Simulated Sceneries

Please allow time to download graphics. (35 MB)



A little technical, introductory note is in order here : when pointing a video camera from a darker area to a lighter one, the light sensor mechanism of a camera might - in accordance with its quality and settings - briefly 'saturate' certain areas before adjusting to a correct exposure of the picture. That is a given. However, the 9/11 image pool features a number of shots and pictures which 'wash out' in absurd fashion - certainly not attributable in any way to the aforementioned light-sensor issues.

In the high-resolution DVD of the Naudet movie "9/11" (from which the film-loop at left is extracted) the originally reddish-brown WTC7 is almost ... white! This is not only absurd: it is impossible.


In fact, MOST shots featuring WTC7 provide us with a simple, Occam's razor proof of the falseness of the 9/11 imagery: more often than not, it appears as a "washed-out" greyish building. This cannot be attributable to any lighting/or chroma-balance issues (see picture with reddish brick wall in the foreground). Any modern camera won't make only one building in a scenery 'lose' its specific color range. This could only happen in (the early days of) the digital domain; in fact, this flaw was a well-known imperfection ("greyboxing") of the first generation of Google / Virtual-Earth geo-referenced imagery. NONE of the WTC7 images shown here were shot by a real camera operated by a real cameraman.


The Naudet 129min movie features a number of such 'washed out' sceneries, 'coincidentally' only in crucial scenes such as the "1st and 2nd planestrikes" or the burning WTC7. Here is a shot shortly preceding the WTC2 strike: The camera tilts upwards and the towers appear gradually, fading-in from full white. This can be no camera exposure-lag issue, since one shaded face of the two towers (the WTC2 Northface) appears before the other.


The infamous Naudet "first strike" film sequence features another similar 'phenomena'. On this occasion, the impossibility for this to be a normal camera exposure-lag is given by a different occurence: the bright blue sky appears before the darker towers. This fact alone disqualifies the veracity of this shot - and indicates that the backdrop (blue sky and towers) must be a separate layer of video inserted into this staged street scenery.

Note: This shot, of course, shortly precedes the incredibly 'lucky' shot of the first "planecrash" ("FLIGHT 11") at 8:46AM. One can only speculate as how it was put together - as it could have been done in any number of ways. This 'prize-shot' is fully analyzed here : "THE PLANE FACTS".


But the "washout" scenes are not confined to the Naudet movie: Even this BBC newscast (featuring BBC correspondent Steve Evans) features 'whitewashed' frames, as the camera gets tilted up towards the collapsing WTC1. (I have freeze-framed this looped clip for a moment in order to show the absurd - partial - "white-washing" of the scenery.) Again, this cannot be a camera exposure-lag - as explained with the next loop below.

If the 'overexposed' frames shown in the previous scene were due to a slow light-sensor setting, it would do so consistently. What we see here is the immediate continuation of the above shot : after panning over dark areas of the scenery, the camera tilts upwards again - yet no exposure-lag occurs.


This was aired on FOX5 and UPN9TV - beieve it or not! As in the above examples, part of the scenery whitens - this time in dramatic fashion. There is also a noticeable cut / glitch halfway through the tower collapse. Whatever the reasons for this - the whole scenery looks quite surreal. This is due to the fact that this shot - just as most of the 9/11 imagery - was totally computer animated. For further evidence of this, go to "COLLAPSE ANIMATIONS".


(This brief video-loop is extracted - just as you see it - from a History Channel 9/11 documentary)