It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Debunk this! (Hoaxed WTC7 video)

page: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Your video has no audio at all for the segment in question. Makes me wonder which one is manipulated, the one with no audio, or the one with "very clever" audiomanipulation? Maybe you can show flaws in the manipulation, such as the aformentioned delay being too long, short. If not, thats even more evidence of explosions. I dont see why a 911 denier would be troubled by them anymore than by all the other evidence. For everybody else the use of explosives has been proven quintuple times or something.

There isnt just the noise of the blasts. There is background noise as well. Maybe one of the debunkers can track down another video with exactly the same background noise? That would indicate the audio of the video in the OT has been faked, with the source of at least the background noise being from some other clip.
edit on 15-9-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


Forgive me for not having a video downloader. I use an image capturing program that doesn't do sound.

It has already been proven though that the timing for everything in the video is off. As soon as the camera zooms in during the OP's video, the line of air-conditioning units, etc. completely disappears. In every other WTC 7 video, we can clearly see that this section of the building doesn't fall in until a few seconds after the penthouse collapses. Why would you have around 20 videos of the building behaving one way, and then believe 1 video that came out 10 years after the fact which is severely low quality, very shaky and zoomy, and has all the timing for the collapse completely off?

It really makes me wonder what people here won't believe, if it supports their preconceived notions.




posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Destroying evidence is not a good motive to blow up buildings, nor is blowing up buildings a good way to get rid of evidence. I can think of way more simple and less risky way to dispose of evidence. Besides, it would require the conspirators to know that the building would caught fire, the sprinkler installation fail, and the fire fighters fail to extinguish it.

Maybe you can answer this question honestly: if you were to plot such an conspiracy, would you plan to blow up building 7 to destroy the evidence? Or would you discard that idea because it is a bad idea?
edit on 15-9-2011 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)


I definitely could think of easier ways to accomplish everything except for the Patriot Act, and public/insurance funding of the Demolition and rebuilding of the complex.

I think 10 years after the fact, if we can zero in on who benefitted the most, then we can narrow our conspiracies down to just a couple. Mainly, the towers were reaching the point of needing expensive renovations, I remember reading they contained asbestos that needed to be removed, they were overly insured, and to have them come down in this manner made it much more economically feasible for the owners to rebuild.

I don't believe in any widespread massive government operation, but I can think of two individuals and one organization capable of doing the whole thing. Cheney and Silverstein with the assistance of Blackwater. Accomplished a huge and profitable real estate transaction, got the Patriot Act passed, got us into Iraq, and ended up with some HUGE and profitable contracts in the aftermath.

It is just one possibility. To be honest, I don't think we will ever know the truth.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I tried to post this comment on the video:

The shakey camera movement isnt natural, its another video thats had the effects overlayed and then zoomed into the footage moving the camera view around to simulate hand held footage its an old trick...

But low and behold... "comment awaiting approval"

The fact that he has done that alone screams fake to me, he is only approving the comments saying good things about the video.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I would call fake on this. And I don't believe the OS. My reasoning?

First, the explosion flashes are too bright based on the color of the rest of the footage. Looks very much like Video Copilot's explosion packs for Adobe After Effects.

Second... it was found on an old camera? Umm... you have pretty definitive proof that WTC7 was detonated and you forget this? I'm not buying it.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   
This really does not prove anything new does it? Does it prove the attack was an inside job? No. The only thing it would prove is that we brought down #7.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


If B7 was brought down and proven to be so, it would be proof of a lying government or related organization.


And that wouldn't be new, but it would be news.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 



The timing off could be due to video conversions.

The real thing what bothers me is:

Why is the front building not in the picture?

The absence and the lack of roof airco's in the second part.

It suggest another recording angle.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
So now it is officially a hoax?

Arent't there a few questions still pending?

Hmm this was the first and last time i put some research time in this 911 bllshtt.

People don t think and look, just repeat.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by EartOccupant
 




The timing off could be due to video conversions.
Exactly. It seems to me like who ever has converted this video has mistakenly managed to reverse it and change the frame-rate...or something like that. That's basically all the skeptics have so far. The original source is yet to be seen and they have so far failed to explain to missing building and other oddities. But off to the hoax bin we go. YAY!

edit on 15-9-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
PAUSE at 0:18 - the building looks 2D, as left hand side of the building is not there - and you would expect it to be? A building of that size would show some depth going away from the camera, as the camera is clearly not "straight on" to the building, so therefore I expect to see the left side of the building.
Also - there are no other buildings around that are visible?

Also - read some comments on the YT video which pull it to pieces - so many issues with it really.
edit on 15-9-2011 by facchino because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by UniverSoul
if this isnt faked (and im sure people can verify it)
could this be the end to 911 doubt?
if its real there is no doubt that its inside job


To what end do you prove yourself::: Bush Lied? People Died? Halliburton made money while people died? War is a sham? Wag the Dog? Hang a past American President for treason? Pretty pathetic thinking I think!!!!

When I go to sleep at night I do not think about "what really happened on 9/11.......I am sorry that you do



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Im going to jam the 2 videos for comparison on the same post to make it easier to cross check

old



new

edit on 14-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


The funny part is that in the first video you can hear an explosion also.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I haven't put a lot of time in to this but after having a quick go I can see it would be pretty easy to fake
So I took the official video from the link on the first page..
I upped the brightness to match the colour of the 'new video'
I screencapped the building from when the windows go out just before it falls.
I masked that image and left in the smoke + mistakes to show how I did it.

All you 'd need do is repeat the process but instead of a red dot and red arrow add 'explosions'

add some zoom, and movement effect and you pretty much have it..

here is my short attempt, if asked I would give it a bigger go later. and could probably match the video in the OP.

as for no building on the right side you only need mask it and add a layer of smoke to hide it.

here is my attempt.

www.youtube.com...


If someone could embed as it will not work for me.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by EartOccupant
 




The timing off could be due to video conversions.
Exactly. It seems to me like who ever has converted this video has mistakenly managed to reverse it and change the frame-rate...or something like that. That's basically all the skeptics have so far. The original source is yet to be seen and they have so far failed to explain to missing building and other oddities. But off to the hoax bin we go. YAY!

edit on 15-9-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


Um, perhaps you didn't notice, but this isn't just a "one video is faster" problem. In this new video, the penthouse collapsing happens at the exact same time as the building beginning its descent downward. This is entirely wrong, as absolutely every other video (and there are a lot, I posted a compilation earlier in the thread) does not have the building collapsing completely until a few seconds after the penthouse goes down.

In this new video, the interior of the building was already gone when the penthouse was shown collapsing, meaning it was spliced together and concealed by the camera movements and zooming in on the building.

Seriously, there's no question that this is fake.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Here is an official controlled demolition. Count how many flashes you see.



Considering there is no windows or walls it looks like wtc 7 collapse. No flashes.
edit on 15-9-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


What I got out of that video primarily was how many bombs were going off through audio. That was a very clear demonstration of how noisy these things are. Imagine having bombs like that echoing through the streets of New York. Everyone and their mother would be testifying about explosives.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by EartOccupant
 


Looks real enough to me.

Haven´t seen any meaningful debunking of it.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Imagine having bombs like that echoing through the streets of New York. Everyone and their mother would be testifying about explosives.


There have been multiple witnesses that have heard multiple booms. The demolition sequence was spread out throughout the day rather than a 10 second rapid demolition. A boom here and there is hardly suspect. You could easily pass it off as gas mains or fire extinguishers blowing up. Many demolitions were concealed during the plane impacts and collapses. Slight of hand.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by galdur
reply to post by EartOccupant
 


Looks real enough to me.

Haven´t seen any meaningful debunking of it.
Maybe you should read the posts that follow the original post and maybe read the second page too.

I am very pleased with ATS' decision to move this thread to hoax. Applause to staff.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by galdur
reply to post by EartOccupant
 


Looks real enough to me.

Haven´t seen any meaningful debunking of it.


So what counts as "meaningful debunking?" There's a lot of information missing from the video:

What camera type was used

What the original length of the video was

Where it was recorded

What time it was recorded

What enhancements were made to the video (or degradations)

There is just too much in question, and the fact that the building collapses in a way defunct from any other video that is seen, and has explosions that are more visible than any demolition that has been done. It's just too fake.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join