Your donations are appreciated and help keep this site running. Even the smallest amount helps.
Thankyou

 
PROMOTE YOUR SITE
HERE
Only $3 USD/month
TRUTHSPOON.COM
The man they can't recruit!
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
Threads and posts subject to the discretion of the moderators in this category.

Moderators: novum

TOPIC: The Hoaxer Condition

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 14:17 #21

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
RottenAr$e wrote:
Ausrotten wrote:
Cousin_Frothy wrote:
Ok readers of this thread, this is the sort of misinformation that no planers use to derail 9/11 truth.

Bending of the truth on the general forum Feedback category.

Re the last ''measurement'' this is the type of misleading information the no planers use to try and convince people that their ''facts' are true.

One needs to consider depth before they make false measurements.


Using depth, imagine the dark WTC face actually facing the arrow that I placed on the photograph as per the flight path, the measurements change because the true depth was not being considered, the poster's measurements are crossing 3D with 2D as per perspective, as explained by the red font and markers that I added to the photograph.

A disinfo poster caught in the act. :up:
truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?start=40#208082

Just to clarify the depth again for those who don't seem to understand it, or rather make excuses for the lack of it in the measurements on this photograph. The plane does not hit the building cutting across the building face, rather it hits the building head on, so the measurements here that include going across the building face are false.
Ausrotten wrote:



Yellow font added. :wissl:

Debunked.

@RottenAr$e

Regarding my analysis you have debunked F**k All.....You are a compulsive liar and disinfo merchant deliberately misinterpreting
what I have demonstrated along with your Jusual $trawmanfest and "Hoaxer Condition" Bull$hit.

@honest followers of the thread. RottenAr$e has added the following text in RED to one of my analysis frames
This area is not a flat surface extending from left to right <--> it's an angular face

The devious little $hit has deliberately lied used a $trawman to confuse you. My measurements are actually taken along the FILM PLANE
onto which the image is projected which is FLAT and I explained this in great detail with my constant velocity tennis ball/wooden post example.
He makes numerous other $trawman accusations but avoids, like the plague, addressing the impossible acceleration in the last frame as the CGI plane morphs into the Tower. To make things easier to follow I'll add my analysis posts to this threat later. That's probably why he posted
his Bull$hit in a new thread which makes it difficult for people to compare his deliberately distorted Bull$hit to what I actually demonstrated..... :iitm:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 15:22 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 14:25 #22

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
^ Sorry but your measurements include measuring across the face of the building, but the plane did not fly across the face of the building, hence your measurements are corrupt.

You can argue otherwise until you're blue in the face, :O but anyone judging my debunking of your analysis who is not a stern advocate for ''no planning'' will conclude that your measurements are clearly wrong, (unless they have a low IQ or are mentally challenged in other ways.) The reason why the measurement that you made over the face of the building is greater than the others, is because the plane did not fly across the face of the building, you are measuring a 2D image of a 3D event, thus you have lost the depth, and you simply have measured over the depth to provide a false conclusion, as if the depth = length.

It;s almost as if you did it on purpose, who are you trying to kid?
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 14:49 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 14:30 #23

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
If they're honest they'll see you for the lying little $hit you are.... :wissl:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Gaia

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 14:39 #24

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
I've answered your point, if you don't like the answer, that's up to you, that's it.

I thought you might have been pleased that I took the time to answer you and had not ''chickened out.''

Good luck with trying to convince anyone else about ''no planning'' with your 2 dimensional measurements on a 3 dimensional perspective.

You're a good example of The Hoaxer Condition, so for that, thank you for your input.
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 14:42 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 14:58 #25

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
Ausrotten wrote:
^ Sorry but your measurements include measuring across the face of the building, but the plane did not fly across the face of the building, hence your measurements are corrupt......blah, blah blah......I've answered your point, if you don't like the answer, that's up to you, that's it.

$trawman ad infinitum.......... :iitm:

Actually I do like your answers because each successive answer shows you up to be a Lying Disinfo Troll on steroids.
Please carry on...... :pmsl:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 15:07 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 16:19 #26

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636


I analysed the footage from this 911 video :arowup: from 8:09 to 8:13 which "allegedly"
shows the second plane approaching the North Tower and crashing into it.

Note the Mocking Talmudic Pi$$take in the YouTube Channel name chosen by the Disinfo Company/Organization that produced the video.....

KTF Productions


Kounterfeet

Sick (((Ba$tards)))..... :mad:





IMAGE 1

I downloaded the video using Free Studio and then grabbed 114 sequential frames using CyberLink Power Director 10. The software enables me to view sequential frames @ 1/30th of a second intervals. I then grabbed each frame, saved it as a jpg and imported them into AutoCad, arranging them in a table with sequential frames numbered. Each column shows all 30 frames in one second of footage. In the AutoCad framegrab the fakery is clearly apparent.

The frames in the consecutive red rectangles are exactly the same!!!!.
In each red pair neither the plane nor the buildings move relative to each other and there is no left to right pan!!!

Note the fakery pattern!!!.....2 duplicate frames....4 frames.....2 duplicate frames....4 frames.....etc

This reduced the number of frames the faker team had to create.

Also the distance travelled by the plane in the last of the 4 frames before it morphs into the Tower contravens Newton's Laws.
The plane accelerates, whereas impact with the Tower's structure should slow it down. This is an incontrovertible fact and can not
be explained away by RottenAr$e's Disinfo Bull$hit.

I'll demonstrate this in following posts.



IMAGE 2



IMAGE 3

:arowup: Above I've posted framegrabs of one of the "duplicate pairs" revealed by the Cyberlink Power Director software..
(Frame #s 98 and 99 in the ACAD screengrab table at the top of this post)

As you can see the position of the plane and buildings is exactly the same in both frames!!!!

This 2/4, 2/4, 2/4 pattern demonstrates conclusively the footage was faked!

Edit
Also refer to the Cyberlink Time panels at the bottom of IMAGE 2 and IMAGE 3 to confirm they are consecutive frames.
The Frame Time units are separated by colons.... HOURS : MINUTES : SECONDS : 30ths of a SECOND


.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 02 Jan 2017 09:33 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 16:29 #27

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
Following on from my post above :arowup:


https://truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?limitstart=0#207926




IMAGE 1
SCREEN GRAB OF ACAD "FULL SCREEN" USING FASTSTONE CAPTURE SOFTWARE
Red rectangle = Frame 111, yellow = Frame 112, Green = Frame 113, Magenta = Frame 114


A few notes regarding the accuracy of the analysis. It's very accurate!
1) Autocad is incredibly accurate software. It's dimensional precision, both linear and angular, is accurate to
13 significant figures. Displayed dimensions can be "dialogue box" set to 8 decimal places. I've set them to
2 decimal places which is more than adequate to show the fakery.

2) The enormous increase in distance traveled by the CGI plane in the last frame relative to that traveled between
the previous 3 frames can not be negated by "you can't reliably track the position of the plane because
of pixel blur"
arguments.
Blur placement errors are insignificant compared to the massive distance traveled
"cockup" in the last frame!


3) The imported jpg frame grabs from Power Director 10 were grabbed using the Faststone Capture "full screen"
mode ensuring they are exactly the same pixel width & height.

4) In AutoCad the imported frames were then placed above each other and each successive frame was moved
a little in the +ve x direction until the vertical line of the edges of the building on the extreme right were in exact alignment.

(In BTwankerSpeak the building on the extreme right would make it Nazi Gestapo HQ^.....Sorry!...couldn't resist that!..:pmsl:)

I chose this building as the vertical alignment reference because the white edge/sky blur is considerably less than the
black edge/sky blur of the WTC Towers.

(In BTwankerSpeak that also makes me a white racist disinfo merchant^.....:pmsl:)

5) On Frame 112 I superimposed white lines over the pyramid roof of the Trump Building. It's the frame where
the junction of the CGI plane and the sloping roof edge is most clearly apparent. I then copied this, as a block, onto the other
frames using vertically aligned reference markers (white) which you can see near the bottom left of Frame #s
112, 113, and 114. This ensured the sloping roof edge is in exactly the same position relative to the Tower in each frame.

See above image :arowup:




IMAGE 2
BLOW UP OF IMPACT AREA ENCLOSED BY WHITE RECTANGLE IN FRAME 111




IMAGE 3
BLOW UP OF IMPACT AREA ENCLOSED BY WHITE RECTANGLE IN FRAME 112




IMAGE 4
BLOW UP OF IMPACT AREA ENCLOSED BY WHITE RECTANGLE IN FRAME 113




IMAGE 5
BLOW UP OF IMPACT AREA ENCLOSED BY WHITE RECTANGLE IN FRAME 114

Between frames 113 & 114 the CGI plane rudder travels a distance of at least 10.88 units before it's hidden by the sloping pyramid roof edge,
That's approx. 2.5 times the distance it travels between each of the 2 previous frames. It accelerates despite the airliner having to crash through the steel framed outer wall and the 4 inch concrete floor slabs completely defying the laws of Physics!.

Impact with the steel framed facade, plate braced by the concrete floors, would cause the structure of a real airliner to compress, shred into a myriad pieces, but most importantly, it would cause it to DECELERATE in the last frame. My analysis shows conclusively this DECELERATION DID NOT OCCUR. It shows a MAJOR ACCELERATION which is impossible!
The airliner in the footage is a CGI fake. The "impact damage" was faked with demolition charges and NO PLANES hit the Towers!!!
.... :iitm:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 23:51 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 16:35 #28

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
Here's the explanation of the analysis method and the geometry supporting it:


IMAGE 1


IMAGE 2

The diagrams are based on the "conceptual Artist's Glass" technique I used to prove beyond a shadow of doubt the mountains are too high on the NA$A Apollo 17 photo. Thread containing the analysis is on the DIF Pit locked away in the Rant Room as per Jewsual.

IMAGE 2 (Frame Plan Drawing) :arowup: shows track of ball (plane) moving at uniform velocity on a straight collision course with a wooden post (Tower).
The ball's colour changes at uniform distance/time intervals (1/30th second). I then drew dotted lines from the camera position at E to the ball at each consecutive position using "tangent snap" where the dotted lines meet the ball's circular profile. I then marked the positions of the intersections of these lines with the conceptual "film plane" line AB using crosses matching the colours of the ball and wooden post profile edges.

IMAGE 1 (Film Frame Elevation Drawing) The intersections were then projected up onto the film plane rectangle ABCD and show a geometrically accurate representation of the ball's (rudder's in the footage analysis) movement relative to the timber post (Tower).
Note the decreasing distance travelled (across the frame) by the ball in equal time intervals This is consistent with the 911 plane footage with the exception of the faker's acceleration cockup in the last frame, not to mention the 2 dupicate, 4 moving frame fakery pattern in post #8 here:

https://truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?limitstart=0#207838


The technique is 100% mathematically valid and variations have been used to create accurate Maps (Surveying) and track moving objects (Astronomy) for centurys. Note the distance between the ball's projected position on the film plane decreases at equal time intervals
This should also apply on the 9-11 plane footage at the impact frames. It doesn't and the plane shows a massive acceleration on the last frame therefore CGI fake!

The above explanatory notes and diagrams explain the theory behind the original analysis in my previous post #56 here:

https://truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?start=40#208082

The above explanation demonstrates the RottenAr$e Liar did NOT debunk the analysis.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 02 Jan 2017 09:43 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 16:46 #29

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
Here's the Google Earth frame grab with imported US "TOPO MAP" overlay I posted to enable reader's to orientate themselves. I've indicated the approx distance to the camera position and a reasonable estimate of the camera field of view.



Yellow squares show the WTC towers,.... the two continuous thick yellow lines show camera field of view, the thin yellow line between
them bisects the angle of view at the field of view axis ...dashed yellow line shows track of fake CGI'd Boeing 767-200.

Google Scale bar at bottom left hand corner reads 3092 feet.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 18:33 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 18:37 #30

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
You're not proving anything, your measurements are on a 2D image, but the perspective is 3D, so you are including depth as part of the length, you wont see that with the blue sky background but only when the face of the building comes into play in your measurements, but on that building image you are measuring depth as length, thus your analysis is corrupt.

Your fake ''depthless measurements;


The reality;



The rest is mainly stuff based on ''estimated'' (guessed) information, that you have transferred onto your equipment, you've proved no hoaxing, in fact if anything you've proved the opposite.

What's occurring Exorcist is that you've made a good effort but in the first instance you have measured perspective depth, as length, and in the second instance you have not accounted that the camera may not only be an old style ''video camera'' also it would only need the tape to be slipping slightly and the footage is corrupt. It's most doubtful that it would have been taken on a high quality tapeless video camera in 2001.
Tapeless[edit]
Main article: Tapeless camcorder
Sony introduced the XDCAM tapeless video format in 2003, introducing the Professional Disc (PFD). Panasonic followed in 2004 with its P2 solid state memory cards as a recording medium for DVCPRO-HD video. In 2006 Panasonic and Sony introduced AVCHD as an inexpensive, tapeless, high-definition video format. AVCHD camcorders are produced by Sony, Panasonic, Canon, JVC and Hitachi.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camcorder

The tape would only need to be slipping minutely to produce what you have posted about the double frames in 1/30th second sections.

Exorcist
I've indicated the approx distance to the camera position and a reasonable estimate of the camera field of view.

I appreciate your effort but I'm trying not to laugh ^ you only have to be a small part off target for your entire analysis to be corrupt.

It's you who is hoaxing.

LOL I nearly missed this bit;



:Look, ^ you've even shown the plane does not go across the building face, debunking you own analysis below.



:killinme:
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 01 Jan 2017 19:56 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 18:44 #31

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
The plane decelerates, as shown here.

Once a hyena always a hyena.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 01 Jan 2017 21:10 #32

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
RottenAr$e wrote:
Tapeless[edit]
Main article: Tapeless camcorder
Sony introduced the XDCAM tapeless video format in 2003, introducing the Professional Disc (PFD). Panasonic followed in 2004 with its P2 solid state memory cards as a recording medium for DVCPRO-HD video. In 2006 Panasonic and Sony introduced AVCHD as an inexpensive, tapeless, high-definition video format. AVCHD camcorders are produced by Sony, Panasonic, Canon, JVC and Hitachi.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camcorder

The tape would only need to be slipping minutely to produce what you have posted about the double frames in 1/30th second sections.:

:arowup: That's a typical example of your deliberately disruptive Disinfo Troll Bollocks. Film reels of pre digital movie cameras did not "slip". The film was guided by pairs of sprocketed wheels on either side of the film strip. The wheel sprockets engaged with the holes on the film strip edges in the same way a bike chain works. Even if slippage occured every 5th and 6th frame (which it wouldn't) the aircraft positions in the said frames (5th & 6th) would still be different relative to the buildings because @ 500 mph the plane would move a considerable distance during your Troll "film slippage" nonsense.

Repeat...your Troll post has not explain the 4 frames, 2 identical frames, 4 frames, 2 identical frames pattern which repeats continuously over 115 plus frames!!! You sink deeper and deeper into the "soft and smelly" with every post you make.

Also "slippage" shorter than the distance between the sprocket holes would result in partly exposed frames as in sections of the the Zapruder JFK assassination vid......that or a broken film tape :roll: .
Even the Zapruder film was altered and the slippage added to conceal the fact Jackie did it.
All the (5th, 6th) frames in the WTC footage I analysed are fully exposed and identical which is impossible with your so called "slippage".

Please entertain us with more of your in$hites....... :thumbup: :iitm:

Interested readers please refer to IMAGE 1 in my post #26 to see the 4, 2, 4, 2, frame pattern.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 02 Jan 2017 19:25 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: hokuspokus, Gaia

The Hoaxer Condition 02 Jan 2017 14:19 #33

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
Exorcist
Repeat...your Troll post has not explain the 4 frames, 2 identical frames, 4 frames, 2 identical frames pattern which repeats continuously over 115 plus frames!!! You sink deeper and deeper into the "soft and smelly" with every post you make.

It does explain it well, because as the mechanisms of the video recorder/video tape rotate, if there is a slight off exact cognition, then that error will most likely repeat consistently. A squeaky wheel always squeaks at the same point(s) in rotation.

It's like a clock that loses one minute per hour, the cogs are most likely sticking in the same place with each rotation, thus at certain points the minute hand/second hand of the clock will most likely well be at certain locations for longer periods than other locations consistently, thus if you observed it acutely with your analysis equipment you'd see the fault on the clock appearing in the same locations with each cycle of the minute hand/or second hand. You'd get dual stills at the places where the clock hands always remain for longer periods during their rotations of the clock face.

You're expecting to see a 2001 or earlier video camera have a precise rotation to the standard of observation of 1/30th of a second precision.

When more than likely it will have a reoccurring mechanical imprecision, which is exactly what one may expect to see in your analysis, rather than having the precision that you say is missing and try to use to deem the video footage as fake.

As I say, it's your analysis which is fake. You want to try and prove a point and you are trying to bend your analysis to prove it.

It's not going to work on me, or anyone else who is not mentally challenged or a stern supporter of the no plane theory.
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 02 Jan 2017 14:37 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 15:57 #34

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636


The "Ace Baker" video got most of it right.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 05 Jan 2017 16:22 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 16:08 #35

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
The plane did slow down, as shown on the Youtube video that I already posted, Baker is full of shit, the plane was not made of ''aluminium'' rather toughened alloy.

What happened to the plane is exactly what would be expected.

I wish that the no planers would give it up, their narrative is ridiculous.

Put your energy into how three building fell at about free fall speed into their own footprint, you're giving tptb ammunition to state that their opposition are crack pots, is that you're agenda?

Every time the no planners get exposed they just go onto their next piece of ''evidence'' that's their MO, lie and shift, lie and shift.

It started off with ''planes can't go through steel - until it was shown the steel fra,e was only quarter inch thick nearer to the top of the structures.

Then onto ''the wing tips went through steel'' until it's shown that the wing tips only went through the aluminium cladding.

The onto ''it's against Newtonian physics, a weak object cant go through a tougher object'' - see ping pong ball video.

Then onto ''the wing goes behind a building'' - until it's shown that said building was in front of the plane.

Then onto '' debunk my analysis chicken'' - job done.

Then ''the plane did not decelerate when hitting the building - see video posted.

Now it's Ace Baker saying ''the plane is made of aluminium'' ''it does not slow down'' :facepalm:
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 05 Jan 2017 16:18 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 16:25 #36

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
:arowup: Strawman, after Strawman after Strawman..... :iitm:
Exorcist wrote:
Here's the explanation of the analysis method and the geometry supporting it:


IMAGE 1


IMAGE 2

The diagrams are based on the "conceptual Artist's Glass" technique I used to prove beyond a shadow of doubt the mountains are too high on the NA$A Apollo 17 photo. Thread containing the analysis is on the DIF Pit locked away in the Rant Room as per Jewsual.

IMAGE 2 (Frame Plan Drawing) :arowup: shows track of ball (plane) moving at uniform velocity on a straight collision course with a wooden post (Tower).
The ball's colour changes at uniform distance/time intervals (1/30th second). I then drew dotted lines from the camera position at E to the ball at each consecutive position using "tangent snap" where the dotted lines meet the ball's circular profile. I then marked the positions of the intersections of these lines with the conceptual "film plane" line AB using crosses matching the colours of the ball and wooden post profile edges.

IMAGE 1 (Film Frame Elevation Drawing) The intersections were then projected up onto the film plane rectangle ABCD and show a geometrically accurate representation of the ball's (rudder's in the footage analysis) movement relative to the timber post (Tower).
Note the decreasing distance travelled (across the frame) by the ball in equal time intervals This is consistent with the 911 plane footage with the exception of the faker's acceleration cockup in the last frame, not to mention the 2 dupicate, 4 moving frame fakery pattern in post #8 here:

https://truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?limitstart=0#207838


The technique is 100% mathematically valid and variations have been used to create accurate Maps (Surveying) and track moving objects (Astronomy) for centurys. Note the distance between the ball's projected position on the film plane decreases at equal time intervals
This should also apply on the 9-11 plane footage at the impact frames. It doesn't and the plane shows a massive acceleration on the last frame therefore CGI fake!

The above explanatory notes and diagrams explain the theory behind the original analysis in my previous post #56 here:

https://truth-zone.net/forum/faq-and-feedback-centre/67019-request-for-research-threads-with-separate-comments-threads.html?start=40#208082

The above explanation demonstrates the RottenAr$e Liar did NOT debunk the analysis.

RottenAr$e has $pammed a YT vid (post #30) containing a gif which demonstrates F**K All....neither acceleration nor deceleration. The only way to establish this one way or the other would be to analyse the footage "frame by frame" using the theory outlined above.......still waiting...... :larf:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 05 Jan 2017 18:25 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Gaia

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 19:25 #37

  • Gaia
  • Gaia's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Member
  • Posts: 7286
  • Likes received: 1571
Exactly what I thought; strawmen, strawmen, strawmen.

I wasn't the one comparing a heterogeneous plane with a homogeneous ping pong ball, that was Ze Rat. But of course he avoids answering what we really said, as that makes him show he doesn't have answers, but just turns to silly shilling strawmen of an ancient era.

Heterogeneous objects colliding with heterogeneous objects cannot show homogeneous collision behaviour.

The thermodynamically impossible fuel problem with the alleged thousands upon thousands of deaths that needed burning allegedly after those thousands of bodies were first buried and then needed to be exhumed again in continental climate winter! is also shilled again.

Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat the same lies over and over again, like a true windowlicking autist.

He might have deserved pity, if he weren't such an impossible character. :emb:
The Only Limit is Your Own Imagination
A truth seeker is someone who dares to wade through thick series of toxic smoke screens and tries not to inhale - Gaia
"What do you call 'genius'?" "Well, seeing things others don't see. Or rather the invisible links between things."
- Vladimir Nabokov (1938)
"The silence of conspiracy. Slaughtered on the altar of apathy." - Lords of the New Church (1982)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 21:17 #38

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
Exorcist, your ''analysis'' is mainly founded upon measuring a 3D reality on a 2D video still, you're measruing depth as length, evryone can see it except you and Gaia, another false aspect measurement from an ''estimated'' (guessed) camera position, but you have even proved your own ''analysis'' to be wrong, because this; 1)



Debunks this; 2)



On 1) your ''analysis'' shows the plane does not fly across the face of the building, on 2) you have measured the plane flying across the face of the building.

You've debunked yourself and you can't even see it :killinme:


Ausrotten wrote:
John Lear - does anyone really believe this old git?



''He worked on a project, a mining machine for the moon.''
Ausrotten wrote:
I'm going to post Morgan Reynolds and Ace Baker together.
Morgan Reynolds talks about "physics", but doesn't ever provide any scientific data. What he offers are simply "appeals to common sense" and "arguments from incredulity", both of which are logical fallacies and have nothing to do with physics.
– If the plane impacts, as seen in the video footage, truly exhibited a violation of the laws physics, it shouldn't be too hard to prove. Physics is all about mathematics. And math doesn't lie. If it could be demonstrated, scientifically, that the plane impacts are impossible according to the laws of physics, then proving 9/11 was an inside job is a slam dunk, because there is no possible explanation other than media manipulation and deception.
– If Ace Baker, Morgan Reynolds, and others believe that ALL the existing published research using mathematical and/or computer models is FALSE, why don't they try to prove it by funding their own research, creating their own "accurate" scientific computer simulations (as opposed to producing rock music videos which serve no purpose but to try to slander people who disagree with their point of view)?
– There's a reason why the truth movement hasn't done this. They CAN'T. If they could, they would. And the reason is that their impossible physics claims cannot be supported scientifically with physics. debunkingnoplanes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-lies-of-ace-baker.html






I rest my case, the o/p premise has been shown to be correct, and Exorcists ''analysis'' is a hoax in tatters.
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 05 Jan 2017 21:26 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 21:42 #39

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 16357
  • Likes received: 1711
Debunking the 9/11 No-Planes Theory

Conspiracy Theory FAIL: The 9/11 Video Fakery No-Planes Theory (The Lies of Ace Baker)

Ace Baker taken to pieces.

debunkingnoplanes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-lies-of-ace-baker.html

:yup:
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Hoaxer Condition 05 Jan 2017 22:05 #40

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1723
  • Likes received: 636
(((RottenAr$e))) wrote:
The plane decelerates, as shown here.


:arowup: Bollocks, Bollocks, and yet more Bollocks..... :iitm: :roll:
Your $pam video demonstrates F**K All.



:arowup: Here's a reasonable analysis by Killtown which shows constant speed after impact!
Constant speed is impossible as the rudder should decelerate during the post impact frames!
He correctly calls Fake on the footage but he's wrong regarding his shutter speed comment......... :D :up:
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
MrAnderson is a Bollock….lmao
Last Edit: 06 Jan 2017 00:27 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
Moderators: novum
Powered by Kunena Forum

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it. Secure transactions via paypal.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2019 - May 2020, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 278 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 160 - Raised
( £ 130 GBP )
donation thermometer
47%
Updated
2nd October 2019

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.