Ed Applying luma curve to photos and footage

[Jack by the hedge]

Why would i expect that? I cant take that serious. That's hilarious.

You raised the issue of the FBI not having produced a public report on their investigations. You referred back to it several times already. When asked why you would expect them to, you seem amazed to be asked.

It's less than clear what point you imagine you are making.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Look big guy. You are all a joke. And a team too.

You are hardly the first new poster to make this mistake. But you're the first for quite some time. If you'd started this thread 10 or 15 years ago it would probably have got a much larger response but the topic kinda ran out of steam as the number of determined cranks gradually diminished.

 

[nt1]

You are hardly the first new poster to make this mistake. But you're the first for quite some time. If you'd started this thread 10 or 15 years ago it would probably have got a much larger response but the topic kinda ran out of steam as the number of determined cranks gradually diminished.

Hi jack. Tldr

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Predict what you want. Low effort guesses and team work. Thats what i see from you lot.

Do please consider this may not be the first time someone has arrived and implied they intend to shake up the topic of 9/11 in some way or other. If you have somethig fresh by all means let's have it. So far it's all a bit cryptic, but we may not be too far from the big reveal. A James Randi connection might be a new angle, if you can tell us what it is.

 

[Oystein]

Why would i expect that? I cant take that serious. That's hilarious.

Thanks for making it clear that you have no rational, fact-based reason to expect a publicly released final report from the FBI.

 

[nt1]

You raised the issue of the FBI not having produced a public report on their investigations. You referred back to it several times already. When asked why you would expect them to, you seem amazed to be asked.

It's less than clear what point you imagine you are making.

I dont imagine anything but the teamwork i am seeing. I imagined that. But instead of imagine. Ill bring image. One moment please

 

[Disbelief]

Predict what you want. Low effort guesses and team work. Thats what i see from you lot.

We've seen it before and you have actually not presented anything new or interesting.

 

[nt1]

Do please consider this may not be the first time someone has arrived and implied they intend to shake up the topic of 9/11 in some way or other. If you have somethig fresh by all means let's have it. So far it's all a bit cryptic, but we may not be too far from the big reveal. A James Randi connection might be a new angle, if you can tell us what it is.

Shaking and baking. Commencing. My biggest flaw in forums is responding to each and everyone of these low effort replies. One moment please. Working.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Hi jack. Tldr

Thanks nt1.

I'll be brief.

Got anything new?

 

[Oystein]

Shaking and baking. Commencing. My biggest flaw in forums is responding to each and everyone of these low effort replies. One moment please. Working.

And also, I guess, creating diversions by branching out rapidly to many other topics (FBI reports or not, semantic games, old quotes about the Commission, views on Judy Wood, what books to read next, ...).

Concentrate on one, well and narrowly specified topic.
Stick to it.
Ignore anyone who tries to pull you out on tangents.

Perhaps abandon this thread, don't cross-post, dedicate yourself to the new thread I made for you, and do exactly what you first came here to do: Show concerns about WTC footage using science.

 

[nt1]

Thanks nt1.

I'll be brief.

Got anything new?

Do this for some quick homework. Im on my way.

 

[nt1]

Thank you. Thank you. That was all i asked for in the first place. Thank you. Geez.

Since nobody can guess what the heck you are driving at, well, why not start with this? It's bin on YT for 14 years now, and the poster, Nathan Flach, I think did as good a job as anyone to get his hands on videos as close to the original as we can hope for, with no edits.


So please, @nt1 , show cause for concern with this video by applying science to it!

You'll need this for some quick homework. I got you your own video. On the way.

 

[ahhell]

I am providing evidence.

I have plenty of suppositions. None that i have mentioned. To my knowledge.

I would love to give my suppositions but thisnis not the forum to do that.

I haven't actually seen you provide evidence. Links to articles about reports you don't trust, yes. Out of context quotes, yes. You started by asking someone else to provide evidence for you to use, a video for you to bunk I believe is what you said.

Without commenting on the specifics ... Sure, some conspiracy theories are proven to be true. I'm confident that your readers know that. You can save electrons next time and just mention Watergate and Iran-Contra.

It's unfortunate that "conspiracy theory" is so loaded with negative connotations. Alas, legions of whacky conspiracy theorists have helped made that happen.

I agree but like Oystein said, we can't do anything about that now.

There are certain things that are frequently exhibited by fact-free conspiracy theorists: Evasiveness. Vagueness. Gish galloping. Taking things out of context. Smugness. Playing the victim.

I think the Gish gallop is most common with 9/11. Mostly listing anomalies that for the most part can all be explained but since there's dozen it tends to end with but still, there's all these questions? Never mind that they've all be answered.

Shaking and baking. Commencing. My biggest flaw in forums is responding to each and everyone of these low effort replies. One moment please. Working.

Then maybe stop that. Provide your favorite most convincing evidence for whatever it is you believe and maybe tell us what it would take you convince you otherwise.

As it stands, I have no idea exactly what it is you think actually happened. It could be anything from Let it happen to the planes were holograms and it was a controlled demo. Probably not the last bit but I just don't know.

What I believe, a bunch of Saudi's took over 4 planes and crashed them into two buildings and an empty field. They were almost certainly helped by an unkown number of other Saudi's and additional members of Al Queda. I bet very few of them actually knew all of the plans though.

What would it take to convince me otherwise. Video of some folks planting bombs in the world trade center buildings before 9/11 2001. Some Saudi Prince saying the CIA put them up to it? Something other than the buildings fell suspiciously fast within their own footprint and I don't trust the government. I assure you, I don't trust the goverment either. I even believe a version of LIHOP but only a version based on incompetence and complacence within the CIA and FBI. If that weren't the case its seems pretty clear that there was intelligence available that could have led to at least some of the conspirators being stopped before 9/11.

ETA: Pet Peeve, give me a description of the video. I and I know others will not watch the video otherwise. Drives me nuts, for all I know its an itchy and scratchy cartoon.

 

[nt1]

You'll need this for some quick homework. I got you your own video. On the way.

You can have these while you wait.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Do this for some quick homework. Im on my way.

Okay. Got to hand it to you. That is new.

Not obviously relevant to the hijackings, but new.

Perhaps we are to be presented with a treatise on manipulated videos on YouTube. This might be the moment to note that 9/11 events were recorded on several analog videotapes, and it all happened several years before YouTube existed.

 

[nt1]

Since nobody can guess what the heck you are driving at, well, why not start with this? It's bin on YT for 14 years now, and the poster, Nathan Flach, I think did as good a job as anyone to get his hands on videos as close to the original as we can hope for, with no edits.


So please, @nt1 , show cause for concern with this video by applying science to it!

All i did was ask for a link to a video of your choice. How hard was that?

 

[nt1]

I haven't actually seen you provide evidence. Links to articles about reports you don't trust, yes. Out of context quotes, yes. You started by asking someone else to provide evidence for you to use, a video for you to bunk I believe is what you said.

I agree but like Oystein said, we can't do anything about that now.


I think the Gish gallop is most common with 9/11. Mostly listing anomalies that for the most part can all be explained but since there's dozen it tends to end with but still, there's all these questions? Never mind that they've all be answered.


Then maybe stop that. Provide your favorite most convincing evidence for whatever it is you believe and maybe tell us what it would take you convince you otherwise.

As it stands, I have no idea exactly what it is you think actually happened. It could be anything from Let it happen to the planes were holograms and it was a controlled demo. Probably not the last bit but I just don't know.

What I believe, a bunch of Saudi's took over 4 planes and crashed them into two buildings and an empty field. They were almost certainly helped by an unkown number of other Saudi's and additional members of Al Queda. I bet very few of them actually knew all of the plans though.

What would it take to convince me otherwise. Video of some folks planting bombs in the world trade center buildings before 9/11 2001. Some Saudi Prince saying the CIA put them up to it? Something other than the buildings fell suspiciously fast within their own footprint and I don't trust the government. I assure you, I don't trust the goverment either. I even believe a version of LIHOP but only a version based on incompetence and complacence within the CIA and FBI. If that weren't the case its seems pretty clear that there was intelligence available that could have let to at least some of the conspirators being stopped before 9/11.

ETA: Pet Peeve, give me a description of the video. I and I know others will not watch the video otherwise. Drives me nuts, for all I know its an itchy and scratchy cartoon.

Good lord!!!!!

Ok. Ok. Ok.

Here

 

[ahhell]

Okay. Got to hand it to you. That is new.

Not obviously relevant to the hijackings, but new.

So, itchy and scratchy then?

ETA: does that second video tell me what's in the first one?

 

[varwoche]

Good lord!!!!!

Ok. Ok. Ok.

Here

I feel the same as ahhell. I don't watch videos unless the poster summarizes the salient points, and provides a time stamp for where said points can be found. Not enough time in the day.

 

[Oystein]

And the point of all this is...?