Boston Bomber Photoshopped Leaving Scene

page: 3
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Existing Thread HERE




posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Um if this is supposed to be FBI evidence, wouldn't the FBI confiscate the camera it was taken on.
Reclaim original picture from camera, even if it had been deleted.

I don't buy the publicity story about the said picture.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticPerhaps
 


I don't see the "fingers". I see stripes from shadows or the edging on one of the shirts underneath his heavy coat. The "fingers" do not match his own fingers. The gray spots are buttonholes (there's a third one seen faintly right between the two). The line is the buttonhole stand (the strip that buttonholes are sewn into).

I also don't see the cloning. Yes, the pattern is close, but not identical.

As many have said, it would be necessary to see the original to compare it with the "photoshopped" one to know for sure.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I am no professional when it comes to manipulating graphics so I have to use logic to assess this video.

So if I use logic then when someone comes along and says “this has been photoshoped” firstly l have to ask, why has it been photoshoped and then secondly how. It seems illogical to me to Photoshop this picture I can see no motivation for doing it and further more if they did Photoshop it then they would need access to the original photo. To get that and to then change the photo surly the photographer would have something to say about this and start ranting publicly to the media that “they” changed his photo. Also if they did Photoshop it then how come they made such a supposedly bad job of it that someone could post a YouTube video exposing it. Lastly if they have went to the bother of conducting some grand false flag and framing these two guys for it then why can’t they delete a video off YouTube.

Logic dictates that this has not been Photoshoped and the video presented in the OP does not prove that its been photoshoped.

for everyone's information this link provides info about the source of the picture

LINK

and the guy who took the picture


"I could either flee or kind of, go and help. I pulled my camera out and took one snapshot," Green said. "I actually think I hit the lottery that I took that one picture that could have been helpful.' so it is about the greatest, you know, win I could've ever had right there to have helped."


Link

so if its been photoshoped why is he not speaking out?
edit on 27-4-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-4-2013 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by rainychica
 


Assuming they're all linked by a select group in our government or "shadow government" what-have-you, then yes, it's being allowed to happen to further an agenda of taking rights. Everyone notice the word "Allowed". Best part of your reply in my opinion. It's not a conspired plot generally, not with secret meetings and blood pacts. The concept is they see a scenario likely to unfold, perhaps even push it along with the right contact or supply, then clean up and capitalize like the hero.

The world is a complex place. There are many people, with short lives, and different intentions, acting on those principles each and every day. We could pin this as a conspiracy, we could tie them all together, we could chalk it all up to chance. I just like to look at evidence and read the facts. Keep it comin guys! This got shoved under way too early imo!



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero

. . .

This picture below also shows a problem with the lines in the brick wall that suggests the photo had been doctored. It leads me to think the photo is fake, more along the lines of someone trying to make money off of it more than a Government conspiracy doing a bad Photoshop job to support a false flag scenario.




As another Photoshop professional--which is to say, someone who's been using it since v2.0 and gets paid money to do so, and since some members require credentials--I can see many problems with this photo. And the ones you point out are only some of the most obvious: For one thing, the guy's forearm is way too long, and upon looking closely I can see why. Take a look around the elbow area, and you'll find another big-ass blob of a patch-job.

When I first saw this photo several days ago, I noticed that the forearm was way too long; in fact, it was one of the most glaring things about it. I've read many threads since then, but haven't bothered to comment until now--mainly because I didn't know what to make of it. But you've put it in perspective. This seems to be a money-shot for some semi-professional photographer.

But someone doctored it. Why? And if, in fact, it was to hide the kid's wearing his backpack after the bombing--and not the backpack that's shown all blown to s--- in the offical photos, what does it mean?

We simply don't know what to believe anymore. All we know for absolute certain is that GOVERNMENT LIES TO US--constantly, habitually, without conscience, about things large and small. And lies so absurd that we wouldn't accept them from a 4-year-old, for Christ's sake--and yet the public gobbles them up without question. Something is very, very wrong here....

ETA: Well, as OtherSideOfTheCoin points out, we do now know who took this photo. It still tells us nothing about how and why someone butchered the hell out of it. Logic or not, this is a very poor hack-job of Photoshop manipulation. Why do they publish something so obvious? Who knows....?
edit on 4/27/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticPerhaps
I couldn't find any posts on this and I found a couple other inconsistencies in the photo worth pointing out. If you haven't heard yet, there are some serious problems with the photograph of Suspect #2 of the Boston Bombings (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev), the younger brother of the two "suspects". There appears to be heavy Photoshopping done to piece together a new arm farther behind his back, most likely to hide a backpack still there after the explosion. If true, it's far from proving his innocence, simply that he's a pawn in someone else's plot


Already debunked several times.
The original image shows no unusual adjustments, and blurred areas seen in the original are genuine artefacts created due to colour contrasts and movement, those genuine artefacts are seen all over the original image and not just around the suspect. They can also be seen around the buildings and other individuals too.

Unless you believe that other people were also "adjusted" and that the buildings were also shopped for some reason - which is not likely considering anyone could walk out into the street there and compare - this is another desperate effort by people wanting to make this a false flag of some kind.

The artefacts in the original image are expected, not unusual, and cover the image, not just around the suspect - therefore it's debunked.



posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Posted earlier here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks




**Thread Closed**





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join