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 Feb 18 2007, 04:55 AM
Post #1


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



http://www.youtube.com/v/YHdt7wRQtaY

There is really nothing new here, except for the fact that we now have a narrated low res. vid instead of slightly higher res. stills which show the same thing. I want to see the video or stills in the highest res. possible, not some unfocused youtube crap with Steve Spak's imprint on it. I want to be able to make out the post no bills words below WTC 6 in a shot without water from a firehose going up the center of the picture- one that doesn't have the words Steve Spak debunking 9/11 put on it.
This youtube vid crap is just that- crap.

Below are sample stills and video screenshots for comparison purposes- all shots taken by Steve Spak:














vs. links for stills from the video

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak4281.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak4261.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak4251.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3381.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3372.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3371.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3331.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3322.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3321.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3311.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3301.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3181.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3171.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3163.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3162.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3161.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3151.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak3001.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2431.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2421.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2362.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2361.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2351.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2281.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2272.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2271.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2261.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2251.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2241.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2221.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2211.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2202.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2201.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2193.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2192.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2191.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2061.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2051.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2041.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak2021.jpg
http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wa...13/spak1531.jpg

Aw, heck, just give me all the footage you shot on 9/11 Steve. I'll sort out what I want and then return it to you. I promise.

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 18 2007, 06:23 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 18 2007, 04:55 AM
Post #2


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



More Spak stills-









Well, you get the idea. Lots of 9/11 footage taken by Steve. Not all of the ones at the link below are, but a substantial number of them are 9/11 shots by Spak. For sale. I sent him a note asking about that shot of the damage to the SW corner and south face, but never heard back. Maybe he doesn't sell hi res. complete images to CTers, I dunno.

http://911pictures.com/photos_catalog.phtml?category=wtc

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 05:33 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 18 2007, 05:16 AM
Post #3


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



and a few more, not taken in the same area, but still taken on 9/11...







This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 18 2007, 05:18 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 19 2007, 08:45 AM
Post #4


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Okay, so we know the youtube vid is low res. crap footage, but is it useful for anything? I think so, poor as it is. Take a look at the following pics, for example:
The first two pics (not from the youtube video) were taken within a fraction of a second of each other based on the positioning of the firemen visible in both, assuming that they might not be from the same negative cropped differently (which in my view is the more likely scenario). The first image is the highest resolution of the two, but we know that it is not the highest possible resolution of that shot, since it lost resolution when it was altered to add the Steve Spak etc. verbiage. So, I'll be combining those two images with a third taken at a different time from a slightly different location to give a fuller picture of the positioning of things in the first two images. It's a bit sloppy and doesn't match up exactly, but it gives a rough idea. The main difficulty in merging them is that the camera seems to have been tilted at a different angle in the video; the verizon building angles differently. The location is probably slightly different as well. Rather than attempting to skew the angles on one or the other, I've just left them slightly unmatched.








This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 02:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 19 2007, 09:22 AM
Post #5


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



What else can we observe from the video?
Well, that clear observable area of WTC 7's south face wasn't just a lucky capture, for one thing. It seems to have been there fairly extensively at various times during the day. Hard to tell exact extent of it (probably varying depending on time and location) due to the poor resolution and multiple cuts in the vid, but smoke free areas on the lower south face (say floors 20 and below) are observeable pretty much throughout the video where it can be seen at all. A few examples below- screenshots and stills... some of these images actually show the south face, some are more implying visibility due to blue sky behind and lack of smoke coming from that area.
For the moment I'm confining this analysis soley to Steve Spak's 9/11 pictures, but will be bringing in other pictures for reference purposes later in the thread. The clear area on the lower south face, for example is independently confirmed by Aman Zafar











This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 19 2007, 10:00 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 19 2007, 09:45 AM
Post #6


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Okay, what else?
Well, we can get a pretty good fix on the floor levels of WTC 7 which we are able to see now, by drawing parallel lines across the lower front of the Verizon building (and a few of the upper ones also, recognising that because of the tiered effect of the Verizon building they will not lie in the same plane as the lower ones) and comparing those lines with lines drawn across the same face in different pictures and seeing how they line up...






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 19 2007, 10:58 AM
Post #7


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



The original of the first image will be familiar from an earlier post in this thread, the others are higher resolution originals from different sources with lines drawn on them. In the case of the higher resolution images, I will make it possible to view the orignals by clicking on the pics. As you can see from these pics (there are lots more from different angles available if you are unconvinced) the first level of the Post Office roof is roughly level to and parallel with one floor below the top of first tier on the Verizon building wedding cake (or the top of the ninth story windows). The roof of the Post Office is roughly level with approximately the 19th floor of the Verizon building, or the third inset in the middle's roof. Those lines are at approximately the height of where the 21st floor of the old WTC 7 building was. It gets a bit tricky to judge because of the inset on the WTC 7 building in relationship to the Post Office and Verizon buildings, but the last two pictures seem to illustrate this most clearly to me.
Thusly, we can see that the clear space of blue sky in some of the video frames above most probably show the southeast edge of WTC 7 as a vertical boundary (though this isn't positive, and it could well be another building behind the P.O. creating a vertical edge in some or all of the shots- see this pic, this one, this one or this one from somewhat similar viewing angles for other posible contenders on the vertical edge) and part of the roof of the Post Office in the horizontal direction.










This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 26 2007, 05:49 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 19 2007, 12:25 PM
Post #8


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Keeping in mind all of the above and looking at both of the following images in comparison with each other (and noting the number of floors which can be seen on the lower part of the Verizon building in the second one), it seems to me that we can get a pretty good idea of what floors we are seeing in the first picture... the second line from the bottom in the first picture appears to me to correspond to the bottom line in the second picture. The bottom line in the first picture would come through the trees on the promenade.




This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 22 2007, 04:59 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Feb 19 2007, 01:39 PM
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Your work on WTC 7 is impeccable.. nice job WD!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 20 2007, 05:14 AM
Post #10


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



QUOTE (johndoeX @ Feb 19 2007, 05:39 PM)
Your work on WTC 7 is impeccable.. nice job WD!

Thanks Rob. Not sure exactly where it will lead just yet, but I'm plugging away. There's one more picture I want to dig up before I do another post here. That inset makes it fairly problematic to determine the exact floors pictured without more info. Basically, I think we are doing the equivalent of looking up through the parallel lines in the last picture shown, but since the damage picture was taken from considerably further away from WTC 7, I think we can see further up on the building between the lines. Still working on it, though.

cheers.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
qaranta
post Feb 20 2007, 05:42 AM
Post #11





Group: Newbie
Posts: 17
Joined: 18-February 07
Member No.: 630



There is another pretty good analysis of WTC 7 at the Study of 911 web site. The paper is entitled 'Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST's Estimations', and can be viewed here.

The image below, from the article, is perhaps one of the most revealing. It shows there is damage to the south west corner of the building, as reported, but that it is not as extensive as is being claimed.



This post has been edited by qaranta: Feb 20 2007, 05:42 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 20 2007, 06:01 AM
Post #12


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



QUOTE (qaranta @ Feb 20 2007, 09:42 AM)
There is another pretty good analysis of WTC 7 at the Study of 911 web site. The paper is entitled 'Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST's Estimations', and can be viewed here.

The image below, from the article, is perhaps one of the most revealing. It shows there is damage to the south west corner of the building, as reported, but that it is not as extensive as is being claimed.


Thx garganta. I helped him fine tune that. I'm looking to take it a step or two further now. I think he has the bottom of the building a bit high. I'm going to try to get a fix on what we can see between the Verizon bldg. and WTC 6's foundation, etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 22 2007, 03:39 AM
Post #13


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



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...







This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 5 2007, 06:45 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 22 2007, 04:07 AM
Post #14


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



West side of WTC 7 and SW corner damage pics and vid (west side visible for a few seconds only on the vid, near the beginning)





This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 31 2007, 04:42 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 22 2007, 04:47 AM
Post #15


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Okay, now let's focus in on a couple of little areas on the WTC 7 SW corner of the Spak image which we only have a debunker's version of- it looks sort of like a window frame, but comparing the size of it to the size of the Verizon windows which are closer, it looks oversized (and at the wrong height) to be a 7th corner window on either the south or west face. What could it be, then? Possibly, just possibly- could we be seeing something like an area framed by the roof of the fourth floor and between two columns? I can't tell for sure (a higher res. image would sure help me guess better, though), but it seems the most likely idea to me. The height seems about right, there don't seem to be any other good possibilities which I can think of to explain it, and it is sort of visible in some frames of the vid., indicating that it may be an actual feature, as opposed to a random pattern... the two images in the third posting are crops of the fourth floor window level in various locations along the south face from two different images. If the horizontal support between the third and fourth floor windows were knocked down, that would leave a two story gap between the columns. Anyway, that's my best guess on that particular item. A few floors above that, we have a visible part of the building which is obviously not floating in midair, so therefore must have some support to hold it up. That means that either smoke or the Verizon building (or both) are concealing a nearby part of the building, not a nearby hole in the building...
So what are we left with? Lots of questions, mostly- how come vids and pics never seem to show a complete picture, even when compared with others? How come we can't see the highest possible resolution pics of those which we have managed to see? How much of the Promenade was actually still standing before WTC 7 fell? How extensive was the actual building damage to the south face of WTC 7, and why don't we have better views of it? I'm afraid the smoke and/or lack of photographers answers won't wash at this point, we've seen too much footage that conveniently manages to hide things without the benefit of smoke. I sure hope NIST comes up with some good answers and then lets us see all their pretty pictures...



This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 22 2007, 05:15 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 22 2007, 11:09 AM
Post #16


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



More images and galleries taken from a similar (vesey and West St.) vantage point:

many of these from the Lib. of Congress http://memory.loc.gov/service/pnp/ppmsca/02100/02121/
some of these
http://web.archive.org/web/20021205024232/...ews.com/wtc.htm
There are lots more, of course, these are just a few...

another image by Willie Cirone- in this one it appears that we may be able to make out some of the hoops on the pedestrian bridge crossing Vesey...


This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 22 2007, 11:12 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Feb 24 2007, 11:17 AM
Post #17


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Fairly similar before and after shots of the promenade area near the NE corner of WTC 6. I only wish I could offer you a shot taken from a similar perspective on 9/11 between 10:30 AM and 5:20 PM. Let me know if you have one hanging around in your picture drawer... someone was up on the roof of WTC 5 with a camera but the only shots I have to show that don't show much of interest. Still, I've included some below just for completeness sake. More can be found @ http://www.editing.fr/wtc_reisinger/ archive
http://static.flickr.com/137/326040199_93d889aab4_o.jpg archive
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/374728-lg.jpg archive
http://www.spazmataz.net/members/photos/al...4/m28.sized.jpg archive
http://www.editing.fr/wtc_reisinger/images...20Center-32.jpg archive





This post has been edited by waterdancer: Feb 24 2007, 12:07 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LizzyTish
post Mar 1 2007, 03:32 PM
Post #18





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,362
Joined: 8-November 06
Member No.: 215



Awwww, c'mon waterdancer....just LOOK at that raging inferno! Everyone was so sure it was gonna go down that the newscasters were all trying to be the first to report it! rolleyes.gif Of course I'm being sarcastic. It looks like someone threw a cigarette in a trash barrel in one office. laugh.gif

Nice work on all the above pics, btw. Too bad nobody caught one of "Mr. Pull It" pushing the plunger. nonono.gif
Attached File(s)
Attached File  Bldg7.jpg ( 0bytes ) Number of downloads: 21
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 3 2007, 11:27 PM
Post #19


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



Hey, Steve has actually posted a version of the damage pic on his site now, looks almost complete, too. He left off a bit at the bottom and the right side, still. Second pic from the top, currently... the resolution looks to be about the same as with the debunking 9/11 version, but the steve spak imprint is at least in a different place on this one.

www.stevespak.com archive

And apparently, if one wanted to shell out some shekels, one might still be able to get better quality video footage than what's on youtube, judging by this, though I'm not sure that there will be anything really good on there. Anyone want to take a risk? www.stevespak.com/wtc911.html

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 4 2007, 02:04 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Mar 5 2007, 02:53 AM
Post #20


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


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



So far, the first picture below seems to be the best match in terms of a current shot from Steve Spak's general location, though not quite direction the camera points, higher up and probably a bit further back. It's not perfect, but it allows us to see what is going on behind WTC 7, I think. Compare it with a video snap, I think you'll agree with me that had the camera been pointing a little further to the north instead of eastwards the two shots would match up pretty well in terms of before and after shots. If anyone wants to go there and snap an even closer matchup, I'd be most appreciative. I think I'm now getting a pretty clear picture of what we see in the background of Steve's damage shot... also, if anyone knows the setback on the old WTC 7 (in terms of the south side being further north than the Verizon and PO buildings) vs. the new one, that'd be a help as well. Is it the same or different? It looks to me like the new one is more nearly flush with those buildings now than the old one was...




This post has been edited by waterdancer: Mar 5 2007, 03:37 AM
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: 13th November 2019 - 01:51 AM