Wreckage in this pic Cannot Be From Flight MH-17

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: mclarenmp4

Every pic you show that is different is more proof of fakery/photoshopping.

Wow, this sites motto is "Deny Ignorance" not embrace it. Enjoy your fantasy.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
Now look at the wreckage again.

A 777 has doors on both sides. Your reference picture shows the right side, it could be from the left side.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
Covered window photos debunked

And another debunking of "it's not the right plane" pictures just for good measure

These are exactly the false theories I mentioned in my op and it has nothing to do with my op.

I'd appreciate it if you not derail my thread with off topic and unrelated debunking, especally if it shows that you didn't read my op.

a reply to: SirElrondofRivendell

I think if you want to be believed, at all, in any way shape or form, then you should answer two questions:

1. If the wreckage isn't MH17, what plane is it that was shot down?
   
2. If the wreckage isn't MH17, then were is MH17 and it's passengers?
   

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
Now look at the wreckage again.

A 777 has doors on both sides. Your reference picture shows the right side, it could be from the left side.

I already mentioned this a few times. It doesn't even matter. Even if it was the left side, the blue line would still not match up with the lettering on that side, which would be the M.

Alsso, in other pics of this piece, there is a flag on the right side, on the left side it is on the left of the door. Also mentioned already.

Please read up before posting to prevent beating a dead horse.

a reply to: stumason

These are questions I don't have to answer to you. Discuss the op.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell

originally posted by: mclarenmp4
OK here's another picture for you since the 1st wasn't clear enough for you.

Italic font, windows blanked out.

Original Image

Thanks, now compare the blue line.


OOOOPS!

In case some have missed this.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: stumason

These are questions I don't have to answer to you. Discuss the op.

HAHA, right....

This is the OP - you're claiming the wreck isn't MH17... If it isn't, then what is it and where is the plane and the 300 odd people on it? Without an adequate explanation, your theory now has more holes in it than an Argentine Warship...

a reply to: stumason

If the wreckage isn't MH17, what plane is it that was shot down?
If the wreckage isn't MH17, then were is MH17 and it's passengers?

Well since this ATS here's the truth...

It was MH 370 and it was full of dead bodies, and now MH 17 is parked where MH 370 was so they have another plane that will have dead bodies for the next false flag.

Does that just about answer the questions?

In case some have missed this.

a reply to: stumason

The topic of my op is that this particular pic cannot be of MH17.

I think I have shown this statement to be correct, you even helped a bit.

I don't have to humor you with anything else. Make a thread about those questions if it bothers you.

a reply to: mclarenmp4

Thank you again, lol, you really think you are helping your point of view with these collages?

How can you act like the third pic adds up with the first two?

a reply to: SirElrondofRivendell

If you look at the correct windows, it changes the angle of the A in the name. If you look at the wrong window, then it won't match up, because it's going to be a different letter.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Even if that were true, whoever thought that diabolical scheme up should be fired for it's utter idiocy and obviousness.

Maybe then I should have put a 3rd question in....

3) If the wreckage isn't MH17 and is of another aircraft, how did they get the bodies of the people on MH17 onto the ground to be mixed in with the wreck of "mystery plane"? All under the noses of a rebel group unlikely to play along with a false flag incriminating them in the shootdown?

See... It's a daft plot.

a reply to: SirElrondofRivendell

No the third pic is the picture you keep holding onto as proof of what, we don't know. But the 1st 2 pictures are from the same plane as it is obvious to most.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
a reply to: stumason

The topic of my op is that this particular pic cannot be of MH17.

Semantics - you're claiming the wreck isn't MH17. So what is it a wreck of and where is MH17?

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
I think I have shown this statement to be correct, you even helped a bit.

No, you haven't and no, I didn't.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
I don't have to humor you with anything else. Make a thread about those questions if it bothers you.

I'm not going to let you off that easy - all your doing here by refusing to deal with my (now 3 questions) is that you haven't really thought this through and are now desperately trying to back peddle to avoid answering the glaringly obvious plot holes in your theory.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: SirElrondofRivendell

If you look at the correct windows, it changes the angle of the A in the name. If you look at the wrong window, then it won't match up, because it's going to be a different letter.

Look at the above pics, in at least two of them the lettering is not even in the same place. How can you not see this, and how can you not see the angle of the blue line is too crooked to be caused by perspective.

Please.

originally posted by: SirElrondofRivendell
The topic of my op is that this particular pic cannot be of MH17.

Well… don't forget about crap like this:


Aviation Expert: Essential Clues to Flight MH17 Crash Being Tampered With

We -- the world at large -- has no clear idea of the provenance of any of the images, including your source images, nor any idea what happened to the wreckage on the ground before the pictures were taken. It's impossible to make any definitive conclusions other than, "yup, that's pieces of a passenger jet," because of the provenance issues, wreckage tampering, intense propaganda, and much more in a long list of issues with the wreckage.

a reply to: stumason

Semantics - you're claiming the wreck isn't MH17. So what is it a wreck of and where is MH17?

I said the wreckage in this pic. I also said that if it is of MH17 then the pic must be shopped.

I'm not going to let you off that easy

You are going off topic. I will alert mods if it continues.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Well… don't forget about crap like this:

Did they also give it a new paint job?

The pic is photoshopped, or the piece in the pic is not MH17.

Take your pic.

Why is Reuters photoshopping pics?