Ignorant guy lets a train hit his classic GMC truck

[billt460]

Yes, the truck rolled backwards. It wasnt hit broadside, what did you expect? To see it flying through the air? The train hit its right front bumper, as shown very clearly in the damage shown at the 7:51 mark in the video. It rolled backwards, its wheels slightly turned, and rolled backwards and eventually tumbled down the hill.

"Slightly turned"?? That thing is practically cranked to the lock. Look at it. "Tumbling down the hill" would have damaged it just as you saw it damaged. Do you honestly believe that if that train hit it, it wouldn't have moved it violently? And that if the guy knew it was going to be hit, he would be stupid enough to stand right next to it, holding the door no less?

Again, look at the uphill angle that thing is parked at. All he had to do is let it roll back enough on it's own, and be out of harm's way.... Assuming it was ever in harm's way to begin with, which it wasn't.

Are you saying they had two different '67 trucks there? One damaged, one not? Since the train never hit the truck, as you claim, how else would they have done this? Not to mention the 'fake' damage on the front of the train.

You keep harping about 2 trucks. Why? If it "tumbled down the hill" as you say, (and I agree with), there's your damage. Do you think a truck is going to roll and tumble down a steep embankment and not be smashed to hell?

In order for your fantastic conspiracy to work, we need these ingredients: - A guy, his wife, and their dog, set up to video at just the right time for the train to come by.......

There are more than likely several trains a day that use that right of way. And why didn't they video it from the side where it was supposedly struck? Why put the train between the camera and the truck, if they knew it was going to be hit?

Taking the video from the same side would have clearly shown the, "wreck". (If you believe there was one). Just as the video I posted did, Along with most every other train / vehicle collision on You Tube shows.

- Not one, but two identically painted '67 GMC pickups, one damaged, one not

Again, why do you need 2 trucks? The truck was sitting there undamaged. Then shown again after it tumbled and rolled down the hill. First shot undamaged. Second shot wrecked. You don't need a train, or 2 trucks. Just exactly what he had.... A truck, and a big enough hill to roll it down.

- The guy hopped in and rolled it backwards after the phony nonexistent collision while the train was barreling by......

No, he didn't have to, "hop in". Just put it in neutral and let gravity do the rest. Older 60's trucks didn't require pressure on the brake to move the lever out of park.

Shifter interlocks weren't required until 1992. Again, going with your theory that this is somehow "real", why would that idiot stand right next to a truck that he knew was going to be hit by a train?

- All perfectly setup and timed so that the truck wasnt visible six seconds after it supposedly "hit"

He didn't have to "time" anything. The truck had plenty of time to roll out of view on it's own, and down the hill....... Because you can WATCH IT.

If you honestly believe this was real, you will have an even easier time believing the Trevor Jacobs plane crash was also not a setup. What is truly unbelievable, is there are people who are this easily B.S.'d. That IS scary.

 

[Kira]

Another dismaying feature is that the videographers saw fit to make such a painfully long video.
That so many people -general population, not us BITOG sharpies- take so long to catch on to zero-content stuff is troubling.
There have always been stupid people. It appears we (mankind) are growing stupider (expressed as a percentage).

To the "inconsistency of passion" of the bit I say the wife looks like she took a cue -which she didn't fully grasp- to begin moving.