• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Proof of Photomanipulation

I Ratant said:
What is the point to all this garbage?
What purpose would be served by the photomanipulation of anything?
Click to expand...

That's the beauty of it. There IS no obvious reason. The NWO does stuff just to mess with our heads.
 
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...

No its not. Its exactly as one would expect it to be. You being wrong does not make the picture wrong..........
 
The OP is just baseless junk to try & manipulate readers into thinking that the photos' shown are "manipulated".

A picture says a thousand words, but to Truthers it's just 1 word: "Manipulation"! :boxedin:

What a maroon! :rolleyes:
 
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...

Mobertermy,

Go to Wikipedia. Look up "Parallax". Educate yourself, since you're not prepared to let anyone else do it.

Dave
 
Mobertermy said:
At the same time if sight lines are such an easy and obvious way to "debunk" the presentation, then why hasn't any one produced one that demonstrates this?
Click to expand...

I have. You're simply refusing to believe it.

Go back to the sight line I posted; it's not perfect, but it's near enough. Print it out. Sight along it, and look what's to the left and what's to the right of the line. Then draw a second line at a right angle to the road, and sight along that. You'll see that some things that were to the right of the first line are to the left of the second.

Honestly, kids in kindergarten can follow this. Why can't you? You keep saying things are to the left of the cab on the overhead but to the right of it on the photo, and I keep telling you that left and right are relative to the direction of view, and you still can't get it. Is it some kind of dyslexia?

Dave
 
Wait this thread is all about proving that CIT was a bunch of lying thugs?

That is nice, but we already knew that.
 
Mobertermy said:
Keep in mind that many other witnesses actually place the cab NoC as well. For instance Sgt. Lagasse said he saw the poles on the ground NoC with his own eyes. He also insisted the cab wasn't on the bridge!
Click to expand...

He also said he was on the opposite side of the Citgo, and facing in the opposite direction, to the position and direction he's seen in on the security cameras. When people are asked to recall events years afterwards, in real life they sometimes get things wrong. But when over a hundred people give statements immediately after an event that all agree, best estimate is that they're right. And everyone agreed that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Dave
 
ing3.jpg



ing2.jpg



Mobertermy:

Do these two picture show the cab in the same place. If so do you still believe the TA marked behind the cab is TA2?
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
I have. You're simply refusing to believe it.

....

Honestly, kids in kindergarten can follow this. Why can't you? You keep saying things are to the left of the cab on the overhead but to the right of it on the photo, and I keep telling you that left and right are relative to the direction of view, and you still can't get it. Is it some kind of dyslexia?

Dave
Click to expand...

Some kind of dyslexia would explain a lot. Come to think of it, I rarely succeed when asking my wife for directions - she cannot get N/S or R/L sorted out.
I just googlemap it myself....:rolleyes:

ETA - maybe mobert's problem is that he is 'spatially challenged'
 
Last edited:
alienentity said:
Some kind of dyslexia would explain a lot. Come to think of it, I rarely succeed when asking my wife for directions - she cannot get N/S or R/L sorted out.
I just googlemap it myself....:rolleyes:

ETA - maybe mobert's problem is that he is 'spatially challenged'
Click to expand...
good grief i cant believe i wasted 15 minutes of my time wading through this nonsense, What this boils down to is, If a Mobert cant understand parralax, lens angles, telephoto lens foreshortening, Then he rejects our reality, and substitutes his own. Ive been over just about every single photo taken and published of the area of question over 3 years ago. Llloyds taxi stopped at the end of the bridge stone guardwall where the armco rail termination ends, between the left and center lane of the three lane southbound, There is no mystery or "photo manipulation". I can open up Google earth and use the timeline tool to go back to sept 11 2001 , do a screen capture, post it here and clear all this nonsense about the gates up. But it is not worth the bother Mobert because frankly,You are not worth my time.
 
16.5 said:
Wait this thread is all about proving that CIT was a bunch of lying thugs?

That is nice, but we already knew that.
Click to expand...


yeah we do but there are internal truther wars where CIT are in one camp and the "cruise missile disguised as a parrot or whatever" are in another. Each side thinks the other are insane or shills. Its paranoia run amok
 
I'm done with this thread. His claim that the photo of the cab with the Pentagon burning with was manipulated was disproven over 100 posts ago. The rest is just death spasms and denial.

I note that he still didn't answer my question as to whether he was going to withdraw the presentation now it is proven to be making false claims.

Anyhow, I've wasted enough hours in my life doing photoanalysis for him, so seeya somewhere else.
 
DGM said:
No. Different photo, different line.


You never answered my question as to the identity of the TA in the cab close-up. Do you still maintain it's TA2 (despite photos showing it can't be)?
Click to expand...

Yes, I still maintain that. Why do you think it can't be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom