September Clues - Layers of Deception - Part One

An Independent Analysis

Preface

This is an updated version of an analysis I conducted on the 9th August 2016, in relation to Simon Shack’s claims he made in his September Clues film. To date, Simon Shack has never updated or corrected these errors, which one would expect from a genuine truth-seeker.

Analysis

In part one of this analysis I’m going to explore video footage which was broadcast live on September 11^th 2001. The Good Day New York Chopper 5 live news coverage which captured United Airlines Flight 175 impacting the South Tower. This particular live news coverage captured an “alleged” anomaly, which has been highly controversial.

The particular area I want to explore is the live video coverage which captured the “alleged” 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 the plane’s nose could not exit the building intact, and this is an impossibility which defies laws of physics as we know it. So, how did a 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?

Simon Shack & September Clues “Flawed Hypothesis” or Deceptions?

When the September Clues film surfaced on the internet in 2007 it offered answers to many questions concerning the unusual anomalies captured within the ‘Chopper 5 news’ footage. Simon Shack’s explanation claimed that a ‘CGI plane’ was inserted using layer masking and Luma Key. However the camera accidentally drifted off centre, allowing an inserted CGI plane’s nose to accidentally poke-out of the other-side of the South Tower building.

Below, is a short segment of the points in question from the September Clues film.

For many years I was satisfied with Simon Shack’s hypothesis in his film that some type of video fakery was used in the Chopper 5 news footage. I was also influenced by another 9/11 researcher named Ace Baker regarding the use of video fakery in the Chopper 5 news footage, which also led me to accept “video fakery” was the most likely hypothesis to explain the anomalies captured in the 2nd plane footage.  

Studying more closely Simon Shack’s claims of video fakery

After studying in more detail Simon Shack’s 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 strengthen his case for video fakery. I began to find Shack’s presentation of the evidence deceptive and misleading. It appears Shack was successful in misleading many of his viewers into believing that the chopper 5 news footage was fake, thus discrediting the video footage.

To illustrate the omissions made by Shack and the “nose out” anomaly, I will first present a step-by-step breakdown of Shack’s theory he presents to explain the “nose-out” anomaly.

Shack believes a centre layer mask was added to the video footage which a graphic plane would disappear behind, to prevent the plane exiting the South Tower. See picture below taken from September Clues video.

In the picture below, Shack explains how the perp’s “washed out the sky” using “Luma Key and Contrast”.

Just to note, Shack does not mention any explanation about using the “Luma Key” effect for masking the area of the building, so the plane could disappear behind the building, which Ace Baker does in his theory using the Luma Key effect? As I will discuss later in this analysis, the technique of using a Luma Key in this video footage creates a major flaw in Baker’s hypothesis.

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.

The picture below shows the centre layer-line (in red). According to Shack the Chopper 5 news helicopter fitted with the F.I.R Camera system drifts slightly to the side, which off-set the centre (red) layer-line, which is why the “alleged” plane’s nose was inadvertently revealed intact in the video.

As we can see Shack’s hypotheses in the above pictures seemed to offer a convincing answer to the plane nose anomaly, which I found to be very plausible for many years.

Let’s take a closer look at Simon Shack’s (CGI and Layering) hypothesis and study the evidence more closely so we can see what has been deliberately omitted

Firstly, what is most notable, Shack has not explicitly stated whether or not the “Luma Key” effect, was also used to create a layering mask to enable to use the building, so the graphic plane could disappear behind the building?

Below, is a short video segment from Ace Baker’s film - The Great American Psy Opera - Part 7 - The Key, where Baker explains how the Luma Key effect is used to create a layering mask for the graphic plane to disappear behind the building. Although I must stress, this is also without a fundamental flaw, which I will discuss later.

Being as Shack does not explicitly state, using the Luma key effect to create a layering mask to allow the graphic plane to disappear behind the building, and only stated that it was used to “wash out” the skyline with “contrast”, I suspect Shack does not want to clarify this point because this would raise the exact same flawed problem which Baker’s encounters with his hypothesis using the Luma Key effect to disappear the graphic plane behind the building, so Shack conveniently omits clarifying this completely, so we are left to assume that Shack perhaps used the Lume Key effect in the same intention as Baker has to disappear the plane behind the building.

Why the Luma Key effect hypothesis is flawed

Analysis of Baker’s Luma Keying effect hypothesis was thoroughly analysed by researcher Saultrain, and showed a fundamental flaw in Baker’s hypothesis.

The flaw in the Luma Key effect is due to the software’s brightness threshold setting, which is unable to distinguish between brightness of the sky and the brightness of the explosion flame. Below is a video analysis, which thoroughly explains the fundamental flaw in Baker’s hypothesis.

Conclusion

Did Shack know that Baker’s Luma Key effect explanation was flawed? Is this the real reason why Shack did not explicitly state in his film the Luma Key effect was used as a layering mask to disappear the plane behind the building, bearing in mind that Shack did not explain how the graphic plane disappeared behind the building?

Shack’s layering glitch hypothesis in the chopper 5 video does not explain the video evidence, but acts merely to lead sceptical people away from studying the evidence closely, thus preventing people from establishing what was really was captured exiting the building. This leads to the question of what exactly exited the building?

Plane Nose Vs Dust Ejection Analysis Video

Below is an analysis conducted by 9/11 researcher ‘Conspiracy Cuber’ in October 2017. In his analysis he proves without question, the "Nose-Out" videos captured a dust ejection, not a plane’s nose.

Finally, I initially I believed Shack and Baker’s hypothesis, and I thought it sufficiently answered the plane nose anomaly. After evaluating new evidence, it has brought forth a change in my perspective, where previously held understanding is now superseded.

In part two of my September Clues - Layers of Deception article, I will present an in depth analysis of the “nose-out” sequence that Simon Shack presents as evidence for video fakery in his film September Clues, where I clearly show manipulation has been used to deceive his viewers.

Thank you for reading and caring.