Wednesday, October 29, 2008

The Effect of Zoom and Viewing Angle


Professor Taylor said...

Hey Ace it's Mike from Fetz's show. I love how you tackle these problems. EVERYTHING is able to be duplicated. Unless..... Now, the only thing still itching me (and God knows YOU'RE going to be able to finally answer this) In the ABC video the angle doesn't move around the WTC at all. AND IT SHOULD! Shouldn't it? I mean if the background is shifting ....aren't we revolving as well? Shouldn't we eventually move around the side? I mean the face of the WTC stares straight at you the whole time in their video. There's a slight change (ever slightly) change
in yours. The face slightly alters it's perspective. You can tell we WILL eventually be staring at the side of the building very soon. KT has a great display Here's a link: Oh and finally....IS THAT ALL THEY RECORDED!!!!????? Those 25 seconds??

Anonymous said...

professor taylor,


L.L. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Markus is a fraud. His main obsession is to spread rumors about Ace Baker's personal life. Because he can't even attempt to debunk his work. He's pathetic to say the least.

Markus, go back to the hole from where you came from. You look more like a salesman selling BULLSHIT.

waiguoren said...

Wow. Very nice demonstration.

In general I find that these theories of "montaged" videos (i.e. wholly artificial videos constructed using some sort of bizarro 2D layering approach, as opposed to actual videos with merely the plane superimposed) are quite easily discounted if you simply open Google Maps, identify the buildings in the video on the map, and consider the probable camera location - you'll find that everything checks out and that the buildings are all right where they should be.

Conversely, if there *were* some kind of physically impossible configuration of buildings in the videos, it should be quite easy to prove using Google Maps (or any other map of NYC), yet for some strange reason none of the people promulgating these theories ever takes this approach - hmmm, I wonder why?!?