Added: Dec 1, 2008
From: youroom101
Duration: 1:26
Second WTC impact comparison, to see if anything looks out of place, its amazing what video can demonstrate when placed in sync with one another. I hope you can see that they do fit with each other rather well, which would explain one of three things: 1. The whole TV fakery / no planes is plainly wrong on many levels. 2. The whole TV fakery thing was just a waste of time, or could have been an total con to keep you looking in places you were not going to find anything. 3. The best video trick ever put into practice involving 40+ film and video, still frame, tv networks and people on the street taking pictures and a team of animators to produce live feed that would have to match the amateur photo's and video perfectly, when you sum it up it sounds a crazy idea.This TV Fakery argument is very hard to understand, especially to newcomers, I've simplified it so far in my posts. All I'm saying is the TV Fakery made up layers / FCS / 3D Graphic argument is plainly incorrect going off the evidence. This removes some baggage away so now we can concentrate on the important analysis; What would a plane do to the building if it really hit into it? This question is key to understanding the falseness in the videos we have seen or not, whatever the case my be. What would the subsequent video evidence look like, after working through the problems we can move on to pick apart every step until we prove no planes/TV fakery or planes and real damage. A simple case in point is the de-acceleration argument of the plane hitting into the towers, this could well have taken place but the video quality, frame rate didn't capture it at 30 frames a second, if you've ever filmed anything at 30 frames anything going across the field of view will be blurred because of this, planes going very fast across the sky would not appear to slow down on impact because its gone in milliseconds, you need a very fast camera for that analysis, unfortunately no evidence will be available to test that, I even made a film about the laws of motion but I forgot the important fact, it could have taken place but not recorded.
Channel: News
Tags: 9/11 comparison fakery feed frame impact live produce second till tv wtc
Rating: 3.10 (10 ratings) Views: 261' favoriteCount='1 Comments: 18
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - Fruitloopers always argue that something is "violent", when they support shills, who block or censor evidence. They picked that from truthling truthers. In this case its the evidence of a master tv fakery application, which is manipulated by the followers of AceBaker and himself. why continue talking here anyway? Boeing, Lockheed, KraussMaffei should send Ace a check ; And genghis and co. *still* ignore the replaced building in the VERY SAME NAKA/FOREMAN CROP!! tinyurl com/5c4du7
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - 'tinyurl com/5c4du7' are from different shooting/filming points, the white structure is close by that masks the distant buildings, so the other shot could be filmed just slightly to the left or right of each other and the distant building would look the same perspective wise because of the distance involved. It would be hard to see the difference, less that a pixel probably.
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - Just to add, if you where right with your master application, the disappearance of buildings in one fake shot then reappearance in another would make this master program full of shit would it not. You don't see Google earth loosing parts of Manhattan because its having a bad day now do you, it might slow down sometimes. I think the Company's you mention are weapons makers so I have nothing good to say about them scum bag war profiteers, but you could be right about their involvement 9/11.
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - I don't argue if the program was good or not, but *that it was used. Answering Questions with more questions is a copout from the argument. I can also speculate by myself, why smoke was looped or the building in the Foreman crop actually came from a different position, but it has nth to do with the fact that these discrepancies point on NO CAMERA(WO)MAN involved, like also cgi's had been "buttoned" into the scenery ;
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - i identified this "pyramid building" [replacing the "staircase building"] at exact same coordinates already many many months ago, since then ignored by AkeBaker and gengho. Take a look, where it originally was 'stolen' and then 'cloned', as this method describes it more precise than 'layering' imo: tinyurl com/5gro4b
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - I've solved the smoke looped argument, there isn't any loops in the archive footage that's available. The building in the Foreman crop if using logic and looking you will see a very sight WTC change which would suggest that they where filmed from differing locations, its in the picture but hard to see because its only about a pixel in width so that about solves it then.
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - youroom101 lies about tinyurl com/5c4du7. It's exactly coming from same desktop view [others call it vantage point], as demonstrated in genghis own video "2001" and demonstrated before (02:06 - 02:09 /watch?v=LLugd-DVJwQ ) You're just repeating his own lie, denying his own reconstructed evidence on the Naka/Foreman crop from same "pool". Don't bring me the 'pixel' shilltalk crap!!
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - You didn's "solve" anything, just adapted the same shilltalker talk from AceBaker. Fact is if a master application had been used, the chronology of broadcast doesn't matter for the argument. While CBS had no loop, Detroit TV *had*. Fact is there is no explanation as to why they looped and superexposed it, but that makes it already evidence for video fakery, coz CBS had no "live" cgi plane either. Better replace the word "filmed" with "recording" of a masterApp. That includes frame-removals etc.
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - and before you drag me down with more pixel-nonsense, i also argue now since 20 months !!!, that *BOTH* Naka and Foreman are actually coming from the Brian Gately desktop view. This point wasn't even addressed yet from original 'layering' arguer ; From the same Gately "coordinate" was also cropped into this lousy B+W "footage", recently released and oddly also analysed by Obama Supporter youroom101. Don't wonder if they call u a shill, for me shilltalking and shill isn't much difference ;
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - One's taken from low down and distant, the others from a high vantage point, I do see the same buildings around, the second shot is also much closer in so a lot of building will not show in first shot.
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - You confuse my point on tinyurl com/5gro4b obviously on purpose. I didnt say the scenerie is the same, i hinted where the original 'pyramid' building coming from, which suddenly appears in the Foreman crop instead of the building with the diagonal staircase - at EXACT same coordinates !! Or you wanna trashcan "2001 fake odyssey" now too?
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - To move on, why does a white plane keep showing up, after the second strike, its on quite a few fake/real pro/amateur shots?
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - That's exactly what dishonest no-planers or apolitical couch-potatoes do since 20 months incl. the breakdown of 911researchers com : allegedly "moving on". I tell you what i do: I "move out" of youtube threads faster than ever before, if they suggest fruitloop shill alert.. 'best greetings' to the animation front of manchester who built your resume and have fun with eyecintel and the kangaroo/KT/jennifer jerkOff factions ;
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - I see what you mean now, sorry, if you rotated the 'pyramid building to match the position of the other one, there will be a larger rotation of the foreground buildings, totally changing the perspective, if this messes with '2001 fake odyssey' I'm sorry.
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - Questions need asking that all, don't forget why we are asking them, its for the truth and nothing more. Don't give up on the argument when its not even started. The idea of a master application is fine in principal but we have no evidence for it, only a couple of badly thought out picture analysis for it use, that is plainly wrong. I think if they did use such a device to deceive we wouldn't find fault with it because they would do a professional job.
OzzybenOswald Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - Your a total fake. None of your opining, your phony expectations, are evidence of anything.The smoke in the Detroit Public Television video is held in a static state and then actually shifts backwards! watch?v=ea0sZ0UjLVA And sink your false teeth into this post at 911movement in the 'Ace Baker Debunked' thread too after signing in: tinyurl com/5appvnNow swallow.
youroom101 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - You see patterns in clouds, we all do, then you show pictures of smoke at 911movement, I don't get it, you haven't a September clue what you're talking about, like my new catchphrase by the way lol.
911censored2 Says:
Dec 3, 2008 - again it's a waste of time to comment here again, but the fakery perps did also an *unprofessional job on the CGI fade-ins, otherwise we wouldn't have noticed it and still only argue about crash physics. However crash physics and logical evidence doesn't lead to the perps. A master application does, and FCS [as part of SDI and Project Trailblazer]has the most options for all this incl. the use of Directed Energy Weapons.I also always argued that the fakery perps had all been part of an exercise
CNN911Fakes Says:
Dec 4, 2008 - youroom101Just saw this and wanted to meniton that the reason they all line up (other than the CBS divebomber) is that they were all taken from a fly by filmed at about 8:57.See my video on the "practice run, start to finish"
youzurk Says:
Dec 4, 2008 - I have no problems to say A Fake Odyssey is wrong,like in CNN/DevinClark, achimspok proved they are different.ALL trajectories of the plane in the videos are COMPATIBLE,I saw your link, i don't see problems in Naka/Foreman.if the plane is fake, is not the way to prove it.Achinspok mades videos against me too, I thought about it, he was correct, I was wrongvideo removed.maybe this is the way, or not?I don't care of 5 stars, 80 favs, 40000 views,I was wrong, end of the story.
youroom101 Says:
Dec 4, 2008 - The dive bomber shot does line up too, its slightly off on my syncing, that's my mistake. I'll have a look at "practice run, start to finish"
JewFor911Truth Says:
Dec 10, 2008 - Thousands of innocents died from false flag operations carried out by our own government.So many people have found out the truth from the paper at this site. Read it and knowlistep. wordpress. comGo there and know the truth, if you read this you will never question what happened on that fateful day again.Real patriots question.--"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."— Sir Winston Churchill
hankwheels Says:
Dec 14, 2008 - watch SEPTEMBER CLUES and 911 TABOO. Whether you're a plane-hugger or a no-planer, I think it's important to agree to disagree. Neither side is going to listen to what the other has to say, so there is no point in starting verbal wars over this subject. That being said, I do feel that evidence supporting faked planes should not be so heavily censored to the public - everyone has the right to see the evidence and make their own decisions.
911spammer2 Says:
Dec 20, 2008 - Don't waste your time on them hankwheels they are beyond us mare mortals according to these clowns SimonShack knows nothing!!
youzurk Says:
Dec 2, 2008 - I'm asking myselfare we victims of a big manipulation?we should speak of No Plane at Pentagonbut we speak of No Plane at WTC and so we seem all crazy,is this?(and why so violent reaction by fred, ozzy, nicoagainst clear and good researches?What's up here?)