Nothing is ever settled your mind, except that we have no Pope, JFK was killed by the NWO, nobody walked on the moon, 9/11 was an inside job, no h0Ɩ0cαųst happened, Obama was born in Kenya... Did I miss anything? These things we know as fact. All else is media propaganda!

With you stevie its like hitting a gopher at one of those arcade machines; you just never stay in the damn hole once beat down with the hammer of truth. It can become wearisome.

Many of those incidents you accuse GV of believing, and also most of us on this forum (including Matthew, by your sweeping generalizations) do not think the h0Ɩ0cαųst DIDN'T happen at all... its the number of dead that is called to question and the methods done by. Way to go in slipping that one in there... you give lawyers a bad name by your conniving behavior. Most lawyers at least understand what the truth is, even if they use that knowledge to better defend falsehood. Hit the books and learn. Better yet, hit the search button and find all the posts by the people who have thumb down'd you over and over to get it in your cranium.

GV, you are impossible to take seriously.

The only one impossible to take around here is you. Speaking of which, how the heck did you get off my ignore button? Time to send you back whence you came!

Quote from: PartyIsOver221

I wouldnt be surprised to this Nathan Goulding on some 3-letter agency's payroll as part of the propaganda campaign.

Weak PIO...

Many million people can reproduce this at home with their computer equipment and see that it's absolutely how he describes it.  

OK, I'll take a bite at you and your smart aleck tech-savvy attitude. GV, this ones for your honor.

I use Adobe CS4 at work frequently. InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, all of that. Thanks to the massive budget my company has, many of us can get licensing for this extremely comprehensive suite of software. Yes yes, it is obvious and established that layers comprise the image and are no longer in the finished saved photo if flattened, preferably after a rasterization to remove any artifacts, dust, etc that may have cropped up from the direct scan onto the digital medium. BUT it is also clear that defects can be seen in alignment, color gradation, and tool usage (blur, contrast adjustment, etc) in the final image. This is where a DFIT/CFU (Digital forensics investigation team/computer forensics unit) can analyze even a flattened, re-copied, re-imaged, re-saved, or re-modified image and blow it up in its entirety to zoom in on the salient features, or even to compare it to a non-modified "best estimate" physical copy run through a scanner simulating the claimed original's methods of digitization.

It was already shown in one other video posted by GV of somebody showing the OCR/color anomaly depicting one side hot/one side cold. I won't delve into detail on it, but what that guy explained is exactly what happens in character scans.

Wake up!

OK, I'll take a bite at you and your smart aleck tech-savvy attitude. GV, this ones for your honor.

I use Adobe CS4 at work frequently. InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, all of that. Thanks to the massive budget my company has, many of us can get licensing for this extremely comprehensive suite of software. Yes yes, it is obvious and established that layers comprise the image and are no longer in the finished saved photo if flattened, preferably after a rasterization to remove any artifacts, dust, etc that may have cropped up from the direct scan onto the digital medium. BUT it is also clear that defects can be seen in alignment, color gradation, and tool usage (blur, contrast adjustment, etc) in the final image. This is where a DFIT/CFU (Digital forensics investigation team/computer forensics unit) can analyze even a flattened, re-copied, re-imaged, re-saved, or re-modified image and blow it up in its entirety to zoom in on the salient features, or even to compare it to a non-modified "best estimate" physical copy run through a scanner simulating the claimed original's methods of digitization.

You clearly don't get it.

I have essentially back tracked from my erroneous idea that Photoshop might have been used to convert a Photostat into something more easy to read.  I'll certainly won't enter into a technical term contest with you.  I made an error, and corrected it.

The debate on the specific "anomalies" is taking place right now between experts, and I certainly won't parrot these ongoing discussions here with you.

But tech savyness aside, what have you done with those graphic softwares ? I have many hundreds of pictures online such has this...


You can look them up, I have a very strong signature on the internet has a 3D and 2D artist.

What have you done ?






 

Did you just post that on this site? That was the equivalent of posting an Anton LeVey Church website FAQ debunking Catholicism on a server paid and hosted by George Soros.

That's quite a sectarian attitude.  

I admonish certain sources myself, but I make sure that in doing so, I can justify it with a reasoned argument if required.  But as I noted earlier this week, you likely can't do that. You poison the well without any reasoned justification (other it seems, that the truth on this board bends in ways it doesn't anywhere else.)