• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread 'Nose-out' footage

Once an F-16 evacuating from a hurricane attempted an emergency landing at the local regional airport, didn't make it, and crashed into a house about two blocks down from mine. It felt and sounded like being in a car wreck, only louder, and that was a measely little fighter jet two blocks away.

There is no way that sound can be faked. Not with all the Dolby in the world.
 
Rogue1stclass said:
Once an F-16 evacuating from a hurricane attempted an emergency landing at the local regional airport, didn't make it, and crashed into a house about two blocks down from mine. It felt and sounded like being in a car wreck, only louder, and that was a measely little fighter jet two blocks away.

There is no way that sound can be faked. Not with all the Dolby in the world.
Click to expand...

Fighter jets are actually louder in my opinion than commercial planes. In any case they are not measely in the sound department.
 
Do not make sockpuppet allegations. If you suspect a sockpuppet, report them and provide evidence.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do not make sockpuppet allegations. If you suspect a sockpuppet, report them and provide evidence.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bardamu said:
Steve Wright has impressive credentials as a videographer, yet he comes up with a ridiculous story like that.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to what his credentials are or are not as far as having been a videographer. In any case, he clearly laid waste to Ace Baker and his ridiculous story.

bardamu said:
Can you see why I'm not happy to leave it to the experts?
Click to expand...

Not especially. He proffered an opinion. But the simple fact is that his degree of expertise and experience (and mine) trump that of inexperienced/clueless. You want a discussion of equals? Find me a no-planer with similar background and depth of experience in television production and transmission and I'll cheerfully have it out with him/her/it on this forum.

But don't bore me with the 'truther' mantra that belief trumps logic/evidence/proof.

bardamu said:
The non-live impact videos need a different explanation.
Click to expand...

Because.......?

bardamu said:
I'm a layman but I'm prepared to learn from somebody who knows. Would a vertical wipe be able to track the tower's edge and stick to it as the camera moved? If not, it might be more risky to use than the layer mask.
Click to expand...

Why introduce two parameters that require adjustment in a dynamic environment when one will suffice?

Did you miss the KISS?

bardamu said:
So opinion polls do count?
Click to expand...

Only insofar as they're scrupulously honest in their methodology, something woefully lacking from any poll that the 'truth' movement has undertaken.

bardamu said:
It's relevant to the difficulty of faking planes, because the cgi's that were broadcast live or soon after the event were relatively simple, whereas the more complex ones didn't emerge till around 9 hours after they were filmed.
Click to expand...

CGI by definition isn't simple. The state of the art in 2001 wasn't real-time rendering and I don't believe even today that NTSC broadcast-quality CGI imagery is taking place (though it's out of my particular bailiwick and I'll defer to an acknowledged expert). So, if you're going to go to the trouble of storyboarding, rendering, outputting and doing a real-time composite for a couple of fairly pedestrian angles (which require just as much rendering time as for more exotic ones), why not front-load all the rendering, all the angles and flood the airwaves with a plethora of different video shots to even more firmly entrench the notion of airplane collisions and thereby forestall the 'truther' movement even more effectively?

bardamu said:
Who'd have thought anybody would need a degree in structural engineering to know the nose of a passenger aircraft couldn't pass through two rows of steel columns and come out come out looking just fine?
Click to expand...

But you no-planers are the ones insisting that that's what in fact happened! What happened to you relying on "common sense" when common sense is in direct opposition to you?
 
Algebra34 said:
Fighter jets are actually louder in my opinion than commercial planes.
Click to expand...
In your opinion? Hmm.... if only there were a way to measure sound.

Edited by Locknar: 
Content removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AJM8125 said:
Exactly how many fighters have you heard crash?

ETA: AW beat me too it.
Click to expand...

None. Though a couple did crash I was at work at the time so I didn't hear it. I'm sure it was very loud. I use to live near an AFB. In another place I lived near a commercial airport. The fighter jets were much louder just flying overhead doing exercises than the commercial jets flying overhead. And I lived closer to the commercial airport than I did the AFB.
 
Algebra34 said:
None. Though a couple did crash I was at work at the time so I didn't hear it. I'm sure it was very loud. I use to live near an AFB. In another place I lived near a commercial airport. The fighter jets were much louder just flying overhead doing exercises than the commercial jets flying overhead. And I lived closer to the commercial airport than I did the AFB.
Click to expand...

...and this is relevant to the discussion of no planes hitting the towers...how?

Do you believe planes hit the towers?
 
Last edited:
Algebra34 said:
None. Though a couple did crash I was at work at the time so I didn't hear it. I'm sure it was very loud. I use to live near an AFB. In another place I lived near a commercial airport. The fighter jets were much louder just flying overhead doing exercises than the commercial jets flying overhead. And I lived closer to the commercial airport than I did the AFB.
Click to expand...

OK. I spend most of my leisure time in a place called Artichoke Joe's Casino in San Bruno, CA. Do a google map and check the distance to SFO. Heavy planes fly so low there you can see the rivet pattern on the bellies. And they're freakin loud. Loud enough to drown out the sound of trains on the adjacent tracks. Then there's the annual visit by the USN's Blue Angels over my city. Yes, F/A-18 Super Hornets at full afterburner are freakin loud too.

Macgyver1968 said:
...and this is relevant to the discussion of no planes hitting the towers...how?

Do you believe planes hit the towers?
Click to expand...

What he said.
 
Macgyver1968 said:
...and this is relevant to the discussion of no planes hitting the towers...how?

Do you believe planes hit the towers?
Click to expand...

It's relevant to what I was asked about how I formed my opinion about what is louder. That's it.

Yes I do believe most likely that planes hit the towers. It would just be a really bad plan if you ask me to just pretend after the fact they were hit by planes.
 
Last edited:
Algebra34 said:
Yes I do believe most likely that planes hit the towers. It would just be a really bad plan if you ask me to just pretend after the fact they were hit by planes.
Click to expand...

I am 100% convinced that commercial passenger planes hit the towers. there is no logical or rational reason to have any doubt about this.
 
Algebra34 said:
It's relevant to what I was asked about how I formed my opinion about what is louder. That's it.

Yes I do believe most likely that planes hit the towers. It would just be a really bad plan if you ask me to just pretend after the fact they were hit by planes.
Click to expand...

Well..thank god you don't believe in holograms. :) If planes did in fact impact the towers...who were in control of the planes? Was it remote control, or NWO agents acting as AQ?

edit: and by the way..thank you for answering my question directly.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom