You don't know if he did or did not hear the plane. But how does this matter anyway? You post a video of United 175 flying into the South Tower to proof United 175 did not fly into the South Tower
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Video Fakery in the 9/11 Attack
- Thread starter Anders Lindman
- Start date
You don't know if he did or did not hear the plane. But how does this matter anyway? You post a video of United 175 flying into the South Tower to proof United 175 did not fly into the South Tower
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Messages
- 13,833
The outrageous theory about it all being faked except demolitions would have required them to fake things like the outpouring of molten metal from one of the floors. I don't think so. About the the video with the commentators, I haven't checked what their confusion exactly is about, but one curious thing is that the commentator says: "I believe that could be a police helicopter that is coming..." so she is mistaking the plane for being a helicopter it seems. That's strange because the commentators must have watched very high-quality video feeds.
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
"The FOX “Chopper 5” and CNN “Ghostplane” videos are both shown to have multiple observable features irreconcilable with reality, yet perfectly consistent with video compositing. For instance, Chopper 5 is missing an airplane in its first 5 seconds." -- From: http://www.psy-opera.com/Papers/Composites-1-9.pdf
Where have I heard 5 seconds before?
Epic stupidity. Absolutely epic.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
You don't know if he did or did not hear the plane. But how does this matter anyway? You post a video of United 175 flying into the South Tower to proof United 175 did not fly into the South Tower
I was just surprised that he was not up and running in an instant. Don't forget that the last low plane 20 minutes before had crashed into a building. As it was it was as if he didn't hear the plane at all. Or his co worker for that matter. Or anyone else.
Last edited:
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Messages
- 13,833
Oh! But the no planers must have checked that.
excaza
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,593
No, they do about as much research as you've been doing.
alienentity
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 4,325
That's hilarious over-denial: If Chief Pfeifer didn't look up it somehow proves no plane flew overhead; if he did look up it means that the whole thing was staged and no plane flew overhead.
Why bother with denial #1 if you were going to offer denial #2 anyway?
Do you realize what a farce you're creating? I hope so, because at least you can laugh along with us. Believe me, we're laughing.
Why bother with denial #1 if you were going to offer denial #2 anyway?
Do you realize what a farce you're creating? I hope so, because at least you can laugh along with us. Believe me, we're laughing.
alienentity
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 4,325
Anders (or whatever you are) I still don't believe you exist. And no amount of evidence can prove that you do, since it could all be faked.
I don't need to check any evidence anyway - it's not necessary to my belief system.
Sound familiar? (no, of course not..
)
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Messages
- 13,833
Oh, my. Are ALL no planers that lazy? I can't really blame them since I haven't looked at that myself. But of course, checking all the victims on the passenger lists could be a heavy task. I certainly don't want to do it. Besides, I assume that most people on that list were Americans.bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
You don't know if he did or did not hear the plane. But how does this matter anyway? You post a video of United 175 flying into the South Tower to proof United 175 did not fly into the South Tower
But what was the cameraman concentrating so hard on ? WTC1 from that distance ? If the Truth be told it looked like he was filming the impact-point-to-be in WTC2.
What do you think Anders ?
Last edited:
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 18,863
Maybe one of these days when I learn to cut and paste and have nothing else to do for the weekend, I will break that pdf down and show you the stupid parts, but, given that they occur somewhere in nearly every sentence, I shall not even attempt it right now. I'll just go with slapping the idiot's head around on why the chopper was not approaching the scene, but drifting to the left.
The sky was full of helicopters that needed to be there. It is just plain common sense that you keep reporters out of the way of emergency response equipment.
(Just one of those things that a fire fighter as opposed to some doofus with a good computer system would know right off the top of his head. Other rational people will figure it out within a day or so once exposed to it. Twoofers probably need a 2x4 upside the head to get their attention before you explain it to them.)
Where have I heard 5 seconds before?
Your tested attention span?
Since WTC1 and WTC2 were really close to each other, how is it strange that WTC2 was in the same frame as WTC1?
Jesus, I can't believe I'm doing this... look at how the WTC is framed in the attached picture. Nothing strange about having both towers in the center of the frame.
Attachments
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
Thank you Bell..
Can you do another one with the plane in shot but just before it hits the building ? (also with the lines)
Last edited:
Anders Lindman
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Messages
- 13,833
I read a part of it. There was some interesting information there, but a very long text. Personally I simply combine several facts to see if there is some consistency between them. Of course, even then, the conclusion might turn out completely false, but then I just abandon it.
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
He was a good action cameraman. When 175 disappeared behind the nearby building, he tracked the camera to the blue sky where the plane had to reappear. It was luck that WTC1 was in the frame.
Any sports cameraman would do as much.
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 18,863
Total garbagge, the source being the first evidence of the unreliability of the information:
This source would lie about the relative humidity at the bottom of the Marianas Trench.
Too obvious an animation to bother discussing. The rest of ther video is edited to make true statements into lies. But then, that's what Nazi scum do. That's their career.
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 18,863
Alles Quatsch!
Just a re-hash of the same twoofer BS that has been available for years with no new data.
excaza
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,593
Yes.
Shocking.
How is that at all relevant?
Last edited:
fitzgibbon
Master Poster
And how large do you think that monitor would be? And just how close to the host do you think it might be? And would the director or producer likely be talking to her through her IFB?
Do you have any concept of just how many things would have been going on in the studio at that moment and how minor an oversight such as you're jumping up and down on actually is?
No...probably not now nor ever.
