Fake CNN video on 9-11

[Logic 7]

Exactly Logic. Why would CNN fake a news clip? Please tell. Is Wolf Blitzer dating Osama Bin Laden? I can't wait to hear.

I really don't know, from my point of view (witches-conspiracy theorist) it is because there was no plane, they had to hide the real fact, or maybe not, if it is just to get more viewers , then does it mean that everything they show is pure fiction-montage?

Can you really imagine people doing that kind of crap on a tragic day like 9-11? where is the end of this?
why don't we see a plane from that camera shot?

 

[Just the Facts]

why don't we see a plane from that camera shot?

I'm no expert, but my first guess would be camera resolution, combined with the fact that the camera is zooming and moving, not being held steady. Low resolution, poor image sensor, cheap ccd, high signal to noise ratio, low quality lens, all or any of those combined with camera movement in a zoom position, and you have no airplane.

Or, somebody at loose change photoshopped it out.

If that was the only existing video evidence, then there may be some value to pursuing the question. But with the preponderance of evidence that a plane actually hit the tower, who cares why there is no plane in one video. There is a plane on so many other videos, and in the accounts of eye witnesses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjbhLuf-PSg&mode=related&search=

 

[Zzarchov]

Find me photo, where it proves CNN video shot is real, i brought you 2 different footage, where it proves it isnt, or get real for once.

Those two clips don't prove anything, you have to first prove THEY are real.

That is how proof works, when you prove one thing, you automatically disprove opposing things. So you still have to prove those two clips are real now don't you?

And you'll have to do it with the same restrictions you've used to ignore others proving the CNN clip is real.

 

[Logic 7]

Those two clips don't prove anything, you have to first prove THEY are real.

That is how proof works, when you prove one thing, you automatically disprove opposing things. So you still have to prove those two clips are real now don't you?

And you'll have to do it with the same restrictions you've used to ignore others proving the CNN clip is real.

The problem with everything you said is just the fact that only special fake cnn video doesnt show the buildings, show me a photo-video that will prove your point, here is another shot that proves cnn video shot was fake.

Get real.

 

[Zzarchov]

Im afraid not. You haven't proven that shot was real Logic 7.


I could easily point out that clip is fake because the CNN shot disproves it. If you want to disprove CNN with a clip, you have to not only show a clip, but prove that clip isnt' fake, and the CNN one is.

All you are at most "proving" is that one of the two is fake. You still have to prove the fake one is CNN.

 

[Logic 7]

Im afraid not. You haven't proven that shot was real Logic 7.


I could easily point out that clip is fake because the CNN shot disproves it. If you want to disprove CNN with a clip, you have to not only show a clip, but prove that clip isnt' fake, and the CNN one is.

All you are at most "proving" is that one of the two is fake. You still have to prove the fake one is CNN.

Not 2, but 3 now, go back and watch the link i posted, now find me another footage other than this one from cnn, that will prove your point, otherwise, keep up the good work of non-sense.

 

[Pangloss]

K & Z:

I just read this whole thread again, including watching the clips, and I can't believe you're still trying to get Logic and his/her cohorts to see reason. You've made your points, the conspiracy nuts haven't had the courage or honesty to address them, and still you try.

The zealot will never return honest debate and generous readings with honest debate and generous readings.

Pangloss

 

[Zzarchov]

Not 2, but 3 now, go back and watch the link i posted, now find me another footage other than this one from cnn, that will prove your point, otherwise, keep up the good work of non-sense.

Well Pangloss is right, but,

Logic has just admited that if more people agree with something, it is right. He said because he has more shots saying one thing, therefore it is correct.

Therefore, because more people believe the official story, it is correct.

(in reality, no matter how many clips you put up, you still need to prove each and every one is correct, posting another clip that says the same thing merely means more than one person could be wrong)

 

[Just the Facts]

(in reality, no matter how many clips you put up, you still need to prove each and every one is correct, posting another clip that says the same thing merely means more than one person could be wrong)

The way I see it, there are two points of curiosity here. The issue where the two clips shot from different angles are superimposed on each other showing the plane approaching from a different origin, I'm trusting is a joke. If anyone seriously takes that as evidence of tampering, CT tinhat or otherwise, would be just too funny. I think I would experience what Eric Cartman experienced when he blew his funny fuse...nothing would be funny anymore. :smile:

Therefore I'm going to just disregard that one. That leaves us with a clip with no plane, and something about missing buildings. Unfortunately, the claims and the clips are somewhat disconnected in terms of making an argument and presenting specific evidence to back up the argument...especially in the case of the missing buildings. I'm not about to render a 3D model of New York City and trace the trajectory of the line of sight of the two camera views to prove someone elses point. If Logic or anyone else would care to present the argument with the video, the stills, and the corresponding map of where the buildings should be, then that would be interesting. I highly suspect if someone took the time to model all the locations, it would turn out there are no missing buildings at all, just different perspectives on the same reality.

That leaves the clip with no plane. Either we're being fooled again by angles, and the plane is actually obscured by the towers, or for some reason the plane is not visible whan one would think it should be. Either way, the clip has no bearing on what actually happened on 9/11, it's just an academic curiosity about angles/perspectives, or digital video technology and how relics may appear or not appear under certain circumstances, or how CT nut will alter a video and claim it as proof of 9/11 tomfoolery.

 

[TenPenny]

Oh, look - here comes the bus.

 

[eh1eh]

Oh, look - here comes the bus.

The short bus per chance?

 

[flipside]

Yeah at this point it really doesn't matter if the video was faked or by who. I'm pretty sure its common knowledge that all the media news giants air constant bogus verbal diareah and dress up anything they want anyway they can to get the message they want out there... fair and balanced with these tycoons is a has been that never was.

All these truth nuts need to stop trying to dig up more evidence.. The truth movement has enough evidence of it being an inside job even the simplest minded backasswards fool can make a judgement..

Where will you be when the truth comes out?

Real Freedom fighters are voting for Ron Paul.

 

[Just the Facts]

Real Freedom fighters are voting for Ron Paul.

:lol: :smile: :happy11: :bounce: :smilebox: :headbang: :laughing8: :tongue8: :snorting: :hello1: :blob8: :cheers: :3some: :toothy7: :laughing6:

That's actually a little bit funny :roll:

Maybe the wave will help his numbers a bit!!!


http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27598

First Choice for 2008 Republican Nomination Based on Republicans/Republican leaners

May 10-13, 2007
%

Rudy Giuliani 29
John McCain 23
Fred Thompson 12
Mitt Romney 8
Newt Gingrich 6
Sam Brownback 2
Tommy Thompson 1
Mike Huckabee 1
Tom Tancredo 1
George Pataki 1
Duncan Hunter *
Jim Gilmore *
Chuck Hagel *
Ron Paul 0 :wav:

Other 2
None 5
All/any 0

No opinion 8

* Less than 0.5%

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The truth movement has enough evidence of it being an inside job even the simplest minded backasswards fool can make a judgement..

Uh huh. This supposedly simple-minded backasswards fool fearlessly predicts that you're entirely wrong and that it was not an inside job. And furthermore, I predict that the comment in a previous post of yours, "This summer the 9/11 truth movement will begin to get its justice. By mid June this will be bigger than Britney , Big Macs and American Idol." is also completely wrong.

You conspiracy theorists have no idea how to assess evidence, how to think clearly, or how to make an informed judgment. I put Logic 7 on my ignore list for his multiple follies and bad manners. You at least have better manners, but you're no smarter. Ask disturbing questions, speculate about the worst possible answers, ignore the real evidence, and fabricate your indictment. Once you've made up your mind it's easy to find confirmation for any belief if you don't know how to think clearly. And you obviously don't.

 

[eh1eh]

I agree Dex. Analizing something in a objective manner is a skill which one must develop. I have found when in an emotionaly charged situation I will step back and try to list the facts and figures etc. Maybe I will even sleep on it to clear my mind and allow the emotion fade. Of course this takes time. The more convoluted the facts have become by romour and inuendo, the longer it takes for the reality to soak in,so maybe check back on this thread in say, a year.

 

[Logic 7]

K & Z:

I just read this whole thread again, including watching the clips, and I can't believe you're still trying to get Logic and his/her cohorts to see reason. You've made your points, the conspiracy nuts haven't had the courage or honesty to address them, and still you try.

The zealot will never return honest debate and generous readings with honest debate and generous readings.

Pangloss

You have big words, and you are not even trying to prove that my point is wrong, you know ,just nice try !!

 

[Zzarchov]

You still haven't proven your clips aren't fake

 

[Logic 7]

Well Pangloss is right, but,

Logic has just admited that if more people agree with something, it is right. He said because he has more shots saying one thing, therefore it is correct.

Therefore, because more people believe the official story, it is correct.

(in reality, no matter how many clips you put up, you still need to prove each and every one is correct, posting another clip that says the same thing merely means more than one person could be wrong)

I have never said if more people agree with something, it is right, show me where, can you?

Exactly this is exactly what i thought, just big words, withouth bringing support to your claim, this is why you agree with pangloss you know , you havent bring no photo, no video whatsover, to prove your point, either because you are too lazy, or you realize that the cnn video was completly fake, too bad for you i guess .

 

[Pangloss]

You have big words, and you are not even trying to prove that my point is wrong, you know ,just nice try !!

Logic, you twit:

My post is not about your argument. Goldfish could read my post and understand that. My point, less-than-goldfish, is that you are a dishonest debater, and you probably don't even realize it. Your deception is all the worse for being self-deception.

I know this might be a lot to ask, but perhaps you could learn the rules of debate, of framing a logical argument, before you make even more of a fool of yourself.

Pangloss

 

[Logic 7]

Logic, you twit:

My post is not about your argument. Goldfish could read my post and understand that. My point, less-than-goldfish, is that you are a dishonest debater, and you probably don't even realize it. Your deception is all the worse for being self-deception.

I know this might be a lot to ask, but perhaps you could learn the rules of debate, of framing a logical argument, before you make even more of a fool of yourself.

Pangloss

Listen, at first you come, only to marginalize my argument withouth even bringing a single fact, video, photo, to prove me wrong, and then you wrote a whole paragraph, on me, to convince yourself and others that i am not a good debater, what is the point of that?

Is the thread about me ? is it written in the title, "Is Logic a good debator or not?"

Start one if you like.