Remains of 9/11 victim identified

While the the "truthers" here are passing the Rohrschach test for stupid in their attempt to twist the meaning of
the picture of the victim did some research

Yes - research where you attempt to locate information (not from conspiracy sites) and try to deterrmine
what actually happened

Company - Keefe, Bruyette & Woods

So actually is such a company and was housed in south tower including 89th floor where victim was

en.wikipedia.org...

The company's prior New York headquarters was located on the 85th, 88th, and 89th floors of the World Trade Center's South tower at the time of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Out of the firm's 172 New York employees, 67 died as a result of the attack when the South tower collapsed. Among the employees killed in the attack were the firm's co-CEO Joseph Berry, CFO Jeffrey Fox, as well as several notable research analysts David Berry, Dean Eberling and Thomas Theurkauf.

Here the line between life and death was thin - in the 16 minutes between the first aircraft impact on the North
Tower and the South Tower some of the employees left the building

The investment banking department left and survived, the equities traders stayed and died

(reference: CITY IN THE SKY: The Raise And Fall of the World Trade Center ) page 261

Of course the disgusting swine over at LETS ROLL have their own take - The victim was on the phone
with her mother. Her mother was watching TV of the North Tower on fire when saw United 175 hit the South
Tower . The connection was broken .

The mentally ill are disputing this as some sort of disinformation.....

Originally posted by lunarasparagus

You're not getting it. Her legs are not crossed. It's an illusion. Her arm is in a place where it causes your brain to be tricked.

Using noplaner/vicsim logic, your simple explanation doesn't matter. The picture has been shown to be false. You can say this, and then you can martial reams of evidence that your subject is a real person. It will be waved away because, as soon as you have proved (to a ludicrously low level of 'evidence' based on personal supposition) that something is impossible, what remains, however unlikely, must be the truth.

Well done. You have proved that this woman is fake. At least to the satisfaction of a noplaner.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Actually, if you didn't notice, pshea38 conceded that the photo I presented was real and hadn't been altered. djeminy, however is a bit slower.
Nonetheless, I accept your congratulations of my failing.

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Actually, if you didn't notice, pshea38 conceded that the photo I presented was real and hadn't been altered. djeminy, however is a bit slower.
Nonetheless, I accept your congratulations of my failing.

It's true that i from the beginning naively 'ass-umed' her legs were crossed.

Raising the white flag, i capitulate and surrender.

You won by a mile, and i sincerely congratulate you on your well deserved victory.

Cheers

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Actually, if you didn't notice, pshea38 conceded that the photo I presented was real and hadn't been altered. djeminy, however is a bit slower.
Nonetheless, I accept your congratulations of my failing.

I do accept the explanation for the illusion.




Can you reasonably explain away the 'illusion' that she has a freak and impossible
right hand with what appears to be two extra fingerless knuckles?
Or why her upper lip doesn't meet in the middle or how her hair seems to impossibly
part above and below the upper rim of her ear? Is that floating hair below the ear rim?
Or why she appears to have an extra joint on the nearest digit to us?
Remember that this is an official September Memorial and Museum victim
photograph and was assumedly provided as is by her family.

All previous attempts to explain these anomalies fail.
(Badly flawed) photoshop Fakery explains it.

Here are the last two (terrible quality) photos of Karol-Ann found from a google
image search.



Her right eye looks weird but her left eye is just a scary elongated gash.
And what is going on with her right ear??

Why would a loving family release photographs such as these?
And If they released better quality pictures, what in the world would be the
purpose in (somebody) having them altered?

You are not genuine if you cannot admit that something very weird is going on here!
This case has no relation to the example you posted lunar, and you know it.


Welcome back to your thread Dman.
Nice Trip? Your post proves nothing.
Please comment on the above.

Originally posted by djeminy

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Actually, if you didn't notice, pshea38 conceded that the photo I presented was real and hadn't been altered. djeminy, however is a bit slower.
Nonetheless, I accept your congratulations of my failing.

It's true that i from the beginning naively 'ass-umed' her legs were crossed.

Raising the white flag, i capitulate and surrender.

You won by a mile, and i sincerely congratulate you on your well deserved victory.

Cheers

He provided an illusion and a satisfactory explanation, which we can all now accept.
I have yet to see any logical explanations put forward to explain away the anomalies
detailed in the case of the Karol-Ann photos.
I am a reasonable man who will accept a reasonable explanation.
But It is harder to explain away multiple 'illusions' within the same (real) photograph.


What do you make of the eyes here, especially her left eye?
Is that really an ear?

It seems like it is only you and me who find these things suspicious.
Funny that!

Originally posted by pshea38

Her right eye looks weird but her left eye is just a scary elongated gash.

Out here in the "real world", we call that "winking". I swear to god. LOL.


Looks like somebody's motherboard is overheating.

CHECK PLEASE!!!

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Actually, if you didn't notice, pshea38 conceded that the photo I presented was real and hadn't been altered. djeminy, however is a bit slower.
Nonetheless, I accept your congratulations of my failing.

I do accept the explanation for the illusion.

Can you reasonably explain away the 'illusion' that she has a freak and impossible
right hand with what appears to be two extra fingerless knuckles?
Or why her upper lip doesn't meet in the middle or how her hair seems to impossibly
part above and below the upper rim of her ear? Is that floating hair below the ear rim?
Or why she appears to have an extra joint on the nearest digit to us?
Remember that this is an official September Memorial and Museum victim
photograph and was assumedly provided as is by her family.

All previous attempts to explain these anomalies fail.
(Badly flawed) photoshop Fakery explains it.

Here are the last two (terrible quality) photos of Karol-Ann found from a google
image search.

Her right eye looks weird but her left eye is just a scary elongated gash.
And what is going on with her right ear??

Why would a loving family release photographs such as these?
And If they released better quality pictures, what in the world would be the
purpose in (somebody) having them altered?

You are not genuine if you cannot admit that something very weird is going on here!
This case has no relation to the example you posted lunar, and you know it.


Welcome back to your thread Dman.
Nice Trip? Your post proves nothing.
Please comment on the above.

edit on 14-2-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)

I don't think she has a "freak and impossible right hand". I think it's impossible to tell exactly what we're seeing because the quality of the picture is so poor. There is no extra knuckle. She has on dark finger nail polish so you can see where her finger ends. I think she's holding something, perhaps her own hair, but can't tell for sure. As I stated, I believe it's her pinky that is touching her chin and it's bent back behind her other fingers. As for her hair around her ears--whatever. It's a total non-issue to me since the quality is so bad, you just can't tell exactly what's happening. As for her lips, and her eye--WTF? I don't see anything wrong with her lips. And so one eye was squinting more than the other--how is that suspect?

All that stuff is beside the point. I think one thing you don't seem to understand is how your bias is affecting your perception. When I, and I would venture to say--most people--look at those photographs, they appear neutral. We don't see what you're seeing. We're not reading anything into them. We see low quality pictures of an imperfect human being. You could pick apart ANY photograph of ANYONE the way your doing and find something to question. But with these victims, you are ALREADY suspicious before ever seeing the photographs, so your mind finds things to question and creates reasons to be suspicious. Most of us don't share your experience, we don't "see" what you're seeing.

Question: Have you EVER considered gathering other kinds of evidence on the authenticity of the victims? How much do you think can really be known by scrutinizing low quality photographs? Don't you think in this situation, when your dealing with alleged innocent victims of a horrific crime, that they deserve the dignity of being remembered and/or judged by more than a few photographs? In other words, how is this not a situation where you would want to afford them and their families the benefit of the doubt? To mistakenly accuse an innocent victim as being FAKE is a transgression I'd rather not be guilty of, so in the same way the "innocent until proven guilty" is a noble guideline--how about real until PROVEN fake?

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

Originally posted by pshea38

Her right eye looks weird but her left eye is just a scary elongated gash.

Out here in the "real world", we call that "winking". I swear to god. LOL.


Looks like somebody's motherboard is overheating.

CHECK PLEASE!!!

edit on 2/14/2012 by DrEugeneFixer because: ADD QUOTE MARKS

I dare you to zoom in, even a little, and try again.
And No comment on the EAR, I see!

Typical transparent BS Dr.!
I am embarassed for you!

reply to post by pshea38


Game over. You win. This conversation is too stupid to be allowed to continue. Congratulations. I'm unsubscribing.

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by pshea38

 

Game over. You win. This conversation is too stupid to be allowed to continue. Congratulations. I'm unsubscribing.

What's that Dr.? I can't quite EAR you!

BTW, Toodle-Pip!

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by pshea38

 

Game over. You win. This conversation is too stupid to be allowed to continue. Congratulations. I'm unsubscribing.

What's that Dr.? I can't quite EAR you!

BTW, Toodle-Pip!

Just a note - all the photos look fine to me and I am as much as an expert as you are, so I am obviously right and you are wrong.

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by pshea38

 

Game over. You win. This conversation is too stupid to be allowed to continue. Congratulations. I'm unsubscribing.

What's that Dr.? I can't quite EAR you!

BTW, Toodle-Pip!

Just a note - all the photos look fine to me and I am as much as an expert as you are, so I am obviously right and you are wrong.

Cropped an resized


---------------------------------



Cropped and resized



Nothing strange going on here JumpinThru?

If the photos are not fine, then you are obviously not right and I am not wrong.
The photos are not fine, as is evidenced from above, so the judgements of thedman,
dr.eugenefixer, lunarasparagus, hooper et al are suspect and can be viewed with
justifiable suspicion.

You're are out of your (critical) minds.
Or something else.

reply to post by pshea38

You're RIGHT! I see thousands of little squares. The squares make up everything! Her whole face is made of little squares. Who in real life is made of squares? FAKE!

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by pshea38

 

Game over. You win. This conversation is too stupid to be allowed to continue. Congratulations. I'm unsubscribing.

What's that Dr.? I can't quite EAR you!

BTW, Toodle-Pip!

Just a note - all the photos look fine to me and I am as much as an expert as you are, so I am obviously right and you are wrong.

Cropped an resized

---------------------------------

Cropped and resized

Nothing strange going on here JumpinThru?

If the photos are not fine, then you are obviously not right and I am not wrong.
The photos are not fine, as is evidenced from above, so the judgements of thedman,
dr.eugenefixer, lunarasparagus, hooper et al are suspect and can be viewed with
justifiable suspicion.

You're are out of your (critical) minds.
Or something else.

edit on 15-2-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)

BTW, thanks for revealing that you know NOTHING about image compression and image resolution. Perhaps you should educate yourself a little before debating this sort of topic. Here's one place to start:
JPEG Artifacts Illustrated

Originally posted by lunarasparagus



BTW, thanks for revealing that you know NOTHING about image compression and image resolution. Perhaps you should educate yourself a little before debating this sort of topic. Here's one place to start:
JPEG Artifacts Illustrated

edit on 15-2-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)

This does not overly apply here and you know it. The cropped photos speak volumes
and why you deny this is for you to know.
Similarly bad photoshop effects occur over and over again with the 9/11 vicsim photos.
Most of the victims are Fake computer generated entities. Your game is that of the
rest of the avid debunkers. And I know it!

Originally posted by lunarasparagus

Originally posted by djeminy

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
reply to post by djeminy

 

What you're describing is exactly the point of my posting this photo. It LOOKS off, like each foot is on the wrong leg. However, there's actually nothing wrong with the photo and it hasn't been altered. It's an unintended illusion.

You're not quite getting it. It LOOKS off because it IS off.
Her legs are crossing each other twice, which is virtually impossible to do.

If you move her right foot over on the other side, so the foot now sits together with the left foot, the two big toes are placed next to each other, BUT her legs are still crossed. Should she now un-cross her legs again, the two big toes will cease to be placed next to each other. Instead they will now be placed in opposition to each other.

As i think it very unlikely she was born in that strange way, there's definitely no' illusion' present in this photo.

The photo has been altered. The photo has been photo-shopped to appear like a "trick photo".

Cheers

edit on 14-2-2012 by djeminy because: (no reason given)

You're not getting it. Her legs are not crossed. It's an illusion. Her arm is in a place where it causes your brain to be tricked. Here's what's happening:

(yes, the image on the above left has been poorly photo-shopped in order to remove her arm and reveal what's happening behind it. Her legs are not crossed, only her feet are).

edit on 14-2-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)

Actually, i probably conceded far too early. Was tired, bored and in all likelihood had a glass of red too many!

A badly done photo-shop amendment is of course not proof of anything.

If you look at the girl on the right, you'll notice that the top of her hand resting on the knee is in line with her other knee, whereas it's the bottom of the lady's hand which is in line with her other knee, indicating strongly that the legs must be crossed.

The lady's right foot looks unnaturally deformed where the heel part meets her lower leg.

The smirky grin on the man's face 'could' be caused by the reason that he and the photographer had already planned 'the trick' they would do, once the photo had been taken!

Anyway it is a boring discussion which will lead to nowhere, so this is my final post about the Spanish minister!

Cheers

Originally posted by pshea38

Originally posted by lunarasparagus



BTW, thanks for revealing that you know NOTHING about image compression and image resolution. Perhaps you should educate yourself a little before debating this sort of topic. Here's one place to start:
JPEG Artifacts Illustrated

edit on 15-2-2012 by lunarasparagus because: (no reason given)

This does not overly apply here and you know it. The cropped photos speak volumes
and why you deny this is for you to know.
Similarly bad photoshop effects occur over and over again with the 9/11 vicsim photos.
Most of the victims are Fake computer generated entities. Your game is that of the
rest of the avid debunkers. And I know it!

Alright then. Good luck with that.

reply to post by djeminy

I know--it sucks to be wrong. In fact, being right is way cooler than the truth! So hold on to that theory, man, DON'T LET IT GO FOR ANY AMOUNT OF REASON OR COMMON SENSE. In fact, I'll give it to you. It couldn't be a simple optical illusion. It's much more likely that some magazine photo editor decided to swap the Spanish minister's legs in the photo used for an international magazine article.

Moreover, I encourage you to take your truth to the disinfo website where I first came across this photo. Someone needs to set those disinfo agents straight.