It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How to build a better Meatgrinder: Black Tuesday, WTC 7, and the missing witnesses

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 09:55 PM
Watching modern films, with amazing cgi, and not understanding the levels of production that go in to these things, or even having a grasp of what technology is capable of could and is misleading the casual observer into mis-guided conclusions.

Sure, i can look at an xray and understand what it shows, does that make me a radiologist? alas no.

Yes, computers are taking leaps and bounds, yes software is capable of doing amazing things, but it still has its limits.

If the manipulated live feeds issues (not sure they really are issues) are to continue, lets at least try to address them properly.

1. How were the live feeds interrupted, and the manipulated content inserted.
This would require either-

a- the feed to be interrupted at the source (from the camera)
b- the feed to be interrupted at the studio uplink/downlink point (satellite truck or land link/microwave link)
c- interrupted at the studio end.

The only way this could have been done is either at the uplink point, downlink point or at the studio. This would require an extensive knowledge of the systems involved, and co-operation of the individuals involved in the production.

1.5 How many links were manipulated, (real numbers here), how many feeds and companies were involved?

2. Where is all the raw footage of "no-planes" shot from amateur sources?

3. Who built the software, 3d models and calculated the geometry, and designed a system, that on the fly, can create perfect geometry syncing of objects in an un-defined 3d live space. I know of no such software, but if you find me something close ill be impressed.

4. Where was the hardware for this?

5. If the feeds were manipulated and a 3d model was placed over the live footage, why did the independent sources of the footage all track and focus on the path of an invisible aircraft?

6. If your answer to (5) is the camera crews were in on this, how do you explain the co-ordination of the shots. Imagine 5 independent cameras, trying follow a non-existent ball in a football match, there is no way all the shots would line up.

Graphics take time to produce, most of the hard work is post-production work. Things do not happen in realtime, it requires alot of power and time to render even small SD resolutions of video. There is not currently any software on the market that can do this in realtime.

Please don't try and fob me off with, the military have silicon-graphics workstations that you wouldn't know about. Simply not true. This kind of software and hardware comes from a few select places for the high-end systems, and there is nothing that comes near to the capabilities of pulling this off.

If it existed, id be using it at work, and we would lay off 14 staff, and save alot of time and money.

UNLESS the whole thing was stage-managed, shots were planned, and there is heavy media involvement in the thing. Who are the last people that are going to be anywhere near a black-op? yup, the media.

Common sense and reality people, or at least give us some credible evidence to suggest otherwise, and in my line of work, if its not minimum of 720x576 resolution its not fit for broadcast, so you-tube videos fall into that category.

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by 2ciewan

Thanks for the post 2c. I agree that systems are required to transmit television, and that something would be required to insert a fake image if indeed that is the case.

All of the things you described in your very lengthy post are what is required to run a modern television broadcast.

All of these systems were in place and operating during the attacks. As evidenced by the fact that there were television broadcasts happening.

The question is : Who decides what gets shown?

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 10:16 PM
thats part of my point...

there is no central command for tv stations, they all run independently. The final edit in a live tv news environment is down the the director for that particular station at that particular time.

These are hungry media types, fighting for ratings and immensely credible professional people. The only way this could happen, is if they were "fed" the altered images. Which i would argue is highly unlikely, and technically impossible.

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 10:28 PM

Originally posted by 2ciewan
thats part of my point...

there is no central command for tv stations, they all run independently.

This is a fals statement. There is indeed central control of local television. These central controllers are known as "Networks" .

Networks are called Networks because they are a Network of stations that transmit what the Network feeds them.

Also, if you are truly curious and you truly beieve what you say, you might dig a little. In the 9/11 commision report it states that local channels were all knocked off the air after the first attack due to the 300' antennae on the roof of WTC1 was used by many local stations. Yet the broadcast continued in NYC, the only thing that changed was that the local stations switched to Network feed excuisively.

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 10:53 PM
Yes there are networks, but local stations "switching" to the network is done on the local level, the local stations "op-in" to the broadcast network signal. This is a manual process, not automated.

Yes there was an outage, there were 10 tv stations, served from 10 antennas on the tower. I read a detailed report on the problems that the loss of the tower caused the tv stations, and the steps they took to re-gain transmission. Ill try and dig it out for you.

In this a network engineer details the transmitter sites, and the temporary tv frequency changes and licensing issues (one if memory serves) is outside central new york, and was brought back into service.

If you want to look at a bigger "smoking gun" ask the questions about the fdny repeater systems that didn't work on that day.

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 11:00 PM

details on the stations effected, and the steps they took.

Channel 2 was the only station broadcasting the day after the attack, channel 2 and 41, are the only stations that had masts on the empire state building, and not as effected by the loss of the 380ft mast on the north tower

posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by 2ciewan

Thanks for clarifying that 2c, I don't live in the NYC area so things like this help a lot.

<< 1   >>

log in