IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Analysis Of The Steve Spak Youtube Footage, low res. BS

waterdancer
post Mar 6 2007, 07:14 AM
Post #21


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



I think you'll agree that it's fairly ridiculous to need to piece together pieces from three different versions (two of which have been modified by adding words, the third being of a lower resolution than the other two) of a single picture for analysis purposes and still not end up with a complete shot... of, course, if it just so happens that these are actually different sequential video frames rather than the same shot (they would have to have been taken within a fraction of a second of eachother given the placements of the firefighters and the shape of the smoke cloud), well, that's also fairly ridiculous, considering the poor quality of the youtube footage... rolleyes.gif
Somebody seems to be taking a bit of note of my analysis, I think. I wonder if he'll fess up to blowing up, modifying (with the steve spak wording) and cropping a full version of the picture to make the damage seem more extensive? I wouldn't hold my breath. Hey, if I only showed you blown up, modified and cropped images, I'll bet I could prove 9/11 was an inside job, LOL. Somehow I doubt we'll get to see the original image he had to work with, at least not from him. Maybe NIST will come through. Again, don't hold your breath, though.



This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 02:05 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bingo
post Mar 6 2007, 10:04 PM
Post #22





Group: Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: 6-March 07
Member No.: 729



undicisettembre.blogspot.com as trouve le monument: Bent Propeller

Vouz le puovez voir ici
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2006/1...mento-wtc7.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 7 2007, 12:28 AM
Post #23


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



QUOTE (bingo @ Mar 7 2007, 02:04 AM)
undicisettembre.blogspot.com as trouve le monument: Bent Propeller

Vouz le puovez voir ici
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2006/1...mento-wtc7.html

Sorry, but that site you've linked to, while it has some good pictures, is in my view incorrect on the analysis. Plus, I gather it is a debunking site as well. They seem to think that the light reflecting off the promenade glass is coming from the south face of WTC 7. Based on the angle of the sunlight, I'd say it's much more likely to reflected light coming off the pedestrian bridge, as in the second picture, not the way they have it in their analysis (first picture). Joining an English language 9/11 truth board to make a first post in French with a link to an Italian debunking site might get you labelled as a troll in some quarters. But, hey, welcome to the forums, bingo.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 21 2007, 12:43 AM
Post #24


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Welp, the image is no longer viewable on Steve's site anymore. Good thing I archived it, huh? I wish I'd archived the 7 WTC shows Major Damage after the collapse of the North Tower! Click Here for photos that Quash the WTC Collapse Myths! link as well, just for giggles, but unfortunately, no such luck. Aw, and he took down the video, too. What a shame. I guess even low res. youtube videos can be too revealing to stand scrutiny for long, huh?

Not that it shows much, but there is still one highlight video left up on youtube-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfdN0L0Q19w

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 21 2007, 01:21 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
behind
post Mar 23 2007, 08:44 AM
Post #25





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 25-August 06
Member No.: 13



WD; What do you think about this. Shadow ? (Some people are suggesting straite line gash)

Showing the South side of WTC7, broadcasted by ABC at 1:45 PM
video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=6186921835292416413

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 23 2007, 10:50 AM
Post #26


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Hadn't seen that before. If it is straight line damage, we can pinpoint the visible floors and columns pretty accurately and compare them to other video sources where there is patchy smoke. I'll have to look at it a bit more. Still doesn't look like it would bring the building down, though, LOL. Possibly that's the NIST upper floor damage. Looks to be in the right position. Like I say, I'll look at it some more soon. Where's it being discussed? Whatever it is, it seems odd that it would look to be pretty precisely a single column wide.

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 23 2007, 10:52 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
behind
post Mar 23 2007, 11:35 AM
Post #27





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 388
Joined: 25-August 06
Member No.: 13



It was posted at Loose Change... and they are talking about it at the govt loyalist site forum.

But if it is some kind of a gash...then it is hard to belive that "falling debris" can made so clean and straite lines. (my opinion)

This post has been edited by behind: Mar 23 2007, 11:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 23 2007, 10:30 PM
Post #28


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



I tried watching the video on the internet archive at this link, since I can't see google vids due to computer issues, but it is too pixellated to tell much...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 29 2007, 03:25 AM
Post #29


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Okay, this first image is one I just found last night, second one draws in a few perspective lines for relative floor height comparisons between WTC 7 and Verizon- the dark patch across the middle of the south face of WTC 7 is at the 22nd and 23rd floors, one can use the reflecting windows on the furthest east and west sides of the south face to count down to floor 11, the dark non relfective patch below that would be at the 5th and sixth floors. 3rd image is the best (in terms of most complete, highest res.) single image of the damage I have to work with; Steve Spak hasn't exactly been forthcoming in terms of helping us find out the truth, IMO.
Fourth one is just a collage. Hopefully, the new image resolves beyond a reasonable doubt that the analysis by Winston shown in fifth image will need to be redone- that patch of blue sky is not where the east edge of WTC 7 is. I've had my doubts about that for awhile. Now, I think we can put those doubts to bed. It looks to me as though it is a feature of the upper eastern levels of the PO building when viewed from that angle intersecting with the roof of the next building to the east- see the 6th image... or possibly the east and west sections of the upper floors of the PO playing with eachother; I'm not ready to commit to either one at this point.
Now, my question is this- how can we make sense of what we see in the Spak image in terms of the damage, given this? I don't know yet, but I'll be interested to find out... looks like a great perspective from which to maximize the perception of the SW corner damage, based on pic #6 to me, LOL.







This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 02:51 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 30 2007, 09:28 AM
Post #30


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Thanks to Carl Bank for these- screenshotted from http://www.stevespak.com/spak/slideshows.html





This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 02:02 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 31 2007, 05:27 PM
Post #31


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Okay, quick and dirty composite and lines drawn in. By my estimation using pictures from earlier in the thread picture as a reference, I'm going to say with a fair degree of confidence that the middle of the 7th floor line drawn across from the Verizon building lines up (more or less exactly) with the top of the 10th/bottom of the 11th floor of WTC 7. Top floor of the first level of the Verizon building I count as the 10th floor; the lowest floor has large archways rather than the typical window spacing which happens above that. The window tops on that 10th floor Verizon building would line up somewhere in the range of the 14th/15th floor of WTC 7, when looking up from a lower level perspective, due mostly to WTC 7's setback. From 100 or so feet up looking from a more or less level perspective, top first level Verizon lined up at about floor 13... http://studyof911.com/gallery/displayimage...?album=28&pos=5
of course, looking down from a height, the 10th floor Verizon building would appear level with a lower WTC 7 floor
http://studyof911.com/gallery/displayimage...album=28&pos=14
Makes sense, right? Lines drawn between top and top floor or bottom and bottom floor on Verizon generally correspond to 1 1/2 floors on WTC 7. So there is an alternating stripey pattern on WTC 7 between floor levels drawn on Verizon.
So... what I think we can see on WTC 7 in these pictures which I've done a compilation of is from a 15th floor window line down to a 9th floor window line. That portion of Winston's analysis I agree with. What I think is missing, however, is enough consideration for the foreshortening effect from this angle and perspective and a corrected alignment for the Eastern edge of WTC 7 (which we can't determine solely from this picture). Basically, I think the eastern columns get all smushed together from this viewpoint, with a significantly wider distance between them as they move towards the camera. So, yeah, there was a damaged SW corner of WTC 7, which went eastward for a few columns, but this perspective tends to maximize how big that damage actually looks. For comparison purposes, refer to Aman Zafar's shot from across the river- the foreshortening would be negligible from that distance...
http://www.studyof911.com/articles/winston...ges/FigD_01.jpg
So, on the very lower corner portion of the south face of WTC 7 which we are able to make out between the Verizon building and the foundation level of WTC 6, I think we can see a framed area which corresponds to the 3/4 floor window levels. We can't actually see the SW corner itself, but there are no windows on that below the 7th floor- these four pics in combination show that corner fairly well-
http://www.studyof911.com/gallery/albums/u...7worldtrade.jpg
http://studyof911.com/gallery/displayimage...album=28&pos=14
http://www.studyof911.com/gallery/displayi...album=28&pos=12
http://www.studyof911.com/gallery/displayi...?album=28&pos=9
compare also with the lower SE corner; they appear to be similarly designed (except, of course for no pedestrian bridge going into the third floor on the SW corner).
http://studyof911.com/gallery/displayimage...album=28&pos=19







This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 05:49 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 31 2007, 05:38 PM
Post #32


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Does anyone still doubt that Steve could have had a better angle on the SW corner than the one he chose to (sort of) make available (sort of)? I sure hope NIST gets the negatives.



This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 05:50 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Apr 1 2007, 07:00 AM
Post #33


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



A little before, during and after 9/11 collage from the west, using mostly Steve Spak footage and images...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Apr 14 2007, 08:32 AM
Post #34


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



So how do you reckon the initial conversation between Steve Spak and FEMA went, way back when when FEMA was working on their report on WTC 7?

"Hey Steve, ya got any nice pics of the south face damage to WTC 7 that we can show our audience?"
"Sure, how about this one."
"Hey, that's cool! It's really more the SW corner than south face, though it does show a bit of south face, but we'll take it. We'll just put a red box on it okay?"
"Sure."
Hey, Steve, got any more pics or video showing the south side damage that we could use? We reaally could use a smoking gun here, buddy- our best hypothesis has only a low probability of being correct."
"Sorry guys, I'm saving my best stuff for my youtube debunking video (which I'm planning to "pull" BTW) and slide show and to give to a 9/11 CT debunking site which can crop and alter the best quality original and misanalyse to their hearts content and then finally tell NIST about it since apparently the debunker thinks I couldn't be bothered..."
"Ah, okay then, Steve, no problemo. Just thought we'd ask. It's not like we have anything riding on getting it right on the first go around. We want to keep this thing speculative just as long as we can..."



This post has been edited by waterdancer: Apr 14 2007, 09:06 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Apr 14 2007, 09:22 AM
Post #35


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bingo
post Apr 30 2007, 03:16 AM
Post #36





Group: Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: 6-March 07
Member No.: 729



QUOTE (waterdancer @ Mar 6 2007, 11:28 PM)
QUOTE (bingo @ Mar 7 2007, 02:04 AM)
undicisettembre.blogspot.com as trouve le monument: Bent Propeller

Vouz le puovez voir ici
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2006/1...mento-wtc7.html

Sorry, but that site you've linked to, while it has some good pictures, is in my view incorrect on the analysis. Plus, I gather it is a debunking site as well. They seem to think that the light reflecting off the promenade glass is coming from the south face of WTC 7. Based on the angle of the sunlight, I'd say it's much more likely to reflected light coming off the pedestrian bridge, as in the second picture, not the way they have it in their analysis (first picture). Joining an English language 9/11 truth board to make a first post in French with a link to an Italian debunking site might get you labelled as a troll in some quarters. But, hey, welcome to the forums, bingo.


yeah...you dont know italian lang.

This is Cirione photo.
http://static.flickr.com/137/326042478_582733e88c_o.jpg
See me the position of Bent Propeller on this image.

When you found the position of debris of this monumet you can understand this post
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2006/1...mento-wtc7.html

bye

PS:
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...tc-analines.jpg
and
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...spak1-lines.jpg
on steve spak photo the line is not really on the edge of the building


EDIT: See the evolution of damage
squib
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/189/4743574...db30f576c_o.gif
damage in the edge of squib
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/228/4745483...1b0ac4bc5_o.jpg
and from this img the particular of damaged penthouse:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/193/4755006...b997011e9_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/4744035...25da2f421_o.jpg
On this pubblied by NIST you can see http://farm1.static.flickr.com/204/4745528...87cc91165_o.jpg
damage in the edge of squib (rotation create dust from the major flexion from down to up...you know the Steve Spak img of sud face-Verizon edge damage)
Here you see http://farm1.static.flickr.com/204/4745528...87cc91165_o.jpg
not white damage on penthouse and on wall of penthouse
also the sud-tear is first only a minor damage to parapet and after this
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/228/4745483...1b0ac4bc5_o.jpg
(you can also see a probable second tear at right of img on the smoke)

Post
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2007/0...old-photos.html
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2007/0...i-sul-wtc7.html
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.com/2007/0...old-photos.html

This post has been edited by bingo: Apr 30 2007, 03:58 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bingo
post Apr 30 2007, 05:11 AM
Post #37





Group: Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: 6-March 07
Member No.: 729



QUOTE (waterdancer @ Feb 22 2007, 02:39 AM)
Four pics (two are basically identical here, so we'll count it as four, not five) looking west on Vesey under the Pedestrian bridge. Sunlight seems to be reflecting off a partly broken glass panel on the promenade, perhaps being reflected onto it from the pedestrian bridge? Compare it with a pic I recently discovered of the area pre-9/11. In any case, a large portion of the promenade appears to be still standing. It looks as though one can see through to the other side underneath it. Think about that for a minute- it was closer to WTC 1 than WTC 7 was and would have had debris landing directly on top of it (as opposed to falling/flying into it like the vertical face of WTC 7 would have had) yet it was still standing. So, the hole from the ground level up the face of WTC 7 in that area story doesn't seem to hold much water, based on these pics. Third and fourth floor were a glassed in lobby area, as you can see from the still from Working Girl at the bottom of the post. So yeah, that glass probably got broken, I'm guessing. Ahem (cough, cough). Look at the size of those outer columns, folks. Pretty substantial looking...






Smoke obscure the sud face of WTC7 when tear appear...but in the Cirione photo dont have some smoke.
Cirione have play this photo when is possible to go at WTC7...at 11.30 this site is evacuated for probable collapse.You can see more testimoniance of Firefighter on oral histories.
Bent Propeller monument is disappear also on this moment.


Here: http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...pedbridge-1.jpg
You cant see pedestrian bridge, but deformed image reflection
and here http://www.studyof911.com/articles/winston...es/Fig13_04.jpg
or here
http://static.flickr.com/125/318121988_aa4e54655f_o.jpg
you see also deformed image reflection of pedestrian bridge.

thumbsup.gif

This post has been edited by bingo: Apr 30 2007, 05:42 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Jun 1 2007, 12:38 AM
Post #38


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Some great screen caps... (no thanks to Steve Spak). More of them viewable here







This post has been edited by waterdancer: Jun 1 2007, 03:34 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Jun 1 2007, 04:16 AM
Post #39


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



Comparing a few of those with some before and after shots should clear up a few questions about what is visible in the background, in case there are any doubts.
First, a couple of fairly recent shots from similar positions:
one
two
There is currently a new structure (I don't know the name of it, sorry) near the Woolworth building which is obstructing the view to the east as it appeared on 9/11 and before. See the third and fourth shots for a pre obstructing building view:

Comparing those shots with two of the screenshots, (five and six below) should make it pretty clear what each bump, knob and edge seen in those shots is. I now agree that we are probably indeed seeing the eastern edge of WTC 7 intersecting the Western edge roofline of the Post office in shot #7 below, but I had to look at a lot of pics to eliminate such possibilities as post office building edges and Woolworth building edge from my consideration. Ultimately, it's the most likely possibility simply because it is apparently in front of rather than behind the PO roof in #s five and six. Of course, that doesn't guarantee that we are still looking at the same vertical edge in #7, but the evidence is pointing towards it, I think.






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bingo
post Jun 9 2007, 08:01 AM
Post #40





Group: Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: 6-March 07
Member No.: 729



QUOTE (waterdancer @ May 31 2007, 11:38 PM)
Some great screen caps... (no thanks to Steve Spak). More of them viewable here






And the problem is?...

I see a new confirmation to video of Steve Spak.


The new Builgind seem also in construction

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 11th November 2019 - 05:22 PM