Ed Applying luma curve to photos and footage

[Thermal]

That was cool. Ok. Agreed.

I enjoy the "prove it" responses. So keep firing away. Ill send proof the sky is blue if someone is genuinely interested. Ill also discuss underground water tables and change my opinion on them ever two hours as info comes in.

So... what im saying is. Thanks

Dynamite. So where should we pick back up? The cancellations? The cars? OP's choice.

 

[JayUtah]

Anyone passing judgment of others research on 9/11 that doesnt know these files snd documents, is not operating at a high enough level.

No. This is not a case of you being smarter and better informed than everyone else. Everyone is obliged to cite their sources.

Had the reception been in anyway not hostile, I would beennexcited and enjoyed going outnof my way to provide direct links and location of any and all information.

My reception has been treated with hostility.

No, you have not been treated inappropriately or unfairly. And even if you had, the proper response is not to deny your obligations to document your claims.

Hostility is not always tone and word choice. Sometimes the hostile words and tone declare an unwillingness to ever change.

If you want people to change their minds you have to address their objections and prove your points with evidence. You don’t get to say people are “hostile” simply because they give you good reasons why they don’t believe you. You are not entitled to a presumption of correctness.

I would still be crucified like Jesus Christ.

No. You’re neither a martyr nor a Messiah.

 

[nt1]

@nt1: on the topic of unusual cancellations on flight 11, you mentioned earlier a 9 member Nat Geo team that appears to be swaying your cancellation numbers towards the high end. Either the team was running long in Boston, or they were not yet needed in California yet. Does that make National Geographic suspicious?

No sir. Is the direct answer to your question.

Let me know it you want an expanded answer to this.

Because yes it makes the event suspicious.

Nat geo has a secretary and a couple receptionist. If one of them goes home and becomes a serial killer. It doesnt make nat geo a serial killer. If they use a nat gro credit card to rent a car. To kill a few people. It requires scrutiny of nat geos records or simply area around their entity.


Doesn't make them anything.

If i take a dump in your bathroom. And i was the last one in there. Even if you found out it was me. You'd still say "what did you eat???"
Maybe nat geo ate taco bell.....

 

[grunion]

What does your evidence indicate? I haven't seen a claim, just bizarre analogies.

 

[Thermal]

No sir. Is the direct answer to your question.

Let me know it you want an expanded answer to this.

Because yes it makes the event suspicious.

Nat geo has a secretary and a couple receptionist. If one of them goes home and becomes a serial killer. It doesnt make nat geo a serial killer. If they use a nat gro credit card to rent a car. To kill a few people. It requires scrutiny of nat geos records or simply area around their entity.

Ok. But nobody *did* anything except change their plans about flying, which is fairly common. If one of the receptionists crashed a plane or otherwise facilitated the attack with Nat Geo resources, I'd be more inclined to agree.

Doesn't make them anything.

If i take a dump in your bathroom. And i was the last one in there. Even if you found out it was me. You'd still say "what did you eat???"
Maybe nat geo ate taco bell.....

All right. So you think it's reasonable to at least examine whether or not there may have been a connection. I'm down. Do we see anything besides a routine cancellation of a cross country flight by a business entity's team? Seems pretty run of the mill to me. Hoofbeats, zebras.

Eta: the burden should actually work the other way, though. Is there any reason to think the cancellations abord the 9/11 flight with the highest occupancy of the four was disproportionate to the point of suspicion? Mark Wahlberg also canceled his reservation on the same flight. Seth McFarlane was late and missed it. Stuff happens.

I guess we should start with what is the usual amount of cancellations for early departure Boston to California flights, and the maximum number, and see where the 9/11 cancellations fall in that range? Like, was it the most ever cancellations? Slightly more than average?

 

[ahhell]

Anyone passing judgment of others research on 9/11 that doesnt know these files snd documents, is not operating at a high enough level.

I have 97 tabs open besides this one. I will provide them to you in no order or in any context. They will still be of educational and investigational importance.

https://catalog.archives.gov/search-within/564?page=3&q=9%2F11%2F2001%20seattle&sort=relevant

9/11 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Finding Aid - Boxes 12-23

Boxes 12-23 (Note: records not linked to the Catalog require a FOIA request for access) Boxes 1 - 11 | Boxes 12 - 23 | Boxes 24 - 35 | Boxes 36 - 47 | Boxes 48 - 59| Boxes 60 - 71 | Boxes 72 - 83 | Boxes 84 - 95 | Boxes 96 - 107 | Boxes 108 - 126 Box # Folder # Record Type Description Digital...

www.archives.gov

I understand and agree.

My disconnect, which IS my fault. Is i wouldn't accept a link, screenshot, or a claimed deity handing me the evidence, without fact checking it myself.

Had the reception been in anyway not hostile, I would beennexcited and enjoyed going outnof my way to provide direct links and location of any and all information.

My reception has been treated with hostility. Calm. Slow. Sure.... you (the grouo) and I havent worded everything with roses....

This is an attempt at really teyinf roxreaxh someone.

Hostility is not always tone and word choice. Sometimes the hostile words and tone declare an unwillingness to ever change.


That's what im upset about. Not the words, action, or tone. Its the unsaid connotation that I could doceverything but reveal myself and I would still be crucified like Jesus Christ.

I dont subscribe to that stuff. I just used it as a common example. The guy genuinely brings some examples and they nail him to the wall. ((That requeires belief or considering the complete acceptance he did heal, coupled with the supposed words he left behind) Jesus Christ lone words and commands outlined by the red words, which were purposely highlighted as an insult by relating them to no more than manual instructions, are the only example of considering others first, a method to move on when they reject you, the knowledge that nothing seperates humans into two tiers, and... as long as you listen to all this and don't judge yourself superior and I dont judge myself superior and we BOTH stop and look around to see if our time could be better spent helping someone in need.... we would have the only heaven we will ever know. In fact the only life we will ever know. Heaven on earth. Because regardless of your belief in heaven, reincarnation or atheism.... this is all going black. You wont remember or take any of this with you. None of it. One day you will drop dead and nothing will change that or matter. No friends... all the friends. Black. If you own a tv. Turn it on. Stare at a human speaking on it. Click the off button. That is you and I. Off.)


Love you all. 9/11 shouldnt be purposely, structurally, and irganized to be guarded for personal or financial gain the way it is used 24 years later. Its kinda mean and manipulative.

Nope, that's flipping the burden of proof. You've made a claim, support it. You apparently already went to the trouble to find your source, why not provide it? Unless that source isn't at archive.gov but you've been told by wherever you found those screen shots that they got them from archive.gov. This is indistinguishable from someone that just grab a screen shot from some random facebook group, someone just fabricating fake documents, or someone actually getting legit government documents.

Things I don't know about the supposed high rate of cancellations even if its true. Is 1, 2, 3 standard deviations away from the norm? Its entirely because a Nat Geo team cancelled. Because, that would absolutely be normal. An organization was sending a team of folks somewhere then decided not to, not actually any more suspicious than one person cancelling. The FBI investigated, what did they find out? Did they find out it was entirely because Nat Geo cancelled some project resulting in 11 more people than normal cancelling all at once?

 

[Oystein]

Notice plane. Notice falling man. Notice luma halo was not removed.

Why? Sloppy or on purpose.

Here is a photograph.

I then used a samsung galaxy stock emoji creator.

I inserted the outline of the body back into the photo next to the original.

Notice the difference in the edge of the shoulder.

You can guard against it. You can mock me.

But you cant argue against physical reality.

Not my reality. Not your reality. Our reality. Universal reality. Not even to living creatures with eyeballs. Computers can see it too..

Well, I am no expert at all, and I haven't bothered to see if this post of yourn has received any replies yet. BUT here is my hunch:

- The 9/11 images you chose feature a foreground object (a falling man; a plane) against a very smooth, contrast-poor background (a cloudless sky; the face of the WTC tower which is already nealy featureless as is, and is additionally smoothed by the panning camera creating motion blur)
- your chosen other image features persons against a very contour-RICH background - nearby trees.

Am I on to something?

 

[Thermal]

Anyone passing judgment of others research on 9/11 that doesnt know these files snd documents, is not operating at a high enough level.

I have 97 tabs open besides this one. I will provide them to you in no order or in any context. They will still be of educational and investigational importance.

Here's the thing: the ISF is not an investigational forum that spends its time chasing other people's claims around. It's a discussion forum, with a focus on critical thinking. This is the general format:

Poster A: I have a unique claim. This is where I found my evidence to support it (provides link).

Poster B: Interesting, but I examined your evidence, and have found conflicting evidence elsewhere (provides link), or disagree with your interpretation of the data you cited.

Poster Thermal: makes wisecrack or sophomoric attempt at humor.

That's pretty much what's expected. It goes galvanting off in different directions after that, with dueling citations/interpretations. But the basic format of 1)claim w/specific support, and 2)discussion of presented material, is the standard. This isn't a classroom exercise in how to spend the day playing hide and seek with evidence. This is the critical end, not the investigative end.

 

[Oystein]

... The good Messieurs JayUtah and Oystien have shown you precisely why.

Wowowoooowwww that's waaaaaay too much credit! I really am an absolute beginner with digital imaging and image editing/conversion, I only know a part of the most basic concepts.
Just enough to have a general feel to have an idea what the minimum requirements would be to prove that a certain analytical method validly, with good statistical power, actually distinguishes between "natural" image degradation and "artificial" manipulation of the sort our interlocutor suggests.

In other words: I expect some well-structured thinking to occur, where a comprehensive explanation if given.

But I noticed something just now that gives little reason to hope for such a comprehensive explanation to be forthcoming:
nt1's posts are organized as mostly single lines, separated by paragraph breaks (2 line breaks). Each such line (even if there are two or three on occasion, those hardly qualify as paragraphs) contains short sentences, or mere phrases that do not amount to a grammatically complete sentence. There is no coherent, structured argument. Ever. Just blurted out half-ideas. And I suggest this accurately reflects a lack of coherent and comprehensive thinking.

Contrast with any post by JayUtah (and many of mine): These contain actual paragraphs. Each paragraph composed of several full, grammital sentences, each devoted to developing an idea.

From paragraph to paragraph, the argument keeps evolving.

What a sharp contrast to nt1's blurted-out one-liners!

 

[ahhell]

Here's the thing: the ISF is not an investigational forum that spends its time chasing other people's claims around. It's a discussion forum, with a focus on critical thinking. This is the general format:

Poster A: I have a unique claim. This is where I found my evidence to support it (provides link).

Poster B: Interesting, but I examined your evidence, and have found conflicting evidence elsewhere (provides link), or disagree with your interpretation of the data you cited.

Poster Thermal: makes wisecrack or sophomoric attempt at humor.

That's pretty much what's expected. It goes galvanting off in different directions after that, with dueling citations/interpretations. But the basic format of 1)claim w/specific support, and 2)discussion of presented material, is the standard. This isn't a classroom exercise in how to spend the day playing hide and seek with evidence. This is the critical end, not the investigative end.

To be fair, that's a bit idealistic.

 

[Axxman300]

Didn't have a high-rez image. While working on this I noticed a lot of things. First, the jumper is falling in the shadow of another building, and that shadow only extends halfway across the North Tower's face, so our guest's "halo" is just reflected sunlight from the bright side of the tower. It's why he doesn't have a shadow. And there are pieces of debris falling with him.

I work with photoshop a lot. There's zero manipulation with the original photo, which is one of 11 of this man falling to his death.

And yes, if this thread continues its spiral, Rodan will show up.

 

[Thermal]

To be fair, that's a bit idealistic.

Well, sure, but as a practical reference structure, it works. Beats the hell out of "Here's a random partial handwritten page, figure out where it allegedly came from in your free hours". I've spent enough of my life playing Where's Waldo without seeking more.

 

[Thermal]

<Nvm, edited>

 

[Axxman300]

It says "oops".

Had to edit it

 

[Thermal]

Had to edit it

Copy that.

As an aside, that picture is soul crushing. He was at the top of the building, right? I can't imagine the state of mind to be going to work in a nice restaurant one morning, then having flames licking at you till you look at that fall and choose it.

 

[Thermal]

Wowowoooowwww that's waaaaaay too much credit!

You presented a coherent summary, man, that i, knowing nothing, could understand. Credit where credit is due.

I'm still reeling that I spelled "messieurs" correctly on the first try but misspelled your handle. Sorry 'bout that.

...What a sharp contrast to nt1's blurted-out one-liners!

Personally, I'm cutting him a lot of slack. I gather that up till now, he has engaged with less disciplined-thinking fora, and it might take a little gear-changing to get used to our style and expectations.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Yes. The post above you. That is a physical photo in my possesion. I added a composite of the same body. I duplicated it. It shows the smooth edge and unnatural blending of light.

Would you like me to do more of them with different tools. I would be happy to.

Have you used your method on photographs you know to have nothing added to them?

What was the result?

If I provide you with 6 pictures, three I have tampered with and three I haven't, would you be able to tell me which three are untouched?

 

[arthwollipot]

I might have missed something.

What do flight cancellations have to do with doctored pictures?

 

[Thermal]

Doctored images wasn't going along swimmingly, but nt1 claims there are anomalies everywhere you look, and brought up flight 11 cancellations, so we're gonna look at some and see if we can carry it through to a resolution.

 

[arthwollipot]

Doctored images wasn't going along swimmingly, but nt1 claims there are anomalies everywhere you look, and brought up flight 11 cancellations, so we're gonna look at some and see if we can carry it through to a resolution.

Is that not a distraction from the topic of the thread?