Proof of Photomanipulation

Mobertermy said:
It has nothing to do with perspective. The cab is between TA2 and TA3, therefore what you said was TA1 isn't right. In fact there is an extra non-existent traffic arm in the Ingersoll photo.
Click to expand...
There is no "extra" traffic arm. Line up everything with the overhead.
 
Childlike Empress said:
... Lloyde insists he wasn't there. ...
Click to expand...

CIT have delusions.

Lloyde, not there!
CITLies1.jpg

Oops, he is there; but he was not there, when the lamppost hit him, he was moving to there. And Paik points to the south flight path verified by FDR, RADAR and damage at the Pentagon.

Lloyde spoofed the CIT morons. Doesn't matter if he was trying or not, CIT has no clue what happen on 911; Are they still the crack expert investigators for math expert Balsamo?
 
Mobertermy,
Reading back through this thread, I think you're approaching this whole problem in reverse: you've decided that the photos have been manipulated, and went looking for corroborating evidence in the photos.

What several of the posters have stated is that it should be the other way around - if the photos are, as you say, evidence (or data) - use them and align them to a sight line plot to identify the deviations or anomalies. That then gives you the truth of the photos, within a significant margin of error.

Having said that, I can tell you as a photographer that I can make any photo show what I want to show you, and you wouldn't have a hope in hell of picking whether I've added, removed, amended or distorted anything. I don't even have to use photoshop - with a wide zoom and telephoto zoom lens and some judicious cropping I can dramatically alter sight lines, fields of view, and perspective.

If you were going to ask me to validate the photos I'd want to see the camera and the settings used at the time. What format sensor, what lens focal length, what aperture. I'd want the original images - raw files on the card. If it was jpeg I'd already be worried, but if I could trace the providence I'd me more happy.

Regards,
KE
 
Mobertermy said:
No I'm not.
Click to expand...

:confused:


The arms of the TAs can go down in either direction...TA3 is down in the opposite direction of TA2. TA3 blocks the lane the cab is in.
Click to expand...

(Bolding mine)

Side note: The bolded part is exactly what I was referring to when I said..
NYCEMT86 said:
You are assuming that TA3 is in the same lane as the Cab
Click to expand...


No they don't. They are specifically used in closing HOV (High-Occupancy Vehicle) Lanes, aka, Carpool lanes during peak hours of travel.

The cab was NOT traveling on an HOV lane, since there is a concrete barrier separating the two, and at the time, the HOV was closed. Therefore TA3 would NOT be blocking the lane that the cab was traveling on.


...Route 27 is the northern terminus of the reversible high occupancy vehicle lanes of I-395.[9][10] The westbound entrance to these lanes have a series of manually closed barriers to prevent an accidental oncoming collision during the hours each day when traffic flows to the east on the HOV lanes.

Wiki
Click to expand...
 
NYCEMT86 said:
The cab was NOT traveling on an HOV lane, since there is a concrete barrier separating the two, and at the time, the HOV was closed. Therefore TA3 would NOT be blocking the lane that the cab was traveling on.
Click to expand...
This claim is absolutely preposterous...anyone can look at photo #3 and see that TA3 is unambiguously blocking the lane the cab is in.
 
Mobertermy said:
This claim is absolutely preposterous...anyone can look at photo #3 and see that TA3 is unambiguously blocking the lane the cab is in.
Click to expand...

Nope. You're confused by the perspective. The TA is beyond the concrete barrier.

Also a TA on a multi-lane section of freeway would be a tad, er, 'weird' no?
 
Last edited:
Kid Eager said:
Mobertermy,
Reading back through this thread, I think you're approaching this whole problem in reverse: you've decided that the photos have been manipulated, and went looking for corroborating evidence in the photos.

What several of the posters have stated is that it should be the other way around - if the photos are, as you say, evidence (or data) - use them and align them to a sight line plot to identify the deviations or anomalies. That then gives you the truth of the photos, within a significant margin of error.

Having said that, I can tell you as a photographer that I can make any photo show what I want to show you, and you wouldn't have a hope in hell of picking whether I've added, removed, amended or distorted anything. I don't even have to use photoshop - with a wide zoom and telephoto zoom lens and some judicious cropping I can dramatically alter sight lines, fields of view, and perspective.

If you were going to ask me to validate the photos I'd want to see the camera and the settings used at the time. What format sensor, what lens focal length, what aperture. I'd want the original images - raw files on the card. If it was jpeg I'd already be worried, but if I could trace the providence I'd me more happy.

Regards,
KE
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately none of what you said is in reference to any point I made in the presentation. I am interested in seeing specific refutations...not assumptions.

Please view the presentation...I'd be especially interested in anything you have to say since you are a photographer.

I would also like to point out that the only actual line of sight/perspective "debunk" attempted in this thread failed miserably because the "debunker" in question didn't even have the objects labeled correctly. I am not interested in hearing that this can all be explained away simply with perspective...if you think you can show me wrong then you have to demostrate it. Don't just make bare assertions.
 
GlennB said:
Nope. You're confused by the perspective.

Also a TA on a multi-lane section of freeway would be a tad, er, 'weird' no?
Click to expand...

Look at photo #3...TA3 is blocking the lane the cab is in...this has nothing to do with perspective...its just an obvious undeniable fact.

Is that really all you guys have? Repeating the word perspective over and over?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Nothing could be further from the truth. Craig desperately tries to get Lloyde to admit that he was where the photos show him to be (which would contradict CIT's theory). Over and over again. Lloyde insists he wasn't there. Mobertermy has correctly described it in #53. Watch it yourself if you don't believe it:

Lloyde England and His Taxi Cab - The Eye of the Storm
Click to expand...


LOL they are trying to get him to look like a liar. CIT absolutely do say that all the witnesses place the plane further down (they have revised their video several times and may have editted that part out of the one you link to....but I have seen the original and have referred to it in debates on P4T etc).

Lloyd does not want to appear wrong so suggests the photos are wrong not him.
sad cruel trick on an old man.
 
Mobertermy said:
Look at photo #3...TA3 is blocking the lane the cab is in...this has nothing to do with perspective...its just an obvious undeniable fact.

Is that really all you guys have? Repeating the word perspective over and over?
Click to expand...
Why do you refuse to draw the line of sight for each picture? Afraid it will show you've wasted a lot of time?
 
Mobertermy said:
This claim is absolutely preposterous...anyone can look at photo #3 and see that TA3 is unambiguously blocking the lane the cab is in.
Click to expand...

Your definition of "unambiguously" differs from mine. It also begs the question - how could a gate block multiple lanes? And why would a DC cab driver with an empty cab take the HOV lane?

You seem to be having trouble with parallax. Why don't you do as many here are suggesting and go back to the overhead view and draw lines of sight for each photo?

ETA - There are many folks here who point to "obvious, undeniable" photos of bigfoot, UFOs, Jesus on toast, and the like. Bare assertion isn't going to gain you any converts here. Draw the sightlines.
 

Attachments

  • clearly.JPG
    clearly.JPG
    30 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
DGM said:
Why do you refuse to draw the line of sight for each picture? Afraid it will show you've wasted a lot of time?
Click to expand...

Why are you trying to get me to do your work? If you think the line of sight will prove something then go ahead and do it? All I keep hearing from you guys is how "perspective" can explain this all away and yet you refuse to demonstrate that this is so.
 
Mobertermy said:
This claim is absolutely preposterous...anyone can look at photo #3 and see that TA3 is unambiguously blocking the lane the cab is in.
Click to expand...

Except your claim is just incorrect period. I provided you with sources that explain what the purpose of these barriers are for. They are for the HOV lanes, you continue to deny this. You can contact the Virginia Department of Transportation if you do not want to believe me.


But here is a better photo of the barriers and the cab



You can clearly see that your TA3 (really TA4) is pointing the opposite way you believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom