Who said he was a fraud ???
No one said simonshack was a fraud. I didn't, I asked him a direct question, which didn't imply
QUOTE (simonshack @ Aug 28 2007, 09:27 AM)
I'm impressed and honored by the time you've taken to analyze the Empire State building shots...
Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
You have some good points, but you're overlooking many others.
No, I only addressed the things I saw that were erroneous. That bit about the background buildings not perceivably moving stuck out when I saw it, and I addressed it. When you are presenting evidence, each piece has to stand up on it's own. One piece of dubious evidence is not made credible by other evidence that might support the same claim. I'm not dissing your whole film, I was just addressing specific points in as thorough a way as I know how, as you should as well if you're going to put your name on it. (With all due respect!)
You might be surprised, if you haven't hung around and read other of my posts regarding this topic, by my opinions on all this. (BoneZ is probably gonna go
"NO, Sanders!!!" when he reads this
- @BoneZ, keep doing what you're doing - the scientific method is the great equalizer IMO)
Disclaimer: These are just my opinions/hunches based on what I think I know - I'm baring them to simonshack because I sense he imagines me to believe something different, that my criticisms have something to do with my "feelings" about NPT/Fakery.
I think a "missile with wings" (whatever that is) was used to hit both towers (and maybe they used the same or similar to hit the Pentagon). I think this aircraft was incapable (too much weight/lift ratio) of flying at moderate speeds (and so it couldn't/didn't). I don't think a mostly aluminum plane can penetrate a steel framed building at any speed, speed does not impart any special qualities on the plane over the building in this case. There is more destruction at higher speeds of course, but both the plane and the building suffer. A plane hitting a building at 500 mph is equivilent to a building hitting a plane at 500 mph. My thoughts on this are confimed by the frames that show the plane "melting" into the building. These images make my bullsh#t meter go bezerk. I buy Factfinder General's theory that at least the nose (I think maybe the leading edges of the wings as well?) were laced with DU, and that that is the source of the "flash". I think this aircraft looked enough like a plane from the ground to have fooled many witnesses.
I think the image of the Boeing was inserted over the "missile". I think Hezarkhani took his video from the deck of a ferry moored at Battery Park, and after the attacks he and Ms. Taylor took the ferry to Ellis Island and handed their images over to a government crew who immediately went to work laying in the plane images - I am told that the federal facility there has a sophisticated multi-media center where this work could have been done. I suspect they spent some time on these to make them look good, and that's why they are the most widely shown images. As far as I know they are the only close-ups of the crash.
I think the idea that entire shots were layered together is junk. I have been over many of these claims in detail, and none of them so far hold up to scrutiny. These claims are invariably based on misinterpretation of the effects of distance, perspective and zoom factors. These effects can be very misleading and seductive if you are not paying attention IMO.
I could be full of sh#t, and I acknowlege it. I embrace this hypothesis, tentatively, because it's the only one that I can think of that accounts for the evidence that I am aware of.
I also believe the whole NPT/TV Fakery rage, while most probably being true to the extent that images of a Boeing were superimposed on the footage that was released or broadcast, is part of a disinfo campaign, that everyone mixed up in this is being unwittingly manipulated. To "get" this requires thinking outside of the box ... Disinfo works much better when it is based on a germ of truth, and there are people in the CIA/DoD that "get it", to our great disadvantage. (I assume I needn't explain why the current focus on NPT/Fakery might have been cooked up by our enemies ... even if it was conveniently
true to some extent?)
There must be those of course that are involved in promoting NPT to a destructive end and spreading disinfo wittingly
, but I have no idea who they are. I suspect they are connected with the 911researchers site - I only say that because when I see people attacking truthers who are actually breathing down the necks of the perpetrators, to me that should be a good clue that they are on the wrong side. As an example, there have been numerous attacks against David Ray Griffin - I have researched it, and the claims appear to be warrantless (not surprised ... i.e. he is not in any way connected with the Rockefeller Foundation, he just got a good deal on a R.F. owed hall he rented because he brought a lot of people. He's being attacked because he's making real progress in waking people up - and it's no accident that his attackers are connected with the NPT crowd).
To me, you (simonshack) do not fit this mold. You seem sincere, but some of your claims appear to be based more on a desire to convince people of your POV than honest research. Regardless, please accept this advice -
Tighten it up ! If you have a sense that something is this or that, investigate it as if you were trying to debunk your own suspicions. Please don't slack just because you want to believe what you think, and think you should get others to think the same - stick with what you can prove !!! It does no one any good to release claims that cannot be substantiated ! I cannot say this strongly enough.
I am not attacking you, simonshack, I am attacking your eagerness to prove something that I am certain is untrue (buildings in the wrong place), and leaning on the disceptive nature of photography to make the case. In my opinion, get off the "buildings-are-in-the-wrong-place" thing - it's a fools errand. I've seen NO evidence of it, and I've seen a lot of claims being made, and have satisfied at least myself that they are all unfounded.
This is serious - bogus claims are destructive, dangerous, divisive! Simonshack, I support you in your research, but hey, if I see anything like the Empire State Building thing in your next video I'm gonna bust your b@lls, you can count on it.
Keep it tight - be your own worst critic. It will serve you well.
Sorry for the long post. Good luck and best wishes for an end to the New Century Madness.
(forgive me if I came off condescending, but I feel very stongly about the things I mentioned - and, hey, I'm 50)