Published on Mar 15, 2012 by Collin Alexander
01 – Broken News
Published on Mar 15, 2012
Revisit 9/11 through the lens of television news.
02 – The Official Story vs. The Truth Movement
03 – Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Jim Fetzer founded the Scholars, and introduced us all to Steven Jones and Judy Wood, who promptly started a spitting match and offered up ridiculous theories about “thermite” and “Directed Energy Weapons”. What was the real purpose of the Scholars?
04 – Phenomena
Radioactive tritium, strontium and barium, molecular dissociation, mushroom cloud, 1400 melted motor vehicles, China syndrome, rare cancers . . . the evidence is overwhelming, and it doesn’t point to thermite any more than it points to a gravity collapse.collapse.
05 Legally Challenged
06 – What Plane?
07 – The Key
The key to solving 9/11 is something called a “key”. Understanding video compositing technology, both its capabilities AND limitations, proves no planes, and therefore proves demolition.
Ace Baker offers a $100,000 reward to anyone who has an ORIGINAL QUALITY 9/11 airplane video.
Theory of a ghost plane
New – $100,000 Amateur Video Challenge.
For a scholarly treatise on the 9/11 video compositing, please visit:
A demonstration of the compositing techniques used in the CNN “airplane” footage, and the other non-live shots. Here’s my blog entry:
For the theory of the live shots, please see:
No-Plane Theory FAQ
Q. How does this video prove there were no planes?
A. It doesn’t. This is merely a demonstration of the technique. For the proof, please see “9/11 Airplane Video Composites”, linked above.
Q. What about all the (hundreds, thousands, millions) of eyewitnesses?
A. If a real plane flew into the South Tower, there would indeed be thousands, if not 10’s of thousands of eyewitnesses. But there are astonishingly few people who actually claimed to have seen and heard a plane. The extreme LACK of eyewitnesses speaks in favor of no planes.
There are a number of eyewitnesses, like David Handschuh, who were looking at the tower, and swear they didn’t see a plane.
The few eyewitnesses that do exist are either (a) lying or (b) mistaken. The govern-media has trillions of dollars, and a hundred thousand secret agents. Manufacturing “eyewitnesses” is no problem. And let’s not discount false memory. Many studies have conclusively shown that fake video alters eyewitness accounts.
Q. Wouldn’t it have been easier to just use real airplanes?
A. No. There are insurmountable problems with that. A real plane would mostly explode against the side of the much stronger building, they needed the plane to appear to completely penetrate. A real plane might miss the target. A real plane would leave real evidence, and it would be the wrong evidence, which might be seen by the wrong people. A fake plane leaves no evidence, unless you make a mistake, such as allowing the nose of the airplane to pop out the back of a layer mask (see Chopper 5).
Q. What happened to the passengers and airplanes?
A. The real planes took off as advertised, and were hijacked by special ops. The planes were landed at Stewart Air Force Base, and replaced on radar by false blips. The passengers and crew were executed, blood and body samples taken. These samples were then planted at the “crash” locations, “found”, and then legitimate DNA testing was done.
Q. But I saw an airplane crashing into the tower on live TV!
A. No you didn’t. On live TV, you were shown “Chopper 5” and “Chopper 7”. Both of these video show a plane passing behind the edge of the tower, not hitting it. The videos that show the plane penetrating the building came later, after there was plenty of time to edit them. They look fake, because they are fake.
Q. How could they create a fake airplane from so many different angles, and have them all match?
A. Easy. First a 3D model of a single plane flight is modeled in a program like Lightwave or Maya. That flightpath can then be rendered from any virtual camera position.
Q. What about the airplane parts that were found on the street?
A. No parts were found BELOW the “impact” area, or in the gashes. The few parts that were found, were located BEYOND the tower, as if they made it all the way through and out the other side. I believe they shot an airplane part out of a cannon on the 80th floor of WTC2. That’s what it looks like on the video. This would explain why the molten metal was seen pouring out of that location before the demolition. They had to melt down the cannon, lest it be blown clear during the demolition.
Q. What about the phone calls?
A. What phone calls? The only recording of any phone call is Betty Ong, early in AA11. That probably was a real phone call, after the real hijackers had taken over the plane, and before they landed it at Stewart AFB. As to the rest of the alleged phone calls, they don’t exist. A “transcript” means nothing. What phone calls?
Q. If there was no plane crash, then what hit the WTC?
A. Nothing. It exploded from within.
Q. What program did you use to create this, and was that available in 2001?
A. I did this in Apple Motion. Various programs like Adobe After Effects have the same and better features, and have been available since the late 1990’s.
Chopper 5 and the Missing Shadow
Chopper 5 was a live composite, so adding shadows was not feasible. The shot was composed in such a way as to not require shadows. Unfortunately, the nose of the airplane slipped out of the layer mask.
If the nose-out was any sort of real object, it would cast a long shadow across the north face of WTC2. It obviously does not.
Compare to the dust explosion that was added in to Naudet 2.
Chopper 5 was a live composite, so adding shadows was not feasible. The shot was composed in such a way as to not require shadows.
9/11 Live Airplane Composite Theory
Uploaded on Jun 2, 2008
A demonstration of the video compositing technique used live on 9/11 to insert flying airplane images into Chopper 5 and Chopper 7 helicopter shots.
See this article for the complete theory:
9/11 Airplane Composite Theory
Uploaded on May 29, 2008
A demonstration of the technique used in the live 9/11 airplane composites. Article is here: