IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Ufos In Skies Right After Wtc Attacks, By UFO's I mean Unidentified Flying Objects not alien craft

Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 05:12 AM
Post #1





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



I've discovered 2 black Unidentified Flying Objects, and one silver object, in video footage of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers on 9/11. I've explained the details below.

What I'm about to describe is in all of the unedited videos of the 1st impact, but with the version I can tell you when and where to look for these objects on your own; or, you can just watch the linked video below in which my friend slowed this original footage down so it's easier to see.
The original Naudet brother's video footage of the 1st attack is 45 seconds long. At 36 seconds, look to the left of the tower--I think the only reason others haven't seen this is because one's eyes are drawn to the tower. But at this time, you will see a black object--looks kind of like a bird, but is obviously at least as big as a fighter-jet and is moving at an extremely high speed--probably close to super-sonic. The object moves in a hook maneuver, coming from the left side of the screen, moving towards the camera, then it hooks back towards the tower, flies into the smoke--where it seems to hit something (you can only see that if you slow it down, though) and then the black object--probably the same one, but I'm not sure--races off to the right of the screen. This is NOT hard to see, it's very clear, and it surprises me no one else has apparently seen it. And there's another almost identical object in footage of the second attack, which I explain later. For some reason, if you want to view these images yourself, they're easier to see in the silent version, which is also 45 seconds long. The version with sound is cropped, and makes it almost impossible to see a second, silver object, moving from the top right side of the screen towards the tower--but it's only there for a second, and then the video ends. The camera actually moves up, panning away, above this silver object so it's out of frame, just before the footage ends. It really puzzles me why Naudet stopped filming this first impact after only 45 seconds? Very curious--seems like they would've kept filming for at least 2 or 3 mins.

Some claim the 1st image is a bird. But a person standing at that distance would be invisible, like the lady who stands in the hole in the N. Tower a few mins later. Yet, this object is at the same distance (as it disappears into the smoke to the side of the tower, which hasn't drifted far, as it was just struck) and is quite visible, so it must be bigger than a human and therefore much bigger than a bird! It may look a bit like a bird, the way it moves, but it's FAR too large and moving FAR too fast. Indeed, that fast motion may be what makes it look like there's a flapping motion at one point. In this video, the object looks like a bird when slowed down to 25% of its original speed. And why would a bird fly into a probably still hot, very dense, cloud of smoke?

Here's a video of these first objects slowed down, but you can independently verify that these images are in the original video by searching it out on YT yourself.

9/11 UFO video


I found another black Unidentified Flying Object in this other footage of the second attack, too, and it acts in a very similar manner, also appearing just seconds after the 2nd plane strike this time, and flying thru the smoke coming from the tower. I haven't gotten to slow this one down, and it's flying much faster. It enters the screen a few milliseconds past .53 (of the 1 min video) and is gone by .54. However, it is obvious this is a similar object. It appears after the plane, moving from the left of the screen to the right. Again, like the first, this object passes thru the smoke that's just started pouring from the S. Tower (first video is of N. Tower). As it leaves the smoke, it passes by the top of the North Tower's antennae about 1/2 way up the length of the antennae/spire, then continues, turns slightly downward, and turns on its side (I watched it many times to determine this) which shows it's a 3-dimensional craft, before disappearing off screen. It transverses the entire distance in one second. The object enters at .53 and is gone by .54.
However, with this video, scale is shown because it shows a human body falling from the N. Tower, before the jet hits the S. Tower. So, scale is established and anyone with an open mind and sense can know that the object we're seeing is far bigger than a human (and any bird). It's about the size of a fighter jet, which is my guess as to what it is. But it must be travelling at about Mach 10. Watch, you will see it. It's definitely there, and I can think of no rational explanation for it, other than an advanced craft. If you listen closely, when the object passes, you can also hear a slight but definite high-pitched whine. I used headphones, so IDK if you can hear it without them. But there is a sound--almost like faint electronic interference!
I am not a conspiracy nut! I've been looking into 9/11 for years, but this was the last thing I expected to discover--an even deeper mystery. No one else appears to have noticed or made any comment about these objects, so I really doubt they were added. See what you think. But if you think the 2nd object here is a bird, please don't bother as you are obviously an idiot as birds can't fly at super-sonic speeds. They also don't make a habit of flying into dense, hot smoke, or being the size of a fighter jet. Remember the scale! Here's the link:

Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower

If for some reason the above link doesn't want to work, just type the video name, "Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower, loud boom.." into YT and watch it.

This post has been edited by Alan H.: Dec 14 2013, 05:28 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 14 2013, 06:15 AM
Post #2





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



With the greatest of respect to Alan H....we have known for years now that the black virtual airplane cannot possibly have been a real Boeing, therefore will you excuse me if I take my UFO sightings from a less unreliable video clip?

Head dicks Meyrs and Cheney have been lying about the faked airplanes since 9/11/2001.

Nauberts' black UFO is likewise no more real or reliable than any of the other fuzzy logic in their phony camera, so why should we give them any more cred now?

This post has been edited by MikeR: Dec 14 2013, 06:17 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 14 2013, 06:36 AM
Post #3





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 14 2013, 09:12 PM) *
I've discovered 2 black Unidentified Flying Objects, and one silver object, in video footage of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers on 9/11. I've explained the details below.

What I'm about to describe is in all of the unedited videos of the 1st impact, but with the version I can tell you when and where to look for these objects on your own; or, you can just watch the linked video below in which my friend slowed this original footage down so it's easier to see.
The original Naudet brother's video footage of the 1st attack is 45 seconds long. At 36 seconds, look to the left of the tower--I think the only reason others haven't seen this is because one's eyes are drawn to the tower. But at this time, you will see a black object--looks kind of like a bird, but is obviously at least as big as a fighter-jet and is moving at an extremely high speed--probably close to super-sonic. The object moves in a hook maneuver, coming from the left side of the screen, moving towards the camera, then it hooks back towards the tower, flies into the smoke--where it seems to hit something (you can only see that if you slow it down, though) and then the black object--probably the same one, but I'm not sure--races off to the right of the screen. This is NOT hard to see, it's very clear, and it surprises me no one else has apparently seen it. And there's another almost identical object in footage of the second attack, which I explain later. For some reason, if you want to view these images yourself, they're easier to see in the silent version, which is also 45 seconds long. The version with sound is cropped, and makes it almost impossible to see a second, silver object, moving from the top right side of the screen towards the tower--but it's only there for a second, and then the video ends. The camera actually moves up, panning away, above this silver object so it's out of frame, just before the footage ends. It really puzzles me why Naudet stopped filming this first impact after only 45 seconds? Very curious--seems like they would've kept filming for at least 2 or 3 mins.

Some claim the 1st image is a bird. But a person standing at that distance would be invisible, like the lady who stands in the hole in the N. Tower a few mins later. Yet, this object is at the same distance (as it disappears into the smoke to the side of the tower, which hasn't drifted far, as it was just struck) and is quite visible, so it must be bigger than a human and therefore much bigger than a bird! It may look a bit like a bird, the way it moves, but it's FAR too large and moving FAR too fast. Indeed, that fast motion may be what makes it look like there's a flapping motion at one point. In this video, the object looks like a bird when slowed down to 25% of its original speed. And why would a bird fly into a probably still hot, very dense, cloud of smoke?

Here's a video of these first objects slowed down, but you can independently verify that these images are in the original video by searching it out on YT yourself.

9/11 UFO video


I found another black Unidentified Flying Object in this other footage of the second attack, too, and it acts in a very similar manner, also appearing just seconds after the 2nd plane strike this time, and flying thru the smoke coming from the tower. I haven't gotten to slow this one down, and it's flying much faster. It enters the screen a few milliseconds past .53 (of the 1 min video) and is gone by .54. However, it is obvious this is a similar object. It appears after the plane, moving from the left of the screen to the right. Again, like the first, this object passes thru the smoke that's just started pouring from the S. Tower (first video is of N. Tower). As it leaves the smoke, it passes by the top of the North Tower's antennae about 1/2 way up the length of the antennae/spire, then continues, turns slightly downward, and turns on its side (I watched it many times to determine this) which shows it's a 3-dimensional craft, before disappearing off screen. It transverses the entire distance in one second. The object enters at .53 and is gone by .54.
However, with this video, scale is shown because it shows a human body falling from the N. Tower, before the jet hits the S. Tower. So, scale is established and anyone with an open mind and sense can know that the object we're seeing is far bigger than a human (and any bird). It's about the size of a fighter jet, which is my guess as to what it is. But it must be travelling at about Mach 10. Watch, you will see it. It's definitely there, and I can think of no rational explanation for it, other than an advanced craft. If you listen closely, when the object passes, you can also hear a slight but definite high-pitched whine. I used headphones, so IDK if you can hear it without them. But there is a sound--almost like faint electronic interference!
I am not a conspiracy nut! I've been looking into 9/11 for years, but this was the last thing I expected to discover--an even deeper mystery. No one else appears to have noticed or made any comment about these objects, so I really doubt they were added. See what you think. But if you think the 2nd object here is a bird, please don't bother as you are obviously an idiot as birds can't fly at super-sonic speeds. They also don't make a habit of flying into dense, hot smoke, or being the size of a fighter jet. Remember the scale! Here's the link:

Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower

If for some reason the above link doesn't want to work, just type the video name, "Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower, loud boom.." into YT and watch it.


With the greatest of respect to Alan H....we have known for years now that the black airplane image scene heading towards WTC2 cannot ever have been a real Boeing, therefore will you excuse me if I look for UFO sightings on less unreliable video clips?

Head dicks Meyrs and Cheney have been lying about the faked airplanes since 9/11/2001.

Route AA11 was canceled on 9/11/2001 (along with AA77) according to the Air Transport website, so the faked WTC1 strike in their fraudulent cutaway cannot have been caused by the claimed Boeing, tail number 334AA

Who'd give them any more cred for a black-spotted rara avis sighting, than watching any of the other fuzzy logic on their virtually phony shotz?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 07:27 AM
Post #4





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 12 2013, 08:36 AM) *
With the greatest of respect to Alan H....we have known for years now that the black airplane image scene heading towards WTC2 cannot ever have been a real Boeing, therefore will you excuse me if I look for UFO sightings on less unreliable video clips?

Head dicks Meyrs and Cheney have been lying about the faked airplanes since 9/11/2001.

Route AA11 was canceled on 9/11/2001 (along with AA77) according to the Air Transport website, so the faked WTC1 strike in their fraudulent cutaway cannot have been caused by the claimed Boeing, tail number 334AA

Who'd give them any more cred for a black-spotted rara avis sighting, than watching any of the other fuzzy logic on their virtually phony shotz?


Well, I think, between these 2 videos that I posted, that it may at least be visible proof that there were highly advanced military aircraft present during the WTC attacks on NY, and these crafts were doing speeds I would approximate at up to Mach 10. I just discovered an article in Yahoo news where this very similar looking black "super-secret hyper-sonic UAV" just crashed because its skin peeled-off at Mach 20! It's here, for those of you who don't find this boring or irrelevant--with all due respect:
Yahoo news article

This post has been edited by Alan H.: Dec 14 2013, 07:29 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 08:04 AM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 12 2013, 08:36 AM) *
With the greatest of respect to Alan H....we have known for years now that the black airplane image scene heading towards WTC2 cannot ever have been a real Boeing, therefore will you excuse me if I look for UFO sightings on less unreliable video clips?

Head dicks Meyrs and Cheney have been lying about the faked airplanes since 9/11/2001.

Route AA11 was canceled on 9/11/2001 (along with AA77) according to the Air Transport website, so the faked WTC1 strike in their fraudulent cutaway cannot have been caused by the claimed Boeing, tail number 334AA

Who'd give them any more cred for a black-spotted rara avis sighting, than watching any of the other fuzzy logic on their virtually phony shotz?


Also, when I "said" UFO, I meant Unidentified Flying Objects,(as stated in the descriptive for the post) not alien craft, like most people think now, it seems, when they hear that term. That term (acronym) has been twisted just like the term "conspiracy theory" has been twisted & used to demonized, even though the Official story is a Conspiracy Theory (OCT)! I posted this stuff here because it puzzles me, and I thought I might get some expert opinions and not be judged in any way. After all, there are two videos with these objects, one which I slowed down. I think they're real. I wasn't looking for it, I didn't make this up, I discovered it as part of my ongoing research into 9/11. I never claimed the black object was a 767 or FL175 or FL11 or any commercial aircraft. Indeed, I'm pretty sure it was a highly advanced (DARPA) aircraft like the one I've referenced via the Yahoo news article in my previous reply. I listed URLs for my "evidence," can you list the URL for this Transportation Website that says all of the things you claim in your post, about Flights 11 and 77 being cancelled? Because I thought the deal was that they were just never scheduled to fly in the 1st place. Man, don't we go thru enough with the "debunkers" that we don't have to dismiss and belittle the questions & ideas of others on what should be an open-minded forum? One thing I hate about cyberspace is that there's always enough distance between people for them to be comfortable being completely disrespectful to each other. And no, I'm not saying that you were really or completely disrespectful--compared to many people, you were downright gracious. But you did dismiss my ideas w/out much thought, and didn't really address my questions. Apparently you're one of those who believe all the footage is fake, there were no planes? How do you explain the thousands of eyewitnesses? Also, I can't remember his name, but this 9/11 investigator made a VT vid doc where he examined the "altered footage" idea, and there were like 50 or more videos filmed by citizens, and he re-created NY to scale and used a computer imaging program to examine all the camera angles of the 2nd plane coming in, and they ALL lined-up. He used a total of 60 plus separate videos in his analysis. Now, I admit, those planes shouldn't have been able to penetrate those buildings as they did without more damage to them, but I think knowing exactly HOW that was accomplished is something that remains un-resolved and is certainly still up for debate. IDK where these aircraft fit it, but they're certainly part of the puzzle, at least for me, now. And I'm never seen any type of UFO before, military or ET. I don't believe in ET visitors from deep space. Maybe from another dimension, but not from deep space, unless they've gotten around Einstein.
"Reality is that which remains when you stop believing in it."--Phillip K. Dick

This post has been edited by Alan H.: Dec 14 2013, 08:32 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Dec 14 2013, 05:45 PM
Post #6





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 14 2013, 04:12 AM) *
I've discovered 2 black Unidentified Flying Objects, and one silver object, in video footage of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers on 9/11. I've explained the details below.

What I'm about to describe is in all of the unedited videos of the 1st impact, but with the version I can tell you when and where to look for these objects on your own; or, you can just watch the linked video below in which my friend slowed this original footage down so it's easier to see.



The first "UFO" is a F_cking bird!
The second "UFO" is debris falling.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 09:09 PM
Post #7





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Dec 12 2013, 07:45 PM) *
The first "UFO" is a F_cking bird!
The second "UFO" is debris falling.


Believe what you want--as I said, those that think it's a bird obviously think a bird can fly at super sonic speed and be the size of a fighter yet. Yeah, right. Wow, I really expected more open minded opinions from people on this forum.

Apparently you didn't watch the 2nd video of the S. Tower attack--unless you're completely retarded--as debris can't "fall" laterally across the sky! And debris from what? The 2nd black object, in the "Rooftop View of 2nd plane hitting South Tower video," enters the screen after the 2nd plane has already hit, again flies thru the smoke, like the object in the first video, flies thru the smoke, over the N. Tower and then exits the screen--and all of this takes place in one second! Do you know bird or debris that flies or falls at super-sonic speeds?

And what about the Yahoo news article that reported a very similar black object, a "super-secret hyper-sonic UAV" developed by DARPA that recently crashed because its skin peeled-off at Mach 20? Was that a bird, too? Jeez, you have no ability for critical thinking. The "bird" is at the same distance as the tower, in that first video (9/11 UFO for Alan) as it disappears into the smoke (when do birds like to fly into dense, probably still hot smoke?). If you could comprehend scale, you would realize that a human shot from that distance would be invisible--aka, too small to be seen. The object is far bigger than any damn bird. Ever think they might make it look like a bird as part of their stealth tech? And with the 2nd video (which I don't think you even watched--there were 2 objects in first video, one black, one silver, and one black object in the 2nd video), the object moves across that entire landscape in 1 second, so it has to be moving at something like Mach 10.

Really, I don't know why I bother answering people with such ideas. Watch the 2nd video, and if you can even catch the black object--you have to pause the video right after it appears just milliseconds past .53 because it's gone by .54. But it is definitely there, and is self propelled. When I get my friend to slow it down, others will see it and you will look like a complete fool for suggesting it was ever "debris" that's somehow self-propelling itself thru the sky, over the tower, at hyper-sonic speed. My guess is that you're talking about the silver object being debris? Debris from what? And I never claimed to know what the silver object is, but I couldn't ignore it. But it's the black UFOs that interest me and which I was really writing about. Why don't you go hang-out with CTCOLE 77 somewhere?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 09:22 PM
Post #8





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 12 2013, 11:09 PM) *
Believe what you want--as I said, those that think it's a bird obviously think a bird can fly at super sonic speed and be the size of a fighter yet. Yeah, right. Wow, I really expected more open minded opinions from people on this forum.

Apparently you didn't watch the 2nd video of the S. Tower attack--unless you're completely retarded--as debris can't "fall" laterally across the sky! And debris from what? The 2nd black object, in the "Rooftop View of 2nd plane hitting South Tower video," enters the screen after the 2nd plane has already hit, again flies thru the smoke, like the object in the first video, flies thru the smoke, over the N. Tower and then exits the screen--and all of this takes place in one second! Do you know bird or debris that flies or falls at super-sonic speeds?

And what about the Yahoo news article that reported a very similar black object, a "super-secret hyper-sonic UAV" developed by DARPA that recently crashed because its skin peeled-off at Mach 20? Was that a bird, too? Jeez, you have no ability for critical thinking. The "bird" is at the same distance as the tower, in that first video (9/11 UFO for Alan) as it disappears into the smoke (when do birds like to fly into dense, probably still hot smoke?). If you could comprehend scale, you would realize that a human shot from that distance would be invisible--aka, too small to be seen. The object is far bigger than any damn bird. Ever think they might make it look like a bird as part of their stealth tech? And with the 2nd video (which I don't think you even watched--there were 2 objects in first video, one black, one silver, and one black object in the 2nd video), the object moves across that entire landscape in 1 second, so it has to be moving at something like Mach 10.

Really, I don't know why I bother answering people with such ideas. Watch the 2nd video, and if you can even catch the black object--you have to pause the video right after it appears just milliseconds past .53 because it's gone by .54. But it is definitely there, and is self propelled. When I get my friend to slow it down, others will see it and you will look like a complete fool for suggesting it was ever "debris" that's somehow self-propelling itself thru the sky, over the tower, at hyper-sonic speed. My guess is that you're talking about the silver object being debris? Debris from what? And I never claimed to know what the silver object is, but I couldn't ignore it. But it's the black UFOs that interest me and which I was really writing about. Why don't you go hang-out with CTCOLE 77 somewhere?



Okay, here it is, the black "debris" (lol) from the 2nd WTC attack slowed down, thanks to my friend Bert Bernardo. Please watch it at full speed first, and pay attention to how much it has been slowed down. No debris or bird can fly that fast. I'm nearly positive that it was a forerunner of the hyper-sonic UAV DARPA developed and which is covered in the Yahoo news article I linked-to in my previous replies/posts.
2nd WTC attack w/black hyper-sonic "UFO" slowed-down
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 14 2013, 09:35 PM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 12 2013, 11:22 PM) *
Okay, here it is, the black "debris" (lol) from the 2nd WTC attack slowed down, thanks to my friend Bert Bernardo. Please watch it at full speed first, and pay attention to how much it has been slowed down. No debris or bird can fly that fast. I'm nearly positive that it was a forerunner of the hyper-sonic UAV DARPA developed and which is covered in the Yahoo news article I linked-to in my previous replies/posts.
2nd WTC attack w/black hyper-sonic "UFO" slowed-down


Also, make sure when you watch the full video (not the slowed-down version) that you pay attention to when the camera-person pans-in for a shot of a human falling from the N. Tower, right before he pans back to show the 2nd plane hit the S. Tower. The human is barely visible, even with this panned-in shot. So that should establish scale, for those of you capable of reasoning. Since the black object is just as far, if not farther, away, the object is obviously far bigger than any bird (about the size of a small jet) just like the first black object in the other video (9/11 UFO for Alan, linked in 1st post). But this one is obviously moving so fast only the most obtuse person would try to claim this is a bird, too. But they're out there, and I'm sure some will claim something like that, rather than make a more logical assumption that this object is probably a forerunner to the hyper-sonic UAV developed by DARPA and which recently crashed because its skin peeled-off at Mach 20, as referenced in the Yahoo news article.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 15 2013, 01:39 AM
Post #10





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 14 2013, 11:27 PM) *
Well, I think, between these 2 videos that I posted, that it may at least be visible proof that there were highly advanced military aircraft present during the WTC attacks on NY, and these crafts were doing speeds I would approximate at up to Mach 10. I just discovered an article in Yahoo news where this very similar looking black "super-secret hyper-sonic UAV" just crashed because its skin peeled-off at Mach 20! It's here, for those of you who don't find this boring or irrelevant--with all due respect:
Yahoo news article


The only real reason your UFO references are irrelevant, Alan H, is the fact that not a single US Air Force spotter airplane was seen flying, peacefully or in anger, in the skies over the WTC. That means there was nothing that NORAD considered significant enough to warrant investigating, let alone intercepting ... i.e. there were no real airplanes flying into buildings on that day at that time and in that airspace.

What UFO doing Mach Eleventeen could possibly be significant to NORAD when Bomber Command wasn't so much as lifting a freighter to deal with the computer generated images seen on all our TV screens?

The BTS website link you so respectfully requested is referenced in Gerard Holmgren's articles, one of which is found at
http://thewebfairy.com/holmgren/holmgren/sydney.html

This post has been edited by MikeR: Dec 15 2013, 01:42 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 15 2013, 04:10 AM
Post #11





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 15 2013, 12:04 AM) *
.... you did dismiss my ideas w/out much thought, and didn't really address my questions.
Apparently you're one of those who believe all the footage is fake, there were no planes?
How do you explain the thousands of eyewitnesses?
Also, I can't remember his name, but this 9/11 investigator made a VT vid doc where he examined the "altered footage" idea, and there were like 50 or more videos filmed by citizens, and he re-created NY to scale and used a computer imaging program to examine all the camera angles of the 2nd plane coming in, and they ALL lined-up. He used a total of 60 plus separate videos in his analysis.


I admit Alan H ... I should have given what you said a minute longer. My sincere respect promises to make up for my unintentional casualness, with a UFO off topic in another post. It should have you absolutely spellbound.

Meanwhile....all 4 Boeing were indeed faked one way or another. It took me a huge amount of midnight candle-burning to become absolutely sure, but Youtube has been a goldmine of great info (amongst all that perpeTRAITORs' disinfo shot) ...if I could find out for sure here Downunder before 2004 was up, ANYBODY can prove the planes were not for real. My lips are sealed, I'm not saying you'll find out HOW they did all the fakery. rolleyes.gif

I can't speak for even one of the eyewitnesses, I was 8000 miles away, but you may be most impressed with an extremely competent survey of dozens of witnesses to the so-called Pentagon Plane (nothing to do with the pretended Route AA77 BTW) ... http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/

Not sure which 9/11 investigator you had in mind, but Richard D Hall does the best recreation I've ever seen, of the recorded radar parameters of the "UA175" faked mate as it appears to fly towards WTC2...
http://richplanet.net.911.php
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_e...lt/pilotfly.gif

Richard's analysis plots a radar track parallel to the faked plane. He wisely stops short of taking an intelligent guesses as to the connection between his radar track and the apparition that MAY have been what your deceived thousands thought they saw. I can only add that video evidence of holographic projection is very impressive when the projected image is a stage actress in a darken room. Some other 911 Pilot will have to help tell us how this might apply to a big illusion the size of David Copperfield's Boeing.

Any Doubting Thomas still balking at the four 9/11 Boeings being fakes (including the Pentagon Airforce Transport that flew through the Hollywood fireball effect) might want to check the curious incident of the onscreen CGI seen targeting WTC2 at an utterly-impossible 579 MPH in level flight at 700 feet:
"The Boeing just flew into the tower"
"Why did the Boeing not disintegrate way-y-y before it appeared in the shot?
It was doing all of 150 MPH over VNe." (any pilot knows the plane would have disintegrated)

Watch Ace Baker's second-best presentation of the layering and compositing tricks available to the presumably completely-competent, completely-criminal corporate videographer
http://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds

NB I wanted to post Ace Baker's even better vid "9 11 NO PLANES Theory - Undeniable Proof" but Youtube's Tel Aviv Minders don't trust US to know about Mossad's Greatest** Crime of the Century
(**Greatest then: we all know the zionists pulled off the Fukushima Nukes (plural) Strike since 9/11...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 15 2013, 06:39 AM
Post #12





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 13 2013, 06:10 AM) *
I admit Alan H ... I should have given what you said a minute longer. My sincere respect promises to make up for my unintentional casualness, with a UFO off topic in another post. It should have you absolutely spellbound.

Meanwhile....all 4 Boeing were indeed faked one way or another. It took me a huge amount of midnight candle-burning to become absolutely sure, but Youtube has been a goldmine of great info (amongst all that perpeTRAITORs' disinfo shot) ...if I could find out for sure here Downunder before 2004 was up, ANYBODY can prove the planes were not for real. My lips are sealed, I'm not saying you'll find out HOW they did all the fakery. rolleyes.gif

I can't speak for even one of the eyewitnesses, I was 8000 miles away, but you may be most impressed with an extremely competent survey of dozens of witnesses to the so-called Pentagon Plane (nothing to do with the pretended Route AA77 BTW) ... http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/

Not sure which 9/11 investigator you had in mind, but Richard D Hall does the best recreation I've ever seen, of the recorded radar parameters of the "UA175" faked mate as it appears to fly towards WTC2...
http://richplanet.net.911.php
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_e...lt/pilotfly.gif

Richard's analysis plots a radar track parallel to the faked plane. He wisely stops short of taking an intelligent guesses as to the connection between his radar track and the apparition that MAY have been what your deceived thousands thought they saw. I can only add that video evidence of holographic projection is very impressive when the projected image is a stage actress in a darken room. Some other 911 Pilot will have to help tell us how this might apply to a big illusion the size of David Copperfield's Boeing.

Any Doubting Thomas still balking at the four 9/11 Boeings being fakes (including the Pentagon Airforce Transport that flew through the Hollywood fireball effect) might want to check the curious incident of the onscreen CGI seen targeting WTC2 at an utterly-impossible 579 MPH in level flight at 700 feet:
"The Boeing just flew into the tower"
"Why did the Boeing not disintegrate way-y-y before it appeared in the shot?
It was doing all of 150 MPH over VNe." (any pilot knows the plane would have disintegrated)

Watch Ace Baker's second-best presentation of the layering and compositing tricks available to the presumably completely-competent, completely-criminal corporate videographer
http://youtu.be/Rml2TL5N8ds

NB I wanted to post Ace Baker's even better vid "9 11 NO PLANES Theory - Undeniable Proof" but Youtube's Tel Aviv Minders don't trust US to know about Mossad's Greatest** Crime of the Century
(**Greatest then: we all know the zionists pulled off the Fukushima Nukes (plural) Strike since 9/11...



Look, I agree with you that the flights were not stock Boeing 767s, and I even agree that they may not have been real. I've seen all of the 9/11 Pilots for Truth presentations, so I know they all exceeded VMOs for the aircraft, etc. However, I do NOT believe all that footage could've been faked--most of the footage was from like 60+ amateur videographers. You think they covered all that up, altered all of these people's video footage? The first video showing the black objects is from Naudet, the other was shot by someone else, I think. I don't think the footage is fake, and one of the reasons I particularly believe that now even more is my finding of these highly advanced hyper-sonic military drone aircraft, which is what I'm pretty sure these objects are--forerunners of the type craft referenced in the Yahoo news article about the recent crash of one of these black hypersonic drones, which was going Mach 20 when its skin peeled-off. I estimated when seeing this object, BEFORE I found that article, was going at least Mach 10, as you can see at full speed it crosses a huge expanse of territory in approximately one second. It may indeed be going faster than Mach 10, I haven't yet attempted to work-up the numbers. Did you watch the slowed-down video? Why would they put something like that in the footage but never talk about it? Why can you believe that there was a conspiracy to alter a huge amount of footage from numerous sources, mostly civilian (other I agree Naudet may be an int. agent) but you don't think it's possible these military craft, which I'm sure can't be traced on radar (but may've been used to generate the NTSB data, perhaps?) could be present? You think the planes may have been holographic, but you don't think it's possible stealth aircraft may have also been employed as part of the plot, even when there's such compelling evidence, and now proof that such craft have already been developed by DARPA? To me that's as closed-minded as the people who can't possibly believe any buildings were demolished because they don't know exactly how they accomplished it. Beliefs don't help, really, they mainly hinder. I'm just presenting evidence and a possible hypothesis for that evidence that makes the most sense to me. If you don't agree, that's fine. There's room for more than one opinion here, I hope--or maybe I posted this material in the wrong place. I honestly thought it would draw more interest & excitement, and I certainly didn't expect to get responses like the other guy, who said that the first black object was a bird--which I can kind of understand, because it does resemble a bird, but if he were capable of critical thinking, he would understand that the object is too large & moving too fast to be a bird. Also, I don't know why two birds would just happen thru (or next to) the dense smoke coming from the towers right after both attacks, two times! I don't think he even watched the second video, because he said that was "debris" lol. I've never see debris fly at Mach 10 and make a turn, as the object in the second video (Rooftop view of second plane hitting South Tower). I think he may have meant the silver object in the first video. Maybe that was "debris" but from what? And no, I'm not actually asking you, that's rhetorical, obviously, since you think the all the video is fake--even though (and I will find this video and link it for you) as I said, a guy did an extensive study of the "faked-video-footage" theory, because he felt some of the evidence that appeared in some of the "no-planes" videos was compelling, particularly a couple shots where it looks like the 2nd plane is coming in from different angles. Yet when he did the study--and it was extensive--he found that ALL of the shots, when he put them into this computer/ 3-d scale model of NY, they all in fact lined-up. Now, where I do think there was video manipulation is in frame 23 of the Pentagon footage--the 5 frames which supposedly show FL77 hit the Pentagon. And I'm not saying there wasn't maybe some other manipulation, but I find the theory that all of the footage was altered weak and too full of holes, and as I said, it doesn't account for all of the witnesses. I wasn't there myself, but a good friend was, whom I trust, and he said he saw what looked and sounded like a plane crash into the S. Tower--live, not on TV. So, whatever they did, it wasn't--IMO (and that's all I'm giving)-accomplished with video-fakery alone. I've been studying 9/11 since 2005, and I've known there was something wrong w/the story since the day it happened, as I know the area around the Pentagon does indeed have surface to air missiles, and the SS at the WH have stinger missiles, too, that they can shoulder-launch, and there's no way a 757 (or any other subsonic aircraft) could've entered that airspace w/no mode C or military transponder code "squawking" & no radio contact w/out being shot down, unless there was some stand-down order (perhaps what Mineta witnessed) or it was somehow defeating the detection systems--especially not after we'd known we were "under-attack" for almost 1.5 hours. So, I've seen just about all the YT videos and other docs on 9/11 there are to see, as well as doing a lot of reading on the subject. My opinions are few, but informed and not made lightly. And, perhaps unlike you, I don't think I have all the answers yet--especially now that I accidentally stumbled onto this new evidence, which I find quite compelling, regardless of whether others may dismiss it. People CAN'T see w/their eyes what their brains refuse to believe. They will make it a bird, even though logic (if they could apply it) should tell them otherwise. Just like people can't see that the towers were blown apart--it's obvious to me, just from watching the collapse of the N. Tower (David Chandler's "North Tower Exploding" is a great video of the collapse looped, with the physicist narrating) that the bld was destroyed with the use of explosives. There is no "pile driver" present, as Chandler points out in his video. The core remained for a minute and then you could see it turn to dust!? What caused this? Was that done by video fakery, too? Or was it thermite? "Directed energy?" IDK! It could be something exotic of which we know nothing about because the tech is classified, just like these hyper-sonic black drones were. It's best to stick to evidence that can be pointed to and examined, IMO, than to resort to speculation. I've found what's very likely visual proof there were military aircraft in the skies of NY on 9/11. I think that's significant, and if the footage were altered, then why insert these objects which are moving so fast most people have never seen them? Why put them in but then say nothing about it, even when no one notices them? What would be the motive to do such a thing? And why can they only be seen in only a couple videos that have the right angle? Why make them both show up just after the attacks? Doesn't make any sense to me.
DARPA develops some crazy shit. Think about the amount of money we spend on "defense" and with the brightest minds working with limitless resources and absolute secrecy, who knows what kind of tech they have? I think the idea of video manipulation may be a bit primitive for them. But again, that's just my opinion.
"Reality is that which remains when you stop believing in it."--Phillip K. Dick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 15 2013, 10:48 PM
Post #13





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 12 2013, 07:12 AM) *
I've discovered 2 black Unidentified Flying Objects, and one silver object, in video footage of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers on 9/11. I've explained the details below.

What I'm about to describe is in all of the unedited videos of the 1st impact, but with the version I can tell you when and where to look for these objects on your own; or, you can just watch the linked video below in which my friend slowed this original footage down so it's easier to see.
The original Naudet brother's video footage of the 1st attack is 45 seconds long. At 36 seconds, look to the left of the tower--I think the only reason others haven't seen this is because one's eyes are drawn to the tower. But at this time, you will see a black object--looks kind of like a bird, but is obviously at least as big as a fighter-jet and is moving at an extremely high speed--probably close to super-sonic. The object moves in a hook maneuver, coming from the left side of the screen, moving towards the camera, then it hooks back towards the tower, flies into the smoke--where it seems to hit something (you can only see that if you slow it down, though) and then the black object--probably the same one, but I'm not sure--races off to the right of the screen. This is NOT hard to see, it's very clear, and it surprises me no one else has apparently seen it. And there's another almost identical object in footage of the second attack, which I explain later. For some reason, if you want to view these images yourself, they're easier to see in the silent version, which is also 45 seconds long. The version with sound is cropped, and makes it almost impossible to see a second, silver object, moving from the top right side of the screen towards the tower--but it's only there for a second, and then the video ends. The camera actually moves up, panning away, above this silver object so it's out of frame, just before the footage ends. It really puzzles me why Naudet stopped filming this first impact after only 45 seconds? Very curious--seems like they would've kept filming for at least 2 or 3 mins.

Some claim the 1st image is a bird. But a person standing at that distance would be invisible, like the lady who stands in the hole in the N. Tower a few mins later. Yet, this object is at the same distance (as it disappears into the smoke to the side of the tower, which hasn't drifted far, as it was just struck) and is quite visible, so it must be bigger than a human and therefore much bigger than a bird! It may look a bit like a bird, the way it moves, but it's FAR too large and moving FAR too fast. Indeed, that fast motion may be what makes it look like there's a flapping motion at one point. In this video, the object looks like a bird when slowed down to 25% of its original speed. And why would a bird fly into a probably still hot, very dense, cloud of smoke?

Here's a video of these first objects slowed down, but you can independently verify that these images are in the original video by searching it out on YT yourself.

9/11 UFO video


I found another black Unidentified Flying Object in this other footage of the second attack, too, and it acts in a very similar manner, also appearing just seconds after the 2nd plane strike this time, and flying thru the smoke coming from the tower. I haven't gotten to slow this one down, and it's flying much faster. It enters the screen a few milliseconds past .53 (of the 1 min video) and is gone by .54. However, it is obvious this is a similar object. It appears after the plane, moving from the left of the screen to the right. Again, like the first, this object passes thru the smoke that's just started pouring from the S. Tower (first video is of N. Tower). As it leaves the smoke, it passes by the top of the North Tower's antennae about 1/2 way up the length of the antennae/spire, then continues, turns slightly downward, and turns on its side (I watched it many times to determine this) which shows it's a 3-dimensional craft, before disappearing off screen. It transverses the entire distance in one second. The object enters at .53 and is gone by .54.
However, with this video, scale is shown because it shows a human body falling from the N. Tower, before the jet hits the S. Tower. So, scale is established and anyone with an open mind and sense can know that the object we're seeing is far bigger than a human (and any bird). It's about the size of a fighter jet, which is my guess as to what it is. But it must be travelling at about Mach 10. Watch, you will see it. It's definitely there, and I can think of no rational explanation for it, other than an advanced craft. If you listen closely, when the object passes, you can also hear a slight but definite high-pitched whine. I used headphones, so IDK if you can hear it without them. But there is a sound--almost like faint electronic interference!
I am not a conspiracy nut! I've been looking into 9/11 for years, but this was the last thing I expected to discover--an even deeper mystery. No one else appears to have noticed or made any comment about these objects, so I really doubt they were added. See what you think. But if you think the 2nd object here is a bird, please don't bother as you are obviously an idiot as birds can't fly at super-sonic speeds. They also don't make a habit of flying into dense, hot smoke, or being the size of a fighter jet. Remember the scale! Here's the link:

Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower


If for some reason the above link doesn't want to work, just type the video name, "Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower, loud boom.." into YT and watch it.


********************************************************************************
***************


People, the important video is the 2nd one. Watch the full speed version first:
Rooftop view of 2nd Plane Hitting South Tower

Then watch this video which is the above footage slowed down first to 1/4 its speed then 1/12 of its speed:
My Move 2

Then read this Yahoo news article which details this DRAPA black drone capable of speed up to Mach 20, which
turned out to be too fast, causing it to crash:
Super-Secret-Hyper-Sonic drone

Think maybe it's possible there were forerunners of these craft there on 9/11, and that's what these black objects are?
The first video isn't definitive enough. I think only the densest person would suggest a bird could fly anywhere close to
this speed. Maybe after watching the above videos first, you can entertain the possibility that the object in this video
isn't a bird, either. Besides, what are the odds that two very large and very fast "birds" would just happen to show up
right after each of the 2 WTC Tower attacks, and that both were do a very similar fly-over, seeming to fly into the smoke
to help conceal their presence. Who knows what else they may've been doing, but there are many possibilities.
I should've put the 2nd video first, but that's the order I discovered them in. Anyway, here is the first video--
remember, the apparent "flapping" motion seen with this first object could be part of its disguise, and it is enhanced
by the act of slowing this object down. It's too big to be a bird, which you should see if you spend any time thinking
about it, as well as too fast. Plus, a bird would never fly into that dense, toxic, probably still hot smoke!
But believe what you want, or what you can. Here's the slow version of 1st video & object after N. Tower attack:
1st black object at N. Tower attack slowed down

If anyone wants to have an intelligent discussion about this, I welcome it. If you think both objects in both videos are
birds or just debris, or just altered footage, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't care to hear it, and I think the idea
that the 2nd object could be a bird is downright preposterous. I'm sure that won't stop some of you from spouting off
that these are just birds or debris or whatever, as that's your right. I just expected a little more from patrons of this site.
Besides, why put these objects, which most have never seen, in the footage and then say NOTHING about them, even
when no one notices them? What would be the motive for doing such a thing? The 2 videos are not from the same source.
The friends with whom I've shared this agree with my logic concerning scale, which proves even the first object, which
does resemble a bird, is far too large to be one, and moving too fast. The 2nd object in the S. Tower attack
footage can obviously only be some kind of highly advanced aircraft capable of super-sonic speed.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 17 2013, 09:15 AM
Post #14





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 15 2013, 10:39 PM) *
you think the all the video is fake--

People CAN'T see w/their eyes what their brains refuse to believe. They will make it a bird, even though logic (if they could apply it) should tell them otherwise. Just like people can't see that the towers were blown apart--


"People CAN'T see w/their eyes what their brains refuse to believe"
I agree 101% .... I've lived with that problem every day for 73 years...
best-ever example is Prof Wiseman's one-minute video ... and if we
learn the simple lesson, we become a lot more careful in how, where,
why and what we direct our attention to. I challenge anyone to see
there entire field of vision fooled in under 60 seconds
http://www.quirkology.com/UK/Video_ColourChangingTrick.shtml

"you think the all the video is fake" .... no, I'd say the entire 9/11 event was faked....
"faked" as in a mixture of real and virtual ... and my question arising has always been
"if they fake one scene SO blatantly (select whichever of the many fakeD scenes
you prefer) then why should we not start all over and assume the entire event
was a fraud, a lie .... and that is exactly what we do find.

You are undoubtedly correct about DARPA planes .... but there is little point even
raising the question seriously in a scene where we don't see a single
conventional military defense airplane of any type. There IS one and only one
very-good (i.e. absolutely-terrible) reason we see no NORAD defense ... and
if we refuse to even consider the dreadful possibility that TPTB knew there were
no real airplanes headed for ANY target buildings, and therefore no need to
send any spotter planes to give chase...then do we deserve any defense?
(Okay, I may be forced to retract and apologize, but I am only making a point ...
not wanting to join Cheney and Bush and Meyrs on the gallows for treason...)


If you want to go where angels fear to tread and where pilots without security
clearance will perhaps keep tight-lipped .... then your most-appropriate
speculation should be devoted to the DEW (whatever it was) that caused
2 of the 3 Twin Towers to turn to dust.

But there again, I suggest MOST expert plane-spotters (and who with pretty good eyes
doesn't consider herself an expert?) most will deny point-blank that 2 steel
buildings turn to dust, even as we can still watch and watch again as the steel
girders (and in one shot, the entire top 23 floors of one tower) really do turn to dust.

They/we tell our minds that steel CANNOT turn to dust, especially not at room
temperature, therefore what we see cannot be happening.

Same peeps who failed to see Prof Wiseman switch scenes in front of
their brainless eyes....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 17 2013, 09:46 AM
Post #15





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 15 2013, 08:10 PM) *
I admit Alan H ... I should have given what you said a minute longer. My sincere respect promises to make up for my unintentional casualness, with a UFO off topic in another post. It should have you absolutely spellbound.


Apologies in advance for any pilots who regard this post as being way too far off topic... and it would take all day and some to explain the admittedly-desperately-tenuous connection. For our friend Alan H. here's my very-recent (as in this month) interest in "real live" UFOs ... and crop circles.
Okay, now don't look at the ceiling like that, chasps ...not until you tell me how those MI5-paid art-students with stomping boards were able to reproduce the fact that ONLY the bent-down-over-night wheat stems exhibit the bent part growing from the node at 90 degrees to the stem .... multiplied by a trillion times, all within a few seconds in real time (it's been shot by night time video) ... and then tell me this topic isn't somehow related to the 9/11 fake mystery... The following is lifted off my FB page facebook.com/hommedespoir


"Check "The Crop Circle Conspiracy" for an amazing chemtrail scene where military jets and UFOs are both seen playing around chemtrails (around 08.45) ...
Do we just need to shut our eyes a little wider?
The most eye-opening video since "Eye...s Wide Shut" might be Chris Everard's insider view of crop circles and chemtrails and mysterious football-sized balls of light which can be seen chasing military jets, themselves seen playing with chemtrails, while other luminous spheres are seen the instant that a crop circle is actually created ... yet another tiny UFO sphere is caught at the instant it downs a fighter jet in anger at a public airshow ... believe it or Ripley not.
Don't blink: you'll miss the moment.

Why is this military fighter jet weaving around a new-formed chemtrail?

A tiny sphere of UFO light appears in the video, darting around the same chemtrail as the fighter jets have been playing with (just below "the")

2 tiny UFO spheres chasing each other across a wheat crop c 1996 ... the crop-circle literally appears as you watch them fly around (you can see the beginning of the pattern emerging in the wheat literally as the UFOs are flying over the field) ... this scene is totally analised (including proof that the National Geographic attempt to debunk this was a total fraud: the exact-same phenomenon was filmed on 2 different cameras 3 years later.... all found in Chris Everard's amazing 2-hour film
(For more still photos, check the original post on hommedespoir's FB page...
The only-just-visible mini UFO just clipped the tail rudder of a fighter jet at a Biggin Hill airshow, causing the plane to crash. Seconds later, 2 UFOs can be seen flying in the fireball smoke plume which erupted after the crash...
See More
Secret Space 3 The Crop Circle Conspiracy
http://www.enigmatv.net/shop/index.php?

This post has been edited by MikeR: Dec 17 2013, 09:49 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 17 2013, 09:55 AM
Post #16





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



Corrected link...

QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 18 2013, 01:46 AM) *
Seconds later, 2 UFOs can be seen flying in the fireball smoke plume which erupted after the crash...
See More
Secret Space 3 The Crop Circle Conspiracy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8_hPbPHomU?


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 17 2013, 11:49 AM
Post #17





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 15 2013, 11:46 AM) *
Apologies in advance for any pilots who regard this post as being way too far off topic... and it would take all day and some to explain the admittedly-desperately-tenuous connection. For our friend Alan H. here's my very-recent (as in this month) interest in "real live" UFOs ... and crop circles.
Okay, now don't look at the ceiling like that, chasps ...not until you tell me how those MI5-paid art-students with stomping boards were able to reproduce the fact that ONLY the bent-down-over-night wheat stems exhibit the bent part growing from the node at 90 degrees to the stem .... multiplied by a trillion times, all within a few seconds in real time (it's been shot by night time video) ... and then tell me this topic isn't somehow related to the 9/11 fake mystery... The following is lifted off my FB page facebook.com/hommedespoir


"Check "The Crop Circle Conspiracy" for an amazing chemtrail scene where military jets and UFOs are both seen playing around chemtrails (around 08.45) ...
Do we just need to shut our eyes a little wider?
The most eye-opening video since "Eye...s Wide Shut" might be Chris Everard's insider view of crop circles and chemtrails and mysterious football-sized balls of light which can be seen chasing military jets, themselves seen playing with chemtrails, while other luminous spheres are seen the instant that a crop circle is actually created ... yet another tiny UFO sphere is caught at the instant it downs a fighter jet in anger at a public airshow ... believe it or Ripley not.
Don't blink: you'll miss the moment.

Why is this military fighter jet weaving around a new-formed chemtrail?

A tiny sphere of UFO light appears in the video, darting around the same chemtrail as the fighter jets have been playing with (just below "the")

2 tiny UFO spheres chasing each other across a wheat crop c 1996 ... the crop-circle literally appears as you watch them fly around (you can see the beginning of the pattern emerging in the wheat literally as the UFOs are flying over the field) ... this scene is totally analised (including proof that the National Geographic attempt to debunk this was a total fraud: the exact-same phenomenon was filmed on 2 different cameras 3 years later.... all found in Chris Everard's amazing 2-hour film
(For more still photos, check the original post on hommedespoir's FB page...
The only-just-visible mini UFO just clipped the tail rudder of a fighter jet at a Biggin Hill airshow, causing the plane to crash. Seconds later, 2 UFOs can be seen flying in the fireball smoke plume which erupted after the crash...
See More
Secret Space 3 The Crop Circle Conspiracy
http://www.enigmatv.net/shop/index.php?



Mike, apparently we have different definitions for what a UFO is. To me a UFO--and this is the only
reason I used this term to refer to the black objects I discovered in the WTC attacks--is an
Unidentified Flying Object. That's what these black objects were to me when I first discovered
them. I NEVER thought they were "alien or ET craft." I discovered the Yahoo news article about the
DARPA hypersonic black drone craft that recently crashed when its skin peeled-off at Mach 20 (and
I think some pilots may find THIS interesting)AFTER I discovered the black super-fast objects flying
by each tower right after the impact/explosion/whatever. I don't even believe in aliens--I mean,
I'm open-minded about the possibility, but I'm trained in science, and when you realize how big
space is, well..Unless they got around relativity, any "aliens" are probably from another dimension &
probably look nothing like what we'd expect. The idea of UFO's being alien craft has always been
a convenient cover & disinfo campaign against people learning about highly advanced military craft,
which is what I believe I discovered in the 2 separate videos of both the N & S Tower attacks, and
I think it's significant. If anyone else is interested in these military craft I found--and they're there,
you will see them--I posted all the links, etc in the section on the N. Tower. This is visual proof that
gov't was lying about having military craft present--it doesn't matter WHY they were there, their
existence isn't speculation! The object that crosses the sky in the video "Rooftop view of 2nd plane
hitting South Tower, w/loud boom" moves so fast it crosses that entire landscape in one second!
It's moving so fast, that's why most haven't seen it. But my friend made a copy and slowed the
footage down, and I think many real pilots might have an interest in this.

I'm NOT trying or wanting to argue with you, Mike. But I also don't believe in crop-circles. That's
one thing that really has been "debunked." It's a hoax. Or maybe not, who knows? But I've seen
really complex circles made in a night with a couple guys, the right equipment, and a good pattern.

Also, as I said, I don't believe the planes were not stock Boeings, and they may not have been real,
or they may have been real planes that were beefed up to do those speed and reinforced to help
penetrate the Towers, which may've either been pre-weakened or had timed-explosion to blown the
columns as the "planes" entered, IDK. Maybe they were missiles that projected a plane hologram
around them. Again, IDK.
One thing I am pretty sure about is that it wasn't done with video fakery, because that doesn't
explain the hundreds or thousands of eye-witnesses (including a friend of mine) seeing and hearing
what looked like a big jet crash into the S. Tower.

Considering they now have these black hyper-sonic drones being able to reach speeds just shy of
Mach 20, I think it's very likely that this object crossing a huge expanse of NY in 1 second was
probably a forerunner of the craft detailed in the Yahoo news article. I see no reason whatsoever
why someone would insert these black objects into the footage and then say nothing about it,
even when no one has noticed! I discovered them by mistake!

The damage to those buildings and the image and sounds of those planes was created in some way
that involved more than video-fakery. Just because there weren't real commercial flights in danger
doesn't mean the military didn't have these hyper-sonic drones in the area for some reason!
That makes no logic and these would only be dismissed by someone w/a VERY fixed belief system!
No one's got all the answers! I've been studying that event for 8 years, and while I know what
didn't happen, I've just begun to learn some of what did happen! And once again, a UFO means
Unidentified Flying Object, not "alien craft!"
Sorry you don't find this interesting, Mike, but others might. We don't have to agree on everything.

For those that are interested, here are the links to the videos & article, but for the full details visit
my original post--unless someone moved it:

Black "UFOs" (hyper-sonic drones) in the skies above NY during both WTC Tower attacks!
I just discovered this! Thanks to my friend Bert for the video work. These videos are for
educational purposes only & not for profit, in accordance with Fair Use law.
Check it out: slowed-down video of "Rooftop view of 2nd plane hitting South Tower":


Rooftop view slowed-down


Slowed-down footage of 1st attack showing another black "UFO" (hyper-sonic military drone):

1st attack


Yahoo news article showing these hyper-sonic drones exist, as one recently crashed
when its skin peeled-off at Mach 20 (yes, 20X the speed of sound!)

Yahoo news Super-Secret-Hyper-Sonic drone


This post has been edited by Alan H.: Dec 17 2013, 11:54 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan H.
post Dec 17 2013, 12:30 PM
Post #18





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 71
Joined: 24-November 07
Member No.: 2,508



QUOTE (MikeR @ Dec 15 2013, 11:15 AM) *
"People CAN'T see w/their eyes what their brains refuse to believe"
I agree 101% .... I've lived with that problem every day for 73 years...
best-ever example is Prof Wiseman's one-minute video ... and if we
learn the simple lesson, we become a lot more careful in how, where,
why and what we direct our attention to. I challenge anyone to see
there entire field of vision fooled in under 60 seconds
http://www.quirkology.com/UK/Video_ColourChangingTrick.shtml

"you think the all the video is fake" .... no, I'd say the entire 9/11 event was faked....
"faked" as in a mixture of real and virtual ... and my question arising has always been
"if they fake one scene SO blatantly (select whichever of the many fakeD scenes
you prefer) then why should we not start all over and assume the entire event
was a fraud, a lie .... and that is exactly what we do find.

You are undoubtedly correct about DARPA planes .... but there is little point even
raising the question seriously in a scene where we don't see a single
conventional military defense airplane of any type. There IS one and only one
very-good (i.e. absolutely-terrible) reason we see no NORAD defense ... and
if we refuse to even consider the dreadful possibility that TPTB knew there were
no real airplanes headed for ANY target buildings, and therefore no need to
send any spotter planes to give chase...then do we deserve any defense?
(Okay, I may be forced to retract and apologize, but I am only making a point ...
not wanting to join Cheney and Bush and Meyrs on the gallows for treason...)


If you want to go where angels fear to tread and where pilots without security
clearance will perhaps keep tight-lipped .... then your most-appropriate
speculation should be devoted to the DEW (whatever it was) that caused
2 of the 3 Twin Towers to turn to dust.

But there again, I suggest MOST expert plane-spotters (and who with pretty good eyes
doesn't consider herself an expert?) most will deny point-blank that 2 steel
buildings turn to dust, even as we can still watch and watch again as the steel
girders (and in one shot, the entire top 23 floors of one tower) really do turn to dust.

They/we tell our minds that steel CANNOT turn to dust, especially not at room
temperature, therefore what we see cannot be happening.

Same peeps who failed to see Prof Wiseman switch scenes in front of
their brainless eyes....


I know what you mean about some of the remaining core columns turning to dust or smoke or
whatever before our very eyes. However, since I know of nothing that acts exactly like that upon
steel, I try not to speculate too much. Maybe it was nano-thermite, maybe it was some kind of
laser, or "DEW," maybe those drones I found were armed with some type of weapon. We simply
can't know for sure.
Judy Woods makes some good points, but she also ignores a lot of evidence. And as far as
Hutchison Effect and those videos--does that steel looks like clay to anyone else? Besides, if they
have drones that fly at almost Mach 20 (that's LA to NY in 12 mins!) who knows what kind of
black-ops tech may've been used to destroy those buildings. To me it's like they were blown-apart
from the inside, though.
But I think the LEAST likely scenario is that all the video footage was manipulated. There was just
too much of it, and most of it--around 50-60 videos--was all shot by amateur videographers,
citizens. That would've been too much work to do too fast and again, it doesn't explain all the
evidence.

Another thing--just because there may've been no hijackings or commercial airlines does not
mean the military or powers behind this attack didn't have the hyper-sonic drones there in NY for
other purpose. Perhaps they were armed with some equally advanced weaponry system. Perhaps
they were being used to establish the bogus radar track. I'm presenting visual evidence and
backing it up with a hypothesis based on a solid lead. It's best not to put too much faith into any
one YT video or theory, I've found, although I think we can all agree the OCT is one of the more
absurd and unlikely theories out there. Still, you know, I took John Lear's testimony seriously,
until I learned everything he believes--including theories I consider truly loony, like Lizard people
and oh, man--the guy is nuts. Skeptics make the best "truthers" because we really don't want to
believe this stuff. I just follow the evidence, wherever it leads, and try to think critically about any
hypothesis, including trying to disprove it before considering it.

I addressed some of your other comments in another reply. I'm glad we can discuss this stuff
like 2 adults, even if we don't agree on everything. For instance, when I say UFO, I mean
Unidentified Flying Object, NOT "alien craft." Crop circles have been explained, they're an
interesting & elaborate hoax, but that's all. I don't believe in alien space ships. If ET's somehow
managed to cross the great gulfs of time-space, they did it thru worm-hole or something like that,
not in a flying saucer. We probably couldn't even process the image of alien because it would be so
foreign. But I address this stuff in that other reply I mentioned. Peace!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 19 2013, 07:30 AM
Post #19





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 18 2013, 04:30 AM) *
Crop circles have been explained, they're an interesting & elaborate hoax, but that's all.


I can't quite imagine why some mystery craft doing Mach 20
becomes the centerpoint of a discussion, when far simpler
theoretical quesses can easily be imagine to explain a black
thingy darting across a computer screen at 1.257 inches per
second in real time if you see what I mean ... yet you cannot
accept impossibly-complex graphical images appearing in
multi-layer wheat stalks, laid so exquisitely that it would have
taken the known MI5 fakers months of effort to design and
even years to execute (so how the complexity appears
overnight, if not in seconds is I suggest way beyond the
hoax....)

We know the unlisted-in-Council-registers
CIA/MI5 hangout apartment the real hoaxers live at
in London Docks... and the reason the simplest of
hoaxes have been extremely actively done is obviously
because somebody high up wants you and I to think that
ALL crop circles are hoaxed ... and my question must be:
What do they not want us to find out about,
and why do they want to hide it in plain sight?

But as you must already know, this is the same sort of thing
they throw at us re 9/11 (and every other false flag they
fly in our curious faces....) ... they'll plant disinfo (e.g. a
video with a black spot doing 1.257 inches per second
for instance, so that we don't spend time looking at
the real important cock-ups.

Of which there are an amazing number in
the Shady Hoax faked videos.

Oh, one last thing.... the reason why I started realizing
crop circles is hugely interesting, important ... and the one
detail that convinces me that they're no hoax... is how
you can tell for sure what is real from what's faked

After the overpaid art students have trampled with clumsy boards,
their stem at ground level are as you can well guess, just
crop stem bent over...

On the real crop circle, EACH individual stem forms a node
at ground level, and the stem above the node has the
appearance of growing out of the SIDE of the node....

In view of the nanosecond that it took at least one crop circle
to form, that would be about the most amazing thing ever.

Or am I way too far off topic still? whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Dec 19 2013, 07:49 AM
Post #20





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (Alan H. @ Dec 18 2013, 04:30 AM) *
Crop circles have been explained, they're an interesting & elaborate hoax, but that's all.


I can't quite imagine why some mystery craft doing Mach 20
becomes the centerpoint of a discussion, when far simpler
theoretical quesses can be imagined to explain a black
thingy darting across a computer screen at 1.257 inches per
second in real time, if you see what I mean ... and you won't
accept impossibly-complex graphical images actually do appear
in seconds in a field of wheat stalks,
multi-layered so exquisitely they would have
taken the known MI5 fakers months to design and
years to execute

We know the unlisted-in-Council-registers
CIA/MI5 hangout apartment the real hoaxers live at
in London Docks... and the reason the simplest of
hoaxes is being extremely actively done is obviously
because some high-up wants you and I to think that
ALL crop circles are hoaxed ...

The question must be:
What do they NOT want us to find out about? and
ucjh that they have to hide it in plain sight?

As you must already know, this is the same sort of thing
they throw at us re 9/11 (and every other false flag they
fly in our curious faces....) ... they'll plant disinfo (e.g. a
video with a black spot doing 1.257 inches per second)
so that we don't spend time studying the other faked
parts of their fakery, they hope we don't notice all
the cock-ups. Of which there are an amazing number in
the Shady Hoax faked videos, BTW

Oh, one last thing.... the reason why I realized
crop circles is hugely interesting, important ... and the one
detail that convinces me that they're no hoax... is how
you can tell for sure real from fake

After the overpaid art students have tramped their clumsy boards,
the stems at ground level are of course, just
crop stems bent over...

On the real crop circle, EACH individual stem is found to be
mysteriously growing from a new node
at ground level: the stem is now growing out of the SIDE of the node....

Multiply that by the squillions of stems that form the
fabuloutsly-intricate design, then in view of the nanosecond
in which at least one crop circle was seen to form,
that would be about the most amazing thing ever,
in my thin black book....

Or am I too far off topic still? whistle.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th July 2019 - 06:55 PM