It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Rosha
Im not sure but this little gem of a news report is showing sattelite imagry that I believe isnt even Irene! The width and mass of the cyclone/hurricane they show on that link looks more like Ophelia. Nothing I've seen anywhere on Irene to date ever showed its mass this large. The image is at 57 seconds into the report. I am no meteorologist, might be wrong..but it seemed sus.
Ro.
edit on 27-8-2011 by Rosha because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by JibbyJedi
...clear the building 2 weeks prior so "security" can plant explosives for the 9/11 event - type of scam.
Originally posted by Andre Neves
Originally posted by Rosha
Im not sure but this little gem of a news report is showing sattelite imagry that I believe isnt even Irene! The width and mass of the cyclone/hurricane they show on that link looks more like Ophelia. Nothing I've seen anywhere on Irene to date ever showed its mass this large. The image is at 57 seconds into the report. I am no meteorologist, might be wrong..but it seemed sus.
Ro.
edit on 27-8-2011 by Rosha because: (no reason given)
Speaking of images....
This article:
www.reuters.com...
Despite it being updated since, around noon today, I first saw it and they had the one image(if you go thru the slideshow) of a woman jogging in front of Manhattan. Funny thing is though, that at the time of it's posting, Manhattan's skyline looked nowhere as dark as it did in person. How would I know? I like about 10 mins away in NJ. Sure it was "slightly" overcast, but nowhere as near as bad as that photo looked.
Now as a photographer, the image does look a bit under exposed, but there should be no excuse for that considering the photographers for Reuters are Professionals....unless that is, they did it on purpose which is what I believe.
Misleading IMO.