Disinformation in Flight 175 Rare Video (Posted Sep 11 2013)


By: Mark Conlon/Andrew Johnson
(Updated 15th Nov 2015)


Recently, a "Rare Video" of Flight 175 apparently hitting WTC 2 on 911 was re-circulated. This was originally shot by Michael Hezarkhani. In this video:

Though the video correctly states that the way the crash and explosion happens is impossible (if a normal plane was involved), the thrust of this video is that it must be fake, because the plane wing passes behind a certain building when it should not be able to do this, because it is claimed the building in question is behind WTC 2.



My short analysis below clearly shows that this conclusion is incorrect. See below for additional information.

The picture below shows the Michael Hezarkhani video with the two buildings in question which Markus Allen claims the plane’s wing passes behind.



In the picture below will help us to understand the two buildings location in relation to the South Tower in the Michael Hezarkhani video.



The picture below also helps to demonstrate the location of the two buildings in question in relation to the Twin Towers at ground level. They are located to the right of the Twin Towers.
 

Below I have inserted the plane’s trajectory into the picture to demonstrate how plane’s wing should have passed behind the two buildings in question, when you consider Michael Hezarkhani’s location on board the ferry at Battery Park.



The picture below plots Michael Hezarkhani’s location and the location of the buildings in question and also the plane's trajectory.


Although the two buildings appear to the left in the Michael Hezarkhani video still image below, they are in fact as I have established to the right and in front of the South Tower, this optical effect is due to the parallax viewing position of Michael Hezarkhani.


 

To understand how Markus Allen made this error, and misrepresented the buildings location we must understand how parallax views work. Please see the picture below to help understand parallax viewing perspectives.


Parallax is a displacement or difference in the apparent position of an object viewed along two different lines of sight.



In the picture below the buildings appear to be to the left of the South Tower, when in fact they are really located to the right. Depending on the point of reference as in the picture below where Michael Hezarkhani is located, the buildings will appear to be to the left of the Towers. This is called parallax viewing. If the camera perspective was located more to the left, then the two buildings would appear to move more to the right. This is how simple errors are made due to not understanding parallax viewing perspectives in videos and photographs.



In conclusion:

The plane’s wing should have passed behind the buildings in the foreground in the Michael Hezarkhani video, and not in front as Markus Allen claims in his video where he misrepresented the buildings location. He also didn’t take into account Michael Hezarkhani’s location and viewing perspective. It is clearly demonstrated that CGI or video fakery was used in this video, but more of an attempt to discredit the Michael Hezarkhani video, and call into question the legitimate evidence captured within it. Unfortunately Markus Allen has shared his video far and wide across the internet, where it has been re-circulated by people unknowingly promoting the false information contained in it in the video, which I feel was the deliberate objective of Markus Allen himself to promote ‘video fakery’.
 
A short note from Andrew Johnson:



In large part, thanks to Richard D Hall's analysis, linked above, it has become clear video fakery doesn't explain the discrepancies in the plane stories and evidence. Another person who has strongly promoted the video fakery and "crisis actors" scenarios is Simon Shack, whom I wrote about here:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=349&Itemid=60

This article (deliberately) tied in with the release Richard's updated analysis. Following my circulation of some of the content of this short piece, I was contacted by Mark Conlon, who had already researched the points argued in the "Rare Video" about the plane wing going behind the building - hence the inclusion of his work above. He has also made a short video including the information above: 





 This case is now closed...


 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In Search of United Airlines ‘Flight 175’

Image
By Mark Conlon I would like to begin by thanking Julia Ratsey and Conspiracy Cuber for their help towards this blog post. Also thanks to Andrew Johnson, Richard D. Hall and Chris Hampton who have been supportive of my research.   United Airlines “Flight 175” (UAL 175) was a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport, in Boston, Massachusetts, to Los Angeles International Airport, in Los Angeles, California. On September 11 th 2001 UAL 175 was scheduled to depart at 08:00 a.m. for Los Angeles. Allegedly fifty-one passengers and the five hijackers boarded the 767 through Terminal C's Gate 19. The plane pushed back at 07:58 a.m. and took off at 08:14 a.m. from runway 9. It is estimated that UAL 175 was hijacked between 08:42 a.m. and 08:46 a.m. while American Airlines “Flight 11” (AAL 11) was just minutes away from hitting the North Tower. We are told the hijackers forcibly breached the cockpit and overpowered the pilot and first officer, allowing lead hijac...
Read more

Who Is 9/11 Harley Guy..? "Seeing Through The Disinformation"

Image
  By Mark Conlon   Much has been made in recent years of the use of "crisis actors" involved in relation to 9/11 and a number of " staged " terrorist attacks that followed. Much of the early promotion of "crisis actors" originated and was heavily promoted by Simon Shack, along with other so-called 9/11 researchers'.  One of the most famous 9/11 cases was the "Harley Guy" on Fox News who gave an account of the " official " 9/11 WTC building collapse story from the get-go, or did he? There has been many people who believe the "Harley Guy" to be actor Mark Adrian Humphries. Of course Mark Humphries denies any involvement on 9/11, and claims he was in Los Angeles at the time the 9/11 events were happening. See image below: Taken from Simon Shack's - September Clues forum.  So who is the "Harley Guy"? I still see and hear people accusing Mark Humphries of being the "Harley Guy". From research which doesn...
Read more

Flight 175 and The Truth about 'The Truth in 7 Minutes' in FIVE Minutes

Image
By: Mark Conlon - 25 Jan 2014   (Updated 24 Feb 2017) Short introduction and note by Andrew Johnson [ADJ] Below, Mark has carefully documented some further errors made by Markus Allen in a recent response to another error he made in an earlier video. The thrust of what Markus Allen appears to be trying to say is that “the videos of Flight 175 crashing into the WTC are fake”. This, of course, has been a topic much discussed on 9/11 “truth” websites. I have come to the conclusion, partly because of what I have covered in this article, that there has been a deliberate attempt to promote the 9/11 video fakery position in order to obscure or cover up the knowledge of the use of some type of image projection technology, which was used to create a very powerful illusion of plane crashes (for those chuckling about this idea, simply try and account for the physical evidence that plane wings cannot cut through steel box-girders and also account for the fact that some witnesses did not see or...
Read more