Lying with Pixels - Technology Article from 2000

[Foolmewunz]

So ACE, here is the easiest thing in the world to do...you are rich, a house in the hills, with a pool, etc...

Take out an add in a major NYC newspaper asking for WITNESSES TO THE PLANES HITTING THE WTCs ON 9/11 to call you.

TAM

... at a 1 800 (or 1 888) number!

 

[pomeroo]

Guys, I readily admit that IF planes had crashed into the WTC, THEN they would have been seen by thousands. I've been to NYC many times, and it's nothing if not chock full of humanity

Yes, Ace, you are correct--accidentally, of course. Thousands of people did see Flight 175 crash into the South Tower.

But the videos are fake

No, Ace, you were caught lying again. Your incompetent attempt to play scientist was, as usual, torn to shreds by people who are much smarter and know much more than you. Note that I state that you were lying. Your errors have been explained to you far too often for them to be honest mistakes.

the planes display no crash physics,

But you have demonstrated that you are ignorant of basic principles of science. You are too unintelligent and uneducated to make such a determination.

you've got a nose coming out of a building

You were caught lying again: there was no nose; just debris.

you've got CNN covering up the replay with a logo that takes up 1/3 of the screen, you've got two different stations that fade to black as the plane hits,

Nope. The videos clearly show the plane.

there are eyewitnesses who say there was no planes,

No, you're lying. There are witnesses who say they didn't see the plane.

there's no wreckage except for stuff that was provably planted, and. . .

No, you been caught lying. The wreckage was not planted. You are insane.

There is a distinct dearth of eyewitnesses who say they saw planes.

Liar. There are thousands.

And it just so happens that most of the folks who did go on TV and saw planes, just happen to work for the media.

Liar. I happen to know three people who saw Flight 175 crash into the South Tower. Your lies will never fool these people.

Ron, you can call me insane a thousand more times.

Okay, let's start: you are insane and you are a liar.

Your "evidence" is underwhelming to say the least.

No evidence is "mine." The evidence that jihadists hijacked planes and flew them into buildings is overwhelming. Your mind is enslaved by your illness and compels you to press your evil agenda in the face of facts and reason.

 

[Mancman]

you've got two different stations that fade to black as the plane hits, there are eyewitnesses who say there was no planes, there's no wreckage except for stuff that was provably planted, and. . .

Both the stations which suffered a signal interruption had equipment at the WTC.
One of these was on a camera that was zoomed in on WTC1, and could not have shown the second plane, thus there was no need for a fade to hide any anamolies. Both videos show clear signs of signal interruption.

And there is a video which was broadcast live, shows the 'nose', yet does not have any blackout. Your theory is absolute garbage. See here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2601827#post2601827


Eyewitnesses who said there were no planes? Hey, would someone in this position see the second plane? Yes or no?

I don't recall anyone proving that this landing gear tyre was planted. Embedded in a 5-10 ton column tree no less:

 

[calebprime]

Oh, OK. Well, all I can say is I've got some people fooled! I've got around 500 published titles, and I provide for my family quite comfortably, we own a home in the hills, with a pool, and a recording studio, living in a very expensive city, and all from writing original music.

You?

Ace is at least a competent musician. Anyone who's worked for a number of years doing film-scoring is probably more than competent. You don't continue working if you are insane or incompetent.

He's probably written huge amounts of music--original, unoriginal, good, bad, indifferent, etc.

His version of Have You Forgotten is an improvement--better drumming, for one thing...

His taste in music is another issue. His connection to reality outside of music and films is another issue.

Probably his experience adapting his musical style to suite the artifice of film, and his work in the studio makes him think that everything is manufactured in the same way.

He's more like a Scientologist than he's like Christophera. Not insane, just living in a bubble.

This is also about over-investment in a bad idea, and extreme suspicion. Hard to admit that he's wrong, at this point.

His persistent mistake is this top-down "It's All Related" stuff.

His libertarian theories are totally separate from whether the war in Iraq is a good thing (I don't think it is) or whether planes hit the towers. (They did)

Where he really sounds willfully stupid is about denying all the eye-witnesses, or thinking he can do expert analysis of videos.

He sounds crazy and paranoid when he starts talking about government shills. When he sees fit to include in his video the symbols on American currency, he seems to be a lunatic like David Icke.

But it's really about living in a bubble--not craziness of the certifiable kind.

 

[pomeroo]

Ace is at least a competent musician. Anyone who's worked for a number of years doing film-scoring is probably more than competent. You don't continue working if you are insane or incompetent.

His insanity takes a particular form. If you lined up two thousand eyewitnesses to the crash of Flight 175, the thought would never cross Ace's mind that their existence undermines his nonsensical theory. He'd set his jaw and undertake to discredit each individual account. His mindset is narcissism carried to a pathological extreme. He will bend reality to his wishes--facts be damned!

He's probably written huge amounts of music--original, unoriginal, good, bad, indifferent, etc.

His version of Have You Forgotten is an improvement--better drumming, for one thing...

His taste in music is another issue. His connection to reality outside of music and films is another issue.

Probably his experience adapting his musical style to suite the artifice of film, and his work in the studio makes him think that everything is manufactured in the same way.

He's more like a Scientologist than he's like Christophera. Not insane, just living in a bubble.

This is also about over-investment in a bad idea, and extreme suspicion. Hard to admit that he's wrong, at this point.

He can't back away from ideas that have been crushingly refuted. He is uneducable.

His persistent mistake is this top-down "It's All Related" stuff.

His libertarian theories are totally separate from whether the war in Iraq is a good thing (I don't think it is) or whether planes hit the towers. (They did)

Where he really sounds willfully stupid is about denying all the eye-witnesses, or thinking he can do expert analysis of videos.

Ignoramuses who are sure that they can out-shout any expert are a dime-a-dozen, e.g., the moon landing deniers.

He sounds crazy and paranoid when he starts talking about government shills. When he sees fit to include in his video the symbols on American currency, he seems to be a lunatic like David Icke.

But it's really about living in a bubble--not craziness of the certifiable kind.

He is crazy and paranoid. But his extreme narcissism accounts for his intense desire to remake reality according to his emotional needs and his bumptious confidence in skills he doesn't possess.

 

[pomeroo]

Hey, Ace, I was just thinking: the photo posted by Mancman really does suggest that a plane hit the building. You know what I mean? I don't know what sort of hole Judy's nonexistent beam weapons produce, but I'll bet it looks different from the hole produced by a plane--from the hole in the photo.

 

[calebprime]

He is crazy and paranoid. But his extreme narcissism accounts for his intense desire to remake reality according to his emotional needs and his bumptious confidence in skills he doesn't possess.

Agreed. Narcissism fits.

(I'm now guilty of half a dozen inter-thread contradictions, which I will try weasel out of if anyone calls me on them. Plus I don't like to speculate about people's mental status. But in extreme cases of obstinacy, all you can do is speculate.)

 

[pomeroo]

Agreed. Narcissism fits.

(I'm now guilty of half a dozen inter-thread contradictions, which I will try weasel out of if anyone calls me on them. Plus I don't like to speculate about people's mental status. But in extreme cases of obstinacy, all you can do is speculate.)

I realize that I'm very nasty with Ace, but there's a reason. I've written about an ex-girlfriend who watched Flight 175 crash into the South Tower. She was a wreck for the better part of a year. I can recall many late-night phone conversations in which she simply needed a shoulder to cry on. Imagine the sort of lunatic who would tell her that she's lying just to feed his own sick fantasies. Probably I should try harder to be civil, but I can't seem to manage it, and, in all honesty, I don't think people like Ace merit civility. They don't care how much pain they inflict, and they do it to promote a truly evil cause. It's impossible to respect such adversaries.

 

[The Doc]

I agree with Ron.

Ace does not merit any level of attention. He is insane, and I fail to see why he is getting so much attention around here.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

But the videos are fake, the planes display no crash physics. . .

And what the hell do you know about "crash physics"?

There is a distinct dearth of eyewitnesses who say they saw planes.

As was asked of you, how many people are on record having seen the Challenger explode? Relatively few, no doubt. Is that evidence that the live video of the accident was also faked? No, of course not.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Both the stations which suffered a signal interruption had equipment at the WTC.
One of these was on a camera that was zoomed in on WTC1, and could not have shown the second plane, thus there was no need for a fade to hide any anamolies. Both videos show clear signs of signal interruption.

What clear signs are those? I see videos that quickly fade to black. Signal interruption does not and cannot do this. Signal interruption can cause noise, pixelization, freeze-frame, but not a fade to black. A black screen requires a signal.

And there is a video which was broadcast live, shows the 'nose', yet does not have any blackout. Your theory is absolute garbage. See here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2601827#post2601827

You're talking about this video -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnRt3cHuAmE

I see no evidence this "EuroNews" video was broadcast live. First there's no audio on it. Second, it shows a series of edited clips. This was posted by Webfairy, and she put the word "live" in quote marks, appropriately so.

Furthermore, consider these two videos, which do have audio, and which were broadcast live:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6wQZznaAVQ&mode=related&search=

They both show no "nose out" event at all. In the Chopper 5 Pinocchio video, the nose out occurs before, that is ahead of the explosion. These two videos would obviously show the nose out, if it had been real.

Eyewitnesses who said there were no planes? Hey, would someone in this position see the second plane? Yes or no?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/102524603d9a32ffb7.jpg

That seems like about the same type of view that Alt+f4 had, and she says she saw a plane hit the building.

I don't recall anyone proving that this landing gear tyre was planted. Embedded in a 5-10 ton column tree no less:
http://killtown.911review.org/images/wtc-gallery/nist1-2d/7-70_tire-embedded-wtc1-panel.jpg

The tire doesn't look like it's "embedded", it looks like it's just sitting there.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

What clear signs are those? I see videos that quickly fade to black. Signal interruption does not and cannot do this. Signal interruption can cause noise, pixelization, freeze-frame, but not a fade to black. A black screen requires a signal.

I'm still amazed you call that a "fade". Then again, you've misused the phrase "pyroclastic flow" and still misuse the term "cross-bracing", so I guess it's not all that surprising...

The picture cuts out, period. There is no "fade to black"; it's a cut to black, which does happen with digital sources. Artifacting is only apparent if the loss/interruption of signal is not abrupt.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

I'm still amazed you call that a "fade". Then again, you've misused the phrase "pyroclastic flow" and still misuse the term "cross-bracing", so I guess it's not all that surprising...

The picture cuts out, period. There is no "fade to black"; it's a cut to black, which does happen with digital sources. Artifacting is only apparent if the loss/interruption of signal is not abrupt.

Oh, it's a fade all right. I've analyzed the Chopper5 video. The fade takes place over 3 frames. The first is about 10% faded, the second about 50% faded, and the the third is black. Motion continues throughout the fade. It cannot possibly be a signal interruption.

 

[gumboot]

Ace is at least a competent musician. Anyone who's worked for a number of years doing film-scoring is probably more than competent. You don't continue working if you are insane or incompetent.

Not that I disagree with the general cut and thrust of your post, but the above isn't necessarily true in the film industry. Quite a few long-working and, indeed, successful filmmakers are both insane and incompetent.

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

What clear signs are those? I see videos that quickly fade to black. Signal interruption does not and cannot do this. Signal interruption can cause noise, pixelization, freeze-frame, but not a fade to black. A black screen requires a signal.

This is patently false.

Noise, for example, does in fact require a signal. Zero signal will result in a black screen. This is an absolute undeniable fact. You're thinking of tuning on a television. We're not talking about tuning on a television. We're talking about a television live feed between a camera and the broadcaster.

No signal from camera = black screen. Pixelation occurs when there is interference in a digital signal (the equivalent of analogue noise). A freeze frame occurs during a signal drop out. If the signal drop out lasts longer than a few moments it will go black.

Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

Oh, it's a fade all right. I've analyzed the Chopper5 video. The fade takes place over 3 frames. The first is about 10% faded, the second about 50% faded, and the the third is black. Motion continues throughout the fade. It cannot possibly be a signal interruption.

The scenario you are proposing can only possibly be performed with a manual fader. It is physically impossible for a human being to perform a fade to black in 1/10 of a second. In addition, even fading as fast as physically possible, in virtually all brands of vision mixer the actual fade will occur more slowly.

Were it necessary, for whatever reason, to cut away from this shot, the vision mixer would do just that - they would cut to another shot. This would happen instantly, would not result in a black screen, and would not be detected by anyone.

The "fade" is almost certainly a byproduct of the digitisation and compression of the image.

-Gumboot

 

[calebprime]

Well, not to belabor the point.

But, having said that creative people (geniuses) can be insane in yet another thread, let me clarify.

You probably know this already, from working on films yourself.

In the science-documentary scoring that I've done, and the lower-than-A-List work that Ace has done, you have to crank out a lot of product--appropriate to the mood and theme, and accurately timed. You have to be able to work the technology. You have to re-write if the client says so. You can't afford assistants.

So--unlike Paul McCartney--you aren't getting someone else to do your tech work and some of the actual composition for you.

You can have a mood disorder, you can be eccentric, you can be narcissistic as hell, but you have to be capable of delivering, and doing the work by yourself. No one else does it for you, and people won't re-hire you if you don't deliver.

Film-composers are too low on the totem pole to be able to be royally crazy like some actors, directors, or star musicians.

One example is the story in Wired about Tom Scott trying to score Neighbors, and trying to avoid an insane John Belushi.

I'm sure there are exceptions--probably some good stories.

I'd enjoy hearing some of your stories about insane and incompetent film-makers--or film-composers.

 

[T.A.M.]

Now gumboot, working in the film and video industry, you, like 8den, who also works in it (a video editor no less) should know better than to argue with a musician over the issue of video signals and video fades...come on man.

TAM

 

[Alareth]

Is this like those "Where's Wally?" books? (That's "Where's Waldo?" for USAians).

I found Waldo, it's that Carmen San Diego woman who is proving to be elusive ...

 

[Alareth]

Oh, it's a fade all right. I've analyzed the Chopper5 video. The fade takes place over 3 frames. The first is about 10% faded, the second about 50% faded, and the the third is black. Motion continues throughout the fade. It cannot possibly be a signal interruption.

No Ace, you've "analyzed" a reduced quality, multi-generational digitized copy of the Chopper5 video.

 

[Swing Dangler]

Oh, it's a fade all right. I've analyzed the Chopper5 video. The fade takes place over 3 frames. The first is about 10% faded, the second about 50% faded, and the the third is black. Motion continues throughout the fade. It cannot possibly be a signal interruption.

Could it also be a blank insert?

A blank image is a special case of a uniform image and comprises an all black image. Normally, blanking is part of a visual transition sequence where blank images are inserted between cut and/or fade transitions. Blank images are also used when a pause is required to inform the viewer of a change of context, such as between commercials, or to mark a major change in location or time. When blanking is used to separate commercial and program segments, experimental data indicates that blanking times may vary significantly between one and eighty or more fields. When blanking is used within a program or commercial segment, experimentally obtained blanking times are more consistent, normally ranging between four and sixteen fields.
Source: PatentStorm