By Mark Conlon
In part one of this analysis, I’m going to explore video footage which was broadcast live on September 11th 2001. The Good Day New York Chopper 5 live news coverage captured United Airlines Flight 175 impacting the South World Trade Tower. This particular live news coverage captured anomalies within it which has been highly controversial. The particular area I want to explore in the live video coverage is the famous ‘nose-in’ ‘nose-out’ footage. The video captured the plane’s nose of United Airlines Flight 175 exiting from the South Tower with its nose intact, without any apparent damage done to it.
Let’s all agree from the outset that this is an impossibility which defies laws of physics as we know it. The question is: How did the Boeing 767 plane’s nose, (where the electronics are situated) penetrate through the steel wall columns and internal central core columns of the South Tower?
When September Clues surfaced on the internet in 2007 it
offered answers to my many questions concerning this unusual anomaly captured
within the ‘Chopper 5 news’ footage. Simon Shack’s explanation claimed that a
‘CGI plane’ was inserted and layering was used which accidentally drifted off
centre, allowing an inserted CGI plane’s nose to accidentally poke-out of
the other-side of the South World Trade Centre building, which was followed by
a blank black screen for 15 frames to conceal the “error“ activated by a
television supervisor, which became commonly known as the ‘fade to black’
sequence, which tried to quickly cover-up the mistake made by the
perpetrator’s.
For many years I was satisfied with Simon Shack’s hypothesis
in his film September Clues and the explanation of video fakery in the Chopper
5 news footage with the plane’s nose-in, nose-out anomaly sequence. I was also
influenced by another character named Ace Baker regarding the use of video
fakery in the Chopper 5 news footage, which also led me to sit back and accept
video fakery was most likely to have been used in the news videos on
9/11. After studying more closely Simon Shack’s other claims
regarding video fakery in other 9/11 videos I began to see a pattern emerging
where information was being omitted by Shack in his film to make his case of
video fakery. I found this very deceptive and extremely misleading. It appears
he successfully mislead many viewers to believe that the chopper 5 news footage
was fake, thus discrediting the video footage. This conveniently created a
division and distraction away from what the live Chopper 5 news footage really
showed.
To illustrate the omissions made by Simon Shack in his film
September Clues I will first demonstrate his hypotheses so we can understand
the bigger picture.
Shack believes a centre layer was added to the video footage which a graphic inserted plane would disappear behind to prevent the plane exiting the South Tower. See pictures below taken from September Clues video.
The picture below shows how Shack believes a ‘Luma Key’ and contrast was used to wash out the Sky-line in the Chopper 5 news video. As I discuss later in this analysis the technique of using ‘Luma Key’ in this video footage creates a major flaw in Shack’s hypothesis, which completely discredits it.
The picture below shows the reference centre layer-line (in
yellow) which creates a layer to the side of the building which would conceal
the plane’s nose, but according to Simon Shack the Chopper 5 news helicopter
fitted with the F.I.R Camera system drifted slightly to the side which off-set
the centre (yellow) layer-line, which is why the plane’s nose was able to be
inadvertently be revealed and intact.
Please note: Still image from September Clues. Centre layer line is set perfectly in this shot before the camera drifted to the side.
The picture below shows the centre layer-line (in red) drifting off centre
which off-set the centre (red) layer-line allowing the plane’s nose to appear
out of the side of the building.
Please note: how the (red) layer line has drifted to the side which
allows the nose to be revealed of the plane.
As we can see Shack’s hypotheses in the above pictures seemed to offer a convincing answer to the plane’s nose anomaly which I found to be very plausible for many years. At the time ‘video fakery’ and the ‘no planes’ debates were dividing researchers in the 9/11 Truth-Movement which has the effect of playing one faction off against the other.
Let’s take a closer look at Simon Shack’s (CGI and Layering) hypotheses and
study the evidence closely so we can see what has been deliberately ‘omitted’
To achieve the layering of the plane going into the building
you would need a layer for the plane’s ‘entrance’ into the building so the
plane would disappear behind the building on ‘entrance’. This has been
completely omitted by Simon Shack. The question is; why has he omitted this
from his hypotheses? The ‘entrance’ layer line should have also drifted if the
‘exit’ layer line of the building drifted… “This did not happen”.
See the picture below:
I have highlighted the ‘entrance’ layer line and ‘exit’
layer line in red.
The picture below shows the ‘nose-out’ of the plane because of the drifting of
the ‘exit’ layer line off centre. Shack makes no explanation regarding the
off-set of the ‘entrance’ layer line only the centre ‘exit’ layer line? Note:
read captions for more details.
The plane’s ‘entrance’ layer line being off-set in the picture above should have visibly affected the plane’s ‘entrance’ into the building in the ‘chopper 5’ video footage. ‘THIS DID NOT HAPPEN’. This rules-out any possibility of layering because the plane in the video “entered” the building correctly.
The fact Simon Shack ‘omitted’ the ‘entrance’ layer line is
quite confusing to me, because ideally it is only necessary for one layer line
to be applied at the ‘entrance’ of the building if the perpetrators were to use
such a layering technique. This would have avoided the problem altogether of a
nose-out issue, but would have still potentially created problems with the
drifting and the off-set of the ‘entrance’ layer line, especially with the
camera being situated on the helicopter.
Conclusion:
The fact the plane “entered” the building correctly in the
‘chopper 5’ video contradicts Simon Shack’s ‘layering and CGI’ hypotheses
completely. Other video evidence of live news broadcasts also captured the
plane’s nose ‘exiting’ from the South Tower.
See pictures below:
Shack’s layering glitch hypothesis in the chopper 5 video does not explain the
video evidence, but acts merely to lead us away from studying the evidence more
closely to establish what really was captured hitting the South Tower in the
9/11 videos and photographs.
Simon Shack’s promotion of video fakery has provided a cover-story to distract
many researchers (including myself) away from actually studying the video
evidence. I believed Shack’s hypothesis answered the anomalies in the 9/11
plane videos, only to discover the use of deceptive means to prove his claims
of video fakery.
In part two of this blog I will deal with an in-depth analysis of the nose-out
sequence that Simon Shack uses for his evidence in his film September Clues,
where clear manipulation has been used to deceive his viewers...
Thank you for reading and caring!
