firemen at pay phone

find the firemen in the video?

of course if they say no, then its obvious they are in on it, err...scared, uhhh...jedi mindtrick?
 
Edx said:
I do think the imagination they have to make the firemen say "seven is exploding" is amazing, it doesn't sound like that at all to me. They simply arent saying those words.
Click to expand...


The clever part is telling and showing on the screen what they are going to hear before they try to hear it. The mind then hears what it expects to hear. In a way this works both ways....a truther thinks they say something, and a skeptical non truther (ie non nutcase) will look for it to sound like something else.

I had to listen to it several time with the screen off before it was clear to me that the truthers were lying about what he said (big surprise). A truther could watch the same video and be quite convinced the other way which of course, was the whole intent of the makers.
Question then is why would truthers fake something like this.......why do they feel that their "truth" requires lies?
 
It's quite possible the filmmakers harmlessly added the explosion to increase the drama of their documentary. For example there's plenty of mainstream documentaries about 9/11 which incorporate loud explosions in time with far-off shots of UA175 hitting the WTC even though A) the original footage didn't capture an explosion and B) If the footage had captured an explosion, because it was so far away the explosion wouldn't be heard at impact but a few seconds after impact.
 
Crazytimes said:
I have a truther friend who loves using this video as some sort of evidence. Not one of these guys says anything about the noise in the video and the two walking towards the phone don't turn to look what it is or where it came from. I wish the original footage could be found.
Click to expand...

I have the original video coming to the house via NetFlix.

I will attempt to put the clip on YouTube.....

ETA: It comes from In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01.

Avalable through NetFlix.....
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
I have the original video coming to the house via NetFlix.

I will attempt to put the clip on YouTube.....

ETA: It comes from In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01.

Avalable through NetFlix.....
Click to expand...

Awesome! Finally :D
 
triforcharity said:
I have the original video coming to the house via NetFlix.

I will attempt to put the clip on YouTube.....

ETA: It comes from In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01.

Avalable through NetFlix.....
Click to expand...

I found a RapidShare link to this video in .avi format. It's broken up into 6 parts and you might need software to put the 6 parts back together again. I use power archiver (free but with a 4 second nag screen after 30 days).

Just extract the first part after you have downloaded all 6 files and it should put it all back together again. I'm watching it right now and it's definitely much better than youtube quality. The guy on the phone is at 25 minutes in but it cuts a few seconds short of where the explosion was in the youtube video.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
Just extract the first part after you have downloaded all 6 files and it should put it all back together again. I'm watching it right now and it's definitely much better than youtube quality. The guy on the phone is at 25 minutes in but it cuts a few seconds short of where the explosion was in the youtube video.
Click to expand...

Urgh,,, are you saying we will still have to keep looking?
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
Urgh,,, are you saying we will still have to keep looking?
Click to expand...

Yeah, pretty much. Sorry. But the video does cover the pre-collapse of Bldg. 7 and how it was expected well before it fell if that helps any. It also has zero explosion noises when it does collapse and the video with the firemen looking into the hole with "Molten steel" that the wackjobs like to use is in there too.

And there's a sharp view of Jammys blob. Right down to being able to see the sun glinting off of it's skin
 
jaydeehess said:
The references to the audio peaking/limiting makes sense to me. I do of course have some experience with this though I usually deal with a single audio stream (broadcast TV tech)I do have some editing experience as well.
With a single mic or even with two closely spaced mics (as would be the case with ENG) if sounds are clipping then they will continue to clip until the gain is reduced and it would be ridiculous to expect even louder sounds to not do so.
Click to expand...

Since the original video looks like it will remain elusive, is it possible to show this clipping of voices vs no clipping of the explsions on an oscilliscope or whatever it is that you audio guys use now days?

Cuz to my understanding, voice clipping would tend to square off the the wave form, and then it could be compared to the explosions, where there wouldn't be any, or at the very least significantly less "squaring".
 
sheeplesnshills said:
The clever part is telling and showing on the screen what they are going to hear before they try to hear it. The mind then hears what it expects to hear.
Click to expand...

There is an entire website that does this, and I can't find it now. There is a really funny video of a church congregation singing, and you are convinced that they really are singing the obscene alternate lyrics you see on-screen.
 
carlitos said:
There is an entire website that does this, and I can't find it now. There is a really funny video of a church congregation singing, and you are convinced that they really are singing the obscene alternate lyrics you see on-screen.
Click to expand...


I've seen that too, but also cannot find it at the moment. Very interesting stuff.
 
Seymour Butz said:
Since the original video looks like it will remain elusive, is it possible to show this clipping of voices vs no clipping of the explsions on an oscilliscope or whatever it is that you audio guys use now days?

Cuz to my understanding, voice clipping would tend to square off the the wave form, and then it could be compared to the explosions, where there wouldn't be any, or at the very least significantly less "squaring".
Click to expand...

Only if the entire signal chain after the stage where the overload occurred was DC-coupled and had a high-frequency bandwidth significantly wider than the generally-accepted "audio" range.

That pretty much lets out all digital recording systems. Although a good DAW or digital tape machine can reproduce the flat-topping of a clipped waveform pretty well (provided that the fundamental frequency involved iw well below the system's Nyquist frequency), by the time the signal has been through the various copying and mixing stages prior to the final dub onto the video master the accumulated phase shifts will have made the recognition of nice clean clipping impossible.

Throwing in something like mp3 encoding (or whatever it is that YouTube uses) makes it impossible2.

If you want an example of how the phase response of a system can alter the time-domain waveform, take an audio transformer and run it well into core saturation at 40 or 50 Hz while observing the output on a scope. Instead of the flat-topping you would observe in the output of an amplifier overdriven to an equal amount of THD, the waveform will do a funny-looking sort of sideways collapse. This is because the phase relationship between the fundamental and the various harmonics is altered. The antialiasing filtering and DC removal filtering in a digital signal chain will have a similar distorting effect, as will the use of AC coupling in whatever analog stages the signal passes through on the way from the mic output to the final product.

Fortunately, the human ear-brain system is rather insensitive to phase distortion, which is how my experienced ear can tell me that the fuzziness of some of the voices on that video sounds remarkably like an in-amp type mic preamp yelling for help.
 
Maybe I've found that blast on another WTC video and if my hunch checks out it couldn't be better evidence that the noise was caused by some collapse, not man-made demolition.
Mark Loizeaux - President of Cont. Demolition Inc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj6ZtXt6W90&​

Listen to the blast starting at 2:18. Start listening at 2:00 for some context then listen to what Loizeaux says about it.

Can one of the audio wizards here put a 'scope on this and compare it to the blast heard by the guys at the payphone?
 
triforcharity said:
ETA: It comes from In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01.
Click to expand...


I have this on videotape.

BTW, this program does use creative sound mixing. The Scott Myers clip, for instance, was goosed up with audio of something crying out, "The other one!"
 
BigAl said:
Maybe I've found that blast on another WTC video and if my hunch checks out it couldn't be better evidence that the noise was caused by some collapse, not man-made demolition.
Mark Loizeaux - President of Cont. Demolition Inc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj6ZtXt6W90&​

Listen to the blast starting at 2:18. Start listening at 2:00 for some context then listen to what Loizeaux says about it.

Can one of the audio wizards here put a 'scope on this and compare it to the blast heard by the guys at the payphone?
Click to expand...

Just a quick listen to both videos tells me that the explosions are quite different in frequency content. That could easily be due to the equipment and distance from the sound, I don't think we'll be able to discern which it might be.

My opinion about the WTC 7 'explosion' video is that the sound was NOT added later. The two guys look around and the camera also swivels around after the sound is heard - this indicates a reaction to something.

I see nothing suspicious on the video. btw, since the firemen have their mouths covered, it's not possible to hear exactly what they say - to claim that they make a reference to WTC 7 is stretching it, IMO.

cheers

AE

 
alienentity said:
My opinion about the WTC 7 'explosion' video is that the sound was NOT added later. The two guys look around and the camera also swivels around after the sound is heard - this indicates a reaction to something.
Click to expand...

Something that could have been a large but unstable peice of the twin towers falling over.

Truthers are taking any sound and labeling it an explosion.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Something that could have been a large but unstable peice of the twin towers falling over.

Truthers are taking any sound and labeling it an explosion.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Who knows what made the sound? You can't tell from the videos.
You can't even tell where the sound is coming from....
 
alienentity said:
Exactly. Who knows what made the sound? You can't tell from the videos.
You can't even tell where the sound is coming from....
Click to expand...

OK, it's not the blast heard by the fireman. It's still a good counter-example when someone insists that what the firemen heard has to be explosive detonation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom