9/11 Solved!

reply to post by ColoradoJens


Oh dear, I didn't realize retard was a forbidden word.

I am also a 100% sure I didn't use it before.

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by ColoradoJens

 

Oh dear, I didn't realize retard was a forbidden word.

I am also a 100% sure I didn't use it before.

I'm sure you don't realize that considering the general lack of decorum you display. You DID say it - actually you said "f'n retard" but your post got pulled by the mods - remember now? Or is your selective memory kicking in?
Honesty is a way of life - lying to yourself is not a good way to go through life.

CJ

reply to post by ColoradoJens


That is simply not true.

What I typed was f.....ret....., exactly like that, which is apparently forbidden.

It can mean anything, false retina, fondue retainer, flaming retiree,

Cry me a river mr pc.

reply to post by ColoradoJens

I'm sure you don't realize that considering the general lack of decorum you display.

Didn't you have 2 posts removed, mr pc?

reply to post by TraitorKiller


More than that I think. I like your explination of what you said was. Really rings true.

CJ

TraitorKiller - With regard to the disruptive behavior of Ms.ColoradoJens

Methinks it best to not continue any conversation with him/her(?). There is a term in Catholic theology that describes this person's condition very well. Its known as "Invincible Ignorance," which is applicable to this situation. Its a psychological condition as well as a spiritual one for which there is no know remedy - mainly because of the intractable nature of those so afflicted. Discussion with these types of aberrant personalities is futile.

Because of past warnings this person has received I am pretty sure the Mods are keeping tabs on the bad behavior and perhaps its only a matter of time before another warning is issued. In the meantime please do not allow this person to sidetrack – or otherwise ruin – this good thread. As far I have been able to determine this person has no good intentions and in fact, only expresses ill will towards other members of the ATS Forum, which incidentally, prides itself on civility and proper decorum of its membership. The disruption caused here by this person is the typical behavior of a “thread killer” – or worse. Thank you…………..

reply to post by Vitruvian


Yeah, you are right, this is a really good thead. Flags out the ying yang. Incontrovertable evidence oozing from its pores. Posters calling people names in the same post where they repeat the need for decorum (see yours above). Ironic statements about ignorance when getting run over by a truck called reality. Keep up the good work you two. If it weren't for me bandying about with you this thread would have died long ago.

CJ

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Yeah, you are right, this is a really good thead. Flags out the ying yang.

I realize you don't quite know how things work here on the ATS Forums so here's an FYI for your edification....... FRESHMAN FOURM - How to Star or Flag a Post, page 1 - www.abovetopsecret.com...
"And if you look at the top of the page you will see threads and PodCasts that have been flagged other by members. It a good way for the members to say that this is a good post/thread"........ check it out why don't you Ms. CJ.......


AND - What does "flagging" do?, page 1
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This should set you on the road to proper kudo's for the more excellent threads such as this one is "OR WAS" till you came along with your disruptive ways and poor manners.......

reply to post by Vitruvian


Geeze, thanks. How zany. How many flags does this thread have again?

CJ

reply to post by Vitruvian


Oh. I forgot. No flags. It is in the hoax bin.

CJ

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Oh. I forgot. No flags. It is in the hoax bin. CJ

Did you finally figure it out .........that there is NO FLAG BOX for this thread.........took you a while huh? Typical !!!
This also points out that by your very nature you are a MOCKING type of personality always looking to dis-credit others and with Zero respect for the participants in these Forums........

COMPARE OK !!!!!!!

reply to post by Vitruvian


Your screen capture says it all.

CJ

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Your screen capture says it all.CJ

But I still think you don't get it.......

Why do you think I posted this www.abovetopsecret.com...
HERE rather than start a new thread on it? And, of course, only YOU would have thought those pics of dead bodies were actually from the WTC 

” These images are being passed off as having come from the WTC collapses............LIES

I was going to open a new thread on this topic but decided that this is actually the right thread for a discussion of these images, which are new to me so they might also be new to most people here.”

reply to post by Vitruvian


Please do. Start another hoax thread. See your screen shot? Can you read the words next to the word Hoax?
Sums this and your next thread up well. Lies scams and fakes pertains to the info presented, if you can't figure it out.

CJ

ENOUGH

Discontinue this bickering immediately. If it continues post bans will be applied to those that do.

reply to post by TraitorKiller


At some point earlier in the thread, you linked to a GIF that depicts a 'seperating' shadow.

This is exactly what could be expected in this scenario - if it hasn't already been explained.

Have a look again at the GIF you linked, if you will.

Do you see the boddy falling? It is travelling very near the WTC. Just before the alleged 'shadow seperation' it is undeniable that the jumper makes contact with the building. This is evidenced in the posture change, as-well-as trajectory change.

The images were not taking at a 0 or 90 degree angle. This angle greatly changes the view of the victim's free fall course.

The movement of the shadow perfectly mirrors the jumper, as they contact the wall and are pushed outward - away from WTC.

Coupling this knowledge with the understanding that the images were captured from an angle can give a strong foundation that supports proper physical movement from both the jumper and his shadow.

Once again, as the jumper contacts the building in free fall, his momentum springs him away from the WTC by several feet. This sudden course change happens at exactly the moment when the shadow starts to seperate and the entire time, stays within an acceptable range of movement to explain the 'seperation'.

Man falls, shadow follows, man's course changes, man's shadow instantly and precisely changes...

Shadow did not seperate from it's owner... if anything, the GIF you linked refutes the claims of shadow seperation, with verifiable evidence - evidence that, when compared to the 'shadow seperation theory', reveals a much higher percentage of probablity.

reply to post by esteay812

Do you see the boddy falling? It is travelling very near the WTC. Just before the alleged 'shadow seperation' it is undeniable that the jumper makes contact with the building. This is evidenced in the posture change, as-well-as trajectory change.

I´m watching this on a 50" screen. There is no posture change. In fact the weird thing is the guy is falling with his body completely stretched out making cartwheels from beginning to end. Which seems more like aerial acrobatics than an uncontrolled free fall.

I don't see him hitting the building, I don't see a change in trajectory, in the end it seems like it, but that's because the shadow shoots off, making it look like he moves away.

You can see that the guy is moving sideways at the same rate as the rest of the fall, judging by the vertical facade beams he crosses.

Again, the whole angle of his trajectory seems impossible. Bodies don't fall down travelling sideways across such a distance.

reply to post by esteay812


Look at the pic,



cluesforum.info...

Point C is where the shadow moves away and, according to you, the guy hits the building and changes his trajectory.

However, the straight line shows that his trajectory never changes.

And once again, doesn't that trajectory look very weird in the first place?

esteay812 - Please go to my Google photo page and you will be able to examine the 'falling man' frame X frame. HERE --->

Earlier post by Vitruvian - "As per this OP's previous post (above) here is a link to ALL 143 of the alleged JUMPER stills seen in the very suspect Jim Huibregtse video" - HERE --> plus.google.com...

In that Google photo page please scroll to the bottom then come back up to frames 9 - 10 (from the bottom) and you will see that the so-called "falling figure" has disappeared from the frames altogether - I think as a glitch in the perps editing process. Then if you scroll up to the place where you speculate that the person actually hit the building you will see more editing glitches right at the spot where his trajectory "seems" to change - although I think is does not cjhange - it just appears to change because of the glitch in the editing process as they were manipulating the video. Just my opinion.

I include here a couple of examples but it is also good for the reader to click the LINK to the webpage that contains all of the frames.
Note the 'missing' jumper in these two frames

Note no change in trajectory in these 4 frames.


At the very beginning of the "jump" I noted a change in trajectory - within the first second there is a marked change from right to left - about the distance of 3 pillars - each window is 3 feet wide - .......why? The wind was not strong enough to do that.

I am makin a new GIF and will post it along with the entire video soon.......

reply to post by Vitruvian


Hi Vitruvian, I am trying to use paint.net to make a screenshot from a yt vid. It works but ATS won't let me upload the pic due to a file size error. Do you know how to solve this?

I tried to resize the pic but it doesn't matter.