Surprise, surprise (NPT)

[Oliver]

Look what I just found...

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/12390.jpg
(Sorry if this an old photo)

[R.Mackey]

Yes, we've seen that before.

The standard response from the "no-planers" is that it was planted. Or the color of the fuselage section is wrong. Or something.

Frankly I think Gravy's policy of simply ignoring the "no-planers" is perfectly reasonable...

[uruk]

That was obviously planted by the same guys that put the thermite into columns

[Oliver]

But it could be Photo-Fakery as well... :duck:

[Reality Believer]

When no-planers scream "planted", then there is an interesting series of questions that surround an artifact such as the one pictured:


How was it planted without eyewitnesses observing the operation?
Who manufactured this piece?
Who designed it, and the artistic alterations that make it look like it was a piece of an aircraft accident?
Why aren't theses artists blowing the whistle?
Who paid for the part to be manufactured?
Where did the budget come from?
Who approved the budget?
If you were a tax paying citizen, does that make you an accomplice?

Hey, I'm just asking questions!

[apathoid]

It was widely reported that the plane that hit WTC2 had no windows, therefore this piece was planted because it has windows. It's the wrong color too and isn't nearly as beat up as it should be. :rolleyes:

[T.A.M.]

:
there was no plane, so windows or not, it obviously was planted. The "planer" above is right about the planting, but nothing else...


TAM:)

[apathoid]

[planer twoofer]
You're disinfo.
[/planer twoofer]

[Whack01]

Being new here I hadn't already seen that photo, thanks. :)

[Vincent Vega]

Here's the difference in truthers.

When a truther looks at that picture the response is "fake!" "It's planted!" Its all about them and how it effects their world view.

When I see it I wonder if someone was looking out one of those windows, just before the plane hit, and if they knew that was the last thing they would ever see. :(

[WildCat]

The official story is that the plane disintegrated into dust. Therefore that must have been planted!
/truther

[Orphia Nay]

It was widely reported that the plane that hit WTC2 had no windows, therefore this piece was planted because it has windows. It's the wrong color too and isn't nearly as beat up as it should be. :rolleyes:


:
there was no plane, so windows or not, it obviously was planted. The "planer" above is right about the planting, but nothing else...


TAM:)

[planer twoofer]
You're disinfo.
[/planer twoofer]

The official story is that the plane disintegrated into dust. Therefore that must have been planted!
/truther

:boggled: You lot have really been around twoofers too long! :newlol

There should be a name for this syndrome, and it should be added to this list:

http://listverse.com/health/top-10-bizarre-mental-disorders/

;)

Shanksville Syndrome, perchance?

[leftysergeant]

Infectious schizophrenia, maybe?

[Brainster]

The thing that always bugs me about that photo is the gridwork atop the buildings in the background. Is that an overlay added by FEMA to demonstrate and analyze the degree of damage to those buildings? Note that the gridlines approximate the column locations, but unlike many other photos in the FEMA report there are no numbers to show this was added to the photo.

[gumboot]

The thing that always bugs me about that photo is the gridwork atop the buildings in the background. Is that an overlay added by FEMA to demonstrate and analyze the degree of damage to those buildings? Note that the gridlines approximate the column locations, but unlike many other photos in the FEMA report there are no numbers to show this was added to the photo.


Do you mean the red stuff? I've often wondered what that was about. I figured they put it on windows to protect them or something (or maybe they filled in broken windows?).

-Gumboot

[Slayhamlet]

I know they put translucent, red-tinted nylon sheets over the faces of some of the damaged buildings at ground zero. I'm not sure if that's what this is or not.

[tacodaemon]

The buildings in the background are two of the World Financial Center buildings that got smashed to heck when the towers fell. At the top is just more of the same two buildings (http://www.projectrebirth.org/gallery/album004_third-anniversary/DSC_0003) above the setbacks, where the design of the building facades around the windows changes; I guess the parts that high up or set that far back weren't damaged as much. I think the one on the left is actually reflecting the huge red mesh net or whatever that was hung over the facade of One Liberty Plaza (seen in the background here (http://www.albright.edu/images/reporter/fall2006/The-Last-Word---Sept-11.jpg))...

[Oliver]

I know they put translucent, red-tinted nylon sheets over the faces of some of the damaged buildings at ground zero. I'm not sure if that's what this is or not.


Gravy should know this for sure... Gravy?
What's the red stuff? :confused: :
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/12390.jpg

[cmcaulif]

Gravy should know this for sure... Gravy?
What's the red stuff? :confused: :
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/12390.jpg

its a sort of colored wallpaper used along with imaging techniques to make photos appear more clear in contrast to surrounding buildings, unless I am misinterpreting this.

from Emergency Response in the Wake of World Trade Center Attacks: The Remote Sensing Perspective, by Charles K. Huyck and Beverley J. Adams (http://mceer.buffalo.edu/publications/wtc/02-SP05-screen.pdf)

3.1.4 Potential Uses
Learning from World Trade Center events, color rather than grayscale aerial
photography would greatly assist response and recovery operations, enabling
crews to distinguish features by their color. In Figure 3-2, on the left hand side,
it is possible to visualize the progress of covering the surrounding buildings
with protective material. It is difficult to discern this information from the same
resolution imagery in the black and white version on the right. Several of the
cranes and cars in the color image are difficult to see in the black and white
image. Furthermore, it is not possible to discern in black and white that the
windows are boarded up on the first floor. Perhaps most importantly, the color
provides a tie between the image and the world around the person viewing the
image on site, allowing them to quickly orient themselves.
Feedback from response crews further suggests that oblique coverage, such as
that acquired by Pictometry, could prove useful if acquired immediately after
the event. This perspective could also aid 3D visualization. Using architectural
rendering software, oblique shots could be draped on high resolution DEMs as
‘wallpaper,’ providing a side view of building facades that is absent from the
orthophotography.
Image processing techniques could generate additional information from highresolution
aerial photographs. Enhancing the visual representation could reduce
shading effects. Procedures such as edge enhancement would be useful for
mapping the locations of girders. Multi-temporal change detection could be
used to monitor clean-up operations in an automated manner. Density splicing
and classification techniques could also be used to categorize debris for planning
purposes. Once images are brought into image processing software packages,
they become much easier to interpret.

[Oliver]

its a sort of colored wallpaper used along with imaging techniques to make photos appear more clear in contrast to surrounding buildings, unless I am misinterpreting this.

from Emergency Response in the Wake of World Trade Center Attacks: The Remote Sensing Perspective, by Charles K. Huyck and Beverley J. Adams (http://mceer.buffalo.edu/publications/wtc/02-SP05-screen.pdf)


Thank you for providing this information, Cmcaulif. :)

Case solved. :D

[negativ]

Obviously Photoshopped (http://xkcd.org/331/).