TOTAL INFORMATION ANALYSIS

Monday, October 30, 2006

More top-quality research on 9/11 TV fakery continues to emerge from 911.blogger.com. The most recent concerns video from the morning of 9/11 that aired live on WNYW television in New York City. What is curious about this footage is the wide shot from the helicopter immediately before the South Tower incident at 9:03:00 am. Using the quarter-mile high towers as a reference, we can see that the field of view of the camera about 11 seconds beforehand extended to about three miles south of the towers. Now, if there was a standard Boeing airliner headed north toward the towers, it would have easily been seen in this shot, being about as long as the clearly-visible towers are wide.

Yet, there's no plane there -- which would seem to indicate that the plane image which appeared 11 seconds later was likely computer-generated.

Here's the first set of back-of-the-envelope calculations which appeared on 911blogger.com 10/25/2006:

" From the towers to the right side of the video (south) is about 3 miles.

From the time the video starts to the time the plane appears is about 11 seconds. The plane was traveling at approximately 500 MPH = 8.33 MPMinute = .138 MPSecond. So 11 seconds * .138 MPSecond = about 1.5 miles.

Therefore the plane should have been approximately half way between the tower and the right side of the frame (field of view). The plane, given its size, should have been CLEARLY visible. BUT ITS NOT THERE.
[...]
The fact remains that the plane is not in the picture. And, I'm not a no-planer, but this is just bizarre.

I hate loose ends (no pun intended). When I started the experiment I assumed that the calculations would show that the plane would have been outside the field of view. UGH!
-----

Brian Vernon of Scholars for 9/11 Truth followed up with similar calculations. Again, from 911blogger.com 10/28/2006:



For reference:


• Short WNYW clip
  
• Long WNYW clip
  

| Posted at 01:34 | PERMA-LINK |

Comments:
Genius!!!!!Excellent work.
assuming the distance of 3 miles is correct then there is no question that the plane should have been in the frame(11 seconds prior to impact) when the video begins.


#

posted by Anonymous : 1/11/06 17:40

 

http://snopes.com/rumors/crash.htm

Excellent work. Thought you might enjoy this!


#

posted by gritzle70 : 8/11/06 09:03

 

http://snopes.com/rumors/crash.htm

The Accidental Tourist

Thought you might enjoy this -- picked up at Killtown's website.

Great work!


#

posted by gritzle70 : 8/11/06 09:03

 

Why couldn't it just be obscured by the smoke? You just see what you want to see!


#

posted by Anonymous : 16/2/07 06:28

 

Post a Comment