International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   9/11 Conspiracy Theories (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=64)
-   -   9/11: How they Faked the Videos (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341275)

beachnut 24th January 2020 08:54 PM

yes, you failed to prove any video was fake
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12965979)
Actually it has been answered a number of times in the last 1600 posts.

And it is in the OP.

and failed

A study proves a 767 can break the shell.
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1...3A10%281066%29
You can't refute it, you don't do engineering.

Physic 9/11 does not understand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo
A good analogy, but you don't get it

The video that is real
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDEczx-8xZI
And you can't say otherwise with evidence

The video that is real bad, your analysis - tripod? lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...youtu.be<br />

You failed, the thread failed when you posted your analysis'

The jet fuel fireball debunks your lies and fantasy

yankee451 24th January 2020 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12965990)
and failed

A study proves a 767 can break the shell.
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1...3A10%281066%29
You can't refute it, you don't do engineering.

Physic 9/11 does not understand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo
A good analogy, but you don't get it

The video that is real
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDEczx-8xZI
And you can't say otherwise with evidence

The video that is real bad, your analysis - tripod? lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...youtu.be<br />

You failed, the thread failed when you posted your analysis

The lightly damaged cladding and the gouged steel columns, bent sharply in a completely different direction than the television wing was traveling are proof ALL the videos of the jet impacts are fake. All the analogies in the world, all your foam-flecked tirades, all your red herrings, ad hominems, and bandwagons don't change anything.

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12965995)
The lightly damaged cladding and the gouged steel columns, bent sharply in a completely different direction than the television wing was traveling are proof ALL the videos of the jet impacts are fake. All the analogies in the world, all your foam-flecked tirades, all your red herrings, ad hominems, and bandwagons don't change anything.

The missiles wings can't do what you said they could do. With only 17 pounds of TNT kinetic energy, the wings might scratch the cladding, plus the missile wing are too thin to do the damage you claim took place.

And again, you failed to get on topic, at metabunk your work would be in the fantasy section, or deleted because it is bunk.

Is this the best you got?
This is your analysis, it is nonsense. yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be
Anyone think this is valid.
I like the "National Treasure" part, using fiction to support fiction is rich.
It is funny, since you are using a low resolution copy, not any where near an original version, you made up the gray screen crap.
It was cool you actually tried to learn how to fake a video, and made a fake video which failed to prove the video was fake.

The best part of your analysis was National Treasure, fiction meets fiction. You failed at metabunk, because this tripe you post, it is bunk

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12966002)
The missiles wings can't do what you said they could do. With only 17 pounds of TNT kinetic energy, the wings might scratch the cladding, plus the missile wing are too thin to do the damage you claim took place.

And again, you failed to get on topic, at metabunk your work would be in the fantasy section, or deleted because it is bunk.

Is this the best you got?
This is your analysis, it is nonsense. yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be
Anyone think this is valid.
I like the "National Treasure" part, using fiction to support fiction is rich.
It is funny, since you are using a low resolution copy, not any where near an original version, you made up the gray screen crap.
It was cool you actually tried to learn how to fake a video, and made a fake video which failed to prove the video was fake.

The best part of your analysis was National Treasure, fiction meets fiction.

o' the irony

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966003)
o' the irony

Truth, your video bad. It would be deleted at metabunk - how many places have you been banned for spamming these lies and fantasy
This is your analysis, it is nonsense. yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be
Anyone think this is plausible.
"National Treasure" part, good, your analysis Bad.
Why are you stuck with a low resolution video

Failed to prove video was fake, proved you can't do video analysis

The irony is you have no clue why the video can't show what you think you should see. You don't know what resolution of video is, and why slow speed video fails to produce what you want - form video in 2001.

TJM 24th January 2020 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12965989)
The self healing walls

Are the product of fevered little minds who don't understand low-resolution, multi-generational, compressed youtubes.

Itchy Boy 24th January 2020 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12965947)
Name them.



Really. I live near SFO departures and hear planes roaring overhead frequently. So frequently that I can usually tell by the sound of the engines what type of plane it is - CRJ, 7-4, 767/757, Airbus types - Airbus seems quieter than Boeings.

So you're making **** up again. No worries, making **** up is no-planer 101. It's expected of you.

I'm not going to waste my time hunting for witness videos for you to prove a minor point.
You're the one making things up here- hurling accusations of lying. You don't know me. Go ahead and prove that I'm saying things I know to be false.

Come Back when you can make an actual argument.

Crazy Chainsaw 24th January 2020 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12965971)
How's the size noq? Still rtoo big? I'll resize again if needed. Why don't you chastise me for typos too, when it's all you've got?

I didn't get booted from metabunk. They simply deleted the posts where THEY proved my assertion and were unable to refute my evidence. Dishonest of them, wouldn't you say?

You know I can still make out the outline of the wing in that shadow those old photo Resisters were not that great at capturing shaded Images so that looks like a camera effect.

Itchy Boy 24th January 2020 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966007)
Are the product of fevered little minds who don't understand low-resolution, multi-generational, compressed youtubes.

not an argument. The videos are clear enough to see there's no damage upon impact.
Plus you have to bolster your nothingness with a personal insult.
Are you new at this? Haven't you learned yet that throwing insults and ridicule only reveals how weak isd your position?

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966008)
I'm not going to waste my time hunting for witness videos for you to prove a minor point.
You're the one making things up here- hurling accusations of lying. You don't know me. Go ahead and prove that I'm saying things I know to be false.

Come Back when you can make an actual argument.

Projection. Why do you support lies? Your claims are lies, don't be upset, you failed to produce evidence. You can't refute Radar, or prove videos are fake.

You posted a video with such low resolution and oversized it. Not good.

This is why your posts fail at metabunk, you post nonsense. Where is your evidence.

Maybe you can help...

yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be
Do you find anything is right?

Why have you failed to prove the video are fake? Do you know the topic?

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:22 PM

no fake video proof,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966011)
not an argument. The videos are clear enough to see there's no damage upon impact.
Plus you have to bolster your nothingness with a personal insult.
Are you new at this? Haven't you learned yet that throwing insults and ridicule only reveals how weak isd your position?

You don't know your limitations, or the limitations of low resolution, slow frame rate video. Did you try to get some knowledge before you made up lies about 9/11?

You are wrong, because you don't know video and physics.

How may pixels are really available for the impact zone on the video? You have no clue.

How many frames persecon would it take to capture the impact? You have no clue.

The video that is real bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

Do you agree with this analysis? you will not take the time to watch it

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966008)
I'm not going to waste my time ...

And you wasted no time making up lies about 9/11 - you make them up as you go and don't do research, no analysis, no time spent making up fantasy.


The video that is real
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDEczx-8xZI

The video that is real bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

Where is your evidence

TJM 24th January 2020 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966008)
I'm not going to waste my time hunting for witness videos for you to prove a minor point.

So you can't name them then. Shocking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966008)
You're the one making things up here- hurling accusations of lying. You don't know me. Go ahead and prove that I'm saying things I know to be false.

Yes, yes I do know you. You're a big-picture woo and 9/11 is just another facet of the way "they" are coming for "us". Seen your kind dozens of times before and you aren't unique.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966008)
Come Back when you can make an actual argument.

When all you've done is dig your heels in and say "nuh-huh"?

You don't know how to argue.

[/queue up the argument clinic sketch]

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:28 PM

yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

It appears to be a failure to prove videos fake. Next

Itchy Boy 24th January 2020 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw (Post 12966009)
You know I can still make out the outline of the wing in that shadow those old photo Resisters were not that great at capturing shaded Images so that looks like a camera effect.

There are many versions of the video. None show any visible damage until after the plane has...ummm... 'penetrated'. No shattered bits visibly fall to the ground until after the explosion. The steel box columns and 3/4 inch thick spandrels backed by 60 ft of steel and concrete flooring, backed in turn by the massive core columns- hit the plane with the kinetic engergy of 2000+ pounds of TNT. I expect to see a severely damaged aircraft if the video was a depiction of a real event.

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12966014)
You don't know your limitations, or the limitations of low resolution, slow frame rate video. Did you try to get some knowledge before you made up lies about 9/11?

You are wrong, because you don't know video and physics.

How may pixels are really available for the impact zone on the video? You have no clue.

How many frames persecon would it take to capture the impact? You have no clue.

The video that is real bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

Do you agree with this analysis? you will not take the time to watch it

Have you ever used a video camera? Can you get nearly motionless footage for 15 frames without a tripod?

The frames in the video are listed here:
https://911crashtest.org/video-the-9...using-tripods/

Itchy Boy 24th January 2020 09:32 PM

d
Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966020)
So you can't name them then. Shocking.



Yes, yes I do know you. You're a big-picture woo and 9/11 is just another facet of the way "they" are coming for "us". Seen your kind dozens of times before and you aren't unique.



When all you've done is dig your heels in and say "nuh-huh"?

You don't know how to argue.

[/queue up the argument clinic sketch]

Wow, what a powerful comeback- NOT! ETA: You've again proven it's not worth wasting my time hunting videos for you. If I had it at my fingertips, I'd provide it for you. But I moved on from 9/11 years ago. I'm only here for a lark because I got a notice from Yankee451.

Yes, I've been studying the bigger picture. You call it 'woo' because you have no clue. Perhaps you're too young to have seen the massive concentration of power over the past few decades. Power has concentrated immensely in gov't, corporations, media. But those at the top of the power structures have only a desire to make life better for the man in the street. That's why, for example, in the 1950s and 1960s a 'blue collar' worker could support a family, own a house and send his kids to college. Cancer, obesity, autism and chronic diseases were much less prevalent than they are today.
Both parents working can barely make ends meet now and their children get indoctrinated starting at ever younger ages. The school curriculum now includes information about anal sex and gender dysphoria in grade school. Natural foods like tomatos, apples and oranges have had the flavour and nutrients bred out of them.
Do you think that's all happened 'naturally'? There's an agenda at work to destroy the traditional family, to dissolve national sovereignty and more.
The evidence for this is all around you, but you're too scared to face it. That's not woo, that is reality. It's law here in Canada that if your 4 year old boy thinks he wants to be a girl, you can go to prison if you don't play along. That's how insane things have already become. And it's going to get worse.

Do you know about the social credit system in China? Is that the way you'd like to live? apparently the Chinese like it - at least from the interviews I've seen. So you'll learn to like it too as it creeps into our western way of life.

How does all this relate to 9/11, you might ask? For one, 9/11 made the public cheer for the invasion and control of countries that have not attacked us.
it has justified in the public mind, erosion of our freedoms and rights, and increased surveillance and control of our day to day lives. It has increased public anxiety and caused people to look more and more to those in power to 'save us' from all kinds of bogeymen.
How's life going to be as robotics take over more and more jobs? Back in the '60s, they were painting a rosy picture, saying we'd have more leisure time. How are you going to enjoy it with no job and no money? Is the price of goods and services going up or down?


Wake the hell up, people. (End of rant).

TJM 24th January 2020 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966011)
not an argument. The videos are clear enough to see there's no damage upon impact.
Plus you have to bolster your nothingness with a personal insult.
Are you new at this? Haven't you learned yet that throwing insults and ridicule only reveals how weak isd your position?

So you and yankee451 don't understand how multi-generational, compressed, low-resolution youtube videoes work.

And...?

TJM 24th January 2020 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966025)
Wow, what a powerful comeback- NOT!

Nuh-huh!

:rolleyes:

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beachnut (Post 12966021)
yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

It appears to be a failure to prove videos fake. Next

The video is only offered as proof the cameraman was using a tripod or dolly, which would be necessary to be able to capture looped footage of the undamaged tower from the same perspective to use as a mask layer to hide the missile impacts.

What proves all the videos are fake is the lightly damaged cladding and the gouged steel columns, sharply bent in a completely different direction than the television jet wing was traveling.

Axxman300 24th January 2020 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12965928)
That only happens in the movies, huh?

Stupid ones, yes.

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966023)
Have you ever used a video camera? Can you get nearly motionless footage for 15 frames without a tripod?

The frames in the video are listed here:
https://911crashtest.org/video-the-9...using-tripods/

You have no clue you don't have the original.

Yes, and I have tripod, and monopods, don't you?

You start the analysis with tripod nonsense.

and you have no clue 15 frames are half a second, or so.

No clue is the key.

You make up BS on the fly, it takes no effort as you use a copy, not the original and don't care as you spread lies.

This is why your posts at metabunk are deleted or moved to the BS section, you offer no evidence.

I have handheld for more than 15 frames. Why can't you? You failed at video analysis.

yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

You failed to prove the videos are fake, and your analysis was bad.

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966026)
So you and yankee451 don't understand how multi-generational, compressed, low-resolution youtube videoes work.

And...?

The sources of my videos are the NIST Cumulus video collection. The compression happens when they are put on YouTube, but that has nothing to do with the 15 frames that prove the cameraman was using a dolly or tripod. Probably the former, judging by the exaggerated boat-rocking that conveniently stops just before the non existent jet sequence begins.

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966032)
The video is only offered as proof the cameraman was using a tripod or dolly, which would be necessary to be able to capture looped footage of the undamaged tower from the same perspective to use as a mask layer to hide the missile impacts.

What proves all the videos are all fake is the lightly damaged cladding and the gouged steel columns, sharply bent in a completely different direction than the television jet wing was traveling.

No, you failed to prove the video is fake, you can't make up reasons due to your lack of knowledge about impacts.

You don't know how collisions work and make it up, prove it. Prove it.

You can't prove anything, your claim of how things should break and bend is based on your opinion, not physics, not collision, just BS you make up.

I like your video, it is an example of things that are wrong in video analysis.

yankee451 analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

Presenting opinions on how you think collisions should be is not evidence. You offer no evidence, only failed speculation.
This is why your posts at metabunk are rated bunk

Axxman300 24th January 2020 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966022)
There are many versions of the video. None show any visible damage until after the plane has...ummm... 'penetrated'. .

Please explain how there would be damage before impact?

Quote:

No shattered bits visibly fall to the ground until after the explosion.
Weird, almost like debris is not a factor until after impact.

Quote:

The steel box columns and 3/4 inch thick spandrels backed by 60 ft of steel and concrete flooring, backed in turn by the massive core columns- hit the plane with the kinetic engergy of 2000+ pounds of TNT. I expect to see a severely damaged aircraft if the video was a depiction of a real event
You could argue that the steel box construction helped contain most of the impact to inside of the building as they absorbed a lot of that energy on both sides (it's one of the ways the Twin Towers could withstand high winds) and allowed them to remain standing long enough to evacuate most of the people .

TJM 24th January 2020 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966039)
The sources of my videos are the NIST Cumulus video collection. The compression happens when they are put on YouTube, but that has nothing to do with the 15 frames that prove the cameraman was using a dolly or tripod. Probably the former, judging by the exaggerated boat-rocking that conveniently stops just before the non existent jet sequence begins.

Itchy is on about 175, you're on about the Naudet video.

Two different videos, both of you wrong.

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966039)
The sources of my videos are the NIST Cumulus video collection. The compression happens when they are put on YouTube, but that has nothing to do with the 15 frames that prove the cameraman was using a dolly or tripod. Probably the former, judging by the exaggerated boat-rocking that conveniently stops just before the non existent jet sequence begins.

A study you can't figure out because it has physics, science and math.
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1...3A10%281066%29

Physic you can't grasp, which involves mass and velocity, and the resulting Kinetic Energy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo

The video that is real
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDEczx-8xZI

The video that is real bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gpr...ature=youtu.be

You failed, the thread failed when you posted your analysis

Why did you fail to get as good as the better one?

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966047)
Itchy is on about 175, you're on about the Naudet video.

Two different videos, both of you wrong.

Talking about Hezarkhani.

beachnut 24th January 2020 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966050)
Talking about Hezarkhani.

the video you failed to prove fake
https://i.imgflip.com/3n5gzs.jpg
Oh, you are still wrong

https://i.imgflip.com/3n5i10.jpg

Better resolution than your failed video

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966047)
Itchy is on about 175, you're on about the Naudet video.

Two different videos, both of you wrong.

Naudet was discussed earlier. Try to keep up. We haven't even gotten to Courchesne, who was also using a tripod.

TJM 24th January 2020 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966050)
Talking about Hezarkhani.

What about Hezarkhani?

TJM 24th January 2020 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966054)
Try to keep up.

Try to make sense.

yankee451 24th January 2020 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966055)
What about Hezarkhani?

Now that's some kind of short attention span!

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
The sources of my videos are the NIST Cumulus video collection. The compression happens when they are put on YouTube, but that has nothing to do with the 15 frames that prove the cameraman was using a dolly or tripod. Probably the former, judging by the exaggerated boat-rocking that conveniently stops just before the non existent jet sequence begins.
Itchy is on about 175, you're on about the Naudet video.

Two different videos, both of you wrong.
I was talking about Hezarkhani.

yankee451 24th January 2020 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966057)
Try to make sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 View Post
Try to keep up.
Try to make sense.
You thought I was referring to Naudet using a dolly, but I was talking about Hezarkhani using a dolly. Hezarkhani was 175, Jules was 11. Make sense?

Elagabalus 24th January 2020 10:17 PM

In an effort to kick this can, they both are using a tripod. Now what?

TJM 24th January 2020 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966025)
d

Wow, what a powerful comeback- NOT! ETA: You've again proven it's not worth wasting my time hunting videos for you. If I had it at my fingertips, I'd provide it for you. But I moved on from 9/11 years ago. I'm only here for a lark because I got a notice from Yankee451.

Yes, I've been studying the bigger picture. You call it 'woo' because you have no clue. Perhaps you're too young to have seen the massive concentration of power over the past few decades. Power has concentrated immensely in gov't, corporations, media. But those at the top of the power structures have only a desire to make life better for the man in the street. That's why, for example, in the 1950s and 1960s a 'blue collar' worker could support a family, own a house and send his kids to college. Cancer, obesity, autism and chronic diseases were much less prevalent than they are today.
Both parents working can barely make ends meet now and their children get indoctrinated starting at ever younger ages. The school curriculum now includes information about anal sex and gender dysphoria in grade school. Natural foods like tomatos, apples and oranges have had the flavour and nutrients bred out of them.
Do you think that's all happened 'naturally'? There's an agenda at work to destroy the traditional family, to dissolve national sovereignty and more.
The evidence for this is all around you, but you're too scared to face it. That's not woo, that is reality. It's law here in Canada that if your 4 year old boy thinks he wants to be a girl, you can go to prison if you don't play along. That's how insane things have already become. And it's going to get worse.

Do you know about the social credit system in China? Is that the way you'd like to live? apparently the Chinese like it - at least from the interviews I've seen. So you'll learn to like it too as it creeps into our western way of life.

How does all this relate to 9/11, you might ask? For one, 9/11 made the public cheer for the invasion and control of countries that have not attacked us.
it has justified in the public mind, erosion of our freedoms and rights, and increased surveillance and control of our day to day lives. It has increased public anxiety and caused people to look more and more to those in power to 'save us' from all kinds of bogeymen.
How's life going to be as robotics take over more and more jobs? Back in the '60s, they were painting a rosy picture, saying we'd have more leisure time. How are you going to enjoy it with no job and no money? Is the price of goods and services going up or down?


Wake the hell up, people. (End of rant).

You poor thing.

Itchy Boy 24th January 2020 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJM8125 (Post 12966026)
So you and yankee451 don't understand how multi-generational, compressed, low-resolution youtube videoes work.

And...?

Actually, we dso. And we understand how your ilk will use any excuse to deny the obvious. You think the videos are real - I think they're fake. Bottom line - neither of us can prove our belief 100%. SO we'll just have to leave it a that.

I wish you and yours well.

yankee451 24th January 2020 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elagabalus (Post 12966069)
In an effort to kick this can, they both are using a tripod. Now what?

Well, Hezarkhani claimed to be a tourist on a boat with a handheld camera, not a professional on a dolly. And Naudet claimed he was practicing shooting with a hand held video camera, not a professional on a dolly. But the lying aside, the tripod/dolly use supports my premise perfectly. Courchesne didn't even try to hide his tripod use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggH89ssUw7I

Elagabalus 24th January 2020 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankee451 (Post 12966079)
Well, Hezarkhani claimed to be a tourist on a boat with a handheld camera, not a professional on a dolly. And Naudet claimed he was practicing shooting with a hand held video camera, not a professional on a dolly. But the lying aside, the tripod/dolly use supports my premise perfectly. Courchesne didn't even try to hide his tripod use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggH89ssUw7I

Hmmmmm ...so everyone using a tripod is in on it?

TJM 24th January 2020 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy (Post 12966076)
Actually, we dso. And we understand how your ilk will use any excuse to deny the obvious. You think the videos are real - I think they're fake. Bottom line - neither of us can prove our belief 100%. SO we'll just have to leave it a that.

I wish you and yours well.

Not so fast.

The burden of proof is on you and other no-planers. Much as you and "your ilk" try to shift it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.