Proof of Photomanipulation

Mobertermy said:
If you are not going to discuss the presentation I suggest starting another thread.
Click to expand...

I corrected your misapprehension of Ryan's post. That's entirely on topic. No, I will not start another thread simply to help you properly interpret what another poster is telling you. When you misunderstand a person's post, that is entirely legitimate thread material.
 
The top down view of slide 4 and Photo #1 with labels has two different traffic arms labeled as TA1. Notice where the red car in Photo #1 is entering the cloverleaf. TA1 is to the right of that car and even with the white V shaped division lines the separate the ongoing traffic lane from the beginning of the cloverleaf.

So, in Photo #1 (with labels) TA1 should be the traffic arm by the edge of the right of the photo that is not labeled.

Am I seeing this correctly?
 
Here's what is mis-labeled.
poles1.png


Here is top down view or slide 4
pole2.png
 
Last edited:
Gamolon said:
Here's what is mis-labeled.
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/poles1.png[/qimg]

Here is top down view or slide 4
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/pole2.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...
I think your right. TA2 should (appear to)be directly under the overhead sign.
 
Another thing.
poles1.png


That largest light-pole on the right. That's the third light-pole on the cloverleaf from the highway signs that span the highway. How can light-poles A and E be seen BETWEEN those two light-poles as you have them labeled? Look at Google Earth and try to get what is labeled as A and E between those two poles with the view angle of the camera above. Use A and E from Slide 1
 
Last edited:
Gamolon said:
Another thing.
[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/poles1.png[/qimg]

That largest light-pole on the right. That's the third light-pole on the cloverleaf from the highway signs that span the highway. How can light-poles A and E be seen BETWEEN those two light-poles as you have them labeled? Look at Google Earth and try to get what is labeled as A and E between those two poles with the view angle of the camera above. Use A and E from Slide 1
Click to expand...
As Dave suggested, he should have plotted the line of sight (on to the overhead) for each of the pictures. This would be the only way to verify correct identification of each feature.
 
Last edited:
Mobertermy said:
As a form of peer-review,....
Click to expand...
Bzzzzzt! Sorry, this is not a form of peer-review. If you are looking for peer-review, write a paper and submit it to a scientific and/or forensic journal.
and to show people the proof of what I consider something that has important implications.
Click to expand...
Your statement shows you have already settled on a pre-conceived notion of events. A true peer-review process would not convince you otherwise.
 
Mobertermy said:
Hey,
I just made a new powerpoint presentation which proves photo manipulation at the Pentagon. It specifically deals with the cab driver Lloyde England, the man CIT accused of being an accomplice. If you have the time you can view it at my blog http://slothrop-blogjammin.blogspot.com/ I'm interested in seeing what you hard core debunkers have to say about it.

Don't be gentle.

(Note: this isn't a plug for my "blog"...it's just that I can't post a powerpoint presentation here.)
Click to expand...


Lloyde makes that comment after being told by CIT that ALL the witnesses say the play crossed over the road further down in a successful attempt to confuse him. he merely remembers the big details so meekly says the pictures are wrong to line himself up with what he is being told is reality.
However CIT were lying and Lloyde was where the pictures showed him to be.

It was a cruel trick to play on an old man but about par for CIT
 
Gamolon said:
The top down view of slide 4 and Photo #1 with labels has two different traffic arms labeled as TA1. Notice where the red car in Photo #1 is entering the cloverleaf. TA1 is to the right of that car and even with the white V shaped division lines the separate the ongoing traffic lane from the beginning of the cloverleaf.

So, in Photo #1 (with labels) TA1 should be the traffic arm by the edge of the right of the photo that is not labeled.

Am I seeing this correctly?
Click to expand...

Gamolon,
to be honest I wasn't sure how to label that photo because the photo is wrong...there is no way to label so that it correlates with reality. But do this if you want to see what I am talking about...look at the white car...the cab would be to the left (north) of the white car, that's why that has to be TA2. Like I said in the presentation - there will be times when you think what I am saying can't be right...but it's because the photo is not right, can't be right.

See photo #3 to see what I am saying about the white car. Then remember what you said about photo #1 and then decide if the photos mutually contradict each other.
 
Last edited:
sheeplesnshills said:
Lloyde makes that comment after being told by CIT that ALL the witnesses say the play crossed over the road further down in a successful attempt to confuse him. he merely remembers the big details so meekly says the pictures are wrong to line himself up with what he is being told is reality.
However CIT were lying and Lloyde was where the pictures showed him to be.

It was a cruel trick to play on an old man but about par for CIT
Click to expand...


Wrong, Lloyde doesn't "meekly" say the photos are wrong...he adamantly insists that the photos are wrong, he argues with Craig about it, and then makes Craig physically drive him down to the scene.

