plane at the pentagon ? - Page 3

michaelr · 07-02-2008, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merantes

And that is precisely what is shown in part of that vid. we're not going to be able to see slo-mo footage of the plane crashing step by step into the building. The framerate of the surveillance cameras would allow one to capture one or two frames of the plane due to the plane's speed. And as Freckles indicated, camera phones were not in widespread use at that time. And as WTW indicates, camera use in that area is restricted

I will give good money to find where the plane went. I read a corners report and the corner said when he walked into the plane the smell of burnt bodies and the sight of them will be forever on his mind......no fucking shit....what plane?

Inkslinger · 07-02-2008, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelr

I did one, I will do the other maybe today. I feel like I needed a few days off, to much bad news makes Mikey a mad mad boy!

I was just telling the wifey yesterday how greatful I am of marijuana.
It's kept me out of jail and saved a many a person from ass-whoopins.

Boyaka · 07-02-2008, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freckles

And from what I've been told by numerous Pentagon employees, not unlike the rules that civilians cannot take pictures of the Pentagon, civilian companies can also not video tape the Pentagon. But, one question I would like you to answer is what caused the structural damage to the top of the Sheraton as well as the exit sign and the taxi cab?

So what are all the pictures and footage after the crash you obviously can film it cause I saw it on the news ! I have not seen anything about damage to the sheraton I will look it up. I don't dispute something hit the pentagon but I can't believe it was a large commercial jet. If it was flying that low it would have been deafening for ppl on the ground and their would be footage of it not to mention the hole in the pentagon was far too small.

Conservative15 · 07-02-2008, 01:28 PM

How do you Truthers explain all the people who saw an airplane? People even identified it as an American Airlines airplane.

michaelr · 07-02-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conservative15

How do you Truthers explain all the people who saw an airplane? People even identified it as an American Airlines airplane.

No one saw it hit..OK?

Djinn · 07-02-2008, 02:35 PM

CCTV recordings do not always provide high resolution, high framerate video. They're designed to capture relatively slow events that take place fairly close to the camera. This was especially true with CCTV cameras in use back in 2001 (using camera systems that may have been made many years earlier).

Old CCTV cameras were excellent for capturing video of a person walking through the camera's range. However, a person sprinting at 18mph is rendered a blur across two or three frames of video - maybe.

Don't forget - normal video is around 30 frames per second. It makes for excellent quality, but routinely storing that sort of data digitally was not viable under 1990s technology, and there was no reason to store it on analog film. CCTVs back then often operated at only two or three frames per second.

But that's not all; those frames were low resolution; comparable to what you'd get on an cellphone-camera a few years ago. As long as the subject isn't moving too quickly, it's fine. But such cameras weren't designed to take high speed photos of moving subjects.

As such, an aircraft traveling at over 400mph a solid quarter-mile from the camera would have barely registered.

Conservative15 · 07-02-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelr

No one saw it hit..OK?

Yeah, people did see it hit.

michaelr · 07-02-2008, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conservative15

Yeah, people did see it hit.

sure they did.

Boyaka · 07-02-2008, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinn

CCTV recordings do not always provide high resolution, high framerate video. They're designed to capture relatively slow events that take place fairly close to the camera. This was especially true with CCTV cameras in use back in 2001 (using camera systems that may have been made many years earlier).

Old CCTV cameras were excellent for capturing video of a person walking through the camera's range. However, a person sprinting at 18mph is rendered a blur across two or three frames of video - maybe.

Don't forget - normal video is around 30 frames per second. It makes for excellent quality, but routinely storing that sort of data digitally was not viable under 1990s technology, and there was no reason to store it on analog film. CCTVs back then often operated at only two or three frames per second.

But that's not all; those frames were low resolution; comparable to what you'd get on an cellphone-camera a few years ago. As long as the subject isn't moving too quickly, it's fine. But such cameras weren't designed to take high speed photos of moving subjects.

As such, an aircraft traveling at over 400mph a solid quarter-mile from the camera would have barely registered.

Your point being ??? If the footage from citgo and the highway cams don't show the plane then why haven't we seen them already , no need for them to be classified is their?? The cctv cameras on top of the pentagon will be high quality and high resolution and certainly saw something.

RSXTC · 07-02-2008, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelr

No one saw it hit..OK?

That is false. There are several witnesses to the impact.
And there are many witnesses to the clean up, and many who participated in identifying hte plane parts and bodies found within the pentagon

Stuart Artman saw the plane impact
David Battle
Gary Bauer
Sean Boger

many more are available.

Are you calling them liars?

Books you should be reading, because you are nothing more than a liar.

Amazon.com: Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11: Patrick Creed, Rick Newman: Books
U.S. Government Bookstore: Tragedy and Heroism: September 11, 2001 at the Pentagon
Judicial Watch