Continuation - Ukraine erupts in riots and general strikes

And yet another investigation has shown that Russia has been dishonest in its discussion of the downing of MH17, this time they have been shown to have doctored photographs.


Russia Doctored Photos in Shooting Down of Airliner, Report Finds


Actual forensic experts don't even take the time to comment in detail on the Brown Noses crap anymore, they just point and laugh. An outrage that they are still peddled by the usual propaganda outlets - or better that people still buy it.
 
Actual forensic experts don't even take the time to comment in detail on the Brown Noses crap anymore, they just point and laugh. An outrage that they are still peddled by the usual propaganda outlets - or better that people still buy it.

Very interesting. And what, pray tell, leads you to certainty as to Mr. Charles Wood's qualifications in forensics? His twitter profile?
 
Actual forensic experts don't even take the time to comment in detail on the Brown Noses crap anymore, they just point and laugh. An outrage that they are still peddled by the usual propaganda outlets - or better that people still buy it.

So why don't you debunk all the rest of Brown Moses/Bellingcat's analysis

For example the satellite photos showing where Russian forces launched rocket barrages against Ukrainian positions from within Russia? (Guardian article here for reference)
 
So why don't you debunk all the rest of Brown Moses/Bellingcat's analysis


There's no need for it. Their track record stands and is known to close observers. Didn't I point you to one of Charles Wood's analysis in the past? And asked you if you ever looked at the stuff with a critical eye yourself? I think so. And nothing came back because as long as your favorite outlets will treat this nonsense as "independent analysis", you'll buy it. Which is kind of sad but won't change anything.
 
There's no need for it. Their track record stands and is known to close observers. Didn't I point you to one of Charles Wood's analysis in the past? And asked you if you ever looked at the stuff with a critical eye yourself? I think so. And nothing came back because as long as your favorite outlets will treat this nonsense as "independent analysis", you'll buy it. Which is kind of sad but won't change anything.

Still no evidence Charles Wood Is Who He Says He Is, just an uncritical acceptance of his "critical eye", which just happens to align to a certain political point of view. He didn't even really analyze this latest time, just pointed to an old article on Google Earth time stamps.
 
Ah, just in, good old Charles gave it a quick treatment: About Bellingcat’s claim: “Russian sat pics fake”

Charles Wood said:
I say again about the purpose of this document. It’s not about proving or disproving or rebutting anything. It’s about showing how Bellingcat is fundamentally incompetent at best and quite possibly malevolent at worst.


My prediction stands that it won't help as long as the holy free Western media treats the crap as "expert analysis" (SPIEGEL has run stories with it as well today, so I'm not picking on Anglo media per se, but the international mighty Wurlitzer (look it up)).
 
Last edited:
Now this supposed forensics analysis is caughing up more credentials, yet he seems to exist nowhere outside these particular tweets and posts against bellingcat.

CE, what validity do you give to this analysis, since you appear to be accepting it as valid merely on this Wood guy's credentials?
 
Edited by Agatha: 
Edited breach of rule 12


Charles Wood showed up at our Syria wiki around the time of the Ghouta incident (autumn 2013) and helped a great deal in several places to demolish the pre-"bellingcat"/Brown Noses stuff about the reach and origin of the missiles apparently used in the attack. None of this has ever been acknowledged by those 15-min-of-fame shills, instead they ban everybody with enough expertise to challenge their tales. Charles feels insulted by that smear of his profession. He has been occasionally contributing to Ukraine research, leaving no doubt about his expertise.

You're welcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edited by Agatha: 
Edited moderated content


Charles Wood showed up at our Syria wiki around the time of the Ghouta incident (autumn 2013) and helped a great deal in several places to demolish the pre-"bellingcat"/Brown Noses stuff about the reach and origin of the missiles apparently used in the attack. None of this has ever been acknowledged by those 15-min-of-fame shills, instead they ban everybody with enough expertise to challenge their tales. Charles feels insulted by that smear of his profession. He has been occasionally contributing to Ukraine research, leaving no doubt about his expertise.

You're welcome.[/QUOTE]

Still no evidence he's a real forensic specialist. Strikes me more as one of those Birther Adobe analysis types.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Strikes me more as one of those Birther Adobe analysis types.

Apparently, he's "very technical".

Extreme-Irony.gif
 
This one really isn't going well for Brown Noses. The man behind the online tool they used totally agrees with the author of this analysis of an analysis (and Charles Wood). Closing remark:

Myghty said:
To the guys at bellingcat: Please read the tutorials at fotoforensics. And to not make fast assumptions. Especially not in such dangerous and hot political topics. I do not want to judge here, wether the MoD pictures are fake or not. I just want to point out, that from your analysis, it is not possible to determine if at least picture 4 is a fake. I will cover picture 5 in a later blogpost.


In other words: "RTFM, amateurs." :D

My prediction still stands, though. As long as it's promoted by "quality sources"... CU next time when all is forgotten again.
 
The report I linked to didn't rely on any such analysis. It matches a video to where witnesses said it was taken, and not where Russia claimed it was taken.
 
The report I linked to didn't rely on any such analysis. It matches a video to where witnesses said it was taken, and not where Russia claimed it was taken.


We weren't talking about something you linked to, but what's in the "news" these days and others linked to as latest Brown Noses revelations. Any substantial comment on what's in the two expert takes on that material? Or is the cognitive dissonance too strong again?
 

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