Lloyde again insisted the same thing when interviewed by Jeff Hill:

"England: You know what? I know where the cab was and I know where they wanted it to be, but I can prove where the car was.
There's a permanent picture of the fire and the Pentagon...my cab is the only cab in the world involved in 9/11...and I now where the car was. And they are trying to put the car somewhere else, for what reason, I don't know because they weren't there.

Hill : So they were trying to use some sort of distorted picture..()

England: The pictures were made to be in one place when I was somewhere else....my car is not there at the bridge at Columbia Pike. They got it wrong, and I don't know why they have it wrong."

Beyond that, I have proven the photos are manipulated.
 
NYCEMT86 said:
ETA

Nevermind, Gamolon beat me to it.



I got the same conclusion as Gamolon.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32924659@N03/5333811764/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/32924659@N03/5333195709/
Click to expand...


be careful as the road markings, lanes etc may have changed between 911 and now. Use the history feature in google maps to get the lanes as on 911. Penny Elgas for example describes pulling off the road just past where llloyd was, going right and down to the pentagon car park. You can't do that now but on 911 you could as the off ramps/traffic barriers have changed.
 
Mobertermy said:
Hey,
I just made a new powerpoint presentation which proves photo manipulation at the Pentagon. It specifically deals with the cab driver Lloyde England, the man CIT accused of being an accomplice. If you have the time you can view it at my blog http://slothrop-blogjammin.blogspot.com/ I'm interested in seeing what you hard core debunkers have to say about it.

Don't be gentle.

(Note: this isn't a plug for my "blog"...it's just that I can't post a powerpoint presentation here.)
Click to expand...

All I've got to say is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur0g-R7ZODY
 
Mobertermy said:
Wrong, Lloyde doesn't "meekly" say the photos are wrong...he adamantly insists that the photos are wrong, he argues with Craig about it, and then makes Craig physically drive him down to the scene.

Lloyde again insisted the same thing when interviewed by Jeff Hill:

"England: You know what? I know where the cab was and I know where they wanted it to be, but I can prove where the car was.
There's a permanent picture of the fire and the Pentagon...my cab is the only cab in the world involved in 9/11...and I now where the car was. And they are trying to put the car somewhere else, for what reason, I don't know because they weren't there.

Hill : So they were trying to use some sort of distorted picture..()

England: The pictures were made to be in one place when I was somewhere else....my car is not there at the bridge at Columbia Pike. They got it wrong, and I don't know why they have it wrong."
Click to expand...

Lloyd simply misremembers, where he was was not important on the day, its what happened to him that he remembers and in the face of CITs insistance that he is wrong he simply makes a mistake. The pictures do not lie however, the cab and Lloyd was where they had to have been.

Beyond that, I have proven the photos are manipulated.
Click to expand...

except you didn't
Click to expand...
 
Dave Rogers said:
Based on your explanation of what a traffic arm is, I agree now that it's not TA3. However, that doesn't rule out the possibility of it being something else; it's not clear to me that it's the base of a traffic arm at all. I notice that there's a fire truck in roughly the right position for some part of it to be visible there. There may be other possibilities. Have you ruled out every other possible identification of this object?
Click to expand...
Dave, it's TA2. It is a traffic arm...look at the object in question then compare it to the other traffic arms in the other pictures.

Again, you're avoiding the issue of the light poles.

For some reason, this is typical of people who claim photo fakery. They come here all friendly, asking for feedback, then when it's offered they dismiss it angrily. The normal pattern is that they start ranting about government shiolls by about page 3 of the thread, and never actually address substantive criticisms. Your entire analysis is based on a very comprehensive misunderstanding of parralax, as is virtually every other argument of this sort that I've seen, and until you realise that you'll never have a clue what your pictures actually mean.
Click to expand...
So dave...now that you acknowledge you were wrong about it being TA3, will you acknowldge that your line of sight explanation in this post is also wrong http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6737684&postcount=22

And will you also acknowledge that that is the only line of sight "debunk" you have thus far attempted, and since you have thus far not produced any corrent line of sight "debunks" then you should stop repeating over and over again that this can all be explained away by line of sight issues.
 
Mobertermy said:
You placed the cab between TA3 and TA4.

I completely agree with you that the way I labeled that picture isn't correct, but its because there is no way to label it so that it correlates with reality. See photo #3 for a clear picture of the cab and white car.
Click to expand...


Ok go correct your presentation and then come back after you have added Aerial shots showing what you think is the line of sight for the photo.

also add third possibility that Lloyd is simply mistaken


also have you also considered that these are photograhers pictures......he may simply have "photoshopped" out details that spoilt the picture....like ugly lamposts! probably not, but its more likely than that a someone faked them on purpose and that Lloyd really knew exactly where he was.
 
Last edited:
oh and how do we know that car was never moved? is it also likely that with required access to the site on the day that someone simply moved the car at least once to get it out of the way?
If the car was moved between the event Lloyd remembers and when some or all the pictures were taken then it would make any analysis moot


This thread might be fun......I like working out how truthers got it wrong :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom