PARALLAX 4U

[1neroamd]

puurualuluuax

you speak English?

[existenceisfake]

This video is excellent. Simon Shack is also utterly ignorant regarding perspective distortion, i.e., how lens focal length can distort an image. For those interested, watch this: watch?v=4xGlCSE7V70

[AnonymousTruther]

So, for you, that's proof of planes?!

ROFL!

[YougeneDebs]

AT~ This video is about the disinfo of Simon Shack promoting parallax as proof of fakery.

Please stay on point. Thanks.

[dimmiecaddie]

You can call me mister if you'll google that CBS address for yourself. You just want traffic on this dead end video, so I'll just leave it to you and spotbelly to figure out why you don't know where the CBS building is located. Why don't you cop a ticket on your computer and take some real pictures of this stuff? I thought all these pictures were faked, so what are you doing anyway?

[YougeneDebs]

dim~ Who told you that "all these pictures were faked"?

Or, did you make that up yourself?

[dimmiecaddie]

Who told you to rag on me, your boss?

[stbays]

Maybe I misunderstood the last part, but it seems as though it's saying you do think there was fakery going on. Am I mistaken?

[YougeneDebs]

Well, I have already demonstrated that some kind of fakery was afoot with "Bogey At 2 O'Clock"; have you watched it?

The real questions are "What kind?" and "To what extent?"

Thanks for your interest!

[stbays]

Not yet and I'll give it a view, considering how you've been far more reasonable then other theorist. I promise to keep any comments on that video polite and relevent to the topic.

[fresniak]

I personally think that in the case of Verrazzano Bridge, it was not due to parallax. On other issues I can agree with you, but not there, sorry.

In that case it looks like a 3d generated scenario rotating around the towers. Towers are not spinning, so there was no change of vantage point.

[YougeneDebs]

fresniak~ You say: "Towers are not spinning, so there was no change of vantage point."

Please consider the idea that a moving helicopter changes its 'vantage point' with every passing second.

BTW, if you have the impression that I said something somewhere that the 'bridge thing' was due to parallax, please show me where you got that impression. Thanks!

[fresniak]

"BTW, if you have the impression that I said something somewhere that the 'bridge thing' was due to parallax"

No you didn't mention the verrazzano, but I think it's important then to clarify that..since you are trying to debunk some "parallax related" stuff, you should recognize that Simon is most likely right on that one..though in sept clue he stated it was a layering effect, I believe it was a much more complex technology..

[fresniak]

Well first of all we are still not sure from where the pictures were taken. It could have been fixed camera as well.

Second the vantage point in the video of verrazzano in sept clue H, does not seem to change at all, or if it does, it is a so incredibly small variation that you cannot see any spinning of the towers, which keep the exact size from the moment when the zoom out starts till the last moment when you see the bridge pillar traveled a long way.

[YougeneDebs]

fresniak~ This caught me: "Well first of all we are still not sure from where the pictures were taken. ..."

I'm sure I can tell, if you would only be so kind as to tell me which shots you have in mind!

[s8rl]

btw the ESB is not  straight...

[YougeneDebs]

Sometimes it's straight.

Sometimes it's not.

Just depends, I guess.

[ancientkiki]

this is paralax too?

watch?v=wkZKOqYMbXo

[YougeneDebs]

ancientkiki~

Off-hand, since there was only one camera involved, I'd say 'No'; but you might be referring to something specific in the footage.

If you would please clarify what you mean by "this" (as in "this is parallax too?"), I might be able to help.

Thanks!

[ancientkiki]

was being sarcastic about the parallax thing, and also i just wanted to make sure people know some fakery did exist as shown in here watch?v=wkZKOqYMbXo

[YougeneDebs]

There's 'fakery' in that video? Are you sure? What is the 'fakery' in that video?

Thanks!

[ancientkiki]

did they not add that black mark to make it look like it was a much bigger plane that hit ?

[YougeneDebs]

ancientkiki~

I used to believe thay did! But that was back in the day when I believed what Simon says.

Since then, I have learned to do my own research; and now I see Simon's disinformation techniques.

Simon is free to hold and express an opinion.

We are free to research the facts of the matter.

I'm glad you are asking questions.

It's the first step of 'research'!

Peace

[rams392]

thank you for the helicopter research. 5*****

[rams392]

oops, wrong video. this comment is for your newest video "DEBS DOES ADDENDUM"...

[11September2009]

Hi Yougene,

I have been trying to find real examples of the parallax effect that show such aberrant displacements without success. Can you help me? Any photo from some city somewhere ?

If it is parallax, how can the empire state building appear bigger, while the background seemingly maintains the same proportions?

Do you agree with Simon that CNN and Devin had the camera in adjacent buildings on the same floor?

Is this your voice? Or a computer program?

Thank you!

[YougeneDebs]

11September2009

Hey, Ozzy~ Wzup?

Maybe you need to get out of the house more often. Parallax is all around you! The next time you cross the street, look at the stuff in the far ground and see that after crossing the street there is a whole new foreground!

But dont worry; its just a conspiracy.

[11September2009]

Hi Yougene,

So, you cannot find a single photo that displays such aberrant "parallax" effect in the entire internet? I assume that is why you did not include one in this video - because they are impossible to find?

You also cannot seem to explain why the empire state building appears bigger while the background maintains the same proportions?

Do you agree with Simon, or not?

Is this your voice?

Thank you!

[YougeneDebs]

11September2009~

Ozzy, really; you're supposed to watch the video BEFORE commenting.

Because you are asking for a single photo, we all know that you haven't got a CLUE what parallax is.

As soon as you can demonstrate that you understand what parallax IS, we'll talk about your questions.

psst: I provided a definition in the video.

[11September2009]

The viscosity of your divergence tactic is at least comical...

You cannot provide me with one single example of the parallax effect that shows similar discrepancies to the 911 videos?! You have got everything at your disposal and an effect that is "all around", but you are incapable to find one single example?

It reminds me of how Ace Baker can only replicate his composites IN the 911 videos.

[11September2009]

Why does the empire state building appear bigger while the background maintains the same proportions?

Do you agree with Simon that CNN and Devin had the camera in adjacent buildings on the same floor?

Is this your voice? Or a computer program?

Get to the point. Answer the questions.

[YougeneDebs]

11September2009~

Hey, Ozzy-- Please learn what parallax is; then we'll chat.

You are only embarrassing yourself.

[YougeneDebs]

When you use the word "single" you exhibit your ignorance.

Please learn what parallax is; then we'll chat.

Thanks in advance!

[11September2009]

You are naked in your old, ugly body.

"Single" means the request for ONE. At least ONE example of parallax, again, that displays such aberrant displacements as the 911 videos. ONE SINGLE piece of evidence. ONE SINGLE comparison. ONE SINGLE image. The SIMPLEST possible approach, in case parallax is the phenomenon we are witnessing in the 911 videos.

You also are not explaining why the empire state building appears bigger while the background maintains the same proportions?

[11September2009]

Or if you agree with Simon that CNN and Devin had the camera in adjacent buildings on the same floor?

Your voice?

Is it cold without the disguise? Youre shaking.

[YougeneDebs]

11September2009

C'mon, Ozzy:

If you would only watch the video, you would have the answer to your question about Devin Clark and CNN.

Thanks for your interest in my work.

[YougeneDebs]

11September2009

Hey, Ozzy:

If only you understood what parallax is! I tried to explain it the video.

Perhaps you should look it up in a dictionary.

OH! OH! I JUST THOUGHT OF SOMETHING! Do you know what you could do? And it would be a BIG HELP! You could google for an image of parallax!

WOW!!! That would be great!

Thanks, Ozzy!

[11September2009]

No serious researcher would so deeply avoid replying to any legitimate question.

If the 911 video discrepancies were a matter of parallax, the easiest thing for you to do would be to show an example, where such aberrancies are evident outside the 911 videos. You cannot.

And regarding the other questions: dont bother.

You got nothing anyway other than your inner wolf.

[YougeneDebs]

If you quit now, that means I win.

As you slink away, I hope you google 'parallax' and try to learn something.

Thanks for your interest in my work!

[stbays]

Are you actually saying you don't believe changing the point of orgin for a photo can change what you see? Stand outside your house and take a picture. Then move ten feet to your left and take another picture. Do they look similar? They should, but are they exactly the same? No, you can make out different details in both pictures because the angle you took the picture from changed.

[11September2009]

Extrapolating my position into your absurdity is not logical.

[stbays]

You really don't understand how this works do you?

I've got a lot of experiance with cameras and how they work. Even a small shift can change what the camera sees, even if the center focus remains the same.

Experiance is the difference and I suggest you get some.

[11September2009]

If you have got a lot of experience with cameras, why not prove the words that come out of your mouth by attending my request of seeing "such aberrant displacements outside the 911 videos" INSTEAD OF WAISTING TIME?

[stbays]

The fact that a reasonable person already knows about this effect would be my only reason for not wasting my time. If my time werent already being wasted, I'd find doing such a thing a huge waste of anyone's time.

As it is, I'll consider the task and see if I can find any examples here in Kansas City.

[11September2009]

The clock is ticking...

[stbays]

Considering I'm a man of few resources, I wouldn't hold my breath for anything any time soon.

[dimmiecaddie]

CBS is west of NBC or am i wrong?

[YougeneDebs]

Hello! Please review the video from 4:06 to 4:19 and be aware that the view is northwards; therefore, NBC is west of CBS.

Thanks for watching!

[dimmiecaddie]

Dude, i'm talking about in real life, not on the video. I thought that was the point. In real life CBS is west of Rockefeller Center (or NBC or General Electric take your pick)

[YougeneDebs]

Im glad youre talking about real life. Please find the General Motors building on any map of NYC and youll see that it is east of the General Electric building.

Your statements are so strongly put that I would like to ask you something: When you say CBS please tell me what you are referring to.

Thanks!

[dimmiecaddie]

What does the GM building have to do with anything? I know where it is. It's where the cars used to be in the lobby and now there's a morning network television show broadcasting from there and sometimes outside on Fifth Avenue. You're fulla crap. You know where CBS is.

[YougeneDebs]

I even said *please*

I really would like to know what you're talking about.

Please share the address of the CBS you are talking about.

Or, just the cross streets, even.

[YougeneDebs]

How's that search coming?

Got that address for your CBS yet?

[dimmiecaddie]

I don't need to search. But you're pretending you need to, so do it.

You can share your search in a new video.

[YougeneDebs]

Just as I thought, you got nothing.

[spotbelly]

this is getting ridiculous - there's an article in last week's New York Observer about Boston Properties considering renaming the GM building, or letting a tenant do it - Mort Zuckerman is quoted in it, and there is other pertinent history and tenancy information. You and dimmiecaddie need to read it and give it a rest. Where is the CBS camera citation? Who is responsible for it?

[YougeneDebs]

thank you spotbelly~

perhaps you can get dimmie to cough up an address for his cbs.

Everybody else knows that CBS had a camera (or 2) on the GM building on 9/11

[spotbelly]

I didn't know that. Why would CBS use the GM building on that particular day? Did you read that somewhere?

[YougeneDebs]

spotbelly~ "...on that particular day?"

It's *every day*; CBS had, and has, studios in the GM building; Bryant Gumble even said, in his conversation with Teresa Renaut, that he was at "59 and 5th" that's the GM building.

But most importantly, the lines of sight, based on the images in the field of view, lead right back to the GM building!

[spotbelly]

Oh, i didn't realize CBS maintains a fixed camera on the roof of the GM building, and did on that day. I knew the morning network program used that location for production because of the high foot traffic (it's CPSouth/59th St. & Fifth Avenue facing the Plaza) but i never noticed any views of downtown from there before i saw your videos. Had you ever seen any broadcast before? Maybe dimmiecaddie is referring to CBS headquarters instead of where they produce The Early Show.

[YougeneDebs]

dimmie~

YOU came on my video page and made a claim.

You need to back that claim up, mister!

[webfairy2]

wow. Thank you! I was taken in by the "moving bridges" argument, to the point where my imagination played tricks on me. Thank you for helping me see the light.

[achimspok]

It comes like a deep breath of fresh air. Thanks

[YougeneDebs]

You are so kind! Thanks for watching!

Parallax is NOT fakery!

[911ElephantRoom]

truth sweet truth!

Keep up the good work Debs.

[YougeneDebs]

Thanks for watching!

[911conspiracyTV]

Good, good work.

[EvilUSAandthe911Lie]

YAWZA!!! What can I say?

You are just da' bomb, Debs! Wow!!!!

They just do not make 'em any better than you, my man.

[YougeneDebs]

Thank you very much.

I might have to put out a 'part two'!

[EvilUSAandthe911Lie]

That would be great!

As always, I salute your character and integrity, Yougene Debs.

[911PersonalityCult]

The problem you have is that the variously distant buildings do not all respond to the shift in viewer perspective as they should, and, in fact, appear just the opposite to how they should if the scene was real.

Notably, the central "steeple" moves in the wrong direction. To achieve the view wherein the designated building "walks" to the far right the viewer must move to the left - and the steeple should become more blocked by it's neighbor to the left - not less.

[YougeneDebs]

911PersonalityCult~

Thanks for watching! You raise some interesting points; I think those points were addressed in my other video: Bouncing Buildings? at

/watch?v=4jBihwLci4w

I would like to invite to take this conversation over there and discuss it.

Debs

[911PersonalityCult]

Why should I go hide there? That video doesn't address the inescapable contradiction any more than this one does.

Is it your task to maintain the gate rather than simply acknowledge the obvious? Are you just a cheerleader for the dim-witted bumpkin choir and the the CyberCom mockingbirds?

[YougeneDebs]

911PersonalityCult~

If you prefer to discuss your alleged "inescapable contradiction" on this page, then we shall.

Please, let us first identify the 'central steeple' which you think "moves in the wrong direction."

Are you referring to the Woolworth building?

[YougeneDebs]

911PersonalityCult~

You say: "...and the steeple should become more blocked by it's neighbor to the left - not less."

Please tell me which "neighbor" building you are talking about. You have a chance to prove fakery, right here and right now!

Please tell me which "neighbor" building you are talking about.

Thanks!

[brokenstyx]

debs ur my hero!

excellent video

[YougeneDebs]

Thanks for watching!