Title: Where Is This Smoke/dust Coming From
Description: before the main collapse?
Description: before the main collapse?
arie - September 10, 2007 09:21 AM (GMT)
Was browsing through some footage, and noticed that smoke/dust seems to billowing from the bottom of the north face of WTC7, just before the main structure collapses. Look at the bottom left of WTC7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926V_0C3pdQ
Cut from the DVD can be downloaded here (use virtualdub mpeg or VLC to play)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=73QH9OI1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=926V_0C3pdQ
Cut from the DVD can be downloaded here (use virtualdub mpeg or VLC to play)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=73QH9OI1
Patches O'Houlihan - September 10, 2007 09:41 AM (GMT)
It's probably coming from wtc7 given that it was damaged, on fire and suffering from structural failure at the time of those pictures.
JointPlays - September 10, 2007 09:48 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Patches O'Houlihan @ Sep 10 2007, 09:41 AM) |
| It's probably coming from wtc7 given that it was damaged, on fire and suffering from structural failure at the time of those pictures. |
Good one.
:D
waterdancer - September 10, 2007 12:06 PM (GMT)
My guess is that the east penthouse collapse would have contributed to what we see in this video.
The Grammaton Cleric - September 10, 2007 12:52 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (JointPlays @ Sep 10 2007, 09:48 AM) | ||
Good one. :D |
LOL Too funny. :lol:
nrmis - September 11, 2007 02:11 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| Was browsing through some footage, and noticed that smoke/dust seems to billowing from the bottom of the north face of WTC7, just before the main structure collapses. Look at the bottom left of WTC7. |
| QUOTE |
| It's probably coming from wtc7 given that it was damaged, on fire and suffering from structural failure at the time of those pictures. |
Wow, just wow. :blink:
Elder4Truth - September 13, 2007 02:12 AM (GMT)
Patches just might be able to get a job with the BBC. I mean, before WTC even collapsed, they stated that it had indeed fallen down, "probably due to weakening" from fires and previous damage.
We got your number, dear.
We got your number, dear.
chris sarns - September 17, 2007 12:44 PM (GMT)
There were no fires below the 7th floor according to NIST.
Around 4:45 p.m., a photograph showed fires floors7, 8, 9 and 11 near the middle of the north face.
All that smoke is not from those fires.
When the video starts, the east penthouse is already gone.
They were announcing the emanate collapse of WTC 7 so they had the camera rolling on WTC 7.
They show a frame or two of a cop in a car, then cut to the collapse after the explosions that caused that billowing smoke cloud.
Then, for no apparent reason, they cut to a longer shot right in the middle of the collapse.
Around 4:45 p.m., a photograph showed fires floors7, 8, 9 and 11 near the middle of the north face.
All that smoke is not from those fires.
When the video starts, the east penthouse is already gone.
They were announcing the emanate collapse of WTC 7 so they had the camera rolling on WTC 7.
They show a frame or two of a cop in a car, then cut to the collapse after the explosions that caused that billowing smoke cloud.
Then, for no apparent reason, they cut to a longer shot right in the middle of the collapse.
Patches O'Houlihan - September 17, 2007 12:52 PM (GMT)
Well you know, if the news media were being told that wtc7 was in danger of collapse because of the damage it had suffered and the fires which had raged unfought for a number of hours, then it's hardly surprising that they are going to give this as the reason when they inadvertently reported the 'is going to collapse soon' as 'it has collapsed'.
As for working for the BBC, perhaps Mr Sarns should apply since he obviously has a directors eye for how news coverage should be shot and mixed. :)
As for working for the BBC, perhaps Mr Sarns should apply since he obviously has a directors eye for how news coverage should be shot and mixed. :)
miragememories - September 17, 2007 06:18 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Patches O'Houlihan @ Sep 17 2007, 08:52 AM) |
| Well you know, if the news media were being told that wtc7 was in danger of collapse because of the damage it had suffered and the fires which had raged unfought for a number of hours, then it's hardly surprising that they are going to give this as the reason when they inadvertently reported the 'is going to collapse soon' as 'it has collapsed'. As for working for the BBC, perhaps Mr Sarns should apply since he obviously has a directors eye for how news coverage should be shot and mixed. :) |
chris sarns is extremely well researched on the timeline for WTC 7!
MM
chris sarns - September 18, 2007 09:47 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Patches O'Houlihan @ Sep 17 2007, 04:52 AM) |
| Well you know, if the news media were being told that wtc7 was in danger of collapse because of the damage it had suffered and the fires which had raged unfought for a number of hours, then it's hardly surprising that they are going to give this as the reason when they inadvertently reported the 'is going to collapse soon' as 'it has collapsed'. |
You ignored the FACT that NBC edited out the beginning of the collapse.
That's when the 'clap of thunder' occurred.
The live audio is down until the building is about half way down.