I don't even remember seeing any video of "the blur", i remember only seeing a still shot.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
9/11 Revisited
- Thread starter asterisktom
- Start date
- Status
I don't even remember seeing any video of "the blur", i remember only seeing a still shot.
CNN showed it, but all you could see is the blur.
Uh, you are the one who brought up the John Farmer inquiry! I guess you gotta own some of the crazy too! LOL!
I would respond, but it would seriously compromise my part in the conspiracy, which doesn't exist, but if it did, I would have no part of because, of course, it doesn't exist. But if I say it doesn't exist proves (First Law of Conspiracy) that it does exist but I am either in on it or I'm a dupe. I would mention that I have 6 tons of WTC wreckage in my basement, but that would further prove I'm a part of the conspiracy, so I won't say it. Or even intimate it.
We never had this conversation, BTW.
I remember seeing it about 1000 times.
Like I said: ridicule and sarcasm . Not meaningful rebuttal. And if you believe A you also believe B through Z. Please. I expected better from you, TCassidy. Really.
Do you remember the first reports? Like Dan Rather' s liikening the collapse of WT7 to a controlled demolition. Or the live premature BBC account of that same building hacing fallen, yet visible in tge live background.
One of the most telling evidences that finally convinced me was the initial circular hole in the Pentagon, no evidence of wing wreckage, no airplane parts visible at all.
It is not up to me to convince you. I,suspect your mind is made up. My responsibility is to say what I remember. And *our responsibility is to sift and evaluate the evidence and reports.
The plane was traveling at over 500 feet per second. A high quality security camera has a 1/10 of a second reaction time to send a frame of a picture. In that time the plane moved over 50 feet. All you see on the screen or on the video recording is a slight blur. The background still lingers for that same time so even the blur seems to be transparent and you can still see what is behind the object being recorded.
The still photo capture option on the video camera takes a still shot once every 1/2 second. In that time the plane moved forward 200 feet. A Boeing 757 is 155 feet long. You do the math.
The reason the video was not released earlier was that it was part of the investigation into convicted plotter for al-Qaeda, Zacarias Moussaoui. As evidence it could not be released until the trial was over. No great tin foil hat conspiracy, just our criminal justice system at work. "The wheels of justice grind slowly."
You missed the point. Entirely. Cameras, plural not singular.
Or do you seriously think there would be only one camera covering the most important military building of the strongest country in the world?
What part of "I will try to make this easy. Planes brought down the WTC buildings. The planes were not well enough tracked to alert ATC of the problem until it was too late. The ADIZ Ready planes were too late being launched and too far away to engage the hijacked planes. What he did was raise the roof on why our ATC system is so over loaded that we can't keep decent track of two B757s and 2 B767s, and why our ADIZ Ready planes took so long to get on station" was so hard to understand?
OK, last
Forget it. I am not going to banter insults with you. Some of the posters here, though they disagree, have something to respond to and are respectful. You are not one of them.
Forget it. I am not going to banter insults with you. Some of the posters here, though they disagree, have something to respond to and are respectful. You are not one of them.
Yes, Dan Rather, the well known structural engineer.
So, if 1 camera takes a still every 1/2 second having more cameras makes that camera faster?
A plane moving at 500 feet per second will only move at 250 feet per second if there are two cameras? And 50 feet per second if there are 10 cameras.
Uh huh. Yep. Right.
I don't blame you. Time to give it up. The facts mitigate against your tinfoil hat theory.
Let's entertain your fantasy that planes brought down the first two buildings. That requires a huge amount of gullibility, but let's say that to humor you. Why did Building Seven go down in the same exact manner? No plane was cited regarding that event.
All three fell into their own footprint. Imagine that. Quite the coincidence.
I lay the blame at the feet of NORAD Commander at the time --Ralph Eberhart.
So, you consider John Farmer's inquiry to be a personal insult? Why? Because it proves you wrong?
You have ignored the work of over 2,500 Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth.Yes, Dan Rather, the well known structural engineer.
It's quite likely that they know a great deal more than you on the subject.
Your government-sponsored theory is a work of fiction.
You really should try to keep up with the discussion.
John Farmer used the fact that planes brought down the main WTC buildings as the starting place for his inquiry.
The question his inquiry addressed was "how was this allowed to happen?" "How can four planes be hijacked then ATC loses them long enough that it is too late to stop them? How could the Ready Flights of the ADIZ mission not be armed and ready, and close enough to America's largest city, and thus America's largest target, to intercept the hijacked planes? Why was the only F-16 interceptor at the Air Force Base which serves our Nations Capitol completely unarmed?
The whole point of the inquiry was that if planes did not bring down the WTC main towers then all of the questions above are moot.
But as the fact is that planes did bring down the WTC main buildings, the questions need to be answered.
Got it now?
No, I haven't. In fact I had a long talk with my son-in-law who is an Architect and Structural Engineer who spent 24 years in the Air Force. He pointed out exactly why the structures collapsed as they did and what caused it.
And Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth was formed 5 years after the WTC towers came down so none of them every examined the wreckage. And who was their main speaker? That well know structural engineer Ed Asner! LOL!
Read the report by Ronald O. Hamburger, chief structural engineer and senior vice president of ABS Consulting Inc. in Oakland, Calif., Hamburger is a member of an engineering team commissioned by the Structural Engineers Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) to assess the performance of the WTC and surrounding buildings in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. He was on site and inspecting the debris the day after the collapse. His first report was given in November 2001. He has since greatly expanded that report as new information has come to light. Had the aviation fuel not cause the fires which weakened the main structural supports the towers could probably have survived the impacts and resulting damage.
- Status