9/11 Solved!

reply to post by Vitruvian


Still waiting on your response. Ever been to the WTC? Ever been inside it?

CJ

reply to post by ColoradoJens


You are clearly playing tactics here.

I'll explain it one more time.

I was saying that the pic must be a fake.

Then I saw you post this to the other poster,

Clearly you know nothing about me. Google Mike Kehoe.

So I gave you a link to a site where they were discussing the inconsistencies in Mike Kehoe's story. What does it matter if they don't think the pic itself was faked, I didn't post it as evidence for that, and the one doesn't exclude the other as I have already pointed out.

You are just being pathetic because you think you caught me on a inconsistency. But it is moot. You are just sidestepping the fact that you can't debunk my statement.

Come on, just tell what causes the shadow, and you have won.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Still waiting on your response. Ever been to the WTC? Ever been inside it?

CJ

Have you? Prove it. Why is a man from Colorado with a Danish name in New York in the WTC so often?

reply to post by TraitorKiller


I see. It is all about "winning" with you. You really don't care about what you are saying, I was wrong about you.
Perhaps you might want to debate your idea that the photo is fake with the people on the forum you linked that say it is from an earlier excercise. That should be interesting. Good luck.

CJ

reply to post by ColoradoJens


You realize that you have reacted to every piece of visible evidence put forward in this thread in that exact smug, empty, non substantial manner.

Sidestepping, deflecting, never actually answering the issue.

I think it is pretty clear what you are, it already was to me way before your suck up u2u trying to play "good cop" with me.

Originally posted by TraitorKiller

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Still waiting on your response. Ever been to the WTC? Ever been inside it?

CJ

Have you? Prove it. Why is a man from Colorado with a Danish name in New York in the WTC so often?

TK.........pay no mind to her.........The Colorado Fem is a fraud - She's a fake poster and a government shill/agent........I have seen many just like here - here and in other palces - and she fits the bill to a tee. ATS is notoriousl for having them aboard. Whether or not AYS actually promotes such behavior is anotherstory...........Best way to handle INTNENTIONALLY disruptive shills like this is to ignore them....

If she continues I'll hit the ALARM BUTTON on her.........I already have a report written and prepared.......

Originally posted by TraitorKiller

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Vitruvian

 

Still waiting on your response. Ever been to the WTC? Ever been inside it?

CJ

Have you? Prove it. Why is a man from Colorado with a Danish name in New York in the WTC so often?

Haha. Who said I am from Colorado? I am, just so you know. Lived in NYC from 1996-2004. Worked for Northwestern Mutual Life and sold financial products to people who made a lot of money. There just so happend to be a lot of those types who worked in the trade centers. I also started and owned a production company and made plays, movies and tv shows. I know, I am a renesance type of guy, what can I say?

CJ

You keep quoting letsrollforums and cluesinfo, two of the most pathetic and obvious troll/disinfo sites.

Those two sites are either made deliberately to distract from the real issues, by "professional" disinfo agents, or REALLY owned/operated AND visited by people with a negative IQ. (Since, frankly, i cannot see anyone who is smarter than a potato taking most of the threads and their logic there seriously)

The threads there are so pathetic, it's nothing but armchair wannabe scientists who have not the slightest expertise looking at images and videos and believing they have any knowledge to determine what is "faked", hoaxed etc. - where it's amazing how, for example, a mis-interpreted JPEG artifact (where i am sure that NO SINGLE PERSON on those forums even knows what this actually is) can easily be taken as a "pseudo proof" rendering an entire story as a "fake" or "lie".

It's just amazing, i don't even need to spend a LONG time on those forums because the lies and trolling is just so obvious.

* someone claims a footage of a falling person must be fake since, in his opinion, the shadow "detaches" in a weird way, since he, obviously, cannot intellectually grasp or see that the person moves away a little from the building, making the shadow "shift away"...something a 3 year old in pre-school would understand

* someone pointing out jpeg artifacts and lines in some youtube footage which are clearly compression artifacts, which, in his opinion, makes the footage (and any other footage of 1000s of them) "fakes".

* fireman "shadow" is the same nonsense, obviously someone has never taken a photo and cannot understand why a shadow would look like it does on the picture, eg. if taken with a flash and other media/lights present

The fact that the rest of your "theories" are just lacking ANY common sense/logic etc. not even touched, the infamous "they put scarecrows on the WTC so they look like victims"...or "they hired actors playing victims" theories...ALL AGAIN coming from the same, two sites. Who operates those sites? What is their agenda?

reply to post by Vitruvian


Haha. Wow, you "riled" me up with your "she" comments - the other ones I'm just fine with. I've been called much worse than that. Please, by all means, please submit your "report".

I do find it telling however that neither you or traitorkiller have ever been at the WTC and have no idea of what went on there, other than from september clues. It says a lot, and most of it isn't good.

CJ

reply to post by flexy123


watch it flexy 123 - they may make a "report" and alert the authorities on you too. Blaringly obvious disinformation and lies go with their creedo of "it was all fake".

CJ

That photo's real, it would be hard to get that over saturation in the back light without a flash in front. Also all the other shadows match a forward flash and back light.
My dad lost some friends on 9/11, I remember how he felt for years afterwards.
Stop with the baiting you two, Coloradojens poses real questions and you divert. If you don't want to have a conversation about this, and yes I'm trying to see the information from your side, The gash in the building does look weird. But citing photography and calling shadows fake when they're not, doesn't go.

EDIT: Not to Mention that if you took that photo, you'd be at the top of the stairs, he'd be coming up. Thus the angle already provides a shadow.

reply to post by Finishthis


So where is the shadow cast on?

Originally posted by Finishthis
That photo's real, it would be hard to get that over saturation in the back light without a flash in front. Also all the other shadows match a forward flash and back light.
My dad lost some friends on 9/11, I remember how he felt for years afterwards.
Stop with the baiting you two, Coloradojens poses real questions and you divert. If you don't want to have a conversation about this, and yes I'm trying to see the information from your side, The gash in the building does look weird. But citing photography and calling shadows fake when they're not, doesn't go.

EDIT: Not to Mention that if you took that photo, you'd be at the top of the stairs, he'd be coming up. Thus the angle already provides a shadow.

edit on 13-7-2012 by Finishthis because: (no reason given)

You just had to go and give a proper explination, didn't you? I appreciate the fact you see I am just trying to discuss the issue. According to the posters mentioned above, your dad in fact did not lose any friends and therefor you are lying. Amazing how this type of thought can be so influenced by a couple of massively debunked websites. And expect your analysis of the photo to be fought with tooth and nail.

ETA: I see it has already begun.

CJ

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by ColoradoJens

 

You realize that you have reacted to every piece of visible evidence put forward in this thread in that exact smug, empty, non substantial manner.

Sidestepping, deflecting, never actually answering the issue.

I think it is pretty clear what you are, it already was to me way before your suck up u2u trying to play "good cop" with me.

That's probably because I am smug, empty and non substantial in general.
My U2U was an attempt to say, we disagree and it is ok to disagree and still have a genial conversation.

CJ

reply to post by flexy123

* someone claims a footage of a falling person must be fake since, in his opinion, the shadow "detaches" in a weird way, since he, obviously, cannot intellectually grasp or see that the person moves away a little from the building, making the shadow "shift away"...something a 3 year old in pre-school would understand

So you are 2 years old.

In order for that shadow to move meters away in last few seconds, the person needs to move away a few meters during his fall during the last few seconds. What made him change his trajectory so violently?

The shadow was connected to him the whole way down.

someone pointing out jpeg artifacts and lines in some youtube footage which are clearly compression artifacts, which, in his opinion, makes the footage (and any other footage of 1000s of them) "fakes".

Can you give an example of that?

fireman "shadow" is the same nonsense, obviously someone has never taken a photo and cannot understand why a shadow would look like it does on the picture, eg. if taken with a flash and other media/lights present

Jeah, bla bla, so what surface is the shadow cast on?

reply to post by ColoradoJens

That's probably because I am smug, empty and non substantial in general.

So why should anyone value anything you say?

reply to post by TraitorKiller

In order for that shadow to move meters away in last few seconds, the person needs to move away a few meters during his fall during the last few seconds. What made him change his trajectory so violently?

The shadow was with him the whole way down.

You contradict yourself. Either his shadow moved away in the last few seconds or it was with him the whole way down. Can't have both. And my guess as to what made him change his trajectory so violently? The CGI artist went to community college and never graduated but had an uncle in the DOD who got him the job.

CJ

reply to post by TraitorKiller

So why should anyone value anything you say?

Because I rock. I also can juggle a soccer ball like a 1000 times. I have been told I have a nice smile and great hair.
Also, may use the phrase "jeah, blah blah blah?" I like it a lot.

CJ

reply to post by ColoradoJens

You contradict yourself. Either his shadow moved away in the last few seconds or it was with him the whole way down. Can't have both.

Wow, talking semantics, lol, you are really pathetic, yes the wjhole way down, except for the last few seconds.

And you're right, we can''t have both, yet it happens in the vid.

reply to post by TraitorKiller


You are correct. His shadow moves accordingly as his trajectory puts him further from the building.
See?

CJ