9/11 SIMCITY

It has taken less than 10 years to pry open the can of worms enshrouding the pathetic 9/11 scam. The central role of the major newsmedia corporations to pull off this sordid "terror" simulation has now been comprehensively exposed. Before joining this forum, please get familiar with the research at: http://www.septemberclues.info
Post Reply
SmokingGunII
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by SmokingGunII » Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:47 pm

Extremophile - You confirm what I would expect. We all have access to 3d modelling tools so it would be absurd that they got any angles wrong, whether the footage was real and manipulated or generated solely through popular 3d programs. However, your view does confirm the doubts I had with regards the pole. I haven't the time or the incliniation to re-create the whole of Manhattan and your expanded view of my basic 3d gives context to heights, with the population of nearby buildings.

To summarise; the pole is an impossibility, unless 40m high road signs are commonplace in New York.

PS. Next time you are posting on LR, can you ask Phil to illustrate an example of when a building can reflect shadows back towards the sun? ;)

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:25 am

*

Since all those NIST videos were released in 2010, many folks have been wondering how to keep detecting the fakery
(now that the videos seem sharper than they ever were...) Here are a couple of tips:

Image
Now, if you think you can see that 45°edge, think again. Why should it be so hard to make out?

Below: Can you see the WTC7 gradually rising (above the foreground building) as the camera zooms out?
Do you really, really believe that this is at all possible in the real world? Try it out !
Image

SmokingGunII
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by SmokingGunII » Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:23 pm

simonshack wrote:Below: Can you see the WTC7 gradually rising (above the foreground building) as the camera zooms out?
Do you really, really believe that this is at all possible in the real world? Try it out !
Image

Hahahaha - great eyes, Simon! Unless of course, he is running backwards upstairs very quickly! :lol:

brianv
Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by brianv » Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:34 pm

Amazing how there is always a convenient fig-leaf! Always a large hill for that helicopter to crash behind - just like the movies!

Image

Image

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Sat Apr 30, 2011 4:39 pm

brianv wrote:Amazing how there is always a convenient fig-leaf! Always a large hill for that helicopter to crash behind - just like the movies!
'A fig leaf' you say?
How about a big, bad bush ? :P

Image

And yes, that is indeed supposed to be WTC2 collapsing in the background. See - that's why photographers abhor bushes !
From the Free Dictionary:
bush n.
1. A low shrub with many branches.
2. A thick growth of shrubs; a thicket.
3.
a. Land covered with dense vegetation or undergrowth.
b. Land remote from settlement: the Australian bush.
4.
a. A shaggy mass, as of hair.
b. Vulgar Slang A growth of pubic hair.

brianv
Member
Posts: 3958
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by brianv » Sat Apr 30, 2011 6:27 pm

Zapruder: Being the only person here with a camera, I think I'd better stand behind that large street sign! That's the ticket!

And just looking at that "Zapruder" shot, it caught my eye that, the actual film on the wall/screen is so behind that studio-prop street-sign! Is it a back projection? Whatever, it ain't kosher!

Moving along quickly.....

reel.deal
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:42 am
Contact:

Re: JFK - SIMCITY

Unread post by reel.deal » Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:58 pm

.
Last edited by reel.deal on Mon Oct 01, 2012 5:34 am, edited 4 times in total.

Brutal Metal
Member
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:58 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by Brutal Metal » Sun May 01, 2011 4:50 am

The Zapruder Film is an Edited piece of Fakery, that is 100% FACT!
Now back to the "Sim City"~

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Mon May 02, 2011 1:01 am

Brutal Metal wrote: Now back to the "Sim City"~
Back to Sim City then...

Here is a series of frames I collected from this CNN video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul--oYht2RE
Between 1:43 and 1:45 of that video, a short 2-second sequence of flickering frames features these 'phenomena':
1:
Image
2:
Image
3:
Image
4:
Image
5:
Image "Ouch!"
6:
Image
7:
Image
8:
Image
9:
Image
10:
Image
11:
Image

*****************************************************************************************************************************************************

For more insights into this sort of 'glitches', please go to http://www.septemberclues.info/simulated_sceneries.htm
Image

Brutal Metal
Member
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:58 am
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by Brutal Metal » Mon May 02, 2011 4:36 am

So this type of glitch is NEVER possible with a correctly functioning video camera?

Brutal Metal
Member
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:58 am
Contact:

Re: JFK - SIMCITY

Unread post by Brutal Metal » Mon May 02, 2011 4:46 am

reel.deal wrote:JFK FRAMED
The Connellys are both thrown to the footwells by the sudden 'emergency stop'.
The motorbike cop catches up Kennedys' limo, caught out by the sudden dead-halt.
The non-insider spook catches & jumps on the limo, not possible unless the car stopped.
The 1-2 seconds dead-halt - for 'the hit' - has been completely re-animated, motion applied.
The background-lapse occurs behind the grey freeway sign, the cut-out motorcade layer gets cropped
1-2 seconds (in 'real-time'...) ahead of background/bystanders layer... then spliced back into place at its
le.

The film is split into different 'stage' layers, freeway sign/lampost foreground layer,
motorcade on seperate CUT-OUT layer, and background by-standers/grass layer enlarged.
Mary Moorman stepped into the road to photograph 'the hit', yet not in Zapruder she doesnt !!!

[;)
Nice observations rd, the limo came to a complete stop (Tons of witnesses confirm this).
Also Moormans first few pictures in her film roll show different colored shoes than seen in Zapruder, The Greer Headsnap,adding and missing people when compared to other video shot that day, plus hundreds of other nuggets which equal forgery!
If you start a thread in another section hit me up I know a fair amount about this topic! CJ

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Mon May 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Brutal Metal wrote:So this type of glitch is NEVER possible with a correctly functioning video camera?
Well, let me put it this way. As you may know, I tend to avoid technical talk and focus on 'boring' common sense and layman logic.

1: I have never seen such glitches anywhere else - that is, no videos I have ever worked with, have featured such glitches.
2: Such glitches are to be found all over the 9/11 imagery - and they affect only certain SECTIONS of the video frames
3: Those glitches are not limited to images aired on TV - they are also seen on supposed 'amateur' imagery:

Here are a couple extracted from the "Evan Fairbanks" video material:
Image
Image
Image

As you can see. the glitches seem to affect only certain parts of the image - and cannot be ascribed to any artifacts caused by any known problems related to tape tracking/alignment issues. They seem to be intimately associated with 9/11 imagery only. I hope this answers your question adequately.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Wed May 04, 2011 3:01 pm

*
Hi all,

You may recall this :

Image

Now, this little streetview of Manhattan (directly below the Twin Towers) seems to have been quite a popular vantage point...
Or - more likely - it was only yet another '3D' imagery environment, once again dreadfully managed by the 9/11 digital animation team.
But you be the judge. Sit down with family and friends - and find the errors. Have fun!

Image

Gary-Welz
Banned
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:21 am

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by Gary-Welz » Wed May 04, 2011 4:58 pm

If I'm correct the palm trees in the left are missing on picture 2. You can see the trees in the left on picture 1.

*EDIT

Never mind I was too hastily, it's probably caused by the perspective. :rolleyes:

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7095
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: 9/11 SIMCITY

Unread post by simonshack » Wed May 04, 2011 6:24 pm

Gary-Welz wrote:If I'm correct the palm trees in the left are missing on picture 2. You can see the trees in the left on picture 1.

*EDIT

Never mind I was too hastily, it's probably caused by the perspective. :rolleyes:
No - that was one valid observation, Gary (but palm trees they are not!)

The perspectives are, quite simply, unrealistic. The trees may move from one view to another, of course, if the vantage point moves. But if the vantage point moves, the buildings behind must change perspective ACCORDINGLY. Have another look ! :)

- Then, tell me about building "z" (pictures 4 and 5). Can you see it in the first 3 pictures?
- Then, compare pictures 4 and 5 - and let me know what you see.

**************************************************************************************************************************************************

Now, please note: the awfully low-resolution of these frames DO NOT HELP us to analyze these pictures. I wish to point this out - so that people wondering "why they did the 9/11 fakery so badly and blurred" might be provided with an answer to this question. And please ignore the recently published video renderings (2010) supposedly released by NIST - due to a FOIA act ... :rolleyes: What matters is THIS video material aired on TV ever since 2001!

Post Reply