911 Eyewitness

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

911 Eyewitness
Topic Started: Sep 5 2008, 05:18 PM (562 Views)
mynameis	Sep 5 2008, 05:18 PM Post #1
Internet Jujitsu Posts: 1,567 Group: Members Member #50 Joined: 01/15/08



mynameis	Sep 6 2008, 12:52 PM Post #2
Internet Jujitsu Posts: 1,567 Group: Members Member #50 Joined: 01/15/08	Time Lapse of Collapse with Sound Rare Footage from inside WTC 1 when WTC 2 collapse Edited by mynameis, Sep 6 2008, 01:09 PM.



skunkrider	Sep 7 2008, 04:03 AM Post #3
Posts: 328 Group: Members Member #166 Joined: 01/21/08	i'm always getting angry when people put this bull on and into their videos... "demon faces" and such... won't you show at least a BIT of decency now, that 7 years have passed? to me it's like seeing the body of a good friend, or just somebody, with bruises on his/her body that remotely resemble f.i. a smiley, or anything else, and shooting pictures of oneself with those features as a kind of 'souvenir'. disgusting! leave that shit out of this forum, or out of the internet for that matter. /topic-related: Rick Siegel put up a great scientific effort (sound- and picture analysis) to already prove the offical story wrong, but after I spoke to him on a screening of his film in Amsterdam 2 years ago, he seemed to have gotten into the idea of a nuclear device of some kind (or a beam from space, I don't quite recall) to have destroyed the Twin Towers' core. If it's true that Rick promotes this theory, I'd rather have him ignored and disassociated with '9/11 Truth'.
Posts: 328 Group: Members Member #166 Joined: 01/21/08


BoneZ	Sep 7 2008, 09:08 AM Post #4
Posts: 721 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	Rick used to be a member of the original LC forums and he was into the no-plane theory big time. I don't know how he is in real life, but he was a very cocky and rude person on the forums back then (and yes it was verified to be him). I lost all respect for him when he spouted about no-planes and then would call you names and attack you (just like a J.ref'er) if you didn't agree with his garbage. His excellent video footage speaks louder than any of his words though.
Posts: 721 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


DoYouEverWonder	Sep 7 2008, 09:29 AM Post #5
Posts: 433 Group: Members Member #206 Joined: 01/24/08	BoneZ Sep 7 2008, 09:08 AM Rick used to be a member of the original LC forums and he was into the no-plane theory big time. I don't know how he is in real life, but he was a very cocky and rude person on the forums back then (and yes it was verified to be him). I lost all respect for him when he spouted about no-planes and then would call you names and attack you (just like a J.ref'er) if you didn't agree with his garbage. His excellent video footage speaks louder than any of his words though. Wasn't there some problems with the sound track? I remember someone used an edited version in a video and he had a fit. Then there was the question about his soundtrack and whether or not he added the 'booms', since no one else reported or recorded these sounds. Edited by DoYouEverWonder, Sep 7 2008, 09:29 AM.
Posts: 433 Group: Members Member #206 Joined: 01/24/08


mynameis	Sep 7 2008, 01:59 PM Post #6
Internet Jujitsu Posts: 1,567 Group: Members Member #50 Joined: 01/15/08	I agree with everyone's assessment. I also heard the theory unameable mentioned in conjunction with Rick, but I am looking at what the footage tells nothing more. Some of the calculations are interesting.



BoneZ	Sep 8 2008, 02:58 PM Post #7
Posts: 721 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	DoYouEverWonder Sep 7 2008, 09:29 AM Wasn't there some problems with the sound track? I remember someone used an edited version in a video and he had a fit. Then there was the question about his soundtrack and whether or not he added the 'booms', since no one else reported or recorded these sounds. I don't know anything about this, but if you can find some sources or a discussion about it somewhere, I'd be interested.
Posts: 721 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


frank nada	Dec 23 2008, 12:31 AM Post #8
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08	Quote: I don't know how he is in real life, but he was a very cocky and rude person on the forums back then (and yes it was verified to be him). hmm. i wonder if it was really him. i mean, you know, internet.. anyway, Quote: Then there was the question about his soundtrack and whether or not he added the 'booms', since no one else reported or recorded these sounds. i don't think that those are added: the sound events before the collapses i just checked the file: BBC_BigExplosionAtWorldTradeCenter.avi (that's the north tower right?) there's a 'boom' (@ 47seconds) also before the collapse... no one seems to take that much notice, it is perhaps slight, but it is there: which is kind of interesting in and of itself. that's around 10 to 12 seconds before what could be seen as the collapse initiation. give or take a few. the "1st 24 Hours" video clip of the north-tower has its famous 'camera-shake' about 10 - 12 seconds before you can see the start of the collapse. the "911 Eyewitness" clip of the north-tower is consistent with that also: there's a defined 'boom' about 10 - 12 seconds before the collapse (adjusting for speed of sound over 3.5Km distance) there's a lot more going on sonically in Rick's video, but explosion sounds travel much better over water than they do over land. what's more, low frequency sounds can move from water to air without loosing their acoustic energy. the way i tend to see it is this: between the wtc basements and rick's camera, there's just a lot of water which could perhaps transmit the sound of subterranean explosions very well. downtown there's a lot of dirt, concrete, city, etc. which would tend to absorb the sound of subterranean explosions.
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08


