Considerable videos...

[JonathanClement]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?

[Pardalis]

BS.

Anything else?

[DGM]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?
Things explode in fires.

[JonathanClement]

BS.

Anything else?

Come on, be more specific than that! :(

Things explode in fires.

What about the people who said they had "Reason to believe that there were explosive devices?" And how about that explosion at the beginning?

[Unsecured Coins]

given the amount of dust in the air and the respirators they are wearing, it would appear the buildings are already down. did they control demolition the pile just to make sure?

[twinstead]

What about the people who said they had "Reason to believe that there were explosive devices?" And how about that explosion at the beginning?

A link or two would make this a more efficient debate

[JonathanClement]

A link or two would make this a more efficient debate

Did you watch the whole video?

[scissorhands]

BS.

Anything else?

Think again, this is a LUCUS production.
The same Lucus that informed us about the usefulness of balls of string, come the NWO/FEMA deathcamp scenario.
Not a youtube videomaker to be taken lightly.

[1337m4n]

And how about that explosion at the beginning?

Yes indeed. How about it?

I'm tired of doing the Truth Movement's work for it. If you think that explosion was a controlled demolition blast, its up to you to explain why.

Bear in mind that a true controlled demolition would have MANY explosions of that volume, not just one.

[jsfisher]

Come on, be more specific than that!

Let me understand this. You are asking for specifics as to why it is not convincing? Don't you have that a little backwards?

[DGM]

What about the people who said they had "Reason to believe that there were explosive devices?" And how about that explosion at the beginning?

And what reason would that be?

When exactly was that first video taken and where? Did one of those cars that were on fire explode? You wouldn't be using speculation alone to say that the noise we heard was a bomb would you?

[T.A.M.]

JC:

You ask what about the people who suspected "Explosive Devices".

Why is this anything but routine. Go back to the moment...ground zero. There has been a terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. less than 10 years earlier there was another one, involving a truck bomb. Does it surprise you that in the chaos of the moments, before all was known, many people, experts and laymen, suspected, or were concerned about, "explosive devices"???

TAM:)

[Jonnyclueless]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?


Funny. Because that explosion sound is the exact same sound made by steel being heated up and cracking. So if you are implying that it is caused by explosives, what method are you using to rule out all the many other causes of explosion sounds?

[stateofgrace]

What about the people who said they had "Reason to believe that there were explosive devices?" And how about that explosion at the beginning?
So what are these people describing?

First floor watching tv sounded like some one ran into my home sounded
like [an explosion] house shook


We heard a rumble,and then what sounded like an explosion


Sounded like an explosion


I heard something exploded


sounded like an underground explosion


I first heard this loud-loud booming sound


Sounded like thunder but lasted a lot longer thought something might have exploded


Heard loud explosion/thunder


It sounded and felt like to me a large object had just exploded in the pasture.


Bombs going off? A controlled demolition ?

Here is a clue. (http://156.110.192.25/atoka.html)

Just because people describe explosions does not mean that it was caused by explosives.

[twinstead]

Did you watch the whole video?

I've watched the whole damn video a HUNDRED times. Tell me what specifically you think is the one part where it proves the sounds heard were actually explosives, and why the witness accounts it refers to somehow supersedes other witness's accounts that heard no 'expolsives' at all.

[Walter Ego]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_2284547f96d11058c2.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=11630)

[Pardalis]

And here we are, talking about molten "metal", "explosions" heard and what not.

This is 2006 all over again.

Sorry, I'm not playing this time.

[Anti-sophist]

This is 2003 all over again.


Fixed.

[kookbreaker]

Didn't we cover this film before? The explosion being added in since the reactions of the people are not those of people reacting to an explosive sound?

[Unsecured Coins]

we did? hell... I didn't know

[kookbreaker]

The search function is slow and failing me. But IIRC, the thing of note was that the reactions of the cameraman and people, especially the firefighters, were not to an explosion but to each other.

[Magenta]

I've seen this video (or at least the first part) discussed before. There's some discussion on this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=72425&page=2) (starting at post #45). See especially Gumboot's post (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2530502&postcount=60) #60 and that links to more discussion on this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=77392&page=6) after post #211:

This is probably the most concise summary of my conclusions, after running the video through editing software to have a look at it:

It doesn't. The sound is fake. It has been added. The fireman in question says "I know that, but you gotta get back, the city's exploded."

The people present talk over the explosion, as if it had never happened. In addition, the explosion is heard most clearly in the low frequency range and upper range. The volume levels for the explosion are well below all other sound in the area - the voices of the people peak frequently and yet the only peaking on the explosion is below 60 Hz.

The lower end could be explained by a distant explosion, however the high-volume upper end indicates close proximity to the explosion. Consumer handycams have very poor performance at the lower end of the audio range, and professional cameras are equipped with shotgun microphones designed specifically to pick up human voices.

There is no echo on the explosion - and yet it supposedly occured in a crowded city - which produces multiple echos.

-Gumboot

[johnny karate]

It's funny to watch someone who has discovered a youtube video for the very first time act as if no one else has seen this video either. Because it makes perfect sense that the case-cracker for the biggest conspiracy in history spends years sitting dormant on youtube waiting for the right genius to come along and unlock its hidden clues.

[gumboot]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?


It's fake.

[kookbreaker]

Glad to know my insanity is not manufacturing false memories.

[beachnut]

Did you watch the whole video?
Did anyone live through 9/11? What is your point? What is your take? Just presenting a video seems a waste without some analysis in the OP.

If you were awake on 9/11 you have seen all this junk. If you took a break and had to work, then you were spared the endless bs from the news trying to find something ever other minute, every other day. The explosives are news bs junk, and false. The video is lame, made up to fool idiots who want to believe stupid CT tripe.

Since the terrorist picked planes to impact buildings, why risk 9/11 with stupid explosives? We were looking for idiots trying to bomb the towers, not planes.

Thanks for brining up the video and trying to waste another hour on this old junk, but it is lame, and the news programs had you leaping before you looked all day.

Here is the key to explosives. If 9/11 was done with explosives, there would be evidence of blown up people. There are none.

Bingo; bs

[thebestodb]

Is there a way to tell the difference from burned bodies and blown up bodies at the ground zero pile.

[Unsecured Coins]

yup. I cleaned up many an IED site in Iraq to tell you what a blown up body versus a burnt body looks like

[Slayhamlet]

What's "considerable" about them? They're of considerably poor quality, if that's what you mean.

[1337m4n]

Here's what I consider a considerable video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxklB-PR7kA

[Brainache]

Here's what I consider a considerable video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxklB-PR7kA

That is just wrong 1337m4n. I was getting ready to hear all about "clunkety Klunk" and all I get is Rick bloody Astley.

You suck!:k:

[timhau]

It's funny to watch someone who has discovered a youtube video for the very first time act as if no one else has seen this video either. Because it makes perfect sense that the case-cracker for the biggest conspiracy in history spends years sitting dormant on youtube waiting for the right genius to come along and unlock its hidden clues.

Well put, sir, well put. Let me also point out that it makes perfect sense that the very same NWO that was able to get away with blowing up one big and two enormous office towers in downtown Manhattan, cannot remove a video from youtube.

[eromitlab]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?

This is what I love about twoofers. Mainstream Corporate Control Media are all lying shills engaging in wide-scale censorship... except in the heat of the moment on 9/11, when they were telling the God's honest truth about secondary explosions and then they had to have their testimony silenced... but they did a lousy job of trying to memory-hole it and it's leaked to approximately 7000 HAY GUISE DEY SAID BOMB ON TEEVEE ON 9/11 DAT MEANS DERE WUR BOMBS AT WTC DUH INSIDE JOB WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!11!!! youtube videos.

1337m3n's video is a far more reputable and solid representation. Thank you, sir.

[Blender Head]

How come these alleged explosions were not heard just before or during the collapse of all 3 [emphasis added ala Mr. Gage] high-rise skyscrapers?

[AkuManiMani]

Here's what I consider a considerable video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxklB-PR7kA

DANGIT! Rick Rolled again >_<

[cloudshipsrule]

It's been said the collapses sounded like trains. What's the obvious conclusion drawn from those quotes?


http://loosetrains911.blogspot.com/

[DC]

The search function is slow and failing me. But IIRC, the thing of note was that the reactions of the cameraman and people, especially the firefighters, were not to an explosion but to each other.

how should they have reacted?

[Drudgewire]

We really need a "running around in circles" emoticon here.

[DC]

:notm

[16.5]

Okay, here's a thread to post videos that are convincing. Here's one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw

What's your take on this vid? Esspecially the first part that contains the explosion?

The original of that tape with the firemen talking on the phone has been located. The explosion was added into the scene. An analysis was provided demonstrating that the explosion was not recorded with the same microphone. All of this was done on this site within the last two months.

It is 100% fake.

I stopped watching it because it is fake.

FAKE.

[jaydeehess]

Didn't we cover this film before? The explosion being added in since the reactions of the people are not those of people reacting to an explosive sound?

I believe so, and I was a bit surprised to find that it took 19 posts before someone noticed the reactions of the people in the video do not match the sound of that explosion. The firemen in particular are just standing about looking at each other rather than in the direction of the 'explosion'. The only person to react would be the guy on the phone who looks towards the firemen. No one ducks or cringes as would be expected and as is seen even in known controlled demolitions byb people who can here the countdown and know that an explosion is coming and when.

I call fake!

When a video with a faked clip, why would I be expected to watch any further?

[DC]

.....

I call fake!

When a video with a faked clip, why would I be expected to watch any further?

alot No Planers say that too :)

[CurtC]

When looking at the YouTube link in the OP, I saw another on the side for a video titled "Strange things in 911 footage - look closely": http://youtube.com/watch?v=r3AwEz0K-UI

Would anyone have a clue what I'm supposed to be looking closely at? They took a video of when 175 hit the South Tower and looped over and over again as it was approaching. It was pretty surreal but I have no idea what the point was.

The description has a link to nwodetox.info, which is a page that says in big letters "Was 9/11 a cover up?" but is other wise a blank page, with no links.

What the hell is all that?