View Project green1 plane

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/1.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/object_filtered.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/flash.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/00'_2.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/secondplanearrow2.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/3_3.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/4_2.JPG

Object hanging from the bottom of the plane was seen in several diffrent photos

The object in this photo appears to be reflecting the sun. This does not look like part of the fuselage of a Boeing 767.
They appear to be hanging below the regular fuselage of the plane.
There seem to be two objects here, one in front, one in back.
Or possibally one continuous object along the fuselage.

In the photo "details" circled are 2 objects in black.
( or one continuous , partially shadowed by the wing and engine)
Also one object in circled in blue.
The object circled in blue, could represent what is seen in the "planebomb" picture.
For a detailed analysis of this photo below
see the link above for "911 photo flight 175"
http://911review.org/flight175photo.html

Several photos and videos were taken of the 2nd plane as it was about to hit the south tower.
Here are some of them together. This may help in analysis, and in deciding if any of these photos or stills were faked or manipulated.

Does the pointy nose, and black color resemble a Boeing 767,
or a fighter jet ?
The other pics show that the plane was in the sun at this time, why is there only two points on the plane that are strongly reflecting the sun, while the rest of the plane is black?

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/Bild7_details1.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/2ndTower.jpg

also see www.pod.batcave.net
and www.phill.batcave.net

Brad's 911 video and photo analysis

extreme closeups of the underside of flight 175 video

www.letsroll911.org

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/7.JPG

http://edit.81x.com/Authors/green1/7b.JPG

911 photo flight 175
http://911review.org/flight175photo.html
Flight 175 Photo, just before impact with the WTC. This is perhaps the best photo of any of the 911 planes. Is it a fake? or is it evidence of remote control ?
My response to the screencapture at Rense.com
Real 911 Science For PM - The ST Airliner Photo
www.rense.com/general63/st.htm
A SECOND Avionics specialist has detected a SECOND REMOTE CONTROL ANTENNA
on the airliner that was crashed into the South Tower

Related...
Ghost Gun UA175
http://www.gallerize.com/2005-01-11_001_MI_SG_UA175.htm
Were some of the photos and videos from 911 fake ?
This is a very well done presentation, and well worth the reading.It makes one wonder who and why someone would go through the trouble of faking media surrounding September 11th ?
This also gives an excellent presentation as to which photograhps and videos came from where.
The Questions site is wrong, and has absolutely no idea which video i took the still from.

911 photo flight 175

Ghost Gun UA175

Also see 911 review's WTC Plane Pod page

Response to the "questions" and oilumpire sites...

here is a clip from the "questions" site that bashes MY site, before ever speaking to me, or even taking the time to understand my site

the "questions" site says...

"Personal beliefs are simply inadequate as a basis for debate. If the no-plane advocates want us to agree that these are different planes, then they must prove it using geometry and image analysis.. As for my opinion, I think that all but one of the photos clearly show the 767 that was alleged to hit the tower. The differences are due to different brightness levels, image quality, resolution, and foreshortening due to changes in perspective. The one image that is difficult to interpret is an extremely degraded image
http://www.81x.com/Authors/green1/7b.JPG
at the bottom of 911 Batcave's main page. But check this out: taking the second image from the top
http://www.81x.com/Authors/green1/7.JPG
of the home page and blowing it up, we find that these two images

probably come from the same source:"

Well he is absolutely wrong.
Withought taking the time to research this, or bothering to ask me,
he decides to try and trash my site.
He should have done a little research first.
These 2 images come from different sources.
one is a photo, the other i extracted form a video.
He says....
"Personal beliefs are simply inadequate as a basis for debate."
Well, i did not debate him, he made negative comments about my site, and has never tried to contact me at all.
Is he chicken ?
What is he hiding?

First he says...
"Personal beliefs are simply inadequate as a basis for debate."

then he says...
"As for my opinion, I think that all but one of the photos clearly show the 767 that was alleged to hit the tower. "

well by his own standards, personal opinions are
"inadequate as a basis for debate."

but now, he never did debate me, so.. ???

the "questions" site, and the "Oil-umpire" site both follow the same pattern,
never debating me, but writing negative stuff about me.

The photos may be degraded, but since neither of these sites have (or can) do photo analysis, they evidently must bash the people who do.

he says...
"As for my opinion, I think that all but one of the photos clearly show the 767 that was alleged to hit the tower. "

Guess he is agreeing with me that one is NOT a 767 ?

I am not sure what happened, but flight 175 did not hit the south tower.
there may have been photo, or video fakery though...

also he is totally wrong in the fact that i am a "no-planer" but since he didnt ever bother to ask me, its expected that he would be wrong about my site.
i dont think that it was flight 175 that hit the south tower, though it may have been a 767 or different plane.
Nowhere on my site do i say that no plane hit the tower.

I have to wonder about someones intentions
when they make outrageous lies.

Myspace Advanced Search Page. Search myspace.com blogs, forums, music, videos, profiles, more ! APFN political art make a statement political art at 911review.org

Web Pages referring to this page

Link to this page and get a link back!

Search this site

search September 11th articles 911review

Was the term "PULL IT" and industry term prior to 9/11 ?

HOW HOT DID THE JET FUEL HEAT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?

September 11 2001 'Modern Minutemen' on scene less than 24 hours after attack

Your Ad Here