"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE!"

Unread post by **simonshack** » Thu Aug 26, 2010 8:34 pm

**********Win a free ride on the next NASA mission to planet Mars**********

"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !"

THE FLY-BY CHOPPERS

All along the 9/11 TV broadcasts we do see quite a few choppers fly over and straight past the towers at sustained speed.
Actually, we see dozens of them! None seem to be particularly interested in the burning WTC and all just zap by and disappear into the distance.
You might rightly ask yourself : " what on Earth are they up to? Do they have some more urgent matters to tend to?"
Here are but two examples of the speedy, busy choppers:

Now, the only slow-moving helicopter(s) we see in the TV morning broadcasts are these two:

As you can see, both (or is it the same?) are reversing. They are seen practically in the same spot over Manhattan - both appearing within an 11 minutes timeframe. Now, helicopters can of course travel in reverse - no question about it. The question is why? It is, after all, a tricky maneuver: I have talked with two chopper pilots/instructors and asked if it's something you would do over a city. Both responded along these lines: "not likely - unnecessary risk - don't see any reason to do such a thing ". Ok. That's just how they answered (I mentioned nothing about 9/11 to them ). So with that out of the way, let's consider aspects of probability: what are the odds for those 2 choppers appearing at bottom left of both shots, both reversing over pretty much the same area of Manhattan?

So today's challenge (N°24) will be posited in this manner:

In a scale of 1/1,00,000, what is your score for this double- occurence being :
1. A perfectly plausible one
2. A terribly unlikely one

And if you don't like the way I have formulated today's challenge - make sure you first tackle the previous 23 episodes of DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !

CHOPPED OUT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ3SQbK2Zfg

Unread post by **idschmyd** » Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:22 pm

Chopper pilot performed exceptional manoeuvre under exceptional circumstances. It is well documented that physics changed on that day - indeed there were at least two suns in New york, as evidenced in the pictures from Aman Zafar and in the hi res photograph posted by Fred earlier in this thread (page 3) - and my own uncle regularly flies his chopper backwards over the city for several minutes before breakfast. Nothing surprising here. Move along.

Unread post by **simonshack** » Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:45 pm

idschmyd 4 Aug 26 2010, 09:22 PM wrote: Chopper pilot performed exceptional manoeuvre under exceptional circumstances. It is well documented that physics changed on that day - indeed there were at least two suns in New york, as evidenced in the pictures from Aman Zafar and in the hi res photograph posted by Fred earlier in this thread (page 3) - and my own uncle regularly flies his chopper backwards over the city for several minutes before breakfast. Nothing surprising here. Move along.

Idschmyd's uncle scores 100,000 points towards NASA' ongoing selection of the first astronaut to land a reversing spaceship on planet Mars - while having coffee and bagels.

Unread post by **simonshack** » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:24 pm

**********Win a free ride on the next NASA mission to planet Mars**********

"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !"

And today's clue for allcomers to debunk is... :

"THE JUMPERS"

The most gut-wrenching stories of 9/11 were undoubtedly the reports of "people jumping to their death" from the very tall WTC buildings. According to "a joint investigation by ABC and USA TODAY", as many as 200 people jumped from all sides of the towers, most of them from Tower1... I ask you to read this USA TODAY article, please - oh please - take the time to read it all: http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/200 ... mper_x.htm

Done? So, I am sure that you took note of - among the outrageously absurd drivel - the remarkable comments of Ellen Borakove, the spokeswoman for the NY Chief Medical Examiner CHARLES HIRSCH:

"She says the medical examiner's office couldn't determine who jumped because the injuries were similar to those suffered by the people killed in the collapse of the towers." Hmm. I am quite tempted to comment on that zany statement - but will let you process it without unduly invading your brain cells. Remember that her boss, Charles Hirsch, stated in December 2001 that the reason so few people had been identified ("less than 500") was probably because "most bodies vaporized".

So anyway: 200 people jumped from the WTC ? And not one was captured on LIVE TV by the TV chopper cameras (constantly aimed at the towers the entire morning) even though they came as close as this ?

Allright. So the professional TV cameramen were just "out of luck" and missed the 'action'. Yet, an amateur cameraman on the street apparently managed to capture 3 jumpers within minutes, ALL visible from his streetview and nicely panned from top to bottom, as if all 3 were stuck in the middle of his lens:

Wow. And what about this other photographer who managed to catch 3 jumpers in one shot?
Where was his vantage point, ANYWAY??? Was there a building as tall as the WTC alongside it?

And this one, who caught 2 jumpers HOLDING HANDS ?

Of course, it is TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE to produce realistic-looking computer imagery of people jumping to their death ...

A scene from the Hollywood movie "SKYSCRAPER" (1996)

So today's challenge (N°25) is :

What evidence can you submit to prove that anyone jumped from the towers?

http://septemberclues.org/jumpers.htm

Unread post by **simonshack** » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:55 am

*

Allright folks, treading into September 2010...

Over 6.000 views so far. Yet no one is even close to clinching the NASA ticket to Mars. It's still all up for grabs!

Anyways - it's good to see that the debunkers have now ran for cover into their bunkers.
None of the moles dare nudge September Clues with a bargepole. That is - all in all - excellent news.

Unread post by **simonshack** » Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:31 pm

**********Win a free ride on the next NASA mission to planet Mars**********

"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !"

And today's clue for allcomers to debunk is... :

THE VICSIMS (part1)

The entire 9/11 victim list is a bogus digital database. They are simulated victims - aka "vicsims". The vast majority of the "3000" casualties are totally fictitious identities - that much is now clear. Whether a few of them were real people who just chose to apply to a "victim-protection program" and reappear under a new identity is an ongoing investigation. The least likely scenario is that a number of people were killed for real - since a botched hit-job could have compromised the entire 9/11 hoax scheme. However, this remains a remote possibility.

For now, let's have a look at the portraits we may find in the 9/11 memorials.
As you may imagine, if you had been asked to produce 3000 faces with digital face-morphing softwares, a certain amount of stress/fatigue would set in. In fact, when scouring the 9/11 memorials, we may bump into what may well be such moments - caused by human fallibility. Here we are at letter "P". Four sequential vicsims with a surname initial "P" are shown below:

POCHER-POLATSCH-PLOGER-POLHEMUS

As should be evident to any honest observer, these 2 pairs of faces are astonishingly similar (one with eye-glasses - one without).
Considering that they are alphabetically sequential, the question is one which appeals to the unique processing mechanisms of your own brain.
This means that - if you are to dismiss what you see as "mere coincidence" - the burden to sell your coincidence-theory to other brains is on you.

So today's challenge (N°26) is :

What are the statistical probabilities of two pairs of alphabetically sequential "9/11 victims" looking like
twin brothers photographed at similar angles, postures and expressions?

Unread post by **J?N$** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:43 am

OMG you really got it!

The evidence you present is mindblowing!

I dont know if to laugh or cry

FOR NOW IM ANGRY! WHAT CAN WE DO? This evidence should send a shockwave around the world...

Unread post by **simonshack** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:22 pm

**********Win a free ride on the next NASA mission to planet Mars**********

"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !"

And today's clue for allcomers to debunk is... :

THE VICSIMS (part2)

We will now look at another sequential section of "9/11 victims" listed in the memorials under letter "P".
The previous sequence (challenge N?25 ) featured 4 white individuals while this time we have 4 black individuals.

POWELL-POWELL-POWELL-PORTILLO

Once again, we have 2 stunningly similar pairs of faces - and once again, one with eye-glasses - and one without. Of course, they are all meant to be totally unrelated persons who died on 9/11. We now have 8 "victims" at letter "P" - for a total of 4 pairs of extremely similar-looking people / half of them with spectacles and half without.

So today's challenge (N?°27) only raises the bar set at challenge N°26 :

What are the statistical probabilities of four pairs of alphabetically sequential "9/11 victims" looking like
twin brothers - 4 with glasses and 4 without?

Unread post by **J?N$** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 1:27 pm

"Why is there absolutely NO Manhattan backdrop to be seen on FOX5?

I witnessed the incoming light reflections from Manhattan. First on a rainy, then on a sunny day. Then I witnessed the background imagery collapse and disappear, mostly due to structural failure, because the sunshine was just too intense. "

LOL ;)

Unread post by **nonhocapito** » Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:10 pm

simonshack 4 Sep 6 2010, 01:22 PM wrote: What are the statistical probabilities of four pairs of alphabetically sequential "9/11 victims" looking like
twin brothers - 4 with glasses and 4 without?

I don't know about statistics... but the weird lightning on the chin of the first vicsim here reminded me of the absurd shadow I saw on the chin of vicsim William Fallon from heroic Cantor Fitzgerald offices

http://www.voicesofseptember11.org/dev/ ... =278240818

half chin in the dark, the rest of the face flooded by light. how shadows work? whatever. amazing

Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:49 pm

simonshack 4 Sep 6 2010, 01:22 PM wrote:

We will now look at another sequential section of "9/11 victims" listed in the memorials under letter "P".
The previous sequence (challenge N°26 ) featured 4 white individuals while this time we have 4 black individuals.

POWELL-POWELL-POWELL-PORTILLO

Once again, we have 2 stunningly similar pairs of faces - and once again, one with eye-glasses - and one without. Of course, they are all meant to be totally unrelated persons who died on 9/11. We now have 8 "victims" at letter "P" - for a total of 4 pairs of extremely similar-looking people / half of them with spectacles and half without.

So today's challenge (N°27) only raises the bar set at challenge N°26 :

What are the statistical probabilities of four pairs of alphabetically sequential "9/11 victims" looking like
twin brothers - 4 with glasses and 4 without?

I can't debunk it.

1 chance in "lots and lots"...

Re: Anthony Portillo of the 4 statistically unlikely Black Ps...

?

I've been enjoying the discussion on celebrity faces used for vicsims.
How their names and biographical details can be used as inputs too.

This does seem a bit too obvious, maybe.

Both Portillos:

1. have weirdly exaggerated lips and teeth and nose.
2. born in 1953.

Politician Michael Portillo's middle name is Denzil.

Vicsim Anthony Portillo worked for Washington Group International

Unread post by **simonshack** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:35 pm

**********Win a free ride on the next NASA mission to planet Mars**********

"DEBUNK A SEPTEMBER CLUE !"

THE "CLIFTON CLOUD" CLIP

"Clifton Cloud" is a guy who supposedly was on a rooftop and captured with his videocamera "FLIGHT 175" crashing into WTC2.
He gets interviewed on TV about it. This is the clip that he's credited with:

Can you see that the entire scenery is digital? That all the buildings are as "real" as Playstation imagery?

Anyways, here's the short NBC interview of Clifton Cloud (with Matt Lauer and KatieCouric)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X09R95S3Jck

So today's challenge (N*28) is the following:

Tell us why you would have zoomed in at the exact moment of the plane's appearance (a "550mph projectile")
- which would have been A VERY SMALL DOT in your lens?

Unread post by **nonhocapito** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:50 pm

simonshack @ Sep 15 2010, 12:35 AM wrote: "Clifton Cloud" is a guy who supposedly was on a rooftop and captured with his video camera "FLIGHT 175" crashing into WTC2. He gets interviewed on TV about it.

what a nice blob of pixels appearing from nothing... but he spotted it coming all right.
Google says "Clifton Cloud" works for an audio/video editing company, "Scharff Weisberg": a purely incidental circumstance.

Unread post by **nonhocapito** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:22 am

one of the most absurd zooming in videos i've seen is this Fred Hadley "Queensdude" shot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lOI3_NVPHQ

the very long slow zooming in starts at 0:11 and ends at 0:33, just few seconds before the hit. I can't think of anything more theatrical than this. It is not even a lucky shot, it is a presentation

Unread post by **Dcopymope** » Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:57 am

nonhocapito @ Sep 15 2010, 01:22 AM wrote: one of the most absurd zooming in videos i've seen is this Fred Hadley "Queensdude" shot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lOI3_NVPHQ

the very long slow zooming in starts at 0:11 and ends at 0:33, just few seconds before the hit. I can't think of anything more theatrical than this. It is not even a lucky shot, it is a presentation

Assuming this is real footage, how the hell does he know for sure that was a 'jet' plane? You could hardly see the damn thing from that distance. He should have just said "fast moving object hits south tower" to keep his credibility as a supposed "eye witness".