Proof of Photomanipulation

Childlike Empress said:
Yes, this was just something i've spontaneously thrown into the room, for dissection and reference - and in reply to sheeplesnshills' incorrect posts. He has a problem with cognitive dissonance.
Click to expand...

Damn, Ms. Empress; you owe me one irony meter too.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yes, this was just something i've spontaneously thrown into the room, for dissection and reference - and in reply to sheeplesnshills' incorrect posts. He has a problem with cognitive dissonance.
Click to expand...


Wheres the irony meter when you need it :)

and what incorrect posts??? CIT did tell Lloyd that ALL the witnesses have the plane crossing the road further to the north. This was recorded at his house. They then show him the pictures which show him and his taxi where the plane really went and since he knows he saw the plane he simply moves his memory of it to where they say it was and say the pictures are wrong. He did not take the pictures so why should he argue the matter?. Where exactly it was was not an issue to him as he simply describes what happened to him and his cab.

As I said, a dirty trick to play on an old man but about par for the course for CIT.
 
Last edited:
Gaaah, too late to the party. New poster (long time lurker) here.

Hello.

I set up a 3d scene up in 3dsMax to try to get the point across
It's really really rough, ground heights are eyeballed not taken from a DEM. Same with the scaling of the lamp poles and cars, but its good enough to show the effect of a long lens and to get stuff roughly in the right place.
I didn't build everything (the bridge parapet and the bushes for instance) but it shows up on the ground texture.


I'm too noob to get to post image URLs, so if someone wants to PM me so we can get some images posted that'd be great.
 
Mobertermy said:
You are honestly trying to tell me the cab is 80 ft north of the overhead sign? Look at the picture in post #245...that's 80 ft. away from the overhead sign?
Click to expand...
Flight 77 impacted the Pentagon and a lamppost hit the cab. What is your conclusion? Why did you fail?

I would recommend never using any CIT information in forming or analyzing 911 issues.

Your overall conclusion would be interesting to know, since your lie of photo manipulation has failed.
 
So here's the scene, I've made gate 36 (TA3) and Pole B bright red, and made pole A yellow to make them easier to see. CIS it ain't :) but it'll do.


Photo 1
Gate36, behind the brown car and light pole, Pole B to the right of that.
Lens set to ~110mm

Photo 2
Gate 36 behind cab, I've got this as ~140mm lens,

Photo 3
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1
 

Attachments

  • Pent0.jpg
    Pent0.jpg
    113.4 KB · Views: 25
  • Pent1.jpg
    Pent1.jpg
    119.3 KB · Views: 20
  • Pent2.jpg
    Pent2.jpg
    122.4 KB · Views: 19
  • Pent3.jpg
    Pent3.jpg
    122.7 KB · Views: 14
Last edited:
Photo 4
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1

Photo 5
Gate36 behind the brown car, gate 35 behind the crowd of people (where the red car is n my scene). ~280 mm again (probably max zoom of this particular lens). Taken from way up the hill.
 

Attachments

  • Pent4.jpg
    Pent4.jpg
    132.7 KB · Views: 14
  • Pent5.jpg
    Pent5.jpg
    121.8 KB · Views: 193
drewid said:
Photo 4
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1

Photo 5
Gate36 behind the brown car, gate 35 behind the crowd of people (where the red car is n my scene). ~280 mm again (probably max zoom of this particular lens). Taken from way up the hill.
Click to expand...
Looks like you got a reasonably good match. Nice Job!


BTW Welcome
 
drewid said:
So here's the scene, I've made gate 36 (TA3) and Pole B bright red, and made pole A yellow to make them easier to see. CIS it ain't :) but it'll do.


Photo 1
Gate36, behind the brown car and light pole, Pole B to the right of that.
Lens set to ~110mm

Photo 2
Gate 36 behind cab, I've got this as ~140mm lens,

Photo 3
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1
Click to expand...

Good work - I came to the same conclusion in respect of photo 2 at post 123, but was hesitant to nominate the lens on account of not knowing the camera used (full frame/DX or other).
 
drewid said:
Photo 4
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1

Photo 5
Gate36 behind the brown car, gate 35 behind the crowd of people (where the red car is n my scene). ~280 mm again (probably max zoom of this particular lens). Taken from way up the hill.
Click to expand...


QED Excellent work.


Now mobertermy are you going act like an adult? Admit you were wrong and learn a valuable lesson from this? Just because you "know" that something is true does not actually make it so.

or are you going to behave like a child and simply put your fingers in your ears and scream "I'm not listening"!

Note that debunking you does not prove that their was no elaborate plot by reptile people or whatever on 911, all we are showing you that what you presented is not evidence of anything other than those pictures were not manipulated as you said they were.
Follow JREF and you will find EVERY piece of evidence of foul play presented by the truth movement has been shown to be simply wrong and that might hopefully lead you to a logical conclusion re 911 and CTs in general.:cool:
 
drewid said:
Photo 4
Gate 36 behind the brown car. ~280mm lens, taken from nearly the same position as photo#1

Photo 5
Gate36 behind the brown car, gate 35 behind the crowd of people (where the red car is n my scene). ~280 mm again (probably max zoom of this particular lens). Taken from way up the hill.
Click to expand...

Drewid, thanks for your diagrams.

1) Do you agree that the labels of TA2 and TA3 are labeled correctly in photo #1?

2) Do you agree that the cab is not on the bridge?
 
Mobertermy,

I think that around 60 hours have passed since you posted this PowerPoint as "proof" of
photo manipulation. What has kept you from doing the overhead / line of sight analysis?
 
carlitos said:
Mobertermy,

I think that around 60 hours have passed since you posted this PowerPoint as "proof" of
photo manipulation. What has kept you from doing the overhead / line of sight analysis?
Click to expand...

If the Eiffel Tower was behind the Pentagon in these photos would you still be insisting I have to do sight lines?
 
Last edited:
So the Eiffel Tower behind the Pentagon in a photograph wouldn't be evidence of photo manipulation in your opinion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom