ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags David Chandler , wtc 7

Reply
Old 24th September 2011, 02:40 AM   #1
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions (David Chandler video)

Apologies if there's already a thread open for this, but my feeble attempts at using the search function came up dry.

Have David Chandler's assertions regarding WTC 7 audio (sounds of explosions are present but faint, require selective filtering of WTC 7 collapse audio in order to be heard) been discussed here at JREF?

I suspect that what he discovered was really just the sound of many thousands of tons of WTC 7 impacting terra firma, but I'd like to replace mere suspicion with something more solid, if I can.

Feel free to redirect/merge/generally point me in the right direction. Thanks.

EJ
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 02:48 AM   #2
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
Apologies if there's already a thread open for this, but my feeble attempts at using the search function came up dry.

Have David Chandler's assertions regarding WTC 7 audio (sounds of explosions are present but faint, require selective filtering of WTC 7 collapse audio in order to be heard) been discussed here at JREF?

I suspect that what he discovered was really just the sound of many thousands of tons of WTC 7 impacting terra firma, but I'd like to replace mere suspicion with something more solid, if I can.

Feel free to redirect/merge/generally point me in the right direction. Thanks.

EJ
Have you got a link to said video? Preferrably with timestamps so that I don't have to listen to any of Chandler's insanity.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 03:05 AM   #3
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
I would love to give you a URL, but I'm new here and don't have enough posts. You can find it by Googling "WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions".
2:00 to 4:00 would be the portion of interest.
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 03:08 AM   #4
Marokkaan
Graduate Poster
 
Marokkaan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
I would love to give you a URL, but I'm new here and don't have enough posts. You can find it by Googling "WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions".
2:00 to 4:00 would be the portion of interest.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlRmaUCE8sM
Marokkaan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 03:26 AM   #5
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,048
Baboom McPadden? You cannot be serious.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 03:39 AM   #6
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
Thanks, Marokkaan.

When I first came across the source video that Chandler used, I rather naively assumed that since the voices of the reporter (Ashleigh Banfield of NBC) and her subject were audible, and the sounds of an explosion wasn't, that pretty much ruled out the possibility that an explosion had occurred.

Chandler asserts that because the mike "was set up to exclude background noises", the sound of the explosion is present but only audible if you boost the bass and listen reeeal close.

It seems obvious to me that Banfield, her subject, and several of the other people in the shot are reacting to a stimuli, and it makes sense to me that is an audible stimuli (I've heard other suggestions, but they seem less plausible). But I am sceptical that this stimuli was indeed, an explosion. I believe Chandler detected the sound of WTC 7 making a hard landing.

Is there any way to get at this? Perhaps understand the characteristics of the mike and downstream audio processing to the point of being able to rule in or rule out what could be heard? I'm aware of othere videos that have audio of reporters at controlled demolitions where the sound of the explosions was very clearly audible. I suspect Chandler would say that the reason we can hear those but not WTC 7 would be because those mikes "were set up" to carry the sound of an explosion, and Banfield's mike wasn't.

Chandler also speculates about "tailoring the sound of the demolition so that it would be easily masked", but I think that's likely a wild goose chase, and at the very least, a different discussion.
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 04:54 AM   #7
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
The reporter is reacting to sound behind her, obviously. As is everyone else. Chandler even syncs up the footage with other footage of the collapse. I cannot actually speak to whether he synced properly, but let's assume he did.

As has often been shown, the TM got themselves into trouble with their timed free fall by ignoring the collapse of the penthouse. By the time he cues the video of the collapse, the penthouse is already gone. And, as everyone can very readily surmise, the penthouse collapsed due to internal structural failure.

All of that would've made noise, noise to which the people were reacting.

Chandler's a maroon. He spends more than half the video "proving" that there were sounds of explosions, then tops it all off by positing hush-a-boom nano-thermxte. Which was it? Explosions or deadly quiet thermxte?

(Veteran 911 CT forum posters will recall - didn't someone here once do a complete analysis of Chandler?)
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 05:20 AM   #8
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by Marokkaan View Post
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlRmaUCE8sM
McPadden description sounds like a real demolition, but one that is not picked up on any video of the collapse. He apparently didn't get the memo that the WTC7 demolition used soooperseekrit nano-thermite explosives that can vaporise entire floors in a blink of an eye quietly.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 05:42 AM   #9
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,924
You can get the sound of explosives by dropping one flat surface onto the top of another, such as the floor of one building onto the top of the one below. The sound is produced by the air escaping between the surfaces at supersonic speeds.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 06:16 AM   #10
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Where Banfield is standing, she would have had a view farther down the street toward WTC7 than had the camera. It appears to me that there is some perterbation of the smoke or dust visible around the corner a little before Banfield reacts. This would indicate to me that collapse was well under way at that time.

We do NOT hear a thing on the microphone at the penthouses dropped.

Explosive charges would have been much more clearly audible in that box canyon than were some of the street noises which Banfield captures on video. That bit of video supports the progressive collapse theory.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:00 AM   #11
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 27,378
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
It seems obvious to me that Banfield, her subject, and several of the other people in the shot are reacting to a stimuli, and it makes sense to me that is an audible stimuli (I've heard other suggestions, but they seem less plausible).


It looks more to me like Banfield is reacting to something she sees in her peripheral vision. Note two important things:

1) The woman she is interviewing, who's line of sight is further away from looking at WTC7, reacts after Banfield reacts. That's consistent with her reacting to Banfield's motion, not to a loud sound they would both hear simultaneously.

2) The baby doesn't react at all. Unless the baby is deaf, is there any way a loud explosion noise wouldn't make it cry its lungs out?


Now, as to their analysis - they're filtering to find "rumbling sounds" and the like, which they simply then declare are the sounds of explosions. Except there's no justification for that declaration. First off, we know there would have to be some kinds of sounds of the rubble collapsing - where are those sounds in their analysis?

Secondly, have they done any sort of a control experiment? It would not be difficult to find a camera and microphone set-up as used in this clip, adjust it for "picking up voices" as they say it was set, and then film various types of explosions and demolitions, and show how those known sounds look under this sort of analysis. That they haven't done this suggests that they have no interest in really figuring out what is depicted in that video and audio. Instead, they're merely looking for an excuse to ignore one of the main arguments against their hypothesis. That's not how you do good science.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:10 AM   #12
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
It looks more to me like Banfield is reacting to something she sees in her peripheral vision. Note two important things:

1) The woman she is interviewing, who's line of sight is further away from looking at WTC7, reacts after Banfield reacts. That's consistent with her reacting to Banfield's motion, not to a loud sound they would both hear simultaneously.

2) The baby doesn't react at all. Unless the baby is deaf, is there any way a loud explosion noise wouldn't make it cry its lungs out?

Jebus. More bedunker video analysis.

What compelling logic. Yah, I'm convinced.

__________________
ďMuch of the 9/11 story has not been told to the public" - Steven Badger, attorney for insurance litigators affected by the WTC disaster.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:20 AM   #13
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Jebus. More bedunker video analysis.

What compelling logic. Yah, I'm convinced.

Find me a demolition that is not picked up on video, you cant.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:42 AM   #14
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 27,378
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Find me a demolition that is not picked up on video, you cant.


Hell, find me a video of a baby that doesn't react at all to a sudden, loud noise like an explosion.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:47 AM   #15
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 27,378
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Jebus. More bedunker video analysis.

What compelling logic. Yah, I'm convinced.



And of course, you ignore the parts of my post where I explain how you should really go about showing that the analysis presented in that video has any validity.

Odd how you would simply laugh off my analysis, even though it's based on simple things you can see in the video, like babies, while completely ignoring the fact that your truther buddies have utter failed in their burden of showing that their analysis is useful.

Why do you think you might be doing that?
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 07:49 AM   #16
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
Hell, find me a video of a baby that doesn't react at all to a sudden, loud noise like an explosion.
Exactly they hardly notice, truthers have no idea what explosives sound like.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 10:20 AM   #17
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
Exactly they hardly notice, truthers have no idea what explosives sound like.
That was my take on Chandler, confirmation bias run riot.

