Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wtc

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Wtc

    Originally posted by deathknight View Post
    imo this is bush's mess and i think he deserves the blame for it ... that comes with being president
    See and that's a key difference. I blame the terrorists for doing it, not someone else for failing to stop it. Heck, you failed to stop it, perhaps it's your fault.

    Lucky Shot

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Wtc

      i'm not saying the terrorists wouldn't have attacked

      i'm saying that a different president may have made a different decision

      is that so hard to understand?

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Wtc

        Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
        See and that's a key difference. I blame the terrorists for doing it, not someone else for failing to stop it. Heck, you failed to stop it, perhaps it's your fault.

        Lucky Shot
        well you see that is where you and i differ

        if you have the power to stop something and don't i think you are just as guilty as the person who did it

        doesn't make me either of us right - just different

        but yeah i guess i did fail to stop it seeing i have the power

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Wtc

          Originally posted by deathknight View Post
          i'm not saying the terrorists wouldn't have attacked

          i'm saying that a different president may have made a different decision

          is that so hard to understand?
          I don't think another president would have stopped it, but there is nothing that can be proven one way or another. The people who could have stopped it were the terrorists.

          Lucky Shot

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Wtc

            i agree with you there but i think it isn't unfair for people to blame bush and my comment wasn't directed at you it was directed at the poster above that post

            the terrorists were wrong to attack people who had nothing to do with whatever gripe they have against the united states

            but there will always be terrorists or freedom fighters or militiamen or whatever they want to call themselves who think they have the right to attack innocents or unsuspecting soldiers, gov't officials etc

            it's up to the good guys to stop them

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Wtc

              Originally posted by Switch View Post
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZpXvCqjemI
              Found video of the pentagon impact.

              The only visible detail of the plane is in a single frame. The refresh rate was too slow on the security camera. Anyway, what is visible is a very long, narrow nose cone/tip. Compare that to the large dome tip of the plane type declared to have made the hit and it becomes arguably clear that it was not a 757.

              Beyond casual argument is math.
              Consider the distance from the camera to the tip of the projectile and to where the projectile meets the maximum width of the cameras field of view.
              Throw in some simple geometry and you can determine exactly how much was visible, according to width.

              see my silly paint drawing to see what I mean. Very basic. http://img295.imageshack.us/my.php?i...ashmathso9.png

              I didn't dig this crazy theory up on anyone else's site. I was just watching the footage and came up with this myself. Don't go saying its not scientifically valid. Geometry is geometry whether or not I have a phd. This test would make a solid determination of how much nose should be visible in the footage. Once thats set, you can look at a 757 and say, "hey -- at x meters back we should be able to see the cockpit windows. I don't see it in this video -- odd."

              Don't blow up about the drawing -- this is a very simple point that isn't geared to prove either way, it'll just provide solid data that could determine either way. Woot for bipartizanship.
              More here and much, much more here
              New to TG?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Wtc

                Originally posted by Lucky Shot View Post
                See and that's a key difference. I blame the terrorists for doing it, not someone else for failing to stop it. Heck, you failed to stop it, perhaps it's your fault.
                The difference between any of us and government is that the latter has huge intelligence capability including humint, electronic surveillence and lord knows what else. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect government to use these resources for genuine anti-terrorism activities and I don't think it's wrong for citizens to expect, nay demand, that they get results.
                BFCL TF2 league admin

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Wtc

                  Originally posted by Switch View Post
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZpXvCqjemI
                  Found video of the pentagon impact.

                  The only visible detail of the plane is in a single frame. The refresh rate was too slow on the security camera. Anyway, what is visible is a very long, narrow nose cone/tip. Compare that to the large dome tip of the plane type declared to have made the hit and it becomes arguably clear that it was not a 757.

                  Beyond casual argument is math.
                  Consider the distance from the camera to the tip of the projectile and to where the projectile meets the maximum width of the cameras field of view.
                  Throw in some simple geometry and you can determine exactly how much was visible, according to width.

                  see my silly paint drawing to see what I mean. Very basic. http://img295.imageshack.us/my.php?i...ashmathso9.png

                  I didn't dig this crazy theory up on anyone else's site. I was just watching the footage and came up with this myself. Don't go saying its not scientifically valid. Geometry is geometry whether or not I have a phd. This test would make a solid determination of how much nose should be visible in the footage. Once thats set, you can look at a 757 and say, "hey -- at x meters back we should be able to see the cockpit windows. I don't see it in this video -- odd."

                  Don't blow up about the drawing -- this is a very simple point that isn't geared to prove either way, it'll just provide solid data that could determine either way. Woot for bipartizanship.
                  The plane is on-screen in that security camera footage for exactly 2 frames. The 2nd frame shows the fireball as the plane strikes the pentagon, leaving only the first frame showing the plane itself. (So far, we agree.)

                  Now, during that one frame, you don't have to talk about whether x meters of the plane were visible and whether there should be cockpit windows or not...the ENTIRE PLANE fits in the screen at once, with the small problem that 95% of it is blocked by the other parking meter. The little bit of the plane that sticks out around the parking meter has a total width of about 2-3 pixels on either side. With 3 pixels, you can't tell me whether you saw windows on the cockpit, or a long pointy thing, or a short round thing. Its 3 pixels!

                  The larger "object" you see on the right isn't part of the plane at all. Thats just the smoke trail. Try advancing the video one more frame and notice the smoke trail is still there, and now covers the whole distance from the side of the image up to the edge of the fireball.

                  It was a good theory, unfortunately you didn't bother to actually check the data before using your theory to jump to a conclusion. :row__585:

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Wtc

                    Originally posted by Root View Post
                    The difference between any of us and government is that the latter has huge intelligence capability including humint, electronic surveillence and lord knows what else. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect government to use these resources for genuine anti-terrorism activities and I don't think it's wrong for citizens to expect, nay demand, that they get results.
                    The fixation of some to blame the government for blowing up the WTC is as wrong as blaming the UK government for the UK subway bombing. People are pointing the finger in the wrong direction and they should put the blame on the terrorists. Our media has misrepresented the information gathering so that it seems the US is spying heavily on the US as opposed to terrorists.

                    Lucky Shot

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Wtc

                      well if the UK gov't had good intelligence that someone might attack the subway system and did not increase security then yes i think criticism and blame can be laid at their feet

                      and i don't think anyone here thinks the terrorists are free of blame

                      but it seems that you don't think the government has an obligation to take reasonable actions to protect it's citizens from terrorists

                      or am i reading your statements wrong?

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Wtc

                        The blame resides with the people perpetrating the crime. Say if you hear a rumor that someone doesn't like you. Three nights later you wake up and find your yard toilet papered, someone has smashed in your car windows and splashed paint on the side of your house. By your logic your to blame for ignoring the warning.

                        Lucky Shot

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Wtc

                          Originally posted by deathknight View Post
                          well if the UK gov't had good intelligence that someone might attack the subway system and did not increase security then yes i think criticism and blame can be laid at their feet
                          What is this "good intelligence" you speak of? The memo? There was no specific threat in that memo, no time, no place, no actionable information. I believe the public would not have tolerated the increased screening at airports and increased surveillance pre-911. People complain about the inconvenience now, but pre-911 it would've been called "fear mongering" don't you think?
                          New to TG?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Wtc

                            Originally posted by deathknight View Post
                            unless someone was to try to recreate the disaster many times under controlled circumstances, called an experiment, then we won't know really what happened

                            They recreated it in a lab several times and were unable to observer the structure fail. Eventually they resorted to computer modeling and were unable to observe the structure fail. They began changing settings in the computer model to force failure. Eventually they made it fail.
                            |TG|Switch

                            Better known as:
                            That noob who crashed the chopper.
                            That noob who ran over the mine.
                            That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
                            That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Wtc

                              Originally posted by Kerostasis View Post
                              It was a good theory, unfortunately you didn't bother to actually check the data before using your theory to jump to a conclusion.
                              I didn't make a conclusion. You guys are incapable of examining evidence without already having a conclusion decided.

                              I watched the video several times and im freeze framing it now. 3 pixels? what are you talking about.

                              Here's a nice biased video. They have their conclusion already, but they provide support.
                              Whether you believe it or not, how does on refute some of the things they put up for argument?
                              http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm
                              |TG|Switch

                              Better known as:
                              That noob who crashed the chopper.
                              That noob who ran over the mine.
                              That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
                              That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Wtc

                                Originally posted by Switch View Post
                                I didn't make a conclusion. You guys are incapable of examining evidence without already having a conclusion decided.

                                I watched the video several times and im freeze framing it now. 3 pixels? what are you talking about.
                                Wait, you don't know what a pixel is? I'm sorry, I should have explained that. A pixel is an area on screen recorded by a digital camera or file format as being a single point, so everything in that area is displayed with an identical color, shading, and so on, making any details inside the pixel impossible to distuinguish when the video is played later. :)

                                Now, let me repeat myself: The plane sticks out around the parking meter by about 3 pixels. Its also out of focus. If I give you a 3-pixel representation of an out-of-focus nose cone of a plane, you couldn't look at it and tell the difference between a 747 and a Cessna, let alone make out the windows on the cockpit. The camera just doesn't store enough information.

                                You do get a little more of the tail-fin though, since that sticks out above the parking meter. Still not much, but its better than what you have on the nose cone.

                                Comment

                                Connect

                                Collapse

                                TeamSpeak 3 Server

                                Collapse

                                Twitter Feed

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X