Brand New CT sub-group: No-Sounders

LastChild

Banned
L
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
2,062
Well we have all heard of the No-Planers right? Well apparently we now have the No-Sounders. The No-Sounders claim first that no audio captured on 9/11 has the sound of explosions. Secondly in the same breath the no-sounders then claim if there are any sounds of explosions caught on any of the many recordings captured on 9/11 they are either explosive sounds that are not explosives or they are fake.

That’s right! You heard it. Fake audio just like the no-planers claim fake video.

And who prêt ell is behind such evil doings as to put the sound of explosions into wtc collapse videos? Are you ready for this?

Rudi Giuliani.

That’s right folks. Apparently according to Gravy and ktesibios Rudy and his evil cohorts may have had access to a Hollywood FX lab and put the sounds of explosions into a WTC collapse video.

Why would he do this?

I have no frigging idea.

Some no-sounders like Jonnyclueless go further and claim that all microphones record sound the same exact way. So it doesn’t matter that it is not known what was used in any of the recordings of the wtc collapse videos because all microphones would have distinctly picked up the sound of explosions over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building the same exact way. Even if it was just a microphone built into a hand-held camcorder while the person holding it is running for their life. Jonnyclueless also claims that the sound of something carries just as well from underground or behind walls as it does in an open environment. He knows this because he is an expert who knows more then anyone here on JREF about audio.

I’ve started this thread so that they may explain their conspiracy theory in more detail. I’m especially interested in what they have to claim about fake audio and Rudy.
 
LastChild said:
Well we have all heard of the No-Planers right? Well apparently we now have the No-Sounders. The No-Sounders claim first that no audio captured on 9/11 has the sound of explosions. Secondly in the same breath the no-sounders then claim if there are any sounds of explosions caught on any of the many recordings captured on 9/11 they are either explosive sounds that are not explosives or they are fake.

That’s right! You heard it. Fake audio just like the no-planers claim fake video.

And who prêt ell is behind such evil doings as to put the sound of explosions into wtc collapse videos? Are you ready for this?

Rudi Giuliani.

That’s right folks. Apparently according to Gravy and ktesibios Rudy and his evil cohorts may have had access to a Hollywood FX lab and put the sounds of explosions into a WTC collapse video.

Why would he do this?

I have no frigging idea.

Some no-sounders like Jonnyclueless go further and claim that all microphones record sound the same exact way. So it doesn’t matter that it is not known what was used in any of the recordings of the wtc collapse videos because all microphones would have distinctly picked up the sound of explosions over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building the same exact way. Even if it was just a microphone built into a hand-held camcorder while the person holding it is running for their life. Jonnyclueless also claims that the sound of something carries just as well from underground or behind walls as it does in an open environment. He knows this because he is an expert who knows more then anyone here on JREF about audio.

I’ve started this thread so that they may explain their conspiracy theory in more detail. I’m especially interested in what they have to claim about fake audio and Rudy.
Click to expand...
This is not new. You "truthers" have been claiming destruction with "hushaboom" explosives for a long time now.

Hey LastChild. I was going through some videos from last new years and low and behold you could hear the fire works. Even though the videos were taken inside and the explosions were miles a way. I must just have a "special" video camera huh?
 
angrybaby.jpg


Why would the collapses conceal the sounds of explosions?
 
LastChild said:
And who prêt ell is behind such evil doings as to put the sound of explosions into wtc collapse videos? Are you ready for this?

Rudi Giuliani.

That’s right folks. Apparently according to Gravy and ktesibios Rudy and his evil cohorts may have had access to a Hollywood FX lab and put the sounds of explosions into a WTC collapse video.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to "Rudy: The Rudy Giuliani Story" a bad 2003 made for TV movie? According to your logic, James Woods really is Rudy Giuliani because he played him in a crappy movie. What does this movie have to do with actual footage shot on 9/11/2001?
 
LastChild said:
Well we have all heard of the No-Planers right? Well apparently we now have the No-Sounders. The No-Sounders claim first that no audio captured on 9/11 has the sound of explosions. Secondly in the same breath the no-sounders then claim if there are any sounds of explosions caught on any of the many recordings captured on 9/11 they are either explosive sounds that are not explosives or they are fake.

That’s right! You heard it. Fake audio just like the no-planers claim fake video.

And who prêt ell is behind such evil doings as to put the sound of explosions into wtc collapse videos? Are you ready for this?

Rudi Giuliani.

That’s right folks. Apparently according to Gravy and ktesibios Rudy and his evil cohorts may have had access to a Hollywood FX lab and put the sounds of explosions into a WTC collapse video.

Why would he do this?

I have no frigging idea.

Some no-sounders like Jonnyclueless go further and claim that all microphones record sound the same exact way. So it doesn’t matter that it is not known what was used in any of the recordings of the wtc collapse videos because all microphones would have distinctly picked up the sound of explosions over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building the same exact way. Even if it was just a microphone built into a hand-held camcorder while the person holding it is running for their life. Jonnyclueless also claims that the sound of something carries just as well from underground or behind walls as it does in an open environment. He knows this because he is an expert who knows more then anyone here on JREF about audio.

I’ve started this thread so that they may explain their conspiracy theory in more detail. I’m especially interested in what they have to claim about fake audio and Rudy.
Click to expand...
But, you silly liar, we can all see that your opponents have not claimed what you claim that they claim. You were even dumb enough to supply links to their actual statements so that we can all see that you're lying.

Why are you lying about their opinions rather than debating their real opinions?

If, as I suspect, it is because you cannot debate their real opinions, that's nature's way of telling you that they are right and you are wrong.
 
Last edited:
Nobody's saying that Rudi himself is responsible for adding the sound of explosions ( two of them, pre collapse ) to the audio in a movie that was merely about him. From what I gather on the gravy's new video thread, the BOOM BOOM was added by the foley guys when they were putting the movie together.

Good question though.....Why ?
 
So we have another attempt to assert (with no proof) that the WTC was destroyed with a controlled demolition.

And as such, the OP should be treated with the same intellectual rigor that it demands of everyone else:

fail.jpg
 
Oh, I thought the 'no sounders' were the 'truthers' who believed that every loud bang emitted by the wtc towers was proof of explosives, thus leaving no sounds left to be attributed to the buildings actually collapsing.

A kind of noisy silent cd.....or something.
 
LastChild said:
Well we have all heard of the No-Planers right? Well apparently we now have the No-Sounders. The No-Sounders claim first that no audio captured on 9/11 has the sound of explosions. Secondly in the same breath the no-sounders then claim if there are any sounds of explosions caught on any of the many recordings captured on 9/11 they are either explosive sounds that are not explosives or they are fake.

That’s right! You heard it. Fake audio just like the no-planers claim fake video.

And who prêt ell is behind such evil doings as to put the sound of explosions into wtc collapse videos? Are you ready for this?

Rudi Giuliani.

That’s right folks. Apparently according to Gravy and ktesibios Rudy and his evil cohorts may have had access to a Hollywood FX lab and put the sounds of explosions into a WTC collapse video.

Why would he do this?

I have no frigging idea.

Some no-sounders like Jonnyclueless go further and claim that all microphones record sound the same exact way. So it doesn’t matter that it is not known what was used in any of the recordings of the wtc collapse videos because all microphones would have distinctly picked up the sound of explosions over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building the same exact way. Even if it was just a microphone built into a hand-held camcorder while the person holding it is running for their life. Jonnyclueless also claims that the sound of something carries just as well from underground or behind walls as it does in an open environment. He knows this because he is an expert who knows more then anyone here on JREF about audio.

I’ve started this thread so that they may explain their conspiracy theory in more detail. I’m especially interested in what they have to claim about fake audio and Rudy.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to have learnt much about demolition. Here's a quick recap, you'd darn well better study this hard:

1) Bombs go off
2) Building falls down

Do you promise to remember that?
 
LastChild said:
That’s right! You heard it. Fake audio just like the no-planers claim fake video.
Click to expand...
Fake video=difficult. You have to make everything you do fit every frame so there are now issues with shadowing or color or layering, etc.
Fake audio=easy. I could take the audio of a controlled demolition and fit it to any WTC video using my laptop. Sound overdubs well, and I'd just have to make sure the stereo image matched and the timing looked right. The only issue would be trying to find a video where there weren't people to obviously ignore the explosions I just added.
Some no-sounders like Jonnyclueless go further and claim that all microphones record sound the same exact way. So it doesn’t matter that it is not known what was used in any of the recordings of the wtc collapse videos because all microphones would have distinctly picked up the sound of explosions over the sound of a collapsing 110 story building the same exact way. Even if it was just a microphone built into a hand-held camcorder while the person holding it is running for their life. Jonnyclueless also claims that the sound of something carries just as well from underground or behind walls as it does in an open environment. He knows this because he is an expert who knows more then anyone here on JREF about audio.
Click to expand...
All microphones do record sound in the same basic way. They have some moving element (a wire coil attached to a diaphragm, a metal ribbon or a large capacitor) that reacts to air pressure. All mics are naturally omnidirectional (they hear all directions equally) unless they are vented behind to diaphragm to create direction based phase cancellations. Most video camera mics are indeed omnidirectional and any mic built into the surface of a camera would have to be omnidirectional. Even if a cardioid mic was pointed in exactly the wrong direction, it would still hear reflected sounds unless it was in an anechoic chamber. Downtown Manhattan is hardly an open environment. There are buildings in all directions which will quite readily reflect a lot of sound so a directional mic pointed in the wrong direction would still hear everything loud. As for underground or behind walls, underground would be hard to hear but, I assume, easy to feel, but with a top down collapse, that really doesn't make any sense, does it? For sound behind walls, there would be ample reflection and this would only apply to cameras that couldn't see the towers. Walls of the towers themselves would provide minimal resistance to sound of explosions within. Good sound reduction involves transitions of material followed by air spaces. This makes buildings good insulators, but single walls pretty bad ones. These sounds would have to be extremely loud and the exterior walls of the buildings would be terrible at muffling it. Keep in mind, the exterior collapsed first, so that's where the charges would have to be.
I’ve started this thread so that they may explain their conspiracy theory in more detail. I’m especially interested in what they have to claim about fake audio and Rudy.
Click to expand...
I claim that your fellow "truth seekers" have added the sound of explosions where there there previously were none, not that Rudy Guliani did anything. I have not seen the TV movie you are apparently referencing.

Oh, and I have bachelor's degree in sound engineering. I am well informed about the operation of microphones and the physics of sound that I was talking about above. Unless my university's sound department is part of the inside job too.
 
Why didn't the OP refer to any of my posts in that other thread? Have I offended you LastChild? Or are my duhbunker skillz just too mad for you?

I'd still like to hear your explanation for why no windows were shattered by those explosives you say were going off...
 
Lastchild, it's not appropriate to lie on these forums. Please list examples of these people and show examples to prove your claim.

I guess you're still a little sore that you were proven that you don't know what you are talking about, so now you have to flat out LIE about people. Go learn about audio and stop making a fool of yourself. You got your arse handed to you, get over it. Stop lying.
 
Last edited:
LastChild said:
Well we have all heard of the No-Planers right? Well apparently we now have the No-Sounders. The No-Sounders claim first that no audio captured on 9/11 has the sound of explosions. .
Click to expand...

Who said this?
 
I also can't help but laugh at Lastchild with his claim about how a dynamic microphone only picks up sound in front of it. Would anyone like me link to the quote of him making this claim? And even in this thread he implies that the explosion sounds from the WTC weren't capture because all the sources were from people running away. Well forget about the fact that this claim is a flat out lie. Look at the fact that people didn't run away until the COLLAPSE (!!!!!). No explosion sounds indicative of a CD just prior to the collapse when no one was running away (again, ignoring the fact that only some of the footage were of people running away).

I have seen some nutjobs in my lifetime, but Lastchild is just the bottom of the barrel. He's upset that he made a fool of himself by making absurd claims about audio and was proven to be flat out wrong.

But none of that justifies lying Lastchild.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
I also can't help but laugh at Lastchild with his claim about how a dynamic microphone only picks up sound in front of it. Would anyone like me link to the quote of him making this claim?
Click to expand...

yes, please.
 
interesting that these so called demo explosions would reduce concrete and launch steel hundreds of feet sideways but windows on surrounding buildings would be unaffected
 
In My Spare Time, all of this has been explained for LastChild's benefit multiple times. LastChild simply refuses to acknowledge the existence of facts which falsify his position, or that there is anyone in the universe who knows more about a technical subject than he/she does. Unless you enjoy this feeling::hb:
my advice would be not to waste your time on LastChild.

I'll just add what I know about the provenance of the altered Trinity Church clip. The mediumrecords guy got it from a Danish Web site, terrorize.dk. That much was posted on the mediumrecords Web site.

After my essay demonstrating that the audio from that clip could not have been an authentic stereo-miced recording was posted on 911myths.com, it occurred to the mediumrecords guy to write to terrorize.dk and inquire where they had obtained it. The reply was that it was taken from the TV movie "Rudy! The Rudy Giuliani Story", starring James Woods.

This is true. I have obtained a copy of the DVD and checked it out myself. The collapse sequence is approximately 37 minutes into the film.

This explains another puzzling thing about the clip- it is of the collapse of WTC2, but a title reading "10:28 AM"- the time that WTC1 collapsed- has been superimposed on the picture. Apparently the producers wanted to depict Giuliani watching the collapse of WTC1 from the street and needed some footage of the collapse. For reasons unknown- perhaps that there wasn't any footage of the WTC1 collapse that they thought good enough dramatically- they used the Trinity Church video of the WTC2 collapse as a stand-in. They used only the video, adding the incorrect time title to suit their own narrative, and created their own sound track from scratch and SFX libraries.

That CTers would take this rather poor-quality sound design job as proof of explosives detonating in WTC2, when the evidence that it was not recorded at the scene was beating the listener about the ears is, IMO, instructive. That some are still trying to cling to the idea that there could somehow be authentic audio mixed in with all the SFX is more instructive, and a good indication of what you can expect if you choose to engage LastChild's ignorant and dishonest claims.
 
The context is helpful. That is some profoundly poor filmmaking. Guess I was mistaken about thinking the truthers deliberately added that one.

As for engaging LC, I know how it goes, but I rarely have an opportunity to weigh in on audio matters on these forums, and I wanted to take the chance while I had it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom