding 9/11, Iraq, False Flag Operations, CIA and Osama. Just doesn't add up to what we have been told. It is not the first time and it will not be the last.
gangsterdrester 3 years ago
wow, i allways thought those 9/11 truthers were just crazy but shit. theres just no explanation for this
wildabeast11235 3 years ago 4
Hahahahah
Yea we are all idiots. I think you sir are in denial about what is really happening. Why is USA in Iraq? To liberate them? Terrorists? Why don't they fix your own country? Oh ya they are 700 billion to fix wallstreet while homeowners with no jobs are left to rot. No Iraqi was involved with 9/11. Why are they not in Saudi Arabia where all the terrorist were from? Go look for some of your own answers and stop believing everything FOX news tells you.
gangsterdrester 3 years ago 3
i did it
swordshops777 3 years ago
So it appears that you (muzicmaker) have most of the people disagreeing with you, that you are not correct.
You need to become more responsible before posting theories, and learn about camera angles, perspective, parallax, etc.
I understand how these shots can look confusing to people with no camera or perspective experience.....but it is your job as someone seeking the truth, to investigate before posting "evidence" that you do not fully understand.
You ARE seeking the truth, right?
FreqBand 3 years ago
Freqband,
Explain it to me. Obviously, the camera is not rotating around the Towers because the Tower's perspective never changes. And a telephoto lens that only magnifies the bridge in the background which is 7 miles away. Educate me.....
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
Google search "telephoto lense makes distant objects appear larger" The same chopper also captured both tower collapses, it was also 5 miles away above 79th street, though I suppose some gullible people actually believe the entire attack was animated, riiiiight.... These claims are designed to willfully discredit anyone asking real questions about 9/11, on purpose, the video's author Simon Shack is well aware of it, he's laughing at you.
Xenomorph911 3 years ago
wikipedia extract edited down by me
QUOTE
Some individuals, primarily internet, have made the claim that no hijacked airliners hit the World Trade Center towers 'No Plane Theories'). Supporters of this claim have been described as "no-planers," by members of the 9/11 truth movement who generally maintain that the claim is a case of poisoning the well — an effort which is intended to broadly discredit the more credible theories.
UNQUOTE
or... some sad fcuk seekin attention
futahroid 3 years ago
Good morning, idiot.
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 5
Just explain how the bridge is even visible. Here's two REAL shots of the Verrazzano Bridge in relation to the famous NYC skyline. Wake up!!!
watch?v=NnLlXLupA9Y
watch?v=TGANEqXcGJg
Love to hear it.....
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
The movement of the bridge is because the camera is moving (on a helicopter). I don't know what I think about you're "no plane" theory, but this moving bridge thing is not at all relevant. Also the video links you put here show it from the shoreline, not the sky line... big difference... impossible to compare the main video with the two examples.
tracerguitar 3 years ago
lol , the camera is moving, but there is no way the bridge angle difference could be that DRASTIC, and the WTC angle remains unchanged (look at the both sides of it)
fullfist 3 years ago 3
I still fail to understand this "camera is moving" theory when explaining the moving bridge. See fullfist's explanation. And this video is very relevant to the no plane theory as it shows how the NYC skyline was controlled and manipulated.
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
That is quite good but I dont believe that it was a fake!
redflyier1993 3 years ago
It's called 'doublethink', from Orwell..
Means ur in real trouble with ur mind!
911 fake day
novembrine1 3 years ago
WHAT ARE U ON ABOUT ???
redflyier1993 3 years ago
Google 'doublethink'
Novembre41 3 years ago
Doublethink
is the act of simultaneously accepting as correct two mutually contradictory beliefs. It is related to, but distinct from, hypocrisy and neutrality.
Doublethink is an integral concept of George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Fair enough.
redflyier1993 3 years ago
This is due to foreshortening from viewing the tower through a telephoto lens with extreme magnification. They were miles north of the towers, so the bridge was enlarged also.
You see this same effect with people in front of sunsets (like at the end of Indiana Jones and the Holy Grail).
PuzzledMonkey 3 years ago
911 was in inside job, but focusing your efforts on fanatical details just gives people reason to ignore the truth.
You show them all this SUPER STRETCHED evidence and they will never believe that the real evidence is also not STRETCHED TRUTH.
Tell Simple truth is enough, when you fallow the money, the training, and the organization. Let alone the project for a new American century and the teachings of Leon Strauss father of neo-cons like Paul Wolfawitz, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney.
WizardTom2 3 years ago
Well, it's like digging on two levels.
U guys go ahead with the "911 inside job" thing and spread the word;
Others will go even further.
What could be possibly wrong with that?
novembrine1 3 years ago
A couple of questions. First, can you post a link to another video example of this? Also, can you explain why other objects near the bridge are not also magnified to the same degree? Or other objects before the brdge? Why is just the bridge magnified?
muzicmaker2001 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That's tha MOST DUMBEST RETARDED AND IDIOTIC SHIT I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!! LOOOL The "no plane" theory XDD How dumb can u be???
what u show in your video as all easily explainable... I wasted here only my time!
BarneveldDarts 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I don't exist either. I am a figment of your imagination! 9/11 never happened! The moon landings never happened! America was never discovered! Dogs love cats! Humans never evolved! McDonalds fake their big macs (they are actually Burger King Whoppers and the whole planet except you is paid to pretend otherwise). Woooooooaaaggghhhrrrrrr! The sky is green! haha! he he! they're coming to take me away!!... Nurse!! Nuuuuurse!!
Fidelio76 3 years ago
To summarize, you have no logical explanation? Next....
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
P A R A L L A X
Fidelio76 3 years ago
First problem here. The bridge is 7 miles away from the Tower. You shouldn't even see it. Parllax doesn't explain that. Next, the Tower's perspective never changes, so parallax can't be applied here. There is no rotating view or angle. Pure CGI.
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 2
I work in the World Financial Center, right next to the WTC, and I can see the narrows bridge out my window on any given day...you're obviously a complete idiot
ikemavent 3 years ago
ur a dipshit
just cause you see it does not have anything to do with PERSPECTIVE
if the v bridge was right outside your window and moving wouldnt that seem strange since its near 7mi away from lower Manhattan?
GO BACK 2 SLEEP W/ THE REST OF THE SHEEP
BAA BAA
2JOHNNYT 3 years ago 2
I grew up on the Bklyn side of the V-bridge, in Bay Ridge. I now live across the river from where the WTC stood, Carrol Gardens, about 6 miles away.
For the V Bridge 2 appear as it does here, the bridge would hav 2 connect Red Hook Bklyn 2 Staten Island!
4 perspective, the Bklyn Bridge connects 2 Brooklyn Hts, the next community south is Carroll Gardens, & then Red hook - 6miles away from Red Hook is Bay Ridge where the V-Bridge takes off 2 Staten Island.
TV FAKERY PERIOD!
2JOHNNYT 3 years ago 7
I work in the world financial center, right next to the WTC site, and I can see the narrows bridge out my office window every fuck day, you nimrod
ikemavent 3 years ago
I bet you can. The point is the bridge shouldn't appear that close on the video. Open your eyes!!!
youtube*com/watch?v=5ID2b3nb5dA
seeknthetruth 3 years ago 6