Proof of Photomanipulation

Chodorov said:
The State manipulates photos relentlessly. For example NASA always puts Mars ground and low-orbit photos through a red-tinged lens and have been doing so for decades. This is how government behaves. They make mistakes and then reinforce those mistakes ruthlessly for decades to come. People naively assume that they do things in accordance with logic and normal human decency. This is more the exception then the rule.
Click to expand...


No No its not the State its the Reptile people!

Nice that you show your true colours. Typical truther. come up with a conclusion and then desperately bend fact to fit your fantasy.
 
Oystein said:
In Photo #1, there is an unlabelled TA on the right margin. Isn't that TA1, and consequently, should you not relabel
TA1->TA2
TA2->TA3
TA3->TA4
?

In the Commentary on Photo #1, you'd have to conclude that the cab between TA3 and TA4, not?
Click to expand...

Exactly! But the cab is not between TA3 and TA4 in reality. Get it? The photo can't be right. If you label TA2 and TA3 correctly in relation to the cab you end up with an impossible extra TA. If you label the TA by the turn off correctly you end up with the cab impossibly between TA3 and TA4.

The photo is impossible.
 
Mobertermy said:
Exactly! But the cab is not between TA3 and TA4 in reality. Get it? The photo can't be right. If you label TA2 and TA3 correctly in relation to the cab you end up with an impossible extra TA. If you label the TA by the turn off correctly you end up with the cab impossibly between TA3 and TA4.

The photo is impossible.
Click to expand...
Why do other photos show this not to be true? Let me guess, They're ALL fake?

:confused:
 
Mobertermy said:
You have to watch the presentation, decide if I am right or not, and then draw your own conclusions. I wrote out some of the implications, but for the most part I think people can draw their own conclusions.
Click to expand...
Are you a fan of the "fly-over"? If not, why do you think the evil doers would go through so much trouble to fake so much evidence? It doesn't make any sense.


(if you a "fly-over" fan you hopeless because your own witnesses prove your wrong)
 
Mobertermy said:
I don't flat out refuse. I'm not going to have time to work on this til next week. I'd also like to point out that you guys claim that line of sight plots could debunk this whole thing very easily...why haven't any of you produced any yet then?
Click to expand...

Because its work and we have lives. Go back and redo your PPT with the corrections required and add overhead line of sight diagrams so that we can see where you think photographer must have been/couldn't have been

To be honest, I am looking forward to the line of sight thing because it is going to help me.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Yes, it might be an epiphany. Understanding that you are indeed wrong, will be a first step on the road back to reality.
 
Oystein said:
That is a typical problem I have with many truthers:
They are so often so absolutely, totally, unambiguously, 100%, no mistake possible, beyond all doubt sure, certain and convinced that they are right.
When in fact they are wrong.
Even about simple things like "what do we see in this picture?"
Click to expand...


And he was so adamant about the truth of his claim regarding this detail; a detail that he claimed was insignificant only after he was proven wrong.

No, it is VERY significant. Once you claim to be absolutely right, and we are preposterously wrong - once you use such strong words AND turn out to be flat wrong, we must view everything else you present as absolutely true with utmost skepticism. Because it shows you are not approaching the problem you want to solve with an open, skeptical mind, but instead with a very rigid and fixed predisposition.
Click to expand...


Technically, the detail itself is rather insignificant. It's Mobertermy's handling of it which is significant. As you said, it makes [even more] obvious some very fundamental flaws in his reasoning and analysis; flaws that may taint all of his other claims.
 
Chodorov said:
The State manipulates photos relentlessly. For example NASA always puts Mars ground and low-orbit photos through a red-tinged lens and have been doing so for decades. This is how government behaves. They make mistakes and then reinforce those mistakes ruthlessly for decades to come. People naively assume that they do things in accordance with logic and normal human decency. This is more the exception then the rule.
Click to expand...


Supreme Court Upholds Lower Court Opinion - NASA Too Decent
Red Planet Police Can Warrantless Raid Homes To Destroy Non Red-Tinged Mars Photographs
Chodorov Moves to North Korea Where Mars Is Green.​
 
Last edited:
Merko said:
No. All photos make sense if the cab is between TA3 and TA4. All of them.
Click to expand...

Well, if you can demonstrate this you will have succesfully debunked me. Have a got at it! All you've done so far is make worthless bare assertions.
 
Mobertermy said:
Well, if you can demonstrate this you will have succesfully debunked me. Have a got at it! All you've done so far is make worthless bare assertions.
Click to expand...
Is TA2 almost directly (actually slightly south) of the overhead sign (like in your overhead diagram)?
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
And he was so adamant about the truth of his claim regarding this detail; a detail that he claimed was insignificant only after he was proven wrong.
Click to expand...
You have to put the claim in context. I was trying to find the easiest way to demonstrate that the cab is to the right of TA3. Actually, the fact that I was thinking of the traffic arm going the wrong way actually strenthens my case because that puts TA3 even further to the left than I marked it.

Technically, the detail itself is rather insignificant. It's Mobertermy's handling of it which is significant.
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree. I did the intellectually honest thing and admitted to a mistake. That is significant.

As you said, it makes [even more] obvious some very fundamental flaws in his reasoning and analysis; flaws that may taint all of his other claims.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. It just shows I admit to mistkaes when I make them. Furthermore, if you look at the claim that was being demonstrated (the location of TA3) me being wrong actually helps me because it puts TA3 even further north than I had marked it, and makes it even more obvious that the cab is between TA2 and TA3.

All you have done is highlighted the fact that I am intellectually honest and admit to mistakes when I make them. Thank you.
 
Mobertermy said:
You have to watch the presentation, decide if I am right or not, and then draw your own conclusions. I wrote out some of the implications, but for the most part I think people can draw their own conclusions.
Click to expand...

That is not an answer. You have inundated us with pages and pages of minutiae without illustrating why any of this is germane to the larger issue of 9-11. What larger point are you attempting to make with this presentation? That is what I want to hear you say.
 
Mobertermy said:
Merko said:
All photos make sense if the cab is between TA3 and TA4. All of them.
Click to expand...
Well, if you can demonstrate this you will have succesfully debunked me.
Click to expand...
No, you will have to tell us what is wrong with them. Please start by at least offering a coherent explanation for which photo you think is wrong, and which one(s) you think we can trust. Then tell us why you think some particular photo is wrong. It is really, really hard to even follow your claim so I basically disregarded anything you've said so far and looked at the photos only, and they all make sense.
 
What is the point to all this garbage?
What purpose would be served by the photomanipulation of anything?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom