View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006 Posts: 932 Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ian neal wrote: | The standard of 'debate' here is pathetic, largely driven by pepik's posts but not exculsively so.
There is an important issue at the heart of this thread regarding the BBC's report but it has shot off at a tangent as usual.
|
Ok, imagine this. Someone near ground zero hears from the fireman that the salomon brothers building is coming down, ie it is going to collapse at some time. By the time it gets to London, the message has become, salomon brothers building is coming down, ie it is collapsing right now. By the time it reaches air, we assume that it was coming down so that means it has collapsed by now.
All this mean is that the BBC heard a whisper and ran with it. Rolling news shows that latest stories. If you don't have the latest story, people will watch another channel that does. The way you get the latest news in a situation is by grabbing at rumours until you find one that sticks. The exact same thing happened with reports of planes heading towards Washington, more hijackings etc. None of them were true, but they reported as "we are hearing that..."
And it still doesn't answer the question, why would there be a controlled report coming through for the BBC to read from? Every news outlet would have to have the same report, so they all gave the same information, otherwise the BBC would be saying one thing, and then be contradicted by every other news outlet in the world. This then leads to, you guessed it, more people in the conspiracy. _________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
""75 Park Place" is part of the URL, and the 2 photos show 75 Park Place. "
that doesn't make it a "website"
"The building is described as 14-storeys high, which it is, and therefore clearly not the building in the BBC film either by height or design. "
counted the floors on the video then?
oh and you still haven't managed to identify that red sandstone building. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
johndoe wrote: | ""75 Park Place" is part of the URL, and the 2 photos show 75 Park Place. "
that doesn't make it a "website"
"The building is described as 14-storeys high, which it is, and therefore clearly not the building in the BBC film either by height or design. "
counted the floors on the video then?
oh and you still haven't managed to identify that red sandstone building. |
You're demonstrably wrong. You're being pathetic. Stop it. Find somewhere else to gibber. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.postalmuseum.si.edu/images/resources/6g1_2_WTC.jpg
(sorry about the circled bit, i couldn't find the original)
simply find the position of the camera that would give the shot shown on the video, oh and if you're feeling really clever point out the red sand stone building and how it could obscure so much of a building 4 times it's size. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
johndoe wrote: | http://www.postalmuseum.si.edu/images/resources/6g1_2_WTC.jpg
(sorry about the circled bit, i couldn't find the original)
simply find the position of the camera that would give the shot shown on the video, oh and if you're feeling really clever point out the red sand stone building and how it could obscure so much of a building 4 times it's size. |
You are fekkin insane .
75 Park Place is much too low to be the building in the BBC film.
The Verizon (among others) would be looming above it, but it isn't. Did The Verizon disappear for the duration?
75 Park Place is only 14 storeys.
What are you on???? _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"75 Park Place is much too low to be the building in the BBC film. "
and the red sandstone building is much to high for it to be wtc 7. unless of course you can find out what that building is and account for it's dimensions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr-Bridger Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 186
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
These two pics shows whereabouts the footage was shot from, its a sideview.
the same building infront of WTC7 is circled in both
_________________ www.infodvds.co.uk
www.cornwall911truth.info |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
hehehehehe
OK I'll play along but only because I've had a few drinks.
The building you circled in black in photo #1 is The Verizon, which is immediately to the W side of WTC7, not the N.
If the BBC's was a side-shot as per your arrow, we would see the narrow W face of WTC7. We don't. We see the N face, the one with the dark band in the centre of the upper few storeys.
p.s. I can't resist a troll. Never could, never will. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr-Bridger Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 186
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
ive looked at the picture above and the still taken from the news footage and something is clearly amiss.
in the above photo it clearly shows the buildings are side by side. yet in the news footage the building in the photo above this post is clearly infront of wtc7's face not side by side, has somebody been moving buildings around or is my prespective wrong? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
ok using the smoke as a guideline you can pinpoint where the towers would of stood, so wtc 7 is in the correct place, so either the building infront should not be where we see, or there is a simular building ferther away from wtc7 that cannot be seen on the above map of the area.
surely the smoke would be the opposite side if the look at the vantage point being suggested on the map with the arrow.
so the vantage point is looking in the direction of the parkplace building but the building in the foreground proves tampering of the footage a.k.a a disinfo peice to later discredit 9/11 truth or the building is ferther away and the map dosnt show it.
sorry for the many edits i kept having to recheck to make sure im confident i have it right .
dont forget buildings in the foreground also appear bigger than compared to those in the background could the building be one of those white buildings or off white buildings on the map?
like the one infront of parkplace? remember where they are stood and prespective is the key. the antenna on the building in the news footage dosnt seem to have the same detail as the building itself and could be on a building ferther away making it appear as if it is on the building in question on the news clip also i cannot identify the antenna to be sure its the same as in the above photo.
bah this is getting confusing but you have to try and piture their vantage point once the veiw is seen from nearer ground level. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr-Bridger Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 186
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you look at the map, Park Place will be behind the white building with the sloping roof, Even on the map it shows Park Place to be alot lower than this white building so will not be seen from this vantage point.
_________________ www.infodvds.co.uk
www.cornwall911truth.info |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
okay lets look at mr bridger's building he has circled, too see that building and the wtc 7 in line you would end up looking at the side of wtc 7 which isn't what we see in the footage.
"dont forget buildings in the foreground also appear bigger than compared to those in the background Rolling Eyes could the building be one of those white buildings or off white buildings on the map?
like the one infront of parkplace? remember where they are stood and prespective is the key."
you can judge perspective and distance in a photo from detail like the size of the windows for instance. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Surely the most important aspect is the perspective recorded from where Jane Standley was on the day? If she was on a fairly low floor, then the building in the foreground would appear the same height as the WTC7. All the ancillary views that are being posted only aid the relative position not the view we have from her position.
She could only have been in Merrill Lynch or The Mercantile Exchange. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
johndoe wrote: | okay lets look at mr bridger's building he has circled, too see that building and the wtc 7 in line you would end up looking at the side of wtc 7 which isn't what we see in the footage.
"dont forget buildings in the foreground also appear bigger than compared to those in the background Rolling Eyes could the building be one of those white buildings or off white buildings on the map?
like the one infront of parkplace? remember where they are stood and prespective is the key."
you can judge perspective and distance in a photo from detail like the size of the windows for instance. |
So, are you finaly happy that 75 Park Place is much too low to be the building in film?
That is has a very different design?
That, in fact, what we see is WTC7? _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
just because bridger was wrong that doesn't make you right, you have yet to find out the angle and location of the shot and what that red sand stone building is. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr-Bridger Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Apr 2006 Posts: 186
|
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Please note in the BBC pic Number 3 is BEHIND number 1
So as you see that is the side of WTC7.
If you can prove i am wrong please, supply the evidence on here.
I also agree with one of the posters above :
`She could only have been in Merrill Lynch or The Mercantile Exchange. _________________ www.infodvds.co.uk
www.cornwall911truth.info |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The more I study the screen grab from the BBC video, the more it becomes difficult to interpret.
What are the buildings in the foreground marked with the red dots? Or rather, WHERE are they in the aerial photo? The view from Merrill Lynch and The Mercantile Exchange (where Jane Standley was probably located on the day), appears to be unrestricted by any mass of shorter buildings as the videp suggests.
Where exactly was she on the day?
_________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Winston Smith 101 New Poster
Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The view from the BBC
Similar line of view but from a greater elevation. Note the red brick building in front.
and to prove it is the same building that collapsed...
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
All very interesting, but totally academic.
The building behind the "red brick" building that johndoe originally describes as 75 Park Place is clearly WTC7, as Winston has shown.
p.s. Winston how did you get such a clear clip from the BBC news film? Maybe I need a better screen...
Tele - at a rough guess, the red building *appears* to be 2 blocks N of the Postal Building and 1 E of 75 Pk Pl, about 4 o'clock from your #3 on the overhead photo. Which would place the BBC at NE of WTC7 during filming.
I'd say your #1 on the BBC screen clip is misidentified. The yellow #1 on the picture is a much bigger building, and out of shot (to the right) on the BBC clip. My 2p. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ignatz wrote: |
Tele - at a rough guess, the red building *appears* to be 2 blocks N of the Postal Building and 1 E of 75 Pk Pl, about 4 o'clock from your #3 on the overhead photo. Which would place the BBC at NE of WTC7 during filming.
I'd say your #1 on the BBC screen clip is misidentified. The yellow #1 on the picture is a much bigger building, and out of shot (to the right) on the BBC clip. My 2p. |
I have a gun to your head, you must put a cross where you think Jane Standley was on the day - where would you put it? Plus anyone else care to do the same? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
johndoe Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 181
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
"The building behind the "red brick" building that johndoe originally describes as 75 Park Place is clearly WTC7, as Winston has shown. "
ah you win some you lose some, but since we have spent such a long time trying to identify the location of the shot it can be forgiven. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
or maybe behind the red building at the very bottom right. But I can't say I'm happy about it, except there's a gun to my head.
The angles over to the Woolworth building look wrong relative to the "Red" building in front of WTC7. Also the Red building in the TV shot seems too narrow, but I suppose that might be a TV effect. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ignatz wrote: |
or maybe behind the red building at the very bottom right. But I can't say I'm happy about it, except there's a gun to my head.
The angles over to the Woolworth building look wrong relative to the "Red" building in front of WTC7. Also the Red building in the TV shot seems too narrow, but I suppose that might be a TV effect. |
Okay, just so I am clear, can you draw a line following our line of sight from Standley's window to WTC7? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
EmptyBee Moderate Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 151
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://911wtc.freehostia.com/gallery/originalimages/GJS-WTC97.jpg
The above link shows an elevated view of Manhattan following the collapse of WTC1 & 2 but before the collapse of WTC7.
The red Western Union building is in the centre-left foreground, this is clearly visible behind Jane Standley throughout the BBC footage. WTC7 is beyond to the south. The pyramidal topped American Express building to the west of WTC7 and the spire-like Woolworth building to the east can be both seen in the above image, and they are both visible in the BBC footage when the camera shot is at its widest. _________________ "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | Ignatz wrote: |
or maybe behind the red building at the very bottom right. But I can't say I'm happy about it, except there's a gun to my head.
The angles over to the Woolworth building look wrong relative to the "Red" building in front of WTC7. Also the Red building in the TV shot seems too narrow, but I suppose that might be a TV effect. |
Okay, just so I am clear, can you draw a line following our line of sight from Standley's window to WTC7? |
Nope. My "X" is wrong. EmptyBee's photo makes things much clearer. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The link does not open an image for me. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 918
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: |
The link does not open an image for me. |
It redirects to a bunch of advertising, but if you copy+paste into the address bar it works OK. _________________ So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|