Absolute proof: A Pentagon picture montage from start to finish

page: 110
249
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by 911files
 


You pull some picture off the internet and then claim it is 'official'. Get real.

And yet you posted an obvious composite as proof ??

Using your logic ALL of the photos in the OP that have labels are also photo shopped, period!


Oddly I was answering this post by 911files..

What official evidence? You guys post it so it automatically 'official'. What is your evidence trail for the photographs you guys are posting? Who took the picture? What was the date and time? What equipment was used? Who added all the photoshopped little labels and cute little arrows?
You pull some picture off the internet and then claim it is 'official'. Get real.


So..




posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


That's why whenever I post a labeled photo, I always put a link to where I got it. It makes it easier for people to make sure I'm not altering a bunch of stuff.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by backinblack
 


That's why whenever I post a labeled photo, I always put a link to where I got it. It makes it easier for people to make sure I'm not altering a bunch of stuff.


To be honest, there isn't many originals around anymore..
I do however have the full download of some good pics including the ones that composite was made from..



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by backinblack
 


That's why whenever I post a labeled photo, I always put a link to where I got it. It makes it easier for people to make sure I'm not altering a bunch of stuff.


The one he is rejecting as a composite is also sourced. Composite software is very accurate these days. It really doesn't affect the point if no other manipulation are made. The composite is infinitely better than most of those in the OP to show the "hole" where the aircraft went into the building. If you don't trust the measurements then go to the Pentagon a make measurements. It's very amusing that some folks trust obscured or partially obscured objects in a photo as long as they think it makes their misleading point, but don't trust a composite that is without significant obscuration, yet make no attempt to show it's deceiving. I smell confirmation bias....



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


The one he is rejecting as a composite is also sourced. Composite software is very accurate these days. It really doesn't affect the point if no other manipulation are made. The composite is infinitely better than most of those in the OP to show the "hole" where the aircraft went into the building. If you don't trust the measurements then go to the Pentagon a make measurements. It's very amusing that some folks trust obscured or partially obscured objects in a photo as long as they think it makes their misleading point, but don't trust a composite that is without significant obscuration, yet make no attempt to show it's deceiving. I smell confirmation bias....


No, what you smell is common sense..
Without every original that was used in a composite and a time stamp, it's impossible to know exactly what has or hasn't been altered..



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Reheat
 


The one he is rejecting as a composite is also sourced. Composite software is very accurate these days. It really doesn't affect the point if no other manipulation are made. The composite is infinitely better than most of those in the OP to show the "hole" where the aircraft went into the building. If you don't trust the measurements then go to the Pentagon a make measurements. It's very amusing that some folks trust obscured or partially obscured objects in a photo as long as they think it makes their misleading point, but don't trust a composite that is without significant obscuration, yet make no attempt to show it's deceiving. I smell confirmation bias....


No, what you smell is common sense..
Without every original that was used in a composite and a time stamp, it's impossible to know exactly what has or hasn't been altered..


There are a limited number of photos available, most from the Jason Ingersoll collection. They are not difficult to find at all....



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


There are a limited number of photos available, most from the Jason Ingersoll collection. They are not difficult to find at all....

So post them...If all are original with data attached...



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Reheat
 


There are a limited number of photos available, most from the Jason Ingersoll collection. They are not difficult to find at all....

So post them...If all are original with data attached...


I'm not inclined to do research for you or anyone else. I've already done it for myself and do not have a collection in my personal possession. It is quite obvious that if it disagrees with fantasy it will be rejected or hand waved away anyway. My time is more valuable spent on other endeavors. As 911Files has pointed out actual data from multiple sources is more valuable than photos shot from telephoto lens from hundreds of yards away anyway. Those are subject to all of the distortions inherent in telephoto lens and can easily lead to false conclusions. Prime example = This thread.
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Yankee451
 


Ah, apologies then. I didn't know that it was three days later that it collapsed, though it would be nice to have a source before I am certain that was the case. I did a quick search and couldn't locate the information.

So do we have a date/time yet on the pictures, or am I just asking for the impossible?


maybe you should read the OP... just sayin'

most estimates say around 20 minutes AFTER the first small explosion (probably what Jerry Henson heard), when the plane allegedly hit, there was a very large secondary explosion which caused the collapse with lots of fire. In one TV news vid the guy says 45 minutes, but mostly I've heard the 20-25 minute range.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
I'm not inclined to do research for you or anyone else. I've already done it for myself and do not have a collection in my personal possession. It is quite obvious that if it disagrees with fantasy it will be rejected or hand waved away anyway. My time is more valuable spent on other endeavors. As 911Files has pointed out actual data from multiple sources is more valuable than photos shot from telephoto lens from hundreds of yards away anyway. Those are subject to all of the distortions inherent in telephoto lens and can easily lead to false conclusions. Prime example = This thread.
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)


let's translate this...

you don't care about any new information because you made up your mind a long time ago and won't change it. Anything that doesn't agree with your previously decided belief you will call "fantasy". You would rather spend your time doing something else but have to be here for some reason. and... you categorically throw out any data that is from a telephoto lens. In other words your only purpose here is to keep other people from proper investigation.

Curious - do you look at the pictures that are posted by your OS cronies, or by various government reports? I doubt you do.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Yankee451
 


Ah, apologies then. I didn't know that it was three days later that it collapsed, though it would be nice to have a source before I am certain that was the case. I did a quick search and couldn't locate the information.

So do we have a date/time yet on the pictures, or am I just asking for the impossible?


maybe you should read the OP... just sayin'

most estimates say around 20 minutes AFTER the first small explosion (probably what Jerry Henson heard), when the plane allegedly hit, there was a very large secondary explosion which caused the collapse with lots of fire. In one TV news vid the guy says 45 minutes, but mostly I've heard the 20-25 minute range.


Very, very amusing!


This fantasy concentrates on one statement to the exclusion of the rest of the interview and fails to mention that he described a TIME LINE during which he thought he was going to die. He also described a part of a landing gear and what he thought was a part of a cockpit amidst a devastated area. Those items walked through that hole, which he also described I suppose. That time line he outlined does not fit with this invented fantasy, but it's posted anyway. It's still early in the day, but the monkey's are already up to their throwing tricks.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by Reheat
I'm not inclined to do research for you or anyone else. I've already done it for myself and do not have a collection in my personal possession. It is quite obvious that if it disagrees with fantasy it will be rejected or hand waved away anyway. My time is more valuable spent on other endeavors. As 911Files has pointed out actual data from multiple sources is more valuable than photos shot from telephoto lens from hundreds of yards away anyway. Those are subject to all of the distortions inherent in telephoto lens and can easily lead to false conclusions. Prime example = This thread.
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)


let's translate this...

you don't care about any new information because you made up your mind a long time ago and won't change it. Anything that doesn't agree with your previously decided belief you will call "fantasy". You would rather spend your time doing something else but have to be here for some reason. and... you categorically throw out any data that is from a telephoto lens. In other words your only purpose here is to keep other people from proper investigation.

Curious - do you look at the pictures that are posted by your OS cronies, or by various government reports? I doubt you do.


"proper investigation"?????
Excuse me, where or what is that "proper investigation"? You really don't think what's happening here is a "proper investigation, do you? I suspect you do!


If you or anyone else can truly offer proof with verified data, properly computed math, and photos without telephoto lens anomalies I'll take a close look and evaluate it. What I won't do is view selective photos with water and smoke obscuration and deceptive labels accompanied by unqualified speculation and opinion and agree that it's Absolute Proof of anything other than wasted bandwidth. ALL of the evidence must fit with KNOWN PROVABLE FACTS and stand up to THE SCRUTINY of people with expertise in the various specialties involved.

Only after all of that is available it's then AND ONLY THEN worthy of consideration for "changing my mind".
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Just as 911Files stated earlier, all of what's been presented here in the way of "Absolute Proof" since I joined the thread are expressions of incredulity from unqualified sources, expressions of opinion from unqualified people, and WRONG or distorted information that has all been frequently referred to as evidence.

I'm afraid that's not evidence in the real world and that's precisely why there has been no progress by the TM in over 9 year; not all because of all of the other contrived "made up" fantasies for the failure. At the same rate it will be another 100 years or even 1,000 years with the same results.
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


actually you're right - I don't consider this proper investigation. There was no proper investigation and we can't entirely recreate the entire scene.

There are too many anomalies to say it was a hijack-crash scenario so I want to convince people we need an investigation. I learn more by debating on here, so when I when into a benefactor's office to convince them to do pro bono work, or give money to a campaign for TV ads showing building 7 fall... I can field ANY question, because I've been thrashed so badly by a few people purposefully trying to derail me.

Everytime you post something, reheat, I think cool... the thread is bumped so more people can see the real pictures, and, I'm getting more chance to know how to answer the challenges. I've had a very open mind and willingness to change positions but it hasn't happened yet... still waiting for proof.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
It's still early in the day, but the monkey's are already up to their throwing tricks.


funny



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


There has been TREMENDOUS progress! If not for people fighting for justice the average Joe on the street would believe without doubt it happened like the OS (hijack-crash scenario); that's NOT the case. I know very few people who actually believe the OS or have never heard there might be a conspiracy going on.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
still waiting for proof.


I doubt that proof is going to jump up and bite you. The evidence resulting in eventual proof is not found in one place it in multiple places some Government, some in the US, some in Foreign location. If you want a start, some (not all) of it is here:

www.911myths.com...

The person who compiled all of this material above IS NOT an American Citizen and has no political affiliation with any specific group of which I am aware.

This site is pretty good specifically regarding the Pentagon. I haven't found any wrong info on it, yet. The author is a rather well known truther.

911research.wtc7.net...



edit on 25-3-2011 by Reheat because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

There are too many anomalies to say it was a hijack-crash scenario so I want to convince people we need an investigation.


No investigation will satisfy everyone, particularly the confirmed conspiratorist. They will always exist and will never change; finding anomalies and conspiracies in many or most events during their lifetime.

There have been "anomalies" for every significant event during the entire history of mankind if you look for them. Most (if not all) are the result of a lack of knowledge or understanding. Many are merely invented by the profiteers for either perceived fame or to make a $ in selling a book. They are perpetuated by the confused, the gullible, and the paranoid. In some cases, knowledge will cure the latter three maladies. In some cases there is no cure until death.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


Simple question to you or any other OSer.

Fake witnesses, fake victims and a lack of forensic evidence is all you've offered to justify the continued murder of innocents. That, and obfuscation and distraction.

You have deigned to provide any evidence to support your story. The photographic evidence alone disproves the OS, and you and your cohorts have spent much effort to avoid discussing how that photographic evidence fits the OS (it doesn't). This speaks volumes. How can anyone of conscience allow this atrocity to continue?

So quite simply, can you provide any tangible evidence or justification for the continued murder of people in Pakistan, Pipelineistan and Iraq based on the crime of 911?

For extra credit, you can answer who's interests are better suited by these invasions, the invaded or the invaders?

Of course, we all know you won't answer either.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by 911files


Sir, I said facts. Not a bunch of pictures and your unqualified opinion as to what they show.


What I provided, "sir" was quite a bit more than you've provided. You dismiss the same photographs used in the various reports produced to support the official story? Why are they good enough to justify the murder of brown people, but not good enough to use to disprove their own story?

It seems you guys only post to simply to put as much space on the thread between the readers and posts that include evidence that incriminates the government.

I repeat for the readers, since you and the other OS folks are obviously not serious about discussing this:

If the OSers avoid trying to explain how a jet caused the damage, it is because they CANNOT explain it, therefore they resort to propagandist tactics of evasion and ridicule. Note how many dozens of pages it took us to REPEATEDLY provide evidence of the reinforced concrete used THROUGHOUT the Pentagon, except on the outer wall, yet they still won't admit it. These facts do not suit their story and it is disingenuous and dishonest to pretend these facts do not exist, yet they've been doing it for almost a decade.

The government's claim is a lie. It is impossible to prove a lie; they know that, therefore it must suck to be them.







edit on 25-3-2011 by Yankee451 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
249
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join