BBC announced collapse of WT7 before it happened!

[Jazzz]

Gosh... amazing that this only comes to light now. Astonishing. And moreover it's been under all our noses all this time!

Here is the BBC feed from around about a half hour before WTC7 collapsed, hosted on liveleak.com with a few comments.

They announce that WTC7 has collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did, and not merely as an unconfirmed report but as part of the 10pm BST (5pm EDT) headlines. And then it gets even crazier when there's a link to a NY reporter and you can see WTC7 still there in the background!

A further interesting point is that our very own Nemo beat the BBC to it by 2 minutes reporting the collapse right here on urban75 at 8.55pm UTC (4.55pm EDT). Take a bow, Nemo.

WTC7 actually collapsed at 5.20pm EDT.



Right, well how do the conspiracy denialists fancy trying to wave this one away?

edited to clarify timezones and am/pms

edited further to add:

BBC News 24 footage has now confirmed the story with the collapse report timestamped at 21.54pm BST (4.54pm EDT).

 

[Dubversion]

bugger.

that's shown us all up - there's no way on EARTH there's a perfectly logical explanation for this.

I can only apologise, Jazz - you were right all along. and that child's toy you carry around to get attention is actually very cool indeed.

 

[jugularvein]

where are the badgers?

 

[Belushi]

Here we go

 

[8den]

Gosh... amazing that this only comes to light now. Astonishing. And moreover it's been under all our noses all this time!

Here is the BBC feed from around about a half hour before WTC7 collapsed, hosted on liveleak.com with a few comments.

They announce that WTC7 has collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did, and not merely as an unconfirmed report but as part of the 10pm (5pm EDT) headlines. And then it gets even crazier when there's a link to a NY reporter and you can see WTC7 still there in the background!

A further interesting point is that our very own Nemo beat the BBC to it by 2 minutes reporting the collapse right here on urban75 at 8.55pm UTC (4.55 EDT). Take a bow, Nemo.

WTC7 actually collapsed at 5.20 EDT.



Right, well how do the conspiracy denialists fancy trying to wave this one away?

Ah Jazzz after getting his arse handed to him about structural enigneering decides to run away and start a new thread about something else entirely.

So Jazzz what are you suggesting? That the BBC were in on it? Or that there were reports coming from the area that the building was about to collaspe, and they either misheard them, or a graphics guy screwed up the Astons.

 

[Jazzz]

bugger.

that's shown us all up - there's no way on EARTH there's a perfectly logical explanation for this.

I can only apologise, Jazz - you were right all along. and that child's toy you carry around to get attention is actually very cool indeed.

I fancy, despite your apparent sincerity Dubversion, that you are actually still in denial... why don't you watch the video?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Did you actually read that page?

The one, you know, with all the times marked as EST? Not EDT? Which you're using here? The one which says it collapsed at 5.20pm EST, when it didn't, it collapsed at 5.20pm EDT (as you correctly say) which is one hour earlier?

 

[Dubversion]

because after years of exposure to your odious bullshit, i'm actually no longer interested.
So well done the conspiraloons.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Ok, once more with feeling:

FUCK OFF YOU CONSPIRALOON CUNT.

 

[Dubversion]

Did you actually read that page?

The one, you know, with all the times marked as EST? Not EDT? Which you're using here? The one which says it collapsed at 5.20pm EST, when it didn't, it collapsed at 5.20pm EDT (as you correctly say) which is one hour earlier?

fucking priceless.

Jazz - you're a clueless twat

 

[jæd]

A further interesting point is that our very own Nemo beat the BBC to it by 2 minutes reporting the collapse right here on urban75 at 8.55pm UTC (4.55 EDT). Take a bow, Nemo.

WTC7 actually collapsed at 5.20 EDT.

So WTC7 collapsed before the buildings were even attacked...? I thought the attacks were around 9.00 EDT...?

Either or Jazz's conspiraloonery has turned his brain to mush and he doesn't know the difference between 5.20 EDT and 17.20 EDT. Idiot.

 

[RaverDrew]

Is there really any need for the U2 soundtrack to that clip

 

[bluestreak]

wow! what about the other uncomfirmed reports that didn't turn out to be true. evidence or just dodgy reports during the chaos?

 

[Lock&Light]

I'm sorry, Jazzz. Even your friends can't take you seriously any more.

 

[Dubversion]

wow! what about the other uncomfirmed reports that didn't turn out to be true. evidence or just dodgy reports during the chaos?

i think you missed fridge's unravelling of jazz's claims.

 

[jæd]

I'm sorry, Jazzz. Even your friends can't take you seriously any more.

He has friends...?

 

[bluestreak]

i think you missed fridge's unravelling of jazz's claims.

i did, i got distracted by work half-way through writing that.

 

[Lock&Light]

He has friends...?

I believe that Jazzz in RL is a very pleasant person.

 

[Sunspots]

Did you actually read that page?

The one, you know, with all the times marked as EST? Not EDT? Which you're using here? The one which says it collapsed at 5.20pm EST, when it didn't, it collapsed at 5.20pm EDT (as you correctly say) which is one hour earlier?

Fucking classic.

 

[Jazzz]

So WTC7 collapsed before the buildings were even attacked...? I thought the attacks were around 9.00 EDT...?

Either or Jazz's conspiraloonery has turned his brain to mush and he doesn't know the difference between 5.20 EDT and 17.20 EDT. Idiot.

to help you I have edited my post to add the phrase 'pm'.

 

[Dubversion]

Jazz. this might help

http://www.funsocialstudies.learninghaven.com/articles/timezones.htm

 

[Jazzz]

wow! what about the other uncomfirmed reports that didn't turn out to be true. evidence or just dodgy reports during the chaos?

This wasn't broadcast as unconfirmed report.

How come there is such a frenzy of posts before anyone could have even watched the video?

 

[Jazzz]

Did you actually read that page?

The one, you know, with all the times marked as EST? Not EDT? Which you're using here? The one which says it collapsed at 5.20pm EST, when it didn't, it collapsed at 5.20pm EDT (as you correctly say) which is one hour earlier?

You are right, they should say 5.20 EDT as I have done. It makes no difference. The report of the collapse is before the collapse happened, and this can be verified by looking at Nemo's post, or simply observing the section of the video where they talk about the collapse while the building is still standing!

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You are right, they should say 5.20 EDT as I have done. It makes no difference.

Except that 10pm GMT (or UTC) is 6pm EDT. EST is Eastern Standard Time i.e. not Eastern Daylight Time.

 

[Jazzz]

Except that 10pm GMT (or UTC) is 6pm EDT. EST is Eastern Standard Time i.e. not Eastern Daylight Time.

Yeah, but 10pm BST is 5pm EDT.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Yeah, but 10pm BST is 5pm EDT.

A strange amount of use of UTC in your post, then. And the page doesn't seem to know what timezones it's talking about.

I haven't listened to the thing as I'm at work, I don't even know what they're actually saying at all, so I shouldn't really be commenting to be fair. I have a feeling that this is the most stupid "oh noes teh conspiraceez" thing yet, though.

 

[RaverDrew]

Yeah, but 10pm BST is 5pm EDT.

That is correct actually

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclo...9&year=2001&hour=22&min=0&sec=0&p1=136&p2=179

 

[jæd]

You are right, they should say 5.20 EDT as I have done. It makes no difference. The report of the collapse is before the collapse happened, and this can be verified by looking at Nemo's post, or simply observing the section of the video where they talk about the collapse while the building is still standing!

Perhaps... They... Made... A... Mistake... You fucking loon...

 

[bluestreak]

This wasn't broadcast as unconfirmed report.

How come there is such a frenzy of posts before anyone could have even watched the video?

well, let's look at this rationally...

subject: the news has reported something that appears in retrospect not to have happened yet.

why could this be?

possible scenarios.

1. the news team have made a report based on hearsay. the hearsay could be based on one of the many rumours and misreports at the time; or someone involved in teh conspiracy forgot to check they'd actually knocked wtc7 down yet and got ahead of themselves (and no-one else has noticed in the last five years).

2. the news team reported it as it happened and a poster here on urban has made a slight miscalculation in the times.

i'm saying nothing, but i'd suggest bringing occam's razor into play.

 

[Flavour]

what difference does it make?