Sunday, February 16, 2014

Why Jim Fetzer /Richard Hall/Ace Baker etc. Are Wrong About This Fl.175 Video [Hezarkhani]

              Fig.1: short gif clip- image detail from the full, original Michael Hezarkhani video shown on CNN on 09.12/01                   

One Easy To See Reason Why The Hezarkhani Fl.175 Video [Above] Is   100% Computer-Faked.

[N.B.Update 03/26/14: this post originally contained 2 examples that   raised serious questions about the authenticity of the Hezarkhani video. One has now been removed until I can firmly establish whether or not it is factually relevant- regards, obf.]


Below is an example of a very simple imagery analysis that conclusively proves that the famous Michael Hezarkhani video of Flight 175 crashing into the WTC South Tower is a 100% digital fabrication manufactured wholly via computer simulation, and not a real live movie with  just a plane image inserted later , as Ace Baker [Colin Alexander] contends, nor is it a genuine movie with a projected holographic plane image captured in real time, as Richard Hall and  Prof. Jim Fetzer  contend. 

A Perfect Example Of Exactly What's Missing From Nearly All So- Called 911 Research!

Far  more importantly, this analysis serves  as  an excellent , simple example of the type of detailed imagery analysis that is, sadly, completely missing from the so-called 911 " scientific research"  of  persons such as Prof. Jim Fetzer, Ace Baker, Richard Hall, Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Morgan Reynolds, and organizations such as "We Are Change", "Loose Change", "Pilots For 9/11 Truth", "Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth" etc. etc. [ad infinitum]

Naming The Guilty 

All of these persons and organizations listed above, as well as others not listed, are guilty as charged of elevating entirely unexamined/unverified  imagery [i.e. any/all alleged 9/11 imagery cited by themselves or others-  videos and still photos- including, but not limited to the here briefly reviewed Hezarkhani video], to the level of "genuine evidence" without ever having performed anything like the simple investigative procedures demonstrated in the example given here, or other, similarly related imagery verification tests. 


In fact, this complete lack of any serious  concerted effort towards imagery verification by 9/11 "researchers" before citing that imagery as being " conclusive evidence" [of whatever] , is symptomatic of 99% of the 9/11 "research/truth" community, including all of those claiming some sort of scientific educational background! 

"A Prima Facie" Claim?

Indeed Professor Jim Fetzer, and others associated with him have gone as far as to specifically claim that  imagery like this [ and more specifically, the alleged "live" 911 US network broadcasts], has "a prima facie" justification to be regarded as genuine by any/all "legitimate" 9/11 researchers, and that the simple tests illustrated here [and similar] are not even procedurally necessary for the investigating 9/11 "scientist" !  [N.B. although never broadcast "live", as the MSM broadcasts were all claimed to be, the Hezarkhani clip was shown on CNN and elsewhere shortly after the events of 9/11.]

With all that I hereby submit: 

A Simple To Understand  Reason Why The Hezarkhani Video Is 100% Computer-Faked:

 The "Teardrop" "Fl.175 Stationary Plane Image" Analysis:

                             user posted image

 Fig.2 :Part of the Hzarkhani video with a line drawn in the exact center of sequential frames

Building Moves- Plane Stationary! 

 The short, gif Hezarkhani video analysis above is an older [2007 or 8, if I remember correctly] analysis [by "teardrop"],  of the last few frames of the Hezarkhani video. 

Notice that the tail of the plane remains exactly centered in the consecutive frames [red line], and that in reality, in this segment of the video, it is  the building image that moves towards the plane image from right to left , and not the plane image moving towards the building image from left to right as it should be, and  that that moving building image is what creates the optical illusion that the plane image is still moving toward the WTC2 building.

The plane  image is supposedly moving at over 500 mph across screen. 

Fact: 500 mph Objects Are Impossible To Track With Hand Operated Cameras

The simple fact is  that it is impossible for a camera held by an individual to accurately track an object moving at that speed, not without significant image blur from frame to frame.  

If you don't believe me [understandable], try asking  a professional sports photographer who has to photograph Formula 1 race cars  for a living,  cars which routinely travel at about one third of the alleged speed of the plane image in the Hezarkhani video - and they'll tell you the cars are impossible to accurately track at that speed [ 100+ mph]. 

This means that any/all 9/11 videos showing, and successfully tracking, from fairly close up, a plane moving across the sky,  where the camera operator is forced to track the plane image via "panning" the camera to keep it in view, and does so successfully [i.e without significant image blur], are fakes.  To do so  successfully [no blur] is physically impossible. 

And furthermore,  to keep the 500 mph plane image perfectly centered for several frames[as  it is been so miraculously tracked  is _doubly_ impossible.

Hezarkhani Video allegedly Shot From the Deck of a Boat !

 It is also worth bearing in mind that the Hezarkhani video was allegedly shot with a hand held camera, from the deck of a boat; that is, an unstable platform environment. 


The Michael Hezarkhani video that allegedly depicts what happened when Flight 175  struck the South face of WTC2, is one of the most famous of the  911 "plane into building" videos, most likely because it was shown on mainstream networks shortly after the alleged events of 911, on CNN. 

Variations On A Theme

Jim Fetzer, Ace Baker and Richard Hall all contend that except for the plane image itself, the Hezarkhani video is genuine. 

 Variation 1: that is, Hall and Fetzer contend that the buildings shown in the Hezarkhani video and others like it are genuine, live, "real time"  images , while the plane image itself is a holographic image [ projected via an invisible, "cloaked" military plane flying alongside the holographic projection], captured in real time by the alleged photographer [Hezarkhani]. 

Variation 2:

 If I understand him correctly, Baker, unlike Hall, claims that the plane image is instead  an "insert", that is, a plane image that was later [i.e. post real time filming]inserted into an otherwise live filming of an explosion occurring on the south face of WTC2. 

Concluding Observations:     

1]: Like 99% of "9/11 researchers", neither Hall , Fetzer Or Baker have ever made any even half-way serious attempt to closely examine  either the Hezarkhni video , nor any other alleged live 9/11 video or photo, in the simple yet revealing manner depicted via the example shown here . 

2] More importantly, it can be safely concluded that NONE of the alleged 9/11 imagery, regardless of source, can be trusted. All of it would need to be thoroughly analyzed using both the methodologies briefly illustrated here as well others related, BEFORE any  alleged 9/11 videos or still photos could be  seriously used as "irrefutable evidence" to support any "9/11- what really happened" hypothesis. 

Regards, onebornfree.

More About "Onebornfree":

"Onebornfree" is a personal freedom consultant a problem solver, and a musician. He can be reached at: onebornfreeatyahoodotcom  .

Music Info: 

Onebornfree's [aka Fake-Eye D"] Music channel

Home studio recording example "Somewhere Over The Rainbow Blues":Youtube link :

Live solo example [own composition "Dreams [Anarchist's Blues]:

Youtube link:

Onebornfree Personal Freedom Blogsites: