A (botched) perspective on an old 9/11 video.

page: 2
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

Ok, where did I "backtrack"?




posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


You wouldn't post this unless you thought it was worth while and credible

The fact of the matter is that the video in you OP has been debunked.

END OF THREAD!



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

So I didnt backtrack at all.

Youre making an assumption.

Again, Id ask that you focus on the video but if you are interested in my opinion, please see my post on disinfo.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


I am not having a go at you personally

if you want a little victory then fine

you were directly backtracking...

That does not take away the fact that this is the second time today you have posted stuff in this forum that has turned out to be a hoax.

please stop posting with out first checking out your facts.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


My god dude. You are seriously full of aggro today. Who the heck do you think you are to come into someone else's thread and say END OF THREAD! Take a break or something because seriously. Rude.

To the OP: Thanks so much for the video synopsis. Will be sure to check it out when I get home!



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Malynn
 





You are seriously full of aggro today


its not arggro its frustration, I am sorry if it is coming across that way I just have a low tolerance for ignorance and this its rife today.



Who the heck do you think you are to come into someone else's thread and say END OF THREAD!


The video has been fully debunked, that to me should me the end of the thread.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

Its not about a "victory", youre simply saying things that arent true and attacking me personally.

May I suggest that you first analyze your own assumptions and biases before commenting about others.

If I did post something which has been previously discussed, thats not uncommon even after doing a search.

As far as I know, this video has not been posted previously and I wanted the feedback of fellow ATSers.

Depending on the subject matter, I do put thought into my posts and threads.

If a mod feels that I am doing something in violation of ATS rules, I'm sure they'll let me know.

edit on 11-9-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin


this picture quite clearly shows the same building and its quite obliviously in front of WTC-2 and not behind like the video claims its to be.


And that kind of explains that then.

No CGI required just a quick Google search

OP this is the second thread on 9/11 you have posted to day and its the second i have had to point out as being a hoax.

please check up your sources before you post
edit on 11-9-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)
edit on 11-9-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)


So you are saying that the wing actually did go behind the bulding?



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Hi all


I can see that the building is in front of the tower, but shouldnt it be a shadow appering on the building from that palne?

Love and light
San Nam



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


But the video is wrong

its factually incorrect



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoParadigm
 


yet but that proves nothing, this footage shows the plane flying into the building

form the perspective of who ever was shooting the video then its obviously going be that the plane is at some point going to pass between the building and the south tower. It just so happens that as it did a portion of the wing disappeared behind it the building.

Exactly as one would expect.

the vidoe however claims that this building was behind the south tower not in front of it, when clearly as i have shown the building was actually in front of it.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 

No one is saying youre not entitled to your opinion or even your assertion of fact that the author is mistaken.

And I dont even necessarily disagree with you.

Just not sure why you are trying to silence and attack others?

edit on 11-9-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


A guy named Hezarkhani allegedly shot it.

You are right, the building is in front of the WTC.

Like all 911 footage, it is fake though. For a myriad of reasons, like applying the laws of physics and common sense.

I will be back for more in depth



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


How do you know that building is behind? It could just be a trick of the camera, I'm looking at the pic and it seems that it could be behind, but it also could be in front, I wouldn't claim it as definitive... But I guess you could always get the direction the picture was taken from and then find what streets each building is on and see which is in front/behind from that vantage point...

Side note- you really are committed to battling truthers on here... I find it surprising that you believe the OS so much...



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jhn7537
 





How do you know that building is behind? It could just be a trick of the camera, I'm looking at the pic and it seems that it could be behind, but it also could be in front, I wouldn't claim it as definitive


He sai it is in front and it is. Let's not argue over facts that can be easily looked up on google or Google Earth.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Simply watching the video will demonstrate that the building was in front of the towers.
Here's a grabby..
edit on 11-9-2013 by TXRabbit because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


But the video is wrong

its factually incorrect


The video footage isn't wrong, the assertion that the building was behind the towers is wrong.

It's great that you have posted a picture proving the building was in fact in front the towers, but from the video, you really can't tell. Sure, maybe a little more research by the O.P should have been carried out, but from the video, it looked credible.

Thanks for posting the photograph though.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 





this picture quite clearly shows the same building and its quite obliviously in front of WTC-2 and not behind like the video claims its to be.


Well done!

Thanks for doing "further investigation".



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
That video has been put through a program called Twixtor which is designed to take normal speed video and create ultra slowmotion video. It does this by calculating frames in the video in between the original frames. It has to guess and predict what those frames will look like and then it renders them. It's not fool proof and it's easy to spot errors if you know what to look for. www.revisionfx.com... here are examples of what it can do. Look at the first one with the BMX bike and look through the wheels in the bike when he is jumping in slow motion. It distorts the background. Twixtor is made for special effect videos and a lot of people that record game play for youtube use it for 'bullet time' scenes. It is not meant as a forensic tool like the video in OP.



posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


The entire video looks fake. Unless it's zoomed in so close to make it look fake.





new topics
top topics
 
29
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join