• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Lying with Pixels - Technology Article from 2000

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Tell you what, Corsair. If you and, say, 5 others on this board promise to take a challenge, I'll promise to do the work needed to create it.

I'll present two videos of a plane flying in the air and slipping behind a building. One will be legitimate, and the other will be a composite. You'll know that (at least) one is composited, because the plane will be identical in both videos. The background and buildings will be different.

You and the others will decide which you think is which.

Game?
Click to expand...

I will take the challenge.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
I'll present two videos of a plane flying in the air and slipping behind a building. One will be legitimate, and the other will be a composite. You'll know that (at least) one is composited, because the plane will be identical in both videos. The background and buildings will be different.

You and the others will decide which you think is which.
Click to expand...
I'll give it a whirl. But there's one major caveat: such videos must be of reasonable quality and of a reasonable resolution and screen size. Trying to do any meaningful analysis of a video with the resolution and picture quality of a typical YouTube video is difficult at best - having sufficient detail is the absolutely key component in being able to make any worthwhile judgements.
 
I take it you'll be producing these videos yourself, Ace? This is going to be hilarious, because there's only the slightest possibility that you've got the technical nous or rendering power to pull this off even remotely convincingly.

And it still wouldn't explain the live feeds.
 
Still no explanation from ACE about the 40+ other videos (non network related) videoed by tourists, and other sight seers and those WHO WERE THERE LIVE AND IN PERSON.
 
Alareth said:
I LOVE the Glowpuck.
Click to expand...


here's the part of the debate where I throw your sanity, ability to acquire friends, your love life, and your sexual preference into question with one fell swoop as I implore others to stand around you and laugh in a manner from the likes of which this forum has never seen.
 
Arus808 said:
Still no explanation from ACE about the 40+ other videos (non network related) videoed by tourists, and other sight seers and those WHO WERE THERE LIVE AND IN PERSON.
Click to expand...

My objective is to analyze and interpret the velocity of UA flight 175 on approach to WTC2, and the nose cone-shaped "debris" which exited WTC2, as recorded by "Chopper 5".
Click to expand...

Ace's study is for the Chopper 5 video at this point.
 
Why is anyone even debating TS?

He's clearly not mentally well.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Tell you what, Corsair. If you and, say, 5 others on this board promise to take a challenge, I'll promise to do the work needed to create it.

I'll present two videos of a plane flying in the air and slipping behind a building. One will be legitimate, and the other will be a composite. You'll know that (at least) one is composited, because the plane will be identical in both videos. The background and buildings will be different.

You and the others will decide which you think is which.

Game?
Click to expand...

And how will we know that this is a 'live insertion' which is capable of real-time insertion from a range of spontaneous camera positions?
 
Two more threads from Crazy Central today? Back to ignore you go, "truth"seeker. Get well soon.
 
It would seem reasonable to assume that if nothing hit the buildings, there would surely be some video of "nothing" hitting the south tower at least.

ETA: By the way:

Quit jacking around on internet forums and go to the press.
 
Last edited:
Is this really a picture of the North face of WTC 2 where the nose cone emerged?
 

Attachments

  • molten-steel-9-52-51-am.jpg
    molten-steel-9-52-51-am.jpg
    72.3 KB · Views: 10
  • noholewtc2bk3.jpg
    noholewtc2bk3.jpg
    43.2 KB · Views: 26
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Tell you what, Corsair. If you and, say, 5 others on this board promise to take a challenge, I'll promise to do the work needed to create it.

I'll present two videos of a plane flying in the air and slipping behind a building. One will be legitimate, and the other will be a composite. You'll know that (at least) one is composited, because the plane will be identical in both videos. The background and buildings will be different.

You and the others will decide which you think is which.

Game?
Click to expand...

100% absolutely accepted. In a heartbeat.

Good luck with that.
 
stateofgrace said:
Ace, this is what you are asking people to believe.

No planes hit the Towers, all the film of them doing so is completely fake, everybody in New York who may have seen the planes hitting the towers are wrong and have been fooled for the last five years. Nobody at the TV networks noticed they were broadcasting fake films, nobody from anywhere on the planet as noticed, except you.

Why do you think that is Ace?

A planet with over 6 billion and only you noticed, doesn’t that’s seem slightly odd to you?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Stateofgrace, the point is that it doesn't seem odd to Ace that a poorly-educated musician of average intelligence notices things that every scientist and engineer in the world overlooks. That is why I label him insane.
 
Swing Dangler said:
Ace's study is for the Chopper 5 video at this point.
Click to expand...


sorry, but that's now how a he should be approaching this. He should be taking EVERYTHING into account, if he wants to debate this

that means explaining how his claim could be done on 40+ other people's cameras and media that was covering and taping the event, and how he can account for the statements of WITNESSES to those planes hitting the towers.

He wants to talk about video technology, but there is a HUGE nail that puts all of his "analysis" to the trash can

PEOPLE
WHO
WERE
THERE
SAW
THE
PLANES
HIT
THE
TOWERS


Not amount of semantics, analysis (by someone who clearly doesn't understand the technology in the first place) of video, can explain away what was seen by those people who WERE THERE that morning. And that's including what my Uncle, Aunt and COUSIN saw that morning.


BEFORE beginning to analyze video, HE Should be analyzing what people saw that day, in person.
 
Arus808 said:
sorry, but that's now how a he should be approaching this. He should be taking EVERYTHING into account, if he wants to debate this

that means explaining how his claim could be done on 40+ other people's cameras and media that was covering and taping the event, and how he can account for the statements of WITNESSES to those planes hitting the towers.

He wants to talk about video technology, but there is a HUGE nail that puts all of his "analysis" to the trash can

PEOPLE
WHO
WERE
THERE
SAW
THE
PLANES
HIT
THE
TOWERS
Not amount of semantics, analysis (by someone who clearly doesn't understand the technology in the first place) of video, can explain away what was seen by those people who WERE THERE that morning. And that's including what my Uncle, Aunt and COUSIN saw that morning.
BEFORE beginning to analyze video, HE Should be analyzing what people saw that day, in person.
Click to expand...

I think the point is to bring the issue here to have it attacked so that he can defend it or if it can't be defensed, to move onto a different line of inquiry.

And of accounts of people who thought they saw a missile?
 
Swing Dangler said:
And of accounts of people who thought they saw a missile?
Click to expand...

I will almost guarantee there were probably 1 or 2 people who thought they saw a leprechaun out of all the hundreds or thousands of witnesses. So?

Of course according to some, eye witness testimony must always agree to a man to be valid, right?
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
I will almost guarantee there were probably 1 or 2 people who thought they saw a leprechaun out of all the hundreds or thousands of witnesses. So?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

One or two drunks/street crazies would be more than sufficient for Lyte Trip to demand a Congressional investigation--one that would exclude all scientists, engineers, architects, and aviation experts, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom