Where is the proof that the airliners existed at all?

http://www.zengardner.com/witnesses-saw-people-vaporized-on-911/

Patricia, saw the ball and pretended it could be a plane by pretending that she was far away from the towers, which of course she was very close to. This is called a false excuse.

As this terrified woman was running pell-mell away from the first collapsing tower — her hair, coat and feet on fire — Ms Ondrovic witnessed vehicles parked along the street spontaneously erupt into flames.

She even witnessed an aircraft disappear while in flight: “I saw something in the sky, it was a plane, but it was way out. It looked like it was over Jersey or something, then it wasn’t there anymore. I saw a small fireball, and it was gone. I saw two other planes. One came in one way, and the other came in the other way, and there was a plane in the middle that was way far off in the distance. Then the plane in the middle just disappeared into a little fire ball. It looked like the size of a golf ball from where I could see it. And the other two planes veered off into opposite directions. I just kept on running north.”

 

This is such complete horse(*)(*)(*)(*) I'm surprised it's allowed on this site. How do we know?? I saw them with my very own eyes. So did millions of other people. It was recorded on literally hundreds of video feeds, from the networks, to guys using video cameras in their apartments as they looked on in shock. My wife lost one of her best friends that day. One of MY best friends should have died, but by some miracle didn't as he survived the collapse of one, but both of the towers.

This bull(*)(*)(*)(*) disrespects the memories of those lost and is a disgrace. You should be ashamed of yourself, and this thread should not only be shutdown, it should be deleted.

Despicable and disgusting.

 

I noticed that too....

 

What a load of lying crap..the buildings dropped from the top down,no 'mini nuke' in the basement.....every one of your posts keeps getting more bizarre,and [video=youtube;DDBoqg1RcfU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDBoqg1RcfU[/video]

 

They said "the plane went between the buildings", and from their vantage point they were looking at the front/north side of the towers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFPB_NTi2cs

"There you see the plane...between the two buildings...and then you see the explosion...right there, unbelievable."

 

No,they did NOT....and from their vantage point they didn't see the plane hit...
what they SAW was momentary image of the plane flying past the'visual 'gap' between the buildings
More fail.

 

Yes, they did....and from their vantage point they didn't see any plane because one wasn't captured by chopper 4.

More fail.

 

Sure it was...at around 0:23 you can see the shadow pass between the 'gap' of the two towers.....

A plane hit,only the stubborn or seriously deluded claim there wasn't..

 

What the hell did I just read??? "Cars spontaneously erupted into flames". If that was the case then how the hell is she alive because if there was something going on that was turning metal cars into flames then I'm pretty sure of would melt skin.

An air plane way off in the distance exploded? Then why was every building, person, aircraft and any other form of material between ground zero and that plane in the distance over jersey not also destroyed/vaporized? You mini nuke people are so pathetic.

 

If the plane was between the two towers, why doesn't your tan flight path show it?

 

I never noticed they were defined in that diagram. The truth was left in blips and I have posted many of them. This guy was filming from the south and captured the ball or whatever you wanna call it. He simply turned it over to some authority and got back this fake video of a plane making impossible turns around the south tower.



#43 911conspiracy.tv - 2nd WTC Attack Plane Crash Videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG25MRnPy1o

 

I think I have 7's special form of dementia figured out.

He thinks the aircraft is moving toward the camera at the start of the .gif in the above post, that it somehow makes a u-turn during the time when the aircraft is obscured by the similar coloring of the building.

 

Again,

Why doesn't your tan flight path show the plane doing what you claim it is doing? Why doesn't your tan fligh tpath show the plane traveling between the towers?

 

sop after visitation.

 

no, you are right
and we are bore

 

He would say there was a plane because a fake image of one was added to his pathetic video. He could never claim he saw one while filming and that's all that matters as it concerns Clifton Cloud's eyewitness account. The videos are awful fakes...all of them. A zoomed plane from a mile away on a clear day would never look like a blurred, black blob. It's nonsense. NBC only having around two hours to alter this footage would explain why it's one of the worst fakes from that day.

 

You REALLY need to research what happens to objects when you 'zoom' in on them

Magnification increases distortion,ank any kid who's ever got a cheap telescope for christmas and tried to look at saturn at '650X!'

 

Your analysis of an animated GIF is the nonsense. A zoomed plane? What the heck do you think that means? Fixed lens cameras don't zoom. The enlarging effect is created by enlarging the size of the pixels, and reducing effective resolution.

What type of Camera was Cloud using? It's impossible to tell from the GIF, since the GIF is compressed, but even an 8 megapixel camera is only 3266 x 2450 pixels. We can get an understanding of scale of the image if we take a look at the size of things before Cloud enlarges the image. From a mile away the visible portion of the tower is only 1/4 of the height of the image. The antenna on the tower is less than a 15th of the height of the image. Since the antenna is 360 feet tall, and an 8 megapixel image is 2450 pixels tall we can estimate that even if Cloud's camera was 8 megapixel, (I don't think it was. I think it was much lower. 3 maybe.) the resolution at that distance is more than 2 feet for every pixel. Do I need to create an image of an aircraft at this scale to show you what it would look like?

Can you draw an image using 1 dot for every 2 feet of image without it looking like a blur? Let me see you draw an aircraft using a space that's 75 dots long and 25 dots high. You could use 2 standard pieces of graph paper if you tape them together.

 

Q: Why is the pink circle 7 drew around the aircraft fuzzy?

A: Compression artifacts

7 Obviously drew the circle first in something like MS paint. The edges of his lines would have been sharp, with no pink blending in with the surrounding image. The corners of the shape he drew were a series of right angles that outlined the shape he was trying to draw attention to. He then enlarged the image, and then re-saved the image as a .jpg (Photobucket changed the pixel resolution to match screen resolution, increased the compression level, and re-saved the image when he uploaded it) That's why his pink shape is just as much a blob as the area of the image he was trying to circle.

 

Is it possible for you to write a post without deleting a post?

 

He didn't film or a see a plane. He saw something he couldn't positively identify. Your reply is meaningless to the fact that no real plane was captured by any person or media outlet. Any person could film a plane from a mile or two away and it would be seen as such. You would need to film a plane and alter the footage just the way it was done on 911. The suggestion that Cloud would not have identified a plane is absurd. The blob also appears within the frame, which is another impossibility and further proof they didn't have enough time to produce something similar to most other faked footage. In his NBC interview they started the video after the blob appeared out of thin air. That's called a consciousness of guilt.

He was one mile away and only saw the ball and a white flash. He failed to mention seeing something on tv, but stuck to not seeing anything. This one witness is corroborated by the four tv broadcasts that aired a ball-shaped object. It's not possible for a plane to look like a ball from a mile away.

Clifton Cloud: "I was probably about a mile away and um, I didn't, didn't realize that the second explosion was going on...it was just just a quick sharp blast of white light, orange and then the sound, the shockwave hit a few minutes later."

Lauer: "And it was while you were shooting that, that the second plane came into view, and as you said, you really didn't even realize what you had captured. What was your response when you went back and looked carefully at the tape?

Cloud: "I thought about um, where the plane had hit in the sixties floor where one of my companies largest client's is."

2nd plane & 1st "collapse" Clifton Cloud 9/12 11:50 am - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_bttrlyx4k

"All I saw was a helicopter and I didn't see the helicopter anymore. It just looked like it exploded from the inside."

"There was a police copter like near it...I swear, I don't know what happen to him, but. But when the second one exploded there was a helicopter not too far away."

 

The suggestion that everyone who says they saw a plane actually didn't see a plane is absurd.

Including Cloud, who says he saw a plane.

 

His own words expose your lie. He would not claim he saw a plane unless the interviewer allowed him to get away with it. You certainly know that the earliest accounts are the most reliable. He'd be lying if he said he saw a plane while filming.

"I just caught the second explosion on videotape...No, a bomb, I saw it, NO PLANE HIT NOTHIN', the building exploded from the other tower floors down."

NIST FOIA: Clifton Cloud Clips 1-3 (WTC2 Plane Impact, 9:03am) - YouTube

 

He maintains that he saw a plane.

So what you're saying is this one witness you keep referencing is a liar.

 

Of course he's lying if he meant it that way. He could not have honestly meant it that way because he didn't see a plane. That's according to his video and the TV interview that followed a few hours after the event.