Post by Steve Gardner on Nov 26, 2007 1:38:19 GMT
From THE ALL-SEEING i
I�ve been fascinated by optical illusions for as long as I can remember. My favourite is this [1]�
But this one is right up there�
The image on the left was captured on 9/11 by the NYPD and is used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in its �Working Collapse Hypothesis for WTC7�. The one on the right was taken by Aman Zafar, a witness to the unfolding events that day, from his apartment across the Hudson River in Jersey City. Both have been cropped from larger photographs, and NIST�s has also been �skewed� in order to line up the windows for the purposes of comparison. Here are the original photographs.
The nature of the damage at the Southwest corner of WTC7, said to have been caused by the earlier collapse of the twin towers, sparked a vigorous debate at an online Internet forum, �Above Top Secret� (ATS), where I post as �coughymachine�. The principle charge was that NIST had manipulated its image in order to exaggerate this damage. Whilst NIST certainly needs all the help it can get if it is to convince conspiracy theorists that WTC7 wasn�t brought down in a controlled demolition, I wanted to explore all possible explanations before reaching any firm conclusions.
Initial efforts were focussed on establishing the times the photographs had been taken. If it turned out that Zafar�s had been taken earlier than NIST�s, it opened up the possibility that some sort of an �event� had occurred between the two, like the explosion heard in the video below (see original article for video), to account for the apparent anomalies.
Working with the original images, an aerial shot of Manhattan (below) and astronomical data from the US Naval Observatory, I estimated the times to be around 15:30 EDT for NIST�s photograph and around 15:00 EDT for Zafar�s.
The time for NIST�s was corroborated by another ATS contributor. The time for Zafar�s, however, was challenged and a much later time of 17:00 EDT proposed (see [2] for my final estimation). This prompted the suggestion that perhaps Zafar�s image had been manipulated.
This made little sense to me.
I established a dialogue with Zafar in order to try and arrive at a definitive time. Meanwhile, I also began developing an idea I�d introduced in the early stages of the debate � that there was actually no discrepancy between the two images, only the illusion of one caused by a combination of angles and smoke. The following graphics show how this theory evolved.
The first shows that, despite initial impressions, Zafar�s photograph does show significant damage.
The next demonstrates how the Southwest edge of WTC7 could appear intact in Zafar�s image but not in NIST�s.
I finally became convinced by this explanation when, rather than skewing NIST�s image, I skewed Zafar�s. The only apparent anomaly is a �missing� window at the bottom, circled in yellow. But this window has simply been obscured by smoke in the NIST image (right). The same effect can be seen further, up where another window, also circled in yellow, has been partially obscured.
It�s fair to say that not everyone at ATS is convinced by this. For me, however, it�s very much a case of mystery solved.
[1] Checkerboard illusion: the squares marked �A� and �B� are the same shade of grey.
[2] Throughout the course of the ATS discussion, Aman Zafar and I had communicated via email to try and establish a timestamp for his photograph. Initially, he felt that it may have been as early as 14:00 EDT. However, he now accepts it could have been as late as my final estimate, which was 16:15 EDT.
I�ve been fascinated by optical illusions for as long as I can remember. My favourite is this [1]�
But this one is right up there�
The image on the left was captured on 9/11 by the NYPD and is used by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in its �Working Collapse Hypothesis for WTC7�. The one on the right was taken by Aman Zafar, a witness to the unfolding events that day, from his apartment across the Hudson River in Jersey City. Both have been cropped from larger photographs, and NIST�s has also been �skewed� in order to line up the windows for the purposes of comparison. Here are the original photographs.
The nature of the damage at the Southwest corner of WTC7, said to have been caused by the earlier collapse of the twin towers, sparked a vigorous debate at an online Internet forum, �Above Top Secret� (ATS), where I post as �coughymachine�. The principle charge was that NIST had manipulated its image in order to exaggerate this damage. Whilst NIST certainly needs all the help it can get if it is to convince conspiracy theorists that WTC7 wasn�t brought down in a controlled demolition, I wanted to explore all possible explanations before reaching any firm conclusions.
Initial efforts were focussed on establishing the times the photographs had been taken. If it turned out that Zafar�s had been taken earlier than NIST�s, it opened up the possibility that some sort of an �event� had occurred between the two, like the explosion heard in the video below (see original article for video), to account for the apparent anomalies.
Working with the original images, an aerial shot of Manhattan (below) and astronomical data from the US Naval Observatory, I estimated the times to be around 15:30 EDT for NIST�s photograph and around 15:00 EDT for Zafar�s.
The time for NIST�s was corroborated by another ATS contributor. The time for Zafar�s, however, was challenged and a much later time of 17:00 EDT proposed (see [2] for my final estimation). This prompted the suggestion that perhaps Zafar�s image had been manipulated.
This made little sense to me.
I established a dialogue with Zafar in order to try and arrive at a definitive time. Meanwhile, I also began developing an idea I�d introduced in the early stages of the debate � that there was actually no discrepancy between the two images, only the illusion of one caused by a combination of angles and smoke. The following graphics show how this theory evolved.
The first shows that, despite initial impressions, Zafar�s photograph does show significant damage.
The next demonstrates how the Southwest edge of WTC7 could appear intact in Zafar�s image but not in NIST�s.
I finally became convinced by this explanation when, rather than skewing NIST�s image, I skewed Zafar�s. The only apparent anomaly is a �missing� window at the bottom, circled in yellow. But this window has simply been obscured by smoke in the NIST image (right). The same effect can be seen further, up where another window, also circled in yellow, has been partially obscured.
It�s fair to say that not everyone at ATS is convinced by this. For me, however, it�s very much a case of mystery solved.
[1] Checkerboard illusion: the squares marked �A� and �B� are the same shade of grey.
[2] Throughout the course of the ATS discussion, Aman Zafar and I had communicated via email to try and establish a timestamp for his photograph. Initially, he felt that it may have been as early as 14:00 EDT. However, he now accepts it could have been as late as my final estimate, which was 16:15 EDT.
