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: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.
originally posted by: Greggers
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: Chadwickus
originally posted by: NobodiesNormal
originally posted by: boncho
There is also a short section where she glitches out, disappears and her voice seems to sound like a mans. Clip is cut to a few seconds... Here is that clip.
that part is the strangest of it, very odd
No it isn't.
That is what digital television signals do when there is a drop in signal quality.
Don't be an idiot! The "drop you describe affects the entire frame, not individual people within the frame. What this video proves is that the "signal" of the background and the person are two different streams...which for some of you...isn't possible in real life. This is either proof of superimposing Clinton over the background, or proof that someone played with it afterward to produce this effect.
Personally...I sincerely believe Clinton is very, very ill. She has avoided interviews and documented appearances like the plague. This may be their last ditch effort to make up for her physical short-comings. The goal being...my best guess...is using her name to get her elected so she can then resign and the left would still hold the White House.
He's not being an idiot. He's actually correct. Also, calling people names is a violation of the T&C.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.
I'm not supporting the video one way or the other. I'm telling you that the person in the video can't be affected by a glitch separately from the background unless they are two separate layers or streams, which would mean they aren't there at the same time in reality. And again...unless someone messed with the video to make it look this way AFTER it was recorded.
Just technical facts dude.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.
originally posted by: SudoNim
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Just not possible for example do you think Trump is going to argue with a blue screen?? Don't you think if Hillary wasn't actually at the speech someone would have noticed?? I might buy the video was edited to say increase the crowd size by adding in more people. But to say she wasn't there would be difficult to hide if not impossible. Think about all the people that would have came in contact with her before and after the event. And trust me this would be thr scoop of a lifetime for a reporter. This isn't something they would keep quiet. Look at how they were all over her supposed illness.
I'm not supporting the video one way or the other. I'm telling you that the person in the video can't be affected by a glitch separately from the background unless they are two separate layers or streams, which would mean they aren't there at the same time in reality. And again...unless someone messed with the video to make it look this way AFTER it was recorded.
Just technical facts dude.
"Technical facts" are you serious?
It was CGI, no wait Hologram, no wait she was a prop or a body double. And all those in attendance were paid off.
Desperate times call for desperate threads.
imgur.com...
Oh man this is too funny but also quite sad how many people actually buy into this BS.
Guess your in to deep now.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Just technical facts dude.
originally posted by: Dutchowl
a reply to: boncho I watched the one video and I see what you're saying about the cell phone videos not matching up to what's going on in front of them. One clearly had a video of another rally, it looked like the democrat convention with multiple flash bulbs going off which wasn't happening at that current event. This is getting weird but anything with the Clintons is going to be strange and a little weird.
originally posted by: Greggers
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.
Yes you can.
originally posted by: thepixelpusher
originally posted by: Greggers
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
..I'm just stating the fact that you can't lose single objects out of a frame and have the background remain, unless they were recorded separately.
Yes you can.
I'd be interested in seeing a similar video glitch example to this Hillary clip.
originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher
Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.
originally posted by: Xenogears
originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher
Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.
what about the voice changing to male, and shadows being cast in the distant flag, as well as the camera man that was several meters away, next to the flag appearing to be about the same size as hillary. And the cell phones appearing to be of other events in their screens.
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
OMG read the words before you point fingers. I have no clue if this video was altered or if she was actually there or not. I'm just telling you that the background and the person must be separate. Maybe in some post processing where they decided to replace the background for some reason. I don't know, but it requires two different video frames or layers for one to display the affects you see in this video.
originally posted by: Xenogears
originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher
Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.
what about the voice changing to male, and shadows being cast in the distant flag, as well as the camera man that was several meters away, next to the flag appearing to be about the same size as hillary. And the cell phones appearing to be of other events in their screens.
originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher
Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.
originally posted by: thepixelpusher
originally posted by: Greggers
a reply to: thepixelpusher
Except in one of those frames, the background visibly shifts. Just a few pixels, but it proves the background changed too.
I'd be more apt to agree with you if you could supply a video example of your viewpoint on this, other than the Hillary one.
originally posted by: Greggers
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
Explain how the flag is perfectly visible even behind her, where the camera would not be able to see it, if it's just a glitch.
It's been explained, by AV professionals and others, multiple times already in this thread.