9/11: How they Faked the Videos

Elagabalus said:
He's clearly not using a tripod. The first pic the camera is at waist level with the firemen then he goes even lower (about ankle height) for the next two pics. The last pic he has the camera at about head height (on his shoulder?) and has panned the camera upward.

And even if he was using a tripod, it wouldn't matter. The camera isn't on lock down, you see. He's still panning around and changing the camera's viewing angle in each shot which rules out your realtime CGI nonsense.

And besides, he said he wasn't using a tripod. Maybe you should start with that. I hope you didn't send him any angry letters demanding him to just tell the truth.
Click to expand...

You've never used a tripod, have you. They can be raised or lowered as needed. A dolly would explain it even better. He was centered. The level of the camera is irrelevant. A hand held camera cannot be centered for hundreds of frames like that - even a couple frames of no movement is very difficult.

He had saved the center position on the dolly, as evidenced by the hundreds of frames he captured on center prior to the gas sequence. He did so, so that he could easily spin around and, boom!, he's on center.
 
yankee451 said:
You've never used a tripod, have you. They can be raised or lowered as needed. A dolly would explain it even better. He was centered. The level of the camera is irrelevant. A hand held camera cannot be centered for hundreds of frames like that - even a couple frames of no movement is very difficult.

He had saved the center position on the dolly, as evidenced by the hundreds of frames he captured on center prior to the gas sequence. He did so, so that he could easily spin around and, boom!, he's on center.
Click to expand...

No, just no. A dolly would be ridiculous out in the middle of the intersection. Did Naudet have a dolly grip (the guy who pushes the dolly around) to help him too?

Btw, what camera was Naudet using. Did you ever look it up?
 
yankee451 said:
And? You can trot out all the amateur videos you like. They don't change the damage evidence that proves a plane didn't cut the hole.
Click to expand...

PHOTOS, STEVE.

Be careful out there if you go for a walk today. You may get hit by a bus if you don't look where you're going.

http://www.911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit_photos.html

• ANALYSIS & INFO - 45 Angles - 49 PHOTOS OF THE 2ND PLANE •

- 45 photographers in alphabetical order - I still have 1 or 2 to add to the list.

Robert Clark, Robert Cumins, Kelly Guenther, and Ski Shields all took 2 photos of the plane. They were snapped in quick succession because the photographers saw the plane... like so many people.
 
ProBonoShill said:
Cool story bro.

Tell us Steve, if 9/11 was an inside jobby job why is the CIA allowing you to spew your nonsense all over the interwebs? How come they haven't come calling and eliminated you? I mean you're such a smart guy, exposing the ruthless government and their murder of almost 3000 people, why haven't they taken you and your buddy Feltzer out yet? Please explain.
Click to expand...

The death of my mother is a cool story. I would never say that about anybody's mother. I doubt you would if you used your real name.
 
MattNelson said:
PHOTOS, STEVE.

Be careful out there if you go for a walk today. You may get hit by a bus if you don't look where you're going.

http://www.911conspiracy.tv/2nd_hit_photos.html

• ANALYSIS & INFO - 45 Angles - 49 PHOTOS OF THE 2ND PLANE •

- 45 photographers in alphabetical order - I still have 1 or 2 to add to the list.

Robert Clark, Robert Cumins, Kelly Guenther, and Ski Shields all took 2 photos of the plane. They were snapped in quick succession because the photographers saw the plane... like so many people.
Click to expand...


Still doesn't change the damage evidence that proves they're full of it. Why do you refuse to address the lightly damaged aluminum sheeting and the progressively worse-damaged steel columns that were gouged out and sharply bent in a completely different direction than the television jet (that you are hanging your hat on) was traveling.

Videos and photographs of jets doing impossible things are only proof of fraud.
 
So far the skeptics have been wrong about whether or not the videos of the jet impacts were broadcast live.

They have been wrong about which tower is the north, or south tower.

They have been wrong about the majority of the witness accounts being anything BUT a large jet.

They have been wrong about whether or not Naudet was centered on the towers.

They have demanded the "math," but won't follow suit.

They have accused me of being insane, and of lying and they have even dragged my dead mother into the conversation.

But they will NOT address the evidence that proves all the jet impact videos and photos are fraudulent.
 
For the record, me, my sanity, my intelligence, and my family, passed and present, have nothing to do with the evidence of the lateral impact of small projectiles, that true believers and truthers alike, twist themselves into pretzles of denial to avoid.
 
yankee451 said:
Still doesn't change the damage evidence that proves they're full of it. Why do you refuse to address the lightly damaged aluminum sheeting and the progressively worse-damaged steel columns that were gouged out and sharply bent in a completely different direction than the television jet (that you are hanging your hat on) was traveling.

Videos and photographs of jets doing impossible things are only proof of fraud.
Click to expand...

1. Hilarious! Address what: your non-credentialed interpretation, which is clearly insane?
2. And home video, photographs, witnesses, DNA, tons of plane parts... all of which you refuse to address except with an arrow to #1.

People saw the plane. You are nuts.
 
Last edited:
yankee451 said:
You've never used a tripod, have you. They can be raised or lowered as needed. A dolly would explain it even better. He was centered. The level of the camera is irrelevant. A hand held camera cannot be centered for hundreds of frames like that - even a couple frames of no movement is very difficult.

He had saved the center position on the dolly, as evidenced by the hundreds of frames he captured on center prior to the gas sequence. He did so, so that he could easily spin around and, boom!, he's on center.
Click to expand...

No. The pre-crash shots from low level are pretty steady but wobble enough to be handheld. The crash footage is very clearly handheld as the picture doesn't just pan, tilt and zoom, it also rotates as the camera wobbles.

Your "explanations" for how it was done may seem plausible to you, but only because you don't understand what a technical feat you are proposing.

Instead of trying to buy a 767 wing to crash test, buy some 20 year old pro video equipment and try to prove to the world that it's actually possible to fake the videos in whatever way you reckon it was done. Old pre-high-definition tech will be dirt cheap as nobody wants it any more. In fact you probably need to get a move on as such obsolete equipment is getting hard to find these days.
 
yankee451 said:
[qimg]https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Frame-43609_center-1024x581.png[/qimg]

Last frame before impact:

[qimg]https://911crashtest.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Frame-44606_center-1024x576.png[/qimg]

He was using a tripod.
Click to expand...

Clearly these two frames you label 43609 and 44606 were not shot from the same position.

Look at the traffic lights in the foreground. In the first frame they are well over to the left while in the latter they are right in front of the towers, indicating that the camera position had relocated some distance to the left.

No fixed tripod location. Perhaps you could explain to use what you think the significance of a tripod was to faking this video and then factor in the significance of his not using one.
 
yankee451 said:
The death of my mother is a cool story. I would never say that about anybody's mother. I doubt you would if you used your real name.
Click to expand...

No that was in reference to the other idiocy in your post.

Now are you going to answer the question or keep running away like a coward?

Why hasn't the CIA murdered you yet? According to you they killed almost three thousand people, what's one more?
 
ProBonoShill said:
The moronic drivel you post isn't evidence Skippy.

Oh and the victims can't tell stories cause they're dead. But since in your delusional world you believe them to be alive and living among us, please prove it.
Click to expand...

So Stevie, when are you going to prove any of the murder victims on the planes are still alive and walking among us?

Stop dodging, it makes you look even more cowardly than you do now.
 
ProBonoShill said:
Evidence please.

Footage of the plane crash from 18 separate sources.

Where's you missile footage Steve? Don't have any? How sad.
Click to expand...

Still waiting for that missile footage Steve, thousands of pictures and videos, most taken by regular citizens not one shows missiles, why is that?

Be brave provide a coherent answer for once.
 
yankee451 said:
For the record, me, my sanity, my intelligence, and my family, passed and present, have nothing to do with the evidence of the lateral impact of small projectiles, that true believers and truthers alike, twist themselves into pretzles of denial to avoid.
Click to expand...

Physics fail again. I see science isn't your strong suit, maybe try painting by number that seems to be more your speed.

Oh and that isn't evidence that's you warped belief system which most definitely brings your sanity into question. Please stay away from sharp objects.
 
talk is not evidence, failed analysis is not evidence

yankee451 said:
The truth hurts. Badly.

You're wrong. Surely you own the DVD and can check for yourself.
Click to expand...

how do you fake negatives? There are so many things in your perverted fantasy which you can't explain.

yankee451 said:
For the record, me, my sanity, my intelligence, ... have nothing to do with the evidence ... d.
Click to expand...
It has to do with presenting your fantasy missile lies.

You have no evidence, you have lies about missiles, and are not able to prove your impact theories.

All you have to support your claims, talk and fantasy. You don't know you are clueless and spreading lies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom