Rick Siegel promotes fake video

[defaultdotxbe]

http://www.ricksiegel.com/web/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=119

weve all seen these before, but once again...

seigels version:
-5860825099435530591&hl=en
ETA: thanks phantom :)

original version:
FOGI33HsiCc


also, a thread on SLCF
http://screwloosechange.xbehome.com/index.php?showtopic=1796

[PhantomWolf]

grr, how do you embed a google video?


like this

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5860825099435530591&hl=en

url

[PhantomWolf]

The thing I like best? He makes the tired old claim that the collapse occured in 10 seconds, and yet the video he posts shows it didn't.

[gumboot]

That's a terrible terrible fakery.

-Gumboot

[uk_dave]

The thing I like best? He makes the tired old claim that the collapse occured in 10 seconds, and yet the video he posts shows it didn't.

Ironic, given that the 'truthers' are always accusing rational people of believing the US govt/media without question, and yet when it comes to their CT fantasies about 9/11 the 'truthers' either base their beliefs on being told what to see and what to think by some internet film maker, or expect the 'fencesitters' to see what they are told to see in these videos.

It's the same as faces in the smoke. Some people see it and some people don't. If you have to 'enhance' your video presentation to present evidence which you think is plainly visible but other people can't see, then you really should take a step away and reconsider whether the fault lays with your perception, not the viewers.

[defaultdotxbe]

does anyone have an in depth analysis of these explaining which is the real original and why?

[The Doc]

To be honest, I stopped listening to Siegel after "Pyroclastic Surge" exited his mouth ;)

[defaultdotxbe]

To be honest, I stopped listening to Siegel after "Pyroclastic Surge" exited his mouth ;)
yeah,w ell this is the second time in as many weeks that someone has posted this vid on SLCF, and each time when shown the original they respond with "how do you know yours is original and not the edited one?" or something to that effect

[The Doc]

yeah,w ell this is the second time in as many weeks that someone has posted this vid on SLCF, and each time when shown the original they respond with "how do you know yours is original and not the edited one?" or something to that effect

That can be very frustrating.

The simple fact is, it is a lot easier to add sound to a video as opposed to removing sound from a video.

For example, adding explosions to footage of the collapse of WTC2 would be substantially easier than removing explosions from footage of the collapse of WTC2.

ETA:
Just to clarify :p I am talking about removing specific sounds and adding specific sounds, and not removing the entire audio track ;)

[Par]

each time when shown the original they respond with "how do you know yours is original and not the edited one?" or something to that effect


Even if it wasn’t for what The Doc has said, there’s still a good reason to prefer the explanation that the Siegel video is the one that has been falsified:


Believing the Siegel video has been falsified necessitates positing the existence of some boob who mixed in a fake soundtrack.
Believing that the other video has been falsified, on the other hand, necessitates positing the existence of explosives in the towers* and, as a result, the existence of large conspiracy.


Which is the more parsimonious?

(I suppose they could both have been falsified, but I'm ignoring that for now.)

* = If, of course, that is how we interpret the sounds in video.

[Hourglassmemory]

It's incredible how far people go to look like they know stuff.
They fake truth so their "truth" can float.
********.

[JimBenArm]

Yes, nothing promotes truth so much as fakery and lies!
At least that's what I've heard...

[Unsecured Coins]

I'll have a debunking video up as soon as I get off work.

wait... I'll have a debunking video of this as soon as I get off work, make it, and put it on youtube.

[einsteen]

Different audio tracks, no explosions added or removed on the same background sound track, but 2 totally different tracks

http://i14.tinypic.com/3ydoejd.jpg

See also

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=7561&st=0

[nicepants]

at :14 in the Google video, people start screaming. It sounds like it's from a movie or something. Nothing even close to the other sound track.

[jaydeehess]

The thing I like best? He makes the tired old claim that the collapse occured in 10 seconds, and yet the video he posts shows it didn't.

My stop watch indicates that it is 12 seconds from the time the firemen look up to the point where the camera swings back to show the first debris about to hit the ground. at that point the lower portion of the building is still intact behind the dust.

That puts the lie to anyone who wishes to state that the collapse took less than that.

[Unsecured Coins]

can someone get me those 2 videos in wmv format? Whoever does would rock most awesomely because they are all that I need for my debunking vid