>>12617884>manipulate video evidenceand there it is, was waiting for that
all photos and videos taken of the event are now invalid
we just have to trust the word of some authority
whenever someone shows you a photo or a video taken of the event, just accuse them of manipulation
all praise NIST
>editing the video as to prolong the collapsewhy?
every amateur is in on it?
only NIST speaks the truth?
>slowing down frames of the video and pausing in order to cover up the manipulationagain, why?
>using an audio isn't precise to begin withprecise is one thing, being off by several seconds is another
that's a huge difference even with shitty audio
>it's probable that there were sounds of "collapsing", even after or before the building had ended or started to collapsecorrect, there were cracking noises and other sounds before the collapse started, originating from the buckling columns visible in the .gif i posted above
however, the noise level enters an abrupt and steep climb to extremely loud levels as soon as the collapse is initiated
and likewise, the noise level enters a moderately abrupt and steep dive to quiet levels as soon as the collapse wave hits the ground
audio is a great indicator for how long these events lasted
even with an error range of +- 2 or 3 seconds, it's still longer than the reported 11 and 9 seconds