JFK	Dec 23 2008, 08:40 AM Post #9
Posts: 4,211 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Here is Rick Seigel ( 911eyewitness ) "blowing a gasket" on 29 January 2007 - http://letsrollforums.com/rick-siegel-wages-war-t14131.html?p=124313#post124313 And Frank nada, yes it was verified the he is Rick Seigel by telephone. Edit to add - Also in this thread - http://letsrollforums.com/sophias-response-translated-t15015.html?t=15015 ... And here he is very beligerant to the staff - http://letsrollforums.com/911-mysteries-secrets-and-t14989.html?t=14989 All in all he has 379 posts there and the search engine works very well. Edited by JFK, Dec 23 2008, 09:09 AM.
Posts: 4,211 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


frank nada	Dec 23 2008, 01:45 PM Post #10
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08	hmm..well i will say that diplomacy doesn't necessarily seem to be rick's strong point. . . but do bear in mind that some regulars of that board do also come off as being total tools.. on the surface, as far as i can see, rick is actually right.. they used his footage out of context, changed the sound, etc. etc. as far as rick is concerned, that footage is an extension of his experience.... if it's chopped up and used as cinema, then it could be a misrepresentation. lawsuit of cinematic use of news footage: http://www.afghanistannewscenter.com/news/2008/april/apr282008.html#24 Quote: ... In August of 1986, Mr. Kent produced a 10-minute documentary for the BBC program Newsnight, which detailed his time spent with Afghan mujahedeen... ... Mr. Kent claims that his footage was re-edited and taken out of context, offering a false portrayal of Mr. Massoud in the movie. At various points in the film, images from Mr. Kent's documentary appear without their accompanying narration, and at other times narration is lifted from the documentary and is heard over other footage,... at the heart of the matter: Quote: ... Mr. Kent also contends that the movie - which depicts Tom Hanks as former U.S. senator Charlie Wilson - contains "grossly inaccurate" information despite purporting to be historically accurate, according to court documents. By associating Mr. Kent with Charlie Wilson's War, Universal "perpetuates and deepens the public's misunderstanding of the Afghan conflict ..." while damaging his reputation... Edited by frank nada, Dec 23 2008, 01:48 PM.
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08


JFK	Dec 23 2008, 01:56 PM Post #11
Posts: 4,211 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Yeah, I agree.. Exactly the same type of thing as what the BBC has done with Barry Jennings' testimony.
Posts: 4,211 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


frank nada	Dec 23 2008, 06:00 PM Post #12
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08	JFK Dec 23 2008, 01:56 PM Yeah, I agree.. Exactly the same type of thing as what the BBC has done with Barry Jennings' testimony. oh i haven't seen what they did to jennings' testimony on the bbc but back to the hoboken video.... i'm going to maintain that the 'booms' on the soundtrack are genuine.... this review would say otherwise: http://911review.com/reviews/911eyewitness/index.html Quote: Furthermore, seismic records of the events in Manhattan on 9/11/01, such as illustrated by the Palisades chart, don't show any activity above baseline in the minutes before the explosive collapses began. this is just silly. the 1993 bombing of the wtc basement didn't show any seismic activity either... even though fdny across the street felt the rumble... what's more... seems to me that most people did not actually hear that explosion... though it was certainly big and certainly caused a lot of damage... the only reports of anyone actually hearing the explosion tend to be from people who were either in one of the towers or in BROOKLYN (across the water) my understanding of rick's experience is that he didn't particularly notice the 'booms' until he later reviewed his footage http://911review.com/reviews/911eyewitness/index.html Even if one assumes that the soundtrack is real, there is no basis for assuming that spikes of pink noise are explosions from the World Trade Center 1.8 miles away. For all we know, the sounds could be nothing more than the sound of wind rushing past the microphone. this is just sad. it's not 'wind-blast', you can hear from the long decay of each sound event that it is not. compare with the decay from the sound at the end of the collapse and you get the same profile. it's also not really pink noise for that matter. on a side note, i'd place rick's camera about 2.1 miles (3.5km) from the wtc rather than 1.8 miles. Quote: Uncorroborated claims of explosions at times that are clearly contradicted by other bodies of evidence effectively function to distract from accounts of explosions that precipitated the destruction of the Towers. there are reports of explosions from within the towers leading up to the collapse.
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08


frank nada	Dec 23 2008, 08:06 PM Post #13
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08	http://911review.com/revi.../911eyewitness/index.html Furthermore, seismic records of the events in Manhattan on 9/11/01, such as illustrated by the Palisades chart, don't show any activity above baseline in the minutes before the explosive collapses began. interestingly, the collapse of the north tower as recorded at a different seismic station can be seen as 2 distinct signals, also 10 seconds apart... (this is assumed to be the ruslt of refraction, but still interesting)
Posts: 28 Group: Members Member #969 Joined: 12/17/08


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · 9/11 Video Research Archive · Next Topic »