Was Hillary actually in Greensboro earlier for her speech? (CGI News[?])

a reply to: Greggers

But why edit a flag to cover the people in the background anyway?

Politicians love the nodding "yes"men behind them as it suggests that they have the consensus of people agreeing with them. I imagine that the crowd behind her weren't very lively so they edited the flag there to cover up the dead-eyed crowd. Or her speech wasn't very well said so they later reshot her speech in front of a greenscreen

a reply to: boncho

Strange things popping up and sometimes things are not what they seem to be.

Here's one used by car advertisers:

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: boncho

Man it's got to be frustrating to continually Google to discredit something and being wrong.... AGAIN. They sold WWN almost 10 years ago. It's owned by a company called Bat Boy LLC

en.wikipedia.org...

Going to Google them too for the discredit?

I don't need to google anything, this stuff is in my head. I only need to google to leave links behind. You might want to google the date of the covers I posted. WWN was under the same umbrella as the other tabloids, which were started aka: created with a specific intent for disinformation.

I was speaking about where WWN & NE came from, and what their purposes and goals were. Have you noticed a big change in the material since folded with no warning and were picked up by its "biggest fan"

Weekly World News
First issue‎: ‎1979 Total circulation‎: ‎1.2 million
Final issue‎: ‎August 27, 2007

Oh, Bat Boy LLC - Neil McGuiness, so you have insight to both those names do you? Explain how the content and directives are any different than they used to be. Please.

Dying to know...

in regards to alot of these images on the phones, ive found that part of the problem with comparing the image in the phone to the one were seeing on the cameras is due to the difference in FOV. the news broadcast is probly using some sort of telephoto lens so its pretty cropped whereas the camera phones are giving a really wide angle. so the image on the phones has far more of the venue in the screen versus what u see on the actual broadcast. still though some of the videos ive looked at going back more then a year just dont add up.

originally posted by: Greggers

I tend to stay out of the political threads. I'm on record saying I don't like Hillary and am not voting for her. Plus, what the hell does it even mean to be an expert on everything "anti Trump or pro Hillary?" Seriously, wtf?

"

Oh you tend to stay out of political forums?... odd that your previous posts are 90% political....hmmm

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: derfreebie

@HillaryClinton reflected in the mirror after holding a press conference with reporters in Greensboro, NC.

mobile.twitter.com...

LOL So now they are proving she's not a Vampire?

How ####ing bizarre is this going to get. Can you ask them to CGI an entrance & exit into the stadium which and normal coverage we'd see....normally? (from outside, into the building I mean)

The woman basically died on camera a few days ago, first appearance back and you'd think they'd be following her in from her bus, with cameras.

Im sure they can whip that up by tomorrow. Clocks ticking.

a reply to: TheScale

still though some of the videos ive looked at going back more then a year just dont add up.

That's not really a comforting thought, and I don't think it has anything to do with field of view. The real question is how did she vanish completely.

Im yet to see someone post a video of the same thing happening, though someone claimed it happened in a football game or something and its super common yada yada.

Just not common enough they can present another example that is...

Situation averted guys, I found Hillary outside making her way in the building, with a fan...!!!

originally posted by: sirlancelot

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: sirlancelot

originally posted by: Greggers
I like how suddenly people with no knowledge whatsoever of digital video artifacting suddenly put the onus upon the rest of us to provide them with examples of similar effects from elsewhere.

You know, generally speaking, people don't upload the video if it's fubared, and even if they do, they sure don't lable it "check out my fubared video" so we can easily find it. And now you expect us to peruse through thousands of hours of video footage looking for a particular type of video error that you probably wouldn't accept even if we found it.

I've personally seen footage of football players magically disappearing from the field, and then reappearing downfield. I assure you they were not wizards, and it was caused by insufficient bandwidth.


But I'll tell you what I'll do, just for you guys. I'll drag this sorry, embarrassing topic over to a video compression forum I haven't visited in years to get some industry experts chiming in. I'm quite sure of two things:

1) You guys won't accept whatever they tell me unless it's "Oh that's proof it's a composite image!"
2) They're going to think I'm a political troll.

It may take me a day or two to get a response to this nonsense. Please don't hold your breath on my account.

I really like when people join this forum less then a few months ago and all the sudden are experts in everything anti Trump or pro Hillary!

I like how people make up stuff.

I tend to stay out of the political threads. I'm on record saying I don't like Hillary and am not voting for her. Plus, what the hell does it even mean to be an expert on everything "anti Trump or pro Hillary?" Seriously, wtf?

And whatever it means, why would having an account here for many years make my expertise on such a non-descript thing more believable?

Is active posting on ATS for many years the only way to develop this mystical knowledge of all things "Anti-Trump and Pro-Hillary?"

Firstly if true glad you aren't voting for Hillary!

Secondly when several people join a conspiracy site a few months prior to an election and post a lot of "shill" based post for one candidate or against another those that have been here a bit pre election get a little suspect! Not saying it's one sided either Im sure there are some pro Trump Shills but hey Im biased with those guys!

All that aside re the op the beginning of the video is weird! BTW I did find google digital video codec glitch example and there was a video that had something similar with the forefront image pixelating and the background not so much!

Anyway no hard feeling and welcome!

Thanks for extending an olive branch. I'll extend one as well. No hard feelings.

Truth be told, I probably am not voting this year, at least not for president. I'll stick with the state offices.

I don't get excited much by national politics in general, and this year it's harder than ever.

Strangely, I'm also not much of a conspiracy theorist. But I am a writer of science-fiction, and many of the more esoteric conspiracy theories discussed on ATS provide fuel for my stories.

originally posted by: Kalixi

originally posted by: Greggers

I tend to stay out of the political threads. I'm on record saying I don't like Hillary and am not voting for her. Plus, what the hell does it even mean to be an expert on everything "anti Trump or pro Hillary?" Seriously, wtf?

"

Oh you tend to stay out of political forums?... odd that your previous posts are 90% political....hmmm

No they are not. The vast majority of my posts on this forum are in Skunk Works, with another large percentage in the science forum and a smattering elsewhere. Don't even ask me how I got sucked into the Mandela Effect nonsense.

The last couple of days there have been several political threads where I've contributed, most notably in THIS THREAD and the "Is Hillary Dead" thread, which between them account for the majority of all my so-called political posts. Not that I would characterize my contributions to those threads as political in nature, but I did post in them. Oh, I also dropped into another thread where I levied my claim that Donald Trump was NOT the antiChrist.

But if you take a good look at all my individual posts before this past week, you'll see most of my time has been wasted on some truly silly nonsense in Skunk Works.

Hillary's Motorcade the day in question:



Again, split up:

Left




Right

originally posted by: Kalixi
a reply to: Greggers

But why edit a flag to cover the people in the background anyway?

Politicians love the nodding "yes"men behind them as it suggests that they have the consensus of people agreeing with them. I imagine that the crowd behind her weren't very lively so they edited the flag there to cover up the dead-eyed crowd. Or her speech wasn't very well said so they later reshot her speech in front of a greenscreen

As has been mentioned many times already in this thread, there was a REAL FLAG directly behind her, inbetween the two seating risers on the far back wall. The full wide-shot image (which has already been posted at least 3 times) shows it very clearly.

a reply to: boncho


I bet the Hillary clone-double that travels with her is in one of those vehicles, just in case Hillary blacks out again.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: boncho


I bet the Hillary clone-double that travels with her is in one of those vehicles, just in case Hillary blacks out again.

Or a holographic projection system...Something is wrong here.

Im not sure entirely what, but something is seriously wrong with this whole feed. Look at the grey shirt of the woman next to her (behind her):



As she passes over a crowd:



Look at how they purposely cover up the phone here:
DEFCON 1
THEY ARE COVERING UP THE PHONE!

original link - from hillaryspeeches.com
If you look at the display, I have no idea how he could be shooting what he supposedly is. Then you have two guys filmed in the gym while she is talking and it's totally empty behind them. Supposedly kicked out for saying "you suck".

I see a lot of false contouring in those last shots. That can be caused by a lot of things, and when it's bad, it can fill the whole picture with strange, fog-like artifacts.

False contouring can be introduced at just about any stage of the video chain. Sometimes the display itself does it. Other times it's at the source. And in a case like this, it could also be related to compression of the still image upon upload.

Hillary's face in the second shot is also plagued by what the video guys used to call "clay face," which was a lot more common in the early days of digital television but is still readily apparent in shots like that.

a reply to: Greggers

Did you look at the video of them covering up the phone? This phone is inches from them but it appears like its got something entirely else in it. This isn't the whole shebang though, I got plenty more. Im going back to my original hypothesis. Im seeing evidence this entire thing was faked. (whether or not she was physically present, no idea. Don't know why they'd need to fake it though.)



The next video I have is a doozy. They were 100% covering up certain angles & camera frames that would blow it. www.youtube.com...]Just look at how they used the graphic. It's blatantly obvious.

got this off of facebook, they said it was from today's birther fiasco.

That is odd.

a reply to: imitator

If they are getting this sloppy its a matter of time we get a death announcement (or something else which makes this a non-issue). I wish I could put more time on this, as there are more anomalies to be found, but I might not be able to. Way more though.

To people who think they wouldn't fake an event.

a reply to: boncho