Val McClatchey's camera identified, contained editing software

[Killtown]

although if it was photoshopped it begs the question, how does this implicate the government?

Didn't you read the part about the 3 FBI guys who autographed a shirt for her?

http://flight93photo.blogspot.com/2006/07/val-mcclatchey-photo-more-smoking-guns.html

 

[mortimer]

Essentially.

And your evidence for this so far is:

1. The camera that Val is holding, whether it was the camera used on 9/11 or not, comes with photo editing software prepackaged.
2. ???

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

• Was the camera purchased new or used?
• If used, was the software still bundled with the camera?
• Was her PC/Mac capable of running the software?
• Was the software installed on her PC/Mac?
• Are there any artifacts/evidence of digital manipulation on the photo?

ETA

• What are the available editing functions of the different pieces of software in the bundle?

 

[Killtown]

To even suggest that she managed to alter the plume with this software is laughable and shows your ignorance when it comes computers or media.

You a 100% sure the software that came with her camera couldn't photoshop that plume on there?

 

[Pardalis]

Since you concede that the plume of smoke wasn't an ordnance plume, then why don't you at least remove this theory off your blog? Why would you want to keep this misinformation posted?

 

[Killtown]

Which furthers the idea that she isn't computer savvy enough to use the software - or perhaps were simply not interested in it.

Well what about her husband?

 

[Pardalis]

Well what about her husband?

And what about her dog?

 

[Killtown]

Sorry, you lose on this point. The Post-Gazette was correct. You see, a single AA cell is properly called a "cell," and a combination of multiple cells is called a "battery." You're wrong, the Post-Gazette's account, and Val's account, were technically correct.

Ha ha ha!!!

 

[Hellbound]

You a 100% sure the software that came with her camera couldn't photoshop that plume on there?

I am.

The software provided with her camera was not capable of photoshopping in a smoke plume without leaving obvious digital traces.

A question that anyone who was actually interested in investigating to find the truth could have answered with a few minutes of looking at the software capabilities.

Of course, this requires integrity, and is admittedly a few more minutes of work than making up something to support pre-concieved slander.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

1) she bought a new camera and computer. Was it for her new career in real estate? Possibly, but she says she didn't start taking real estate classes until after the New Year.

very well, point conceded

2) Um, owned a business that was about to go bankrupt. Obviously you didn't read my beginning post very well:

that doesnt necessarily mean anything, business expenses dont always translate directly to personal expenses

not to say val did this, but befroe my mom declared bankruptcy she maxed out all her credit cards because she knew once she filed she wouldnt have to pay them back

3) Go read my linked blogpost.

i did, we went over this before

1. Your guess.

is your guess any better than mine?

2. 100% sure of that?

you clearly never owned a digital camera

3. LoL! What part of her "month-old" camera do you not understand?

what part of "open-box item" do you not understand? personally i think #1 is the most likely answer

Btw, no one thinks it's fishy she had her camera ready by the door waiting for a helicopter flyby?

no, besides what difference does it make? if there were no photos youd be saying "no one thinks its fishy this plane crashed and no managed to get a picture of it?"

And what about her hearing/seeing the jet fly over her house in the near opposite direction Flight 93 supposedly flew in?

sounds doesnt always travel in a straight line, it echoes, it can appear louder from one direction, even if thats not the direction it comes from (this can be because of an open window on that side of the house, diffrences in soundproofing/insulation, and what room val was in when the plane flew by)




so seriously killtown, why dont you lay out exactly what you thinkl happened in shanksville that day, detail for detail, all you CTers liek to poke holes in the official story, but can you provide an alternate explanation with fewer holes?

 

[Killtown]

You do care - a great deal - if she faked this photo. Otherwise, you wouldn't go through all this trouble.

Well I always care if somebody's running a scam, don't you?

But I'm more interested in the connection with the FBI. If her photo is found fake, you think the FBI had nothing to do with it?

 

[Killtown]

Answer the question, Killtown:

Given this startling lack of competence, the very notion that we needed your help to formulate our theory is utterly ridiculous.

What is this relating to?

 

[Pardalis]

to the administrators

I suggest that Killtown's threads should be safeguarded for posterity, in any case Val Mc CLatchey decides to sue Killtown for diffamation of character.

 

[Anti-sophist]

Am I going to need to bust out my protractor and debunk your ridiculous claims, like JDX's?

 

[Killtown]

• Was the camera purchased new or used?
• If used, was the software still bundled with the camera?
• Was her PC/Mac capable of running the software?
• Was the software installed on her PC/Mac?
• Are there any artifacts/evidence of digital manipulation on the photo?

ETA

• What are the available editing functions of the different pieces of software in the bundle?

Why do you think I would know?

Here, ask her: stooge@shol.com


PS - when you going to finish "debunking" me on your blog site? Funny how you just stopped in the middle of it!

 

[Killtown]

Since you concede that the plume of smoke wasn't an ordnance plume,

That's not what I conceded to. Go back and read.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Why do you think I would know?

Here, ask her: stooge@shol.com

You need to know the answers to those questions in order to substantiate your claim.

PS - when you going to finish "debunking" me on your blog site? Funny how you just stopped in the middle of it!

Yes, I was writing up a summary of the thread on the forums. However, I put that on the back burner to address Hoffman's claims of 60 microns. Your point?

 

[LashL]

Well I always care if somebody's running a scam, don't you?

Then you'd best be taking down your blog as it is a complete scam.

But I'm more interested in the connection with the FBI. If her photo is found fake, you think the FBI had nothing to do with it?

As usual, you have everything bass ackwards.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the photo is fake.

Unless and until there is, you are doing nothing more than accusing by insinuation an innocent woman of nefarious deeds on the basis of nothing but your twisted conspiracy-addled imagination.

That is truly despicable.

 

[Killtown]

that doesnt necessarily mean anything, business expenses dont always translate directly to personal expenses

You do remember her talking about they may lose their house, right?

Your other stuff was so amazingly stupid that I'm not even going to bother responding, especially about the "echoing" plane!!!!

 

[LashL]

I suggest that Killtown's threads should be safeguarded for prosperity, in any case Val Mc CLatchey decides to sue Killtown for defamation of character.

That's a good idea. Be sure to keep the IP records as well so that he cannot later claim that someone else was impersonating him.