Analyzing position of sun in last photo
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: Photographs of Madeleine McCann's fateful holiday
Page 8 of 15 • Share
Page 8 of 15 • 1 ... 5 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 11 ... 15
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I'm actually backing up my "opinions" with structured argument and some hard facts.j.rob wrote:BlueBag wrote:j.rob wrote:It should be flat because her elbow is bent so if her hand was hanging down rather than flat her shoulder would be hunched.
???
Bizarre reasoning. Maybe she was just in the process of putting her hand down or lifting it up or maybe she just held it like that.I disagree. Others have disagreed with you as well.The angle of the body and shoulder is not consistent, imo, with her arm disappearing completely. It looks odd.
But then it's just your opinion.
No more bizarre than your reasoning.
It's fine if you disagree with me. It's fine if others disagree with me.
My opinion is 'just' my opinion.
And your opinion is 'just' your opinion.
Easy peasy.
I think we've made a lot of headway in this thread.
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
But you could argue that about the whole case. Very many things have been in police hands that are incredibly incriminating to Team McCann and they are still walking free. The McCanns are even ambassadors for missing children!
The whole case is awash with tampering, interference and 'fake' sightings. So why would the photos be any different?
What about Tanner-man? What about the jemmied shutters? What about the inconsistencies in the statements? What about releasing a photo of a child looking much younger than Madeleine. What about saying she had a coloboma when she didn't?
It's all games and riddles, imo.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
The lip of the pool is quite raised in fact.BlueBag wrote:Gerry's arm.. you know the one I said was "more likely".jeanmonroe wrote:BlueBag wrote:BlueBag wrote:Did you read my next post?jeanmonroe wrote:Actually no!!
It's the shadow of the RAISED white lip of the pool.
-------------------------------------------------------
Then where are the rest of the 'shadows' of all the other raised white 'tiles/lip' of the pool?
Or is it a 'magic' tile and the ONLY ONE able to 'cast' a shadow?
"OR... the shadow of Gerry's arm that is beyond the raised white lip (more likely)."
I hope that answers your question.
I hope you have the good grace to acknowledge that.
I'm nothing, if not curteous, but...........you do have two DIFFERENT 'scenario's' for 'explanation' for the 'black line', so which one are you saying it is, definitively?
the raised tile/lip 'shadow' or Gerry's arm/elbow 'shadow?
I've now upgraded that to "virtually certain".
A) The pool lip is raised, can't be disputed.
B) Gerry's arm is above the black line.
The most logical explanation is that the shadow of the arm falls beyond the lip but part of it is obscured by the lip.
What do you think?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I'm actually backing up my "opinions" with structured argument and some hard facts.
I think we've made a lot of headway in this thread.
--------
If you say so. I don't really agree but I can't be bothered to argue any more. I see what I see.
I think we've made a lot of headway in this thread.
--------
If you say so. I don't really agree but I can't be bothered to argue any more. I see what I see.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
But you could argue that about the whole case. Very many things have been in police hands that are incredibly incriminating to Team McCann and they are still walking free. The McCanns are even ambassadors for missing children!
The whole case is awash with tampering, interference and 'fake' sightings. So why would the photos be any different?
What about Tanner-man? What about the jemmied shutters? What about the inconsistencies in the statements? What about releasing a photo of a child looking much younger than Madeleine. What about saying she had a coloboma when she didn't?
It's all games and riddles, imo.
I hear what you are saying. However my gut feeling is that focussing in on the minutiae of individual photographs is a little like looking at the case through the wrong end of the telescope. Yes, there is a bewildering array of weird inconsistencies that on the surface of it should add up to a collection of circumstantial evidence that would warrant a different path for the investigation. However, I personally think it is a mistake to assume that this is because the McCanns in particular have somehow been given extra-special protection. In crude terms they have, BUT given the rather large number of individuals of "elite" type people that have allied themselves to this case, those that WERE in PdL that "whooshed" inexplicably within the first few hours, odd connectiontions and involvement of individuals that warrant investigation for their "activities" and "interests" I truly believe that Madeleines disappearance became of HUGE interest politically because of WHO could be exposed as being involved in CSA / paedophilia. In other words, I believe the evidence points towards whatever happened to Madeleine was an event that COULD blow open a MASSIVE can of worms, and that is why the establishment are playing along with the story which is so riddled with rubbish. Phone records, Gaspar statements, Gordon Brown, Burgau, botched forensics at FSS and so on. They are all dots in the bigger picture IMO.
____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors- Posts : 2458
Activity : 2685
Likes received : 25
Join date : 2011-07-31
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
If you read my post I didn't say they are always right, I said I would take their word over that of amateurs on a website as would a judge IMO.j.rob wrote:plebgate wrote:I have to say that as PeterM. has posted to say that he has asked two expert photographers who are prepared to give written statements of their findings then for me I believe them and I think any judge would over amateur opinions on a website.
That does look like liquid eyeliner on Amelie's eye to me, but why would anyone photoshop that in?
I am sorry to see bobbin go and can't really see why she has.
Experts are not always right. Sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes they are biased. Sometimes they lie. Sometimes they are singing to a particular tune. We have seen all manner of 'experts' in the Madeleine McCann case. A great many 'professionals' have got rich off the back of the disappearance of a child. Lawyers, doctors, PR people.
I stand by that until it is shown that PeterM's experts are wrong.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
BB - if you look at A's left arm then it fills the whole of the sleeve.BlueBag wrote:j.rob wrote: At least you are consistent! Now, tell me why Amelie's hand is not flat on the pool side edge?
Why should it be?It isn't, it's behind her out of view of the camera.And tell me why her right arm is missing?
And you've been told this before by others but you seem to have ignored it.
How can her right arm be physically present if you can see 90% or so of the sleeve is empty. There is not enough spare room left in the sleeve.
The only way this photo can make sense is if she has her right arm arm inside her top (as toddlers sometimes do). But I do not think that is the case in this photo.
To me A's right arm is pretty much proof that this photo has been tampered with in some way.
Could be for perfectly reasonable reasons that we don't know (e.g. to fit them all in), I'm not saying it's necessarily sinister.
But based on this one fact I would say it has been altered - I have never seen an explanation to convince me otherwise.
Hell we know if was tampered with at some point because we have seen a version with MBM on her own.
As S&M says looking at the bigger picture is probably more revealing - couldn't agree more.
All imo.
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I disagree.BlackCatBoogie wrote:BB - if you look at A's left arm then it fills the whole of the sleeve.
How can her right arm be physically present if you can see 90% or so of the sleeve is empty. There is not enough spare room in the sleeve.
The only way this photo can make sense is if she has her right arm arm inside her top (as toddlers sometimes do). But I do not think that is the case in this photo.
To me A's right arm is pretty much proof that this photo has been tampered with in some way.
All imo.
The simplest explanation is that it's behind her and she may well be gripping the raised lip of the pool and that keeps her arm in tight.
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
plebgate wrote:If yj.rob wrote:plebgate wrote:I have to say that as PeterM. has posted to say that he has asked two expert photographers who are prepared to give written statements of their findings then for me I believe them and I think any judge would over amateur opinions on a website.
That does look like liquid eyeliner on Amelie's eye to me, but why would anyone photoshop that in?
I am sorry to see bobbin go and can't really see why she has.
Experts are not always right. Sometimes they are wrong. Sometimes they are biased. Sometimes they lie. Sometimes they are singing to a particular tune. We have seen all manner of 'experts' in the Madeleine McCann case. A great many 'professionals' have got rich off the back of the disappearance of a child. Lawyers, doctors, PR people.
ou read my post I didn't say they are always right, I said I would take their word over that of amateurs on a website as would a judge IMO.
I stand by that until it is shown that PeterM's experts are wrong.
I am afraid it would take a lot more than two 'experts' to persuade me that all of the photos released by the McCanns were genuine photos. The problem is that experts can be paid to dance to a particular tune. Or they may have other agendas. In actual fact, a self-proclaimed 'expert' is, imo, even more likely to have a particular agenda than a layperson. They get paid (often handsomely) to toe a certain line.
I have no idea if this applies to PeterM's experts. I am simply pointing out that just because someone who calls him or herself an 'expert' it does not necessarily mean that what they say is the only version of 'the truth'. An expert opinion is just that, an opinion.
Expert witnesses can make a lot of money by toeing a certain line. A shed-load of money in fact (Gerry McCann - nuclear power station leukemia risks, or not?). A bit like lawyers can make a lot of money if they can persuade people that certain things/people are true or not (Carter Ruck). Or PR spin doctors can make a lot of money out of influencing public opinion (Clarence Mitchell). Or detectives can make a lot of money by claiming that 'Madeleine will be home by Christmas'. Or the media can make a lot of money out of pretending that Madeleine McCann was abducted by a random bogey-man.
And so on.
I know you didn't say experts were always right. I am simply pointing out that experts are sometimes fallible, corruptible, dishonest, wrong, biased.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Hey j.rob
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Smokeandmirrors wrote:j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
But you could argue that about the whole case. Very many things have been in police hands that are incredibly incriminating to Team McCann and they are still walking free. The McCanns are even ambassadors for missing children!
The whole case is awash with tampering, interference and 'fake' sightings. So why would the photos be any different?
What about Tanner-man? What about the jemmied shutters? What about the inconsistencies in the statements? What about releasing a photo of a child looking much younger than Madeleine. What about saying she had a coloboma when she didn't?
It's all games and riddles, imo.
I hear what you are saying. However my gut feeling is that focussing in on the minutiae of individual photographs is a little like looking at the case through the wrong end of the telescope. Yes, there is a bewildering array of weird inconsistencies that on the surface of it should add up to a collection of circumstantial evidence that would warrant a different path for the investigation. However, I personally think it is a mistake to assume that this is because the McCanns in particular have somehow been given extra-special protection. In crude terms they have, BUT given the rather large number of individuals of "elite" type people that have allied themselves to this case, those that WERE in PdL that "whooshed" inexplicably within the first few hours, odd connectiontions and involvement of individuals that warrant investigation for their "activities" and "interests" I truly believe that Madeleines disappearance became of HUGE interest politically because of WHO could be exposed as being involved in CSA / paedophilia. In other words, I believe the evidence points towards whatever happened to Madeleine was an event that COULD blow open a MASSIVE can of worms, and that is why the establishment are playing along with the story which is so riddled with rubbish. Phone records, Gaspar statements, Gordon Brown, Burgau, botched forensics at FSS and so on. They are all dots in the bigger picture IMO.
If the big cover-up is primarily to do with CSA/paedophilia (and of course it may be to do with that as well as other things) then that raises rather horrible questions about the lack of genuine photos of any of the McCann children that week. Or indeed any of the Tapas children that week. Why so few family photos? A big group of friends supposedly on holiday together for a week and no photos or video-footage of their children playing.
So odd.
Why would that be?
I can only think of a few explanations. And they lead to pretty much the same conclusions I am afraid. Something deeply unsavoury was going on that week. And Madeleine may have been, quite literally or at least metaphorically, 'sacrificed' to keep a lid on a massive secret or secrets.
IMO. Simply a theory which I hope is wrong.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
BlueBag wrote:Hey j.rob
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Yes. Didn't we agree that it was evidence of photo-shopping?
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
@j.rob I agree that some "experts" can be paid off etc., but I trust PeterM's word enough and if he is satsified then so am I unless someone shows otherwise.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
That's hilarious.j.rob wrote:BlueBag wrote:Hey j.rob
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Yes. Didn't we agree that it was evidence of photo-shopping?
Seriously, have you crossed it off your list yet?
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
But you could argue that about the whole case. Very many things have been in police hands that are incredibly incriminating to Team McCann and they are still walking free. The McCanns are even ambassadors for missing children!
The whole case is awash with tampering, interference and 'fake' sightings. So why would the photos be any different?
What about Tanner-man? What about the jemmied shutters? What about the inconsistencies in the statements? What about releasing a photo of a child looking much younger than Madeleine. What about saying she had a coloboma when she didn't?
It's all games and riddles, imo.
I hear what you are saying. However my gut feeling is that focussing in on the minutiae of individual photographs is a little like looking at the case through the wrong end of the telescope. Yes, there is a bewildering array of weird inconsistencies that on the surface of it should add up to a collection of circumstantial evidence that would warrant a different path for the investigation. However, I personally think it is a mistake to assume that this is because the McCanns in particular have somehow been given extra-special protection. In crude terms they have, BUT given the rather large number of individuals of "elite" type people that have allied themselves to this case, those that WERE in PdL that "whooshed" inexplicably within the first few hours, odd connectiontions and involvement of individuals that warrant investigation for their "activities" and "interests" I truly believe that Madeleines disappearance became of HUGE interest politically because of WHO could be exposed as being involved in CSA / paedophilia. In other words, I believe the evidence points towards whatever happened to Madeleine was an event that COULD blow open a MASSIVE can of worms, and that is why the establishment are playing along with the story which is so riddled with rubbish. Phone records, Gaspar statements, Gordon Brown, Burgau, botched forensics at FSS and so on. They are all dots in the bigger picture IMO.
If the big cover-up is primarily to do with CSA/paedophilia (and of course it may be to do with that as well as other things) then that raises rather horrible questions about the lack of genuine photos of any of the McCann children that week. Or indeed any of the Tapas children that week. Why so few family photos. A big group of friends supposedly on holiday together for a week and no photos or video-footage of their children playing.
So odd.
Why would that be?
I can only think of a few explanations. And they lead to pretty much the same conclusions I am afraid. Something deeply unsavoury was going on that week. And Madeleine may have been, quite literally or at least metaphorically, 'sacrificed to keep a lid on a massive secret or secrets.
IMO. Simply a theory which I hope is wrong.
I hope it is wrong too, but this is where my theory tends to go based on the broader picture. This theory was galvanised by some of the contributors to an auction and associated supporters of Missing People. Lets just say there were a couple of "eyebrow" raisers in there, and the subsequent media furore surrounding allegations against one of them (ageing pop star x 2). In a broader context, in recent months a number of individuals connected to charities involving children have also come under the whole CSA spotlight. Link this also to Labour members previous associations with PIE through the Liberty organisation, secret family courts which are taking away children and putting them in care homes, and the subsequent knowledge that "elites" were abusing these children in an organised way, Jimmy Savile and so on, this establishment pedophile ring is absolutely huge, it's tentacles spread everywhere. There has to be some reason WHY the government are prepared to spend £10m looking into this, yet at the same time "losing" massive dossiers of establishment CSA. Add into the mix the pathetically lenient sentencing of paedophiles and the dismissal of victims who are trying to speak out and it's a very very dark picture emerging.
____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors- Posts : 2458
Activity : 2685
Likes received : 25
Join date : 2011-07-31
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I hope it is wrong too, but this is where my theory tends to go based on the broader picture. This theory was galvanised by some of the contributors to an auction and associated supporters of Missing People. Lets just say there were a couple of "eyebrow" raisers in there, and the subsequent media furore surrounding allegations against one of them (ageing pop star x 2). In a broader context, in recent months a number of individuals connected to charities involving children have also come under the whole CSA spotlight. Link this also to Labour members previous associations with PIE through the Liberty organisation, secret family courts which are taking away children and putting them in care homes, and the subsequent knowledge that "elites" were abusing these children in an organised way, Jimmy Savile and so on, this establishment pedophile ring is absolutely huge, it's tentacles spread everywhere. There has to be some reason WHY the government are prepared to spend £10m looking into this, yet at the same time "losing" massive dossiers of establishment CSA. Add into the mix the pathetically lenient sentencing of paedophiles and the dismissal of victims who are trying to speak out and it's a very very dark picture emerging.
--------------
I guess Jimmy Saville was just the tip of the ice-berg, then? And of course those charities involving vulnerable children will of course attract (hopefully only a small minority)of those whose intentions are not benevolent. The Mary Moss Elm Bank Guest House scandal appeared to have tentacles reaching high up. With M15 sitting outside in their cars I do believe I read somewhere. Yikes.
I always thought that there was a potential for massive abuse of the system given the secrecy that surrounds family courts. There were those awful miscarriages of justice - such as solicitor Sally Clarke - when 'experts' were convinced that parents of babies or children with medical problems - sometimes caused by medical procedures, imo, were convicted of 'Munchausen by Proxy.' A good example of a nice little 'catch-all syndrome' beloved of a few high profile 'medical expert witnesses' who were prepared to toe a certain line - perhaps to cover up for medically-induced illnesses in some cases - became the darlings of the family courts as remaining children were taken into care - or put up for adoption (adoption targets?) and the 'experts' get their fame and fortune off the back of other people's suffering, imo.
Which is what has happened in this case, imo. Everyone making money out of an innocent child. Disgusting.
And if children are taken into 'care' and are then subsequently abused either by an establishment paedophile ring or otherwise then that is a horrendous situation.
As you say, a very dark picture emerging. But at least it is emerging. Best way of getting rid of the cock-roaches is by shining a light on them, imo.
--------------
I guess Jimmy Saville was just the tip of the ice-berg, then? And of course those charities involving vulnerable children will of course attract (hopefully only a small minority)of those whose intentions are not benevolent. The Mary Moss Elm Bank Guest House scandal appeared to have tentacles reaching high up. With M15 sitting outside in their cars I do believe I read somewhere. Yikes.
I always thought that there was a potential for massive abuse of the system given the secrecy that surrounds family courts. There were those awful miscarriages of justice - such as solicitor Sally Clarke - when 'experts' were convinced that parents of babies or children with medical problems - sometimes caused by medical procedures, imo, were convicted of 'Munchausen by Proxy.' A good example of a nice little 'catch-all syndrome' beloved of a few high profile 'medical expert witnesses' who were prepared to toe a certain line - perhaps to cover up for medically-induced illnesses in some cases - became the darlings of the family courts as remaining children were taken into care - or put up for adoption (adoption targets?) and the 'experts' get their fame and fortune off the back of other people's suffering, imo.
Which is what has happened in this case, imo. Everyone making money out of an innocent child. Disgusting.
And if children are taken into 'care' and are then subsequently abused either by an establishment paedophile ring or otherwise then that is a horrendous situation.
As you say, a very dark picture emerging. But at least it is emerging. Best way of getting rid of the cock-roaches is by shining a light on them, imo.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
BlueBