Much has been made of the September Clues series (henceforth referred to as September Clueless, for good reason) by the re-invented No Planery splinter fringe group claiming it as a prime demonstrator of their new meme of 'Media Fakery'.
The elements concentrated on here are to clarify two major and contentious points.
Where ‘the missing backdrop’ of NYC went
why the shots of the WTC2 second strike show a plane in one view but not the other.
The 'Media Fakery’ case is that the two camera views shown above are ‘virtually identical’, with the plane ‘inserted’ and the background 'removed' in the right hand frame.
However, closer examination reveals that the shots are far from identical.
The very low resolution (VHS tape copy?) Chopper 4 shots used in the comparisons made by September Clueless are taken from a minimum altitude of approx 1400 ft, (1500 ft if the chopper pilot was staying within NYC overflight regulations) as can be seen by the camera looking slightly down onto the 1362 ft high roof of the North Tower with its TV mast, and overlooking the WTC to view the Upper New York Bay area to the south west of Manhattan.
The only known practical way to look over something is to be viewing from a yet higher altitude.
The WNBC shot by contrast, is taken from the roof of the Rockefeller Centre - 850 ft high max. and home of WNBC studios - and is obviously from a lower elevation looking slightly above the horizontal plane at the damaged area 1200 ft up the North Tower.
Compare with this postcard and extract from the same known location showing the Empire State Building in the foreground and the twin Towers in happier days.
Note the green lines marking the relative positions of the roof levels which will be indicated again later.
As with the zoomed-in shot of WNBC’s 911 view, it can be noted that the city backdrop has also disappeared in the close-up.
As the red outlined area in the next photo, taken with a wider angle clearly shows, there is no ‘missing background’ – only sky could be the visible background in the well known zoomed-in horizontal shot of the plane's approach.
In conclusion, there is no case let alone evidence for 'Media Fakery' editing out the background.
WNBC’s camera angle and its content are perfectly logical and consistent.
Note that in the night time postcard shots above, a very slight gap is visible between the buildings, indicating that we are seeing the north faces (which are actually oriented north east) almost perfectly head on to within less than 2 degrees as in the WNBC 911 shots. Note also the red and yellow lines indicating the same spatial relationship of the Towers' roof lines.
The Chopper 4 shot is oriented differently, from both an altitude of approx plus 500 ft higher and also further to the east (by approx. 6 degrees relative to the Towers), as a comparative measurement of the visible sides of the Towers show.
As it is morning, the brightly lit faces of the Towers are to the east. In the Chopper 4 shot we can see 12 pixels of the East face, as compared to 2 pixels in the WNBC shot.
The angles of view are thus shown to be completely different in all three dimensions.
As the follow-on lo-resolution monochrome section from Chopper 4 that September Clueless 3 also shows, the plane’s approach from the south west can (just) be detected 10 seconds prior to impact due to the increased contrast in the black and white image.
Being small and round – like a ball – when viewed from head on (a B767 has a fuselage diameter of 15.5 ft) and seen from an initial distance 1.4 miles (calculated from the speed) travelling at approx 500 mph, it’s difficult to see the airliner against the dark land background and it gets completely lost over water before disappearing behind the Towers just after it passes Ellis Island, wholly due to the lo-resolution image source used.
The NBC shot on the other hand, being further west and from a lower altitude and with a lightened background provided by the sky, is able to capture the last seconds of the planes approach prior to impact from much closer in.
Illogically, September Clueless then superimposes the plane’s flight path from the hi-level Chopper 4 shot onto the WNBC lo-level shot, and then blithely advises that as two views of the Towers are ‘identical twins’ the difference in perceived flight paths proving some hypothetical missile actually hit the South Tower and the airliner image was ‘inserted’ by ‘Media Fakery’ afterwards.
Compounding its grossly misleading case, September Clueless then shows a much higher definition version of the Chopper 4 video from the WNBC archive (note the greater level of detail now visible on the North Tower TV mast) which does - would you believe it - in fact show the approaching plane, if blurred and in a not very photogenic fashion.
We are gravely advised - because Simon 'socialservice' Shack says so - that the ‘pencilled in ball’ we now see is an 'obvious fake' added afterwards.
Back in reality, the approach closely matches the official flight path as plotted by NIST in the diagram below, with the final curve at landfall as it crosses South Cove obscured by the Towers.
There is some mystery as to why Shack has used the lo-definition version of Chopper 4’s shots in his comparisons; whether it was used to mimic the image quality seen by the average TV viewer or to increase the brightness flaring of the sunlit faces of the Towers to make them seem more similar or to be otherwise deliberately obtuse and/or deceptive is unclear.
It may be that Simon Shack/Social Service is indeed the ‘Father Dougal’ of film making and really hasn’t got a clue about perspective, or it may be he is maliciously misleading those who have little in the way of functioning critical faculties and a tendency to believe whatever they see challenging ‘da official story’ as being gospel.
The subject of 911 – what happened and how it happened - is so serious and goes to the very top and heart of the world’s current power structure that I find I’m unable to easily accept the ‘idiot amateur’ explanation, particularly in view of the manner in which the absolute undiluted bullsh!t September Clueless unquestionably is, has been enthusiastically promoted from some quarters.
Make no mistake, No Plane Theory with its equally feeble minded cousins ‘Media Fakery’ and ‘Exotic Weapons’ are at the centre of the divisions tearing away at what can be termed ‘the 911 truth movement’ (no capitals). Every single 911 group from the Scholars on down to the various websites have seen nothing but division as a result of NPT and its offshoots.
And the biggest joke is that NPT adds nothing but a further layer of incredulity – yet claiming to be the very core! - whilst pretending it is presenting ‘conclusive evidence’.
To answer Simon Shack’s embedded question, yes by now I do feel my intelligence is being insulted.
And the insulting is being done by your pernicious, false and bogus little internet ‘films’.http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11608