FALLING MAN

[simonshack]

*


ISAAC PLUMMETS TO HIS (VIRTUAL) DEATH

The best part of the infamous"Jim Huibregtse's" clip is when it shows a supposed 'suicide jumper' (which we shall call "ISAAC") tumbling down the WTC façade - causing poor Sir Isaac Newton to, once again, spin in his grave. ISAAC's trajectory can be traced in three easy steps: A - B - C.

Here is "A" - just as ISAAC initiates his (supposedly) gravity-driven fall :


Here is "C" - soon before ISAAC disappears from view: (what a remarkable shadow!)


And here is ISAAC's full trajectory. My red line represents how a body - attracted by Earth's gravity - would fall on a perfectly windless day. Thanks to the WTC's vertical beams (and knowing that there were 59 of them for a total tower-width of 208 feet) we can compute ISAAC's sideways-drift speed in this 5-sec long shot. Please check the maths for yourself if you will : I get an approximate figure of 10 ft per second - or 6,81 mph.


So, you may ask: "what was the average wind speed on 9/11?" According to this weather chart (see below), the recorded wind speeds of those early morning hours fluctuated between a minimum of 6,9mph and a maximum of 10,4mph. No need to be a rocket scientist to know that a free-falling human body won't drift sideways at a rate of 7mph ... due to a 10mph breeze! It just won't happen- in the real world.
We ain't kites, you know !

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/wind- ... -t463.html


And here is "D" - the cherry on the cake: ISAAC's shadow separates from his body and goes its own way !


THERE IS ZERO REALITY in these 9/11 computer animations.
They are quite horrid digital contraptions. All of them. I rest my case.

[simonshack]

*

THE JUMPER WHO PARTED WITH HIS OWN SHADOW



Source video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZJXNdhkhCY (at 9:12)

I would really like to hear anyone challenging this finding. Can a shadow suddenly detach from an object - in the real world? I'll be patiently waiting for anyone wishing to explain the above "jumper" imagery.

Until then, I will rest my case: ALL of these 9/11 images are phony, digital contraptions. GAME OVER!

[Maat]

Oh crikey! That's fantastic, Simon! His name must be Peter Pan, that's the only flying cartoon character I know with a detachable shadow >

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Q_prime]

From the source youtube Simon posted, it looks like someone attempts to claim the video is real

The impact wan't edited out. This is my videotape, filmed the morning of 9/11. I had my camera as it was my sons first day of pre school. The first plane flew directly over my head, and it takes a few seconds for the camera to "turn on" to start shooting. I figured I had the earliest footage, until the French documentary filmmakers in midtown displayed their footage of the planes impact. This footage is exactly what was shot, without any retouching or editing. Nothing added. -jim huibregtse

How can he claim the footage is authentic when the French documentary filmmakers 9/11 version is entirely fake?

Hi, the camera was a Sony DCR- PC1, any noises, especially pops, clicks, etc, are likely the result of my hand moving on the shell of the camera, you may recall, those cameras were small, and the microphone was not well insulated...picked up tons of RFI as well. I missed the second impact as I was retrieving my preschooler from his first day of school. 2nd collapse I was inside my apartment, tending to my children (I have only smoke cloud footage) audio track missing because mic off likely.

Shill mode in action. For those looking about Sony DCR- PC1

[Maat]

From the source youtube Simon posted, it looks like someone attempts to claim the video is real

The impact wan't edited out. This is my videotape, filmed the morning of 9/11. I had my camera as it was my sons first day of pre school. The first plane flew directly over my head, and it takes a few seconds for the camera to "turn on" to start shooting. I figured I had the earliest footage, until the French documentary filmmakers in midtown displayed their footage of the planes impact. This footage is exactly what was shot, without any retouching or editing. Nothing added. -jim huibregtse

How can he claim the footage is authentic when the French documentary filmmakers 9/11 version is entirely fake?

Hi, the camera was a Sony DCR- PC1, any noises, especially pops, clicks, etc, are likely the result of my hand moving on the shell of the camera, you may recall, those cameras were small, and the microphone was not well insulated...picked up tons of RFI as well. I missed the second impact as I was retrieving my preschooler from his first day of school. 2nd collapse I was inside my apartment, tending to my children (I have only smoke cloud footage) audio track missing because mic off likely.

Shill mode in action. For those looking about Sony DCR- PC1

Ah yes, Jim Huibregtse is quite 'creative' isn't he:



@ http://www.jimhuibregtse.com/#s=13&mi=1 ... 1&a=0&at=0 "

Another phoNYtographer, similar 9/11 script to "Bob & Bri"

http://www.foundfolios.com/Jim-Huibregtse :-

"Specialties: Liquids, Still Life
"Clients: Sony, Motorola, AT&T, General Electric, 3M, Canon Cameras, Titleist, Gillette, IBM, Guinness, Mitsubishi, Nokia, Visa, Citicorp, Estee Lauder, Shiseido"

[simonshack]

*
NIST FOIA "JIM HUIBREGTSE"clip - video source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2iVhlUoZx0






...and just as a reminder of this planet's Laws of Gravity - here are two men performing a 3-second-long dive...

[whatsgoingon]

x(t) = xo + vo*t + 1/2 g t^2

Assume Vo = 0. Assume one jumper is 0.85 sec ahead of the other for a 3.2 m headstart. To get this, I measured the height of these people and assume they are 1.75 m tall.

Code: Select all

x1   t1   x2   t2   dx
0.0   0.0   3.5   0.9   3.5
0.3   0.3   7.7   1.3   7.4
1.2   0.5   11.0   1.5   9.8
2.8   0.8   15.0   1.8   12.3
4.9   1.0   19.6   2.0   14.7
7.7   1.3   24.8   2.3   17.2
11.0   1.5   30.6   2.5   19.6
15.0   1.8   37.1   2.8   22.1
19.6   2.0   44.1   3.0   24.5
24.8   2.3   51.8   3.3   27.0
30.6   2.5   60.0   3.5   29.4
37.1   2.8   74.5   3.9   37.5
44.1   3.0   78.4   4.0   34.3
51.8   3.3   88.5   4.3   36.8
60.0   3.5   99.2   4.5   39.2
68.9   3.8   110.6   4.8   41.7
78.4   4.0   122.5   5.0   44.1
88.5   4.3   135.1   5.3   46.6
99.2   4.5   148.2   5.5   49.0
110.6   4.8   162.0   5.8   51.5
122.5   5.0   176.4   6.0   53.9

I simulated that these jumpers were off in their jumps by 0.85 seconds. In the last column there you can see that the delta_x between the jumpers can increase.

So they should be separated by ~34 meters and yet they are separated by only 13.5 meters. Gravity acceleration in these videos is not earth-like.

However, if you assume they jumped simultaneously from two different floors. I estimate the floor to floor distance as 3.8 m, which is possible, then Simon, you are correct these jumpers are impossible.

My final thought is that not all the jumpers are separating in time. So how is this video possible? The best explanation of screwy physics is fraud. The physics of jumping are indeed not real world in these videos.

[whatsgoingon]

Simon,
One more oddity for that video. At the 7:10 - 7:11 mark notice that these pair of simultaneous jumpers are actually getting closer together in time, which I have a lot of trouble believing.

[simonshack]

Simon,
One more oddity for that video. At the 7:10 - 7:11 mark notice that these pair of simultaneous jumpers are actually getting closer together in time, which I have a lot of trouble believing.

"CYBORG JIM" strikes again

Whatsgoingon,

There's indeed a lot that defies belief in this "Jim Huibregtse" material.

However, those two seen at the 7:10 mark are not meant to be the same as the previous jumpers discussed earlier. This is a GIF loop (between 7:08 and 7:15) which, as you can see, starts with a crossfade, then a quick & steady zoom-in, then two formidably steady pan shots of successive jumpers. Amazing, isn't it? The guy must have laser-vision - and a rock-steady, GPS-guided wrist!



See, there are heaps of issues with these 'Jim Huibregtse' videos I have lots of trouble with, not least that 'Jim' supposedly used a Sony DCR-PC1 to capture this imagery... For any normal human being to produce the sort of shots seen in the above GIF with that matchbox camera - well, it truly beggars belief, or as the saying goes: 'forget it!' I'll henceforth refer to 'Jim Huibregtse' as "Cyborg Jim".

The DCR-PC1 is a MiniDV camcorder with a MSRP of $1999. The camcorder has a 10x optical zoom and a 120x digital zoom. The camcorder has the same matchbox shape of the first digital camcorders. It is a thin but tall camcorder that has a small shape. The camcorders that are in matchbox form are easy to carry but hard to control. When a camcorder is hard to control, it often creates shaky videos.
http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/so ... review.htm

So yeah - forget it: the steadiness of Cyborg Jim's jumper shots are not possible in the real world !

[simonshack]

*

Some time ago, I downloaded the entire 84,7GB batch of so-called "NIST CUMULUS video files" - which were downloadable as a 'package' back in 2010, allegedly due to a FOIA act filed by ABC NEWS...

I have been revisiting those files, in particular the 38 short clips credited to "Jim Huibregtse". It has been a quite rewarding effort - as I feel some proprietary bugs of the 9/11 animation 'videogame' software have emerged more clearly.

What we have here are two successive frames I have extracted from "Jim's footage". It is meant to depict one of the many jumpers he captures as they tumble down the WTC. Now, in Jim's "camera view", there is (what looks like) a white balcony railing. These two frames depict the instant the jumper passes behind the lower railing... (note: the jumper correctly disappears from view as he passes behind the upper railing - a few frames earlier in the clip!.):


Frames extracted from NIST CUMULUS file "Jim Huibregtse clip_19B"






So could this phenomena be due to some interlacing issue? That is highly doubtful - as it seems to affect only certain areas in the frame :




I later bumped into this other, most interesting glitch - also to be found in "Jim Huibregtse's" (high-quality) imagery:


Note: this brief glitch occurs BOTH in my original high-res NIST CUMULUS file - and in this Youtube-uploaded version (at 0:25):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2iVhlUoZx0

If you ask me: "Have I ever seen such a video glitch in any NON-9/11 imagery? No. So just what causes such glitches? Is this the 3D virtual model of the WTC (note also antenna) playing up? I welcome any (plausible!) alternative explanations from our video students/experts on board.

[simonshack]

*

A question for Youtube user "TheMKMonarch" - who has uploaded the NIST FOIA "Jim Huibregtse" files on YT:

Dear TheMKMonarch,

Why have you faded out the final frames of "Jim Huibregtse clip_19B" - which occur at 8:14 of this video? If you have not done so yourself, before uploading on Youtube your NIST CUMULUS FILES, then who?


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2iVhlUoZx0

Thanks for a kind reply. Please view the above post of mine to understand why I am asking you this question.
You can contact me at my through my Youtube channel ("user.simonshack") or via e-mail: simonshack@libero.it

[The_Thinker]

Upon examining this video, there also appears to be a smaller glitch that occurs at 0.20secs of the 1A clip, it is very quick and just affects a small section of the tower below the impact zone. But I can't seem to pause Youtube at the correct frame in order to take a screengrab of it.

As for the glitch at 0.25secs, I'd like to know for sure exactly what format the video was actually shot on. It looks 'kind of' like how some digital video formats corrupt (in straight bars and cubes), but when this kind of video corruption happens it does tend to affect the entire shot and more than one object in the shot. Generally when digital formats become corrupted, I haven't seen too much evidence of a camera selectively choosing objects in the shot; and upon observation, certainly the smoke and all other areas of the shot appear unaffected. It is just the tower that seems to incur the glitch.

Here is an example I managed to find on Youtube of what it looks like when mini-DV corrupts (Just so you can understand what I'm referring to):


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUYw9kKn90Q

Edit: Sorry, I missed that a Sony DCR-PC1 was mentioned (is this confirmed by the source?). My my, he HAS got a steady hand hasn't he?! In all my years of film making, I've always strived for 'tripod-like' steadiness in my handheld shots, but never quite got there! Plus a camera that size is unlikely to compensate for camera shake (unlike a larger and more expensive camera) so you would get the full hand wobble on playback! Plus he's using the zoom?!!? Did he have a tripod and steadycam setup with him too?

[DeeJay]

I've just terribly offended and hurt a very good friend who has sent me these links and asked me if all these people were not real, if the towers were really empty. He has heard about "conspiracy theories" before but never from someone he respects.

Jumpers - the last is the worst
1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9QN3Aky ... re=related
2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8NNCQy8 ... re=related
3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqp22Vhq ... re=related
4.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HniGxykR ... re=related
5.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGe4bDn8 ... re=related
6.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzKI9TBR ... re=related (especially this one…)

[simonshack]

I've just terribly offended and hurt a very good friend who has sent me these links and asked me if all these people were not real, if the towers were really empty. He has heard about "conspiracy theories" before but never from someone he respects.

May I suggest you tell your friend to read through the 24 pages of this thread? Send him this link: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=501

Hopefully your friend will at least respect his own judgment - and personal cognitive faculties.

(Practically all of the videos you linked to, dear DeeJay, have been thoroughly analyzed here, one by one. The inescapable conclusion is that they are all digital fabrications. Whether this statement of mine is correct or not is up for anyone to verify.)

[brianv]

I've just terribly offended and hurt a very good friend who has sent me these links and asked me if all these people were not real, if the towers were really empty. He has heard about "conspiracy theories" before but never from someone he respects.

That's what happens when people are [mis]guided by their emotions and not logic and reason. If you leave all that emotional garbage aside it all becomes crystal clear! And spare us the "boo-hoo the victims" and the "conspiracy" shite.