The Real Deal with Jim Fetzer: Myself as guest

Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit.

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!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
…
11

The Real Deal with Jim Fetzer: Myself as guest; November 4 2009
Topic Started: Nov 4 2009, 12:38 PM (2,453 Views)
shure	Nov 4 2009, 12:38 PM Post #1
Administrator Posts: 1,787 Group: Administrator Member #1 Joined: Feb 13, 2008	The Real Deal Radio Show with Jim Fetzer - Myself as guest November 4 2009 9/11 video fakery and disinformation discussed: Low quality mp3: http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/rd_110409.mp3 Edited by shure, Nov 5 2009, 02:32 AM.



shure	Nov 4 2009, 01:49 PM Post #2
Administrator Posts: 1,787 Group: Administrator Member #1 Joined: Feb 13, 2008	I found the best copy I've came across so far of Flight 175: As The World Watched and got the "Gamma press" clip of the bird. full clip: http://www.pumpitout.com/video/175_atww.avi bird slowed: http://www.pumpitout.com/video/bird.avi I remember someone posted a better clip before. If anyone knows where it is, can they please post it here.



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 03:05 PM Post #3
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	shure Nov 4 2009, 01:49 PM I remember someone posted a better clip before. If anyone knows where it is, can they please post it here. I believe it was this one: As to suggest what you should discuss at The Real Deal with Jim Fetzer, I pass. I had enough with these compulsive lying people who never answer anything straight. But you could at least confront them them with the footage I found from the top of a ferry. RasgaSaias Pause at the minute 3:34. You'll see this view from the top of a ferry: Maybe this way they'll stop pretending the view from the ferry is impossible and leave Carmen Taylor alone. Their sock-puppeteering questions were embarrassing and unnecessary. If they can't say the truth, they could at least stop harassing innocent people. Edited by RasgaSaias, Nov 4 2009, 03:35 PM.



shure	Nov 4 2009, 03:16 PM Post #4
Administrator Posts: 1,787 Group: Administrator Member #1 Joined: Feb 13, 2008	Thanks Rasga!



thepye	Nov 4 2009, 03:43 PM Post #5
Moderator Posts: 226 Group: Global Moderator Member #36 Joined: Oct 10, 2008	RasgaSaias Nov 4 2009, 03:05 PM shure Nov 4 2009, 01:49 PM I remember someone posted a better clip before. If anyone knows where it is, can they please post it here. I believe it was this one: Can someone convince me that what we see here, is not a big missle?



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 04:15 PM Post #6
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	thepye Nov 4 2009, 03:43 PM Can someone convince me that what we see here, is not a big missle? I can try 1- Too fast: Anthony Lawson's calculations The "thing" crosses the frame in no more than 3 video frames. In NTSC terms that is equal to about 1/10th of a second. Using the width of the Towers 208 feet, the frame at their distance from the camera covers about 5 widths, that is 1040 feet. If the "thing" had been close to the Towers, its speed can be worked out, as follows: 1040 feet in 1/10th a second = 10,400 feet per second. That's about 7,090 miles per hour. I might be out by about a 1,000 mph, but that's the area we are looking at. 2- This is the only video showing it. If it was a missile close to the WTC it would be recorded by many other cameras. So, again, it's more likely that this flying object was close to the camera instead of far away. *3 - It appears to fly past* the WTC7. And if a big and extremely fast missile had hit something behind the WTC7, we would see some equivalent damage on a nearby building. Such was never found or described by any eyewitness. 4- It has wings and flies like a bird. Watch the video in slow motion and you'll notice its shape changing as if the wings were moving. The trajectory isn't a straight line either. Edited by RasgaSaias**, Nov 4 2009, 04:23 PM.



shure	Nov 4 2009, 04:25 PM Post #7
Administrator Posts: 1,787 Group: Administrator Member #1 Joined: Feb 13, 2008	I think "thepye" means could the plane itself be a big missile, not the bird. You are right though, that is a bird not a "UFO" as Jack White implies.



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 04:36 PM Post #8
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	shure Nov 4 2009, 04:25 PM I think "thepye" means could the plane itself be a big missile, not the bird. You are right though, that is a bird not a "UFO" as Jack White implies. Oh. I'm sorry then. Maybe the reason why some people think so is because the plane doesn't seem to have the right wing. But that's because the video compression merged two similar colors. The bright wing illuminated by the direct sunlight and the bight sky. The same happens in the Luc Courchesne shot. When the wings are against the smoke, they are visible. But when they are against the grey WTC wall, they seem to disappear.



broken sticks	Nov 4 2009, 05:09 PM Post #9
Posts: 1,466 Group: Members Member #105 Joined: Jan 3, 2009	good luck jeff i'd just say try to generally find out if he's even interested in explanations for anything. you know, if he'll even consider an explanation for any of his stuff. and see if he can find a physicist to say the impact is wrong. he likes to fall back on "but you'll agree there's no boeing at shanksville?", but you've spoken to the witnesses who basically leave no other explanation than a plane crash



broken sticks	Nov 4 2009, 05:10 PM Post #10
Posts: 1,466 Group: Members Member #105 Joined: Jan 3, 2009	oh, and i expect ace baker will call up and try to get some air time as well. just point people at pump for a thorough debunking of ace.



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 06:33 PM Post #11
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	RasgaSaias Nov 4 2009, 04:36 PM Maybe the reason why some people think so is because the plane doesn't seem to have the right wing. Take for example the PAX TV shot recorded from a similar angle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NljoqxR9HUI You'll notice the wing disappears when the plane comes out of the smoke shadow and the wing color matches the sky. In the case of the Gamma Press shot, we just see the plane out of the smoke shadow. The wing matches the sky in the whole shot. The video compression is commonly responsible for these anomalies.



Chander	Nov 4 2009, 06:44 PM Post #12
Posts: 181 Group: Members Member #155 Joined: Feb 14, 2009	Quote: The wing matches the sky in the whole shot. What evidence do you have that the wing was the same color as the sky? Simply asserting it doesn't make it so. It sure doesn't look sky blue to me- nor does any other part of the plane. Try again cuz your explanation does not explain the missing wing.



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 06:53 PM Post #13
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	Chander Nov 4 2009, 06:44 PM What evidence do you have that the wing was the same color as the sky? Simply asserting it doesn't make it so. It sure doesn't look sky blue to me- nor does any other part of the plane. Try again cuz your explanation does not explain the missing wing. The lack of wing in the plane and the fact that video compression causes it. I'm not simply asserting. I'm demonstrating. Unless you have any alternative explanation that fits all the evidence we have and a way to demonstrate it, you're the one who should try again.



Chander	Nov 4 2009, 06:59 PM Post #14
Posts: 181 Group: Members Member #155 Joined: Feb 14, 2009	You have not "demonstrated" anything, you have only made an unsupported assertion. To demonstrate your thesis you would need to show a plane, painted sky blue, suddenly appear to lose a wing.



RasgaSaias	Nov 4 2009, 07:08 PM Post #15
Posts: 1,368 Group: Global Moderator Member #43 Joined: Oct 16, 2008	Chander Nov 4 2009, 06:59 PM To demonstrate your thesis you would need to show a plane, painted sky blue, suddenly appear to lose a wing. The plane was not sky blue nor the sky was pure blue. You just need similar colors, video compression and quality loss. On the other hand you don't have any alternative explanation to why a wing is visible in one frame and isn't in the next. Thanks for playing though.



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


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
…
11