That location was about 3/8 mile, almost exactly 2000 feet from WTC 7. Do we know what a controlled demolition should sound like at that range? I can find lots of videos of reporters at controlled demolitions, but in most cases, the camera and mike is closer than this.
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 10:26 AM   #18
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
First off, we know there would have to be some kinds of sounds of the rubble collapsing - where are those sounds in their analysis?
I'm not 100% convinced that is the case. I know of several videos of controlled demolitions where there is a fair amount of building standing after the last charge goes off and the echo of that last charge dies away, but you can't hear the sound of the rubble collapsing. I suppose distance from the implosion, sensitivity of the audio equipment, and background noise all play into that.

But your point is well taken...I'd think the scientific thing to do would be to say, "I have found an unusual sound, and here is my analysis of that sound..."

As opposed to simply declaring that sound to be an explosion without any supporting rationale.
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 11:29 AM   #19
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 27,378
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
I'm not 100% convinced that is the case. I know of several videos of controlled demolitions where there is a fair amount of building standing after the last charge goes off and the echo of that last charge dies away, but you can't hear the sound of the rubble collapsing. I suppose distance from the implosion, sensitivity of the audio equipment, and background noise all play into that.

But your point is well taken...I'd think the scientific thing to do would be to say, "I have found an unusual sound, and here is my analysis of that sound..."

As opposed to simply declaring that sound to be an explosion without any supporting rationale.

Sure, it's possible that the sounds of the building collapsing might not be recorded. But the point is, we know those sounds exist. They might even show up as low-level bass rumblings that you might have to manipulate the audio track to find

That they ignore the possibility that these might be sounds that have to exist, whether or not the collapse starts via explosives or fire, and refuse to do any attempt to validate their hypothesis by comparing it to known demolitions, shows exactly how much they don't want real answers.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 11:54 AM   #20
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
why do the rumbling sounds come so late and only AFTER the building starts to collapse? Unlike controlled explosive demolitions like at 2:40 in this video.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Donít get me lolín off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 01:42 PM   #21
Oz1976
Muse
 
Oz1976's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 720
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Jebus. More bedunker video analysis.

What compelling logic. Yah, I'm convinced.

You're sucha waste of time and effort I don't know why I even bother. But I'm sure if even YOUR GOD him or herself came to you and told you that 911 wasn't an inside job that you'd call he/she/it a liar. You're nothing more than a troll now. You've not answered any direct questions honestly over the last couple months, you've simply hand waved everything away anyone has put forth to you, and you simply make idiotic one liners in every thread now. Why in 10 years Ergo, have you not accomplished a single thing other than lining the pockets of a select few "faces of truth"? Have you signed the 911 Truth petition on the whitehouse site? Have you yourself done ANYTHING at all to help your idiotic cause or do you simply parrot the idiocy of others?

When will "teh Twoof" come out Ergo? When will we see your idiotic ideas proven? 10 more years?

David Chandler is a high school teacher, and you support his idiocy more than the certified structural and civil engineers that actually build high rises? Do you not see the utter stupidity in that?
Oz1976 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 03:51 PM   #22
Mancman
Graduate Poster
 
Mancman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,008
The news anchor is standing just north of West Broadway and Worth St. Just 600 metres from WTC7.

Here is a cooling tower demolition. The sound takes ~13 seconds to reach the camera. Thus the camera over 4000 metres distant, almost 7 times further away than the camera in the WTC7 video.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Yet the explosions are still loud and distinctive. Nothing even remotely resembling this was heard on 9/11.
__________________
R.I.P Dr. Adequate
Mancman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 06:27 PM   #23
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Mancman View Post
The news anchor is standing just north of West Broadway and Worth St. Just 600 metres from WTC7.

Here is a cooling tower demolition. The sound takes ~13 seconds to reach the camera. Thus the camera over 4000 metres distant, almost 7 times further away than the camera in the WTC7 video.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Yet the explosions are still loud and distinctive. Nothing even remotely resembling this was heard on 9/11.
[TMer] Bu... Bu... But the droning-boring-voice-guy said the microphone had a filter on, man. It cut out all the background noise. It was some sort of quantum nano zero point filter, I'll bet. [/TMer off]
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2011, 06:34 PM   #24
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Originally Posted by Mancman View Post
The news anchor is standing just north of West Broadway and Worth St. Just 600 metres from WTC7.

Here is a cooling tower demolition. The sound takes ~13 seconds to reach the camera. Thus the camera over 4000 metres distant, almost 7 times further away than the camera in the WTC7 video.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Yet the explosions are still loud and distinctive. Nothing even remotely resembling this was heard on 9/11.
How about this one

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE



Or this one:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Still nowhere near enough to fling steel around, still looks and sounds nothing like the WTC collapses

Last edited by Edx; 24th September 2011 at 06:35 PM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2011, 01:55 PM   #25
El Jefe
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6
I am starting to find Chandler's theory less and less credible. There has been speculation that this mike was simply not sensitive to the sound of an explosion for one reason or another. So, I got some info on the mike.

After looking at a lot of photos of microphones, the only model I could find that physically resembled the one that Ashleigh Banfield was using was the Electro-Voice RE50. It was sold in a "fawn beige" or black color, and the same microphone is still available today in black as the RE50/B. I perused some broadcast engineering forums, and found that the RE50 was, and the RE50/B still is, an extremely popular microphone for remote reporting, heavily used by all the major networks. It is popular for being free of vocal "pops" caused by people breathing into the mike, for having an omnidirectional coverage pattern that allows the mike to pick up what someone is saying even if they turn their head away from the mike, and for being tough as nails (there were several stories of it still working after being subject to various abuses).

I still don't have enough posts to link to it, but you can find technical data at www fullcompass com / common / files / 1635-RE50TechSpecs pdf

I could not find a polar sensitivity graph for this mike, but "omnidirectional" as opposed to "cardioid" implies good off-axis sensitivity. You can see this demonstrated in the video at www youtube com / watch?v=_5XAUUnBYpY (Google 9/11: WTC 7 Collapse - NIST FOIA Release - WCBS Dub2_03 if you don't want to fool with the URL).

Yes, that's the CBS affiliate using the exact same microphone at the exact same moment a few blocks away. (I did claim it was popular.) Note at 0:10 in the video, you can easily hear the bus motor, which is even more off-axis than WTC 7. Also notice at 0:16, the reporter flips the microphone back to himself, yet you can still hear the interviewee quite clearly. It also picks up a siren at 0:22 although pointed directly at the interviewee. The penthouse drop is at 0:39, and no explosions. The main collapse starts at about 0:46, and still no explosions. Also, at 1:27, it picks up the vocalizations of the distaught woman by the bus, although she is several feet away.

You can hear good response at most frequencies throughout. According to the specs at the link, the RE50 has a reasonably flat response from 80 Hz to 13,000 Hz. This would pick up the "BANG" of an explosion quite well. In the CBS (NIST) video, the distance to WTC 7 is almost exactly the same as the distance in the Ashleigh Banfield (NBC) video...about 2,000 feet, so we would expect most of the high frequency content of an explosion to still be present. The RE50 response drops off a good 10db by the time you get down to 40 Hz, so perhaps Chandler's bass "booms" wouldn't be very audible through this rig.
El Jefe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2011, 03:00 PM   #26
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
I am starting to find Chandler's theory less and less credible. There has been speculation that this mike was simply not sensitive to the sound of an explosion for one reason or another. So, I got some info on the mike.

After looking at a lot of photos of microphones, the only model I could find that physically resembled the one that Ashleigh Banfield was using was the Electro-Voice RE50. It was sold in a "fawn beige" or black color, and the same microphone is still available today in black as the RE50/B. I perused some broadcast engineering forums, and found that the RE50 was, and the RE50/B still is, an extremely popular microphone for remote reporting, heavily used by all the major networks. It is popular for being free of vocal "pops" caused by people breathing into the mike, for having an omnidirectional coverage pattern that allows the mike to pick up what someone is saying even if they turn their head away from the mike, and for being tough as nails (there were several stories of it still working after being subject to various abuses).

I still don't have enough posts to link to it, but you can find technical data at www fullcompass com / common / files / 1635-RE50TechSpecs pdf

I could not find a polar sensitivity graph for this mike, but "omnidirectional" as opposed to "cardioid" implies good off-axis sensitivity. You can see this demonstrated in the video at www youtube com / watch?v=_5XAUUnBYpY (Google 9/11: WTC 7 Collapse - NIST FOIA Release - WCBS Dub2_03 if you don't want to fool with the URL).

Yes, that's the CBS affiliate using the exact same microphone at the exact same moment a few blocks away. (I did claim it was popular.) Note at 0:10 in the video, you can easily hear the bus motor, which is even more off-axis than WTC 7. Also notice at 0:16, the reporter flips the microphone back to himself, yet you can still hear the interviewee quite clearly. It also picks up a siren at 0:22 although pointed directly at the interviewee. The penthouse drop is at 0:39, and no explosions. The main collapse starts at about 0:46, and still no explosions. Also, at 1:27, it picks up the vocalizations of the distaught woman by the bus, although she is several feet away.

You can hear good response at most frequencies throughout. According to the specs at the link, the RE50 has a reasonably flat response from 80 Hz to 13,000 Hz. This would pick up the "BANG" of an explosion quite well. In the CBS (NIST) video, the distance to WTC 7 is almost exactly the same as the distance in the Ashleigh Banfield (NBC) video...about 2,000 feet, so we would expect most of the high frequency content of an explosion to still be present. The RE50 response drops off a good 10db by the time you get down to 40 Hz, so perhaps Chandler's bass "booms" wouldn't be very audible through this rig.
Good work. I didn't get around to the technical discussion you started, but I see you've already learned that Chandler hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.
The mic was probably omni, but even if it were cardioid it would still pick up a 120db to 130db explosion sequence HAD this occurred (it didn't).
The building surfaces are fairly efficient reflectors, so the sound would carry reasonably well at that distance. Plus, the mic did pick up a faint rumble as the building collapsed, as we would expect.

Chandler's twisting of the audio to create phantom demolition explosions? That's science fiction.

None of the other videos taken from various distances recorded any explosions, but they did also record a rumble as the building fell (not before!).

I created a video on the subject a while back, after some insane truthers claimed you could hear explosions. OK, if those r explosions then we have to redefine the word 'explosion'...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2011, 06:17 PM   #27
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
Good work. I didn't get around to the technical discussion you started, but I see you've already learned that Chandler hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.
The mic was probably omni, but even if it were cardioid it would still pick up a 120db to 130db explosion sequence HAD this occurred (it didn't).
The building surfaces are fairly efficient reflectors, so the sound would carry reasonably well at that distance. Plus, the mic did pick up a faint rumble as the building collapsed, as we would expect.

Chandler's twisting of the audio to create phantom demolition explosions? That's science fiction.

None of the other videos taken from various distances recorded any explosions, but they did also record a rumble as the building fell (not before!).

I created a video on the subject a while back, after some insane truthers claimed you could hear explosions. OK, if those r explosions then we have to redefine the word 'explosion'...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Broken video link FTFY (works in quote)
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2011, 09:03 PM   #28
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Doofus is looking for just a rumble when he should be looking for a few gawd-awful KABOOMS followed by a rumble that gets louder and then tapers off.
__________________
No civilization ever collapsed because the poor had too much to eat.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2011, 09:45 AM   #29
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
Broken video link FTFY (works in quote)
Thx! I see I left the 'watch=' part in.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


http://youtu.be/5tNhnTBzSyQ
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th April 2015, 03:07 PM   #30
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,706
leftysergeant alreafy said it in a short post: The sounds that Chandler believes are explosive charge come too late, after the dust cloud is already rolling into West Broadway.

I detailed the argument over at Metabunk, synchronizing Chandler's event with the undistrubed NBC footage and setting this in context with the known collapse sequence, all here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/deb...r-ae911t.6071/

I'll link to El Jefe's argument about the mike, that's a good piece of work!
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 05:25 AM   #31
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,706
Dayum. I have to retract/correct myself. Reasons here: I found another video that helps to synchronize the NBC/Banfield scene with the WTC7 collapse sequence. Result: The cloud that's seen rising is probably smoke from the burning building, and it may have started billowing even before the East Penthouse caved in. Chandler's alleged "explosions" more likely originated about 2-3 seconds after the EPH started collapsing, but seconds before the rest of the core buckled; and not, as I had first believed, after the north wall had started to come down.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 06:46 AM   #32
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
Do they describe exactly what is meant by the mic being set up to exclude other sound besides voices?
The pick up pattern of the mic could be part of that. A supercardoid mic will tend to 'hear' sounds behind and to the side of the mic less prominently than those from direct into the end of the mic.
Decreasing the input mic pre-amp will also cause closer sounds to be more prominent.
Turning on the "lo-cut", a setting used to cut out the low frequency sounds that result from hitting the mic will also dampen some other lo freq's.

However, if one is easily hearing street sounds then any sound as loud as those street sounds will also be heard. For instance, we had a reporter standing inside a building 250 feet from a rail crossing with the same mic set up as described above. A train came by and the sound of the train's horn is heard in the video.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 10:29 AM   #33
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,706
jaydee,

EL Jefe in post #25 talks a bit about the microphone itself. Chandler merely asserts that the mike is set up to pick up speech only inches away, but does nothing to justify that assertion.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 10:45 AM   #34
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,286
Originally Posted by El Jefe View Post
I'm not 100% convinced that is the case. I know of several videos of controlled demolitions where there is a fair amount of building standing after the last charge goes off and the echo of that last charge dies away, but you can't hear the sound of the rubble collapsing. I suppose distance from the implosion, sensitivity of the audio equipment, and background noise all play into that.

But your point is well taken...I'd think the scientific thing to do would be to say, "I have found an unusual sound, and here is my analysis of that sound..."

As opposed to simply declaring that sound to be an explosion without any supporting rationale.
There were no charges on 911. Chandler is spreading a lie of CD, and exposes his paranoia in the video. Hard to believe there are people dumb enough to fall for David Chandler's delusional version of 911.

When he talks of the official narrative being spread to the news agencies, when the fire department suspected WTC 7 was unstable, is failed ignorance and BS.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 01:14 PM   #35
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
jaydee,

EL Jefe in post #25 talks a bit about the microphone itself. Chandler merely asserts that the mike is set up to pick up speech only inches away, but does nothing to justify that assertion.
Aaaaaahahahahaha! An omnidirectional mic with a flat response from 80hz to 13khz that won't pick up explosive sounds. Oh that is rich!
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 01:25 PM   #36
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,902
How can you have thousands of people rushing around, buildings on fire, police and firemen everywhere, and fighter jets doing flybies and NOT have unaccountable sounds?
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 01:38 PM   #37
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
BTW, I'll go out on a limb and suggest that there doesn't seem to be a polar sensitivity diagram for the mic because its an omni and will by definition then be a series of concentric circles. Maybe, just maybe, there would be some loss of sensitivity behind the mic , along the line of the handle. IOW someone whispering while holding the connector end close to their mouth might not get picked up, but probably even then will be quite audible.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 21st April 2015 at 01:40 PM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 02:29 PM   #38
George 152
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,012
Obviously no kook has been in the military.
Explosions are LOUD
And to claim a microphone wouldn't pick up a detonation in the background at that range is ridiculous
George 152 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 02:35 PM   #39
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,709
Originally Posted by George 152 View Post
Obviously no kook has been in the military.
Explosions are LOUD
And to claim a microphone wouldn't pick up a detonation in the background at that range is ridiculous
Not to mention the fact these loud sounds are in an echo chamber know as a city block.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2015, 03:51 PM   #40
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,286
Originally Posted by Marokkaan View Post
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlRmaUCE8sM
1:12 sounds like a sonic boom.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:31 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.