100% photoshop?

Take into account the theory that Military Intelligence is 40 years ahead of its time.

NOW look at this photo



now look at this one





Now just so you dont forget.



But guess what you allready have.

I don't get what your point is here.

Not really sure what you mean either, are you saying all three pics were photoshopped in some way?

Are you suggesting that the same technology used to manipulate the alleged 'thermate' angle cut photo could have been around early enough to have been used to manipulate the JFK photographic evidence?

You must be more direct.

WTF

I like riddles but I have no clue on this one.

OP, put the red bull down, slowly approach your computer and respond with coherent reply to WTF are you talking about?

Originally posted by Maxmars
Are you suggesting that the same technology used to manipulate the alleged 'thermate' angle cut photo could have been around early enough to have been used to manipulate the JFK photographic evidence?

You must be more direct.

Speaking of which, I have never seen that photo of the pillar with what looks like an angular cut with melted metal, does anyone have a story behind that photo? What building was that? What would make that pricision cut if that is a cut? Sorry to get off topic but that is very interesting.

are those three people related? (B&w photo, center fireman, cop in upper right corner.)

reply to post by 38181


that is one of the rare photos that show the internal support colunms before they were removed. That is the job of a professional demolition crew.

Originally posted by 38181

Speaking of which, I have never seen that photo of the pillar with what looks like an angular cut with melted metal, does anyone have a story behind that photo? What building was that? What would make that pricision cut if that is a cut? Sorry to get off topic but that is very interesting.

I'm sorry, but are you joking?

That's from 9/11.

They say it's from Thermite/Thermate. Watch it in action here

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Ceara


Since I have never seen that photo before, I cannot jump to conclusions based on one photo, for that matter nobody can. Again can you tell me what building that is?

For the OP we can play games, I think the "Now" in your riddle may mean NWO for what ever reason you are trying make a funny?

Anyone else?

Is there a point to this thread?

I don't see any connection between the three photos, and I don't see any evidence of manipulation either.

OP, please be a bit more forthcoming with your thoughts.

reply to post by N.B.A.Y.S.O.H


Whats your point of posting these pictures?You say are they photoshop...and intelligence 40 years ahead..are you saying they all are photo shopped?

reply to post by maria_stardust


Hi maria! We're in the same boat here. I'd like to think the OP is coming back with something significant, yet I don't see that in the near future.

The Oswald photo has been analyzed from the way he stands, to the shadows, to the missing cleft in his chin.

The Kennedy film has been through the wringer as well. People have gone so far as to analyze the keyhole under the door handle in the assassination film.

The 911 photo? It is not as astounding as the quote:

Thursday, June 7, 2007 at 11:37 PM

TV Fakery Evidence is now banned at fake conspiracy forum Above Top Secret. See 911 Octopus the video Loose Change want censored! Why is everyone trying to hide the most compelling evidence there is about 9/11?

Found here

Whether this is intended by the OP, I can't say. I do find it odd.

And I am not offering the OP any further information which he could twist or manipulate to somehow make the pieces of his puzzle fit, so I prefer to see this as an exercise in visual perception.

And in that instance, certain parts of those photos do appear a little more clearly defined than others.

It would seem the OP should clarify his intent if he wishes to have any discussion of the relationship of the three photos.

Gads I can't believe people have actually FLAGGED this thread

Why cheer on bad threads like this?
in what way does this thread possibly deserve to be flagged?

Is it NOT the job of the thread poster to make sense of the thread they write?

Since when is it ok on ATS to just throw random crap out there with vague ideas and then HOPE other people to give the thread content so that it makes sense...?
.....................well I guess I actually see that allot.

Nevermind.

[edit on 20-7-2008 by theRiverGoddess]

Well-l-l, I can offer a little, but not sure what the OP meant.

In photo 1, there is in existence pics of the same spot, but with:
1. an FBI agent with no head;
2. an FBI agent with his head;
3. a completely white outline of a person standing up;
4. Oswald's head added to someone's body (the CoG is outside the body in that impossible shot) at the line of the chin, under the lower lip. This is virtually proved, imo, and many authors have shown this.
(I'm currently re-reading 'Assassination Science', a compendium of authors edited by James Fetzer, so I'll be reporting on these things and more on my JFK thread.
New photo analysis of JFK murder.)

In photo 3, there are some pics of Nellie and Jackie which seem to show totally different hair styles and even hair colors on that day, and some people think that they pasted their upper bodies into the 'altered' copies of the Zapruder film. But that shot is from further back and was taken by one of the professional photographers from the press car.

Some pics on that day seem to show Jackie with shorter bangs and shorter hair and a taller collar, some pics seem to show Nellie with different hair.

IDK, windy day, women's hair blowing around. It's a little odd but not probative, imo.

Don't follow the 911 stuff...

2 cents.






[edit on 20-7-2008 by Badge01]

BTW, this is a photoshop (looks a little waxy up close, but passes pretty good at a bit of a distance)

From the Adobe fake or foto quiz site:
www.autodesk.com...



Dru Blair
www.drublair.com...

Does even better ones (allegedly).


(I have some doubts about his process shots of him doing these (shrug))





[edit on 20-7-2008 by Badge01]

reply to post by theRiverGoddess


Well, instead of whinnnning about it some people might post content.

Moi, for instance.


Most people cite 1987-8 as the first available image manipulation software ImagePro, later renamed Photoshop.

The OP is claiming that certain gubmint shop were 40 years ahead of what was available publicly.

In the case of NSA, it was probably 50 years ahead of the rest of the world wrt crypto-analysis and code breaking, but that was in the early 80s. Now, not so much.

I'd doubt that the Mil had ability to manipulate an existing photo with -software- on a computer, but they had plenty of capability to use overlays. The earliest overlay was done in the 1800s (approx 1860-ish), a famous photo which is in B&W showing a man looking out a window and some ladies in the foreground and absolutely no evidence of splice lines.

www.cs.dartmouth.edu...

So strictly speaking the OP is not incorrect, but software manipulation is different from re-shooting and overlay filming in the darkroom.

I suspect that the Mil may have been a couple years ahead of Adobe, but often times, they'd buy up a company doing work like this to prevent it from being public. This time they missed their chance, apparently and it was in the public retail sector first. (guessing)







[edit on 20-7-2008 by Badge01]

WAY to GO Badge!! stars for you!

I am still disgusted with the OP however......without YOU coming through for them and giving some real meaning to the thread it is all just a waste of everyones time.

The OP is lucky your here to mop up they're weird mess of a thread........

.........if I squint my eyes at the photoshop knights picture it looks real.

I need to get out more.

.................................just sayin



[edit on 20-7-2008 by theRiverGoddess]

Have a look at the OP photobucket Album.

Photobucket Album:NBAYSOH

They seem to like doing photoshop stuff. Not sure if this helps any?????????

reply to post by greenfruit


you must admit he has some cool photos.