Why do the camera's ZOOM IN seconds before impact?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
It's because the camera operators didn't want their footage to SUCK. They were doing what professional cameramen do, zooming-in on the event being filmed.

BTW, this impact was filmed by SEVEN different live news cameras. They didn't all "zoom-in seconds before impact". Nice cherry-picking of evidence to try to demonstrate your bogus case of media foreknowledge.




posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by revolutionphase1
 

Two things:

The camera had been zooming in and out throughout the whole video you posted. They did it several times and never remained zoomed in or out for too long.

Also, the camera man might have noticed the other plane coming in and started zooming in to get a better shot. There's a guy controlling that camera, and if he saw the plane coming, he might well have been trying to get the best shot of what was going to happen next that he could.



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 02:28 AM
link   
And another point, I know someone who was filming the first tower burning, a professional camera man. He had set up his camera on a tripod and was letting it run. The tape he had in there was already largely used up, so he had to swap tapes at a certain point, when he get the camera back up and rolling he saw the second tower was already burning...he missed the second hit, couldn't hear it from where he was set up on a building in Chelsea. No, he did not know it was coming, he did not have a chance to zoom in at the moment of impact. He was just trying to record the event, and because of bad timing he missed the second hit altogether with his camera, which is probably why it's not one of the ones anyone ever looks at online. Just kind of useless video for this sort of thing. All he got was first one burning tower, then two burning towers and no plane hits. With so many cameras, some are going to get better, more spectacular shots than others, it's inevitable. There were probably hundreds, if not thousands of video cameras trained on the towers at that moment, if you include all the people who pulled out their home cameras to tape it. (If this happened now there'd probably be a hundred thousand views of it, what with all the cell phone cameras these days.)



posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
This is sophisticated fake video with actor voice overlay.

You can bet your bottom dollar that most of the better quality footage
has only been released or 'discovered' in the last 2 or 3 years.
Better quality software sure produces better virtual animation than the pile of s**t they first
released. But none is without tell-tale fakery signs.

www.septemberclues.info
www.cluesforum.info

It is not my fault if you can't bother your arse to investigate the thousands upon thousands
of examples offered up as proof of 9/11 video fakery.
And anyone who denies these facts (after sufficient investigation), is a fool or a liar.
And there an an awful lot of liars around.

This is known for years now. 9/11 was a fakery extravaganza, with fake terrorists,
fake plane crashes, fake victims, fake video, fake witness testimony etc. etc......ALL FACT

Wise Up. We were duped (and continue to be duped by many, including the pre-established
9/11 'truth movement').


LOL u srs?



posted on Apr, 3 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by pshea38
This is sophisticated fake video with actor voice overlay.

You can bet your bottom dollar that most of the better quality footage
has only been released or 'discovered' in the last 2 or 3 years.
Better quality software sure produces better virtual animation than the pile of s**t they first
released. But none is without tell-tale fakery signs.

www.septemberclues.info
www.cluesforum.info

It is not my fault if you can't bother your arse to investigate the thousands upon thousands
of examples offered up as proof of 9/11 video fakery.
And anyone who denies these facts (after sufficient investigation), is a fool or a liar.
And there an an awful lot of liars around.

This is known for years now. 9/11 was a fakery extravaganza, with fake terrorists,
fake plane crashes, fake victims, fake video, fake witness testimony etc. etc......ALL FACT

Wise Up. We were duped (and continue to be duped by many, including the pre-established
9/11 'truth movement').


LOL u srs?


Wht de hll mn? Dz 't nt luk lke ime srs?
Plse tke de tme!

pfft!



posted on Apr, 3 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by pshea38
This is sophisticated fake video with actor voice overlay.

You can bet your bottom dollar that most of the better quality footage
has only been released or 'discovered' in the last 2 or 3 years.
Better quality software sure produces better virtual animation than the pile of s**t they first
released. But none is without tell-tale fakery signs.

www.septemberclues.info
www.cluesforum.info

It is not my fault if you can't bother your arse to investigate the thousands upon thousands
of examples offered up as proof of 9/11 video fakery.
And anyone who denies these facts (after sufficient investigation), is a fool or a liar.
And there an an awful lot of liars around.

This is known for years now. 9/11 was a fakery extravaganza, with fake terrorists,
fake plane crashes, fake victims, fake video, fake witness testimony etc. etc......ALL FACT

Wise Up. We were duped (and continue to be duped by many, including the pre-established
9/11 'truth movement').


LOL u srs?


Wht de hll mn? Dz 't nt luk lke ime srs?
Plse tke de tme!

pfft!


Hell yeah, bro!

Wait, you do have proof of everything you're saying, right?



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by pshea38
This is sophisticated fake video with actor voice overlay.

You can bet your bottom dollar that most of the better quality footage
has only been released or 'discovered' in the last 2 or 3 years.
Better quality software sure produces better virtual animation than the pile of s**t they first
released. But none is without tell-tale fakery signs.

www.septemberclues.info
www.cluesforum.info

It is not my fault if you can't bother your arse to investigate the thousands upon thousands
of examples offered up as proof of 9/11 video fakery.
And anyone who denies these facts (after sufficient investigation), is a fool or a liar.
And there an an awful lot of liars around.

This is known for years now. 9/11 was a fakery extravaganza, with fake terrorists,
fake plane crashes, fake victims, fake video, fake witness testimony etc. etc......ALL FACT

Wise Up. We were duped (and continue to be duped by many, including the pre-established
9/11 'truth movement').


LOL u srs?


Wht de hll mn? Dz 't nt luk lke ime srs?
Plse tke de tme!

pfft!


Hell yeah, bro!

Wait, you do have proof of everything you're saying, right?



Do you see the links just above?
Try clicking!



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 



Do you see the links just above?
Try clicking!


Waste


of


Time



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38


Do you see the links just above?
Try clicking!


I did.

I asked for proof, not gross misconstructions.

Is it too hard for you to explain in your own words?
I'm up for an intelligent debate if you can manage. I know it will be hard having an intelligent discussion with someone who thinks all of reality is fake, but I'm up for a challenge.
edit on 4-4-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by revolutionphase1
The lady in the first video seems not surprised at all a Boeing filled with innocent passengers is about to commit a suicide crash.


in this video a news reporter doesnt take her eyes of the camera when a car accident happens behind her......
She must have been involved some how!!!!!!




posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by pshea38


Do you see the links just above?
Try clicking!


I did.

I asked for proof, not gross misconstructions.

Is it too hard for you to explain in your own words?
I'm up for an intelligent debate if you can manage. I know it will be hard having an intelligent discussion with someone who thinks all of reality is fake, but I'm up for a challenge.
edit on 4-4-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)


Gross misconstructions??? Don't be a clown!

How about legitamite analysis of flawed and problematic 9/11 photographs and video.

No interest in arguing with you. Gone beyond that.

The evidence is there, and the case is proven.
(And All will find out soon.)

Adios.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by pshea38
 



Do you see the links just above?
Try clicking!


Waste


of


Time


As I told g.o.d. and others, Give it up jumpinthruhoops.

The game is up. You can do it the easy way or the hard way.
I believe you have the choice.

best of luck hooper.



posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38


Gross misconstructions??? Don't be a clown!


I'm afraid that title would seemingly belong to you, with your gross misconstructions, humorous, baseless accusations void of any logic and factual basis whatsoever, and resort to ad hominem name calling when asked to defend your stance.



How about legitamite analysis of flawed and problematic 9/11 photographs and video.


Well, we can start here. Please pick something in specific, and let's converse.



No interest in arguing with you. Gone beyond that.


Who said anything about an argument? Arguments are for people of low intelligence. You wouldn't happen to fall under the category, right? I believe the term was intelligent debate. Is that not something you wish to partake in? Do you wish to be ignorant to facts, refuse to learn, and live in your own (borderline schizophrenic) fantasy world? Maybe you should head over to GLP. This is not the place for that. This website is meant for debate and denial of ignorance.



The evidence is there, and the case is proven.


Once again, please pick something specific and do not be so vague. Proven by whom? You wouldn't mind taking this evidence to a court of law then, if it is so solid and factual, would you?



(And All will find out soon.)



Adios.


lmao. Good luck with that
edit on 4-4-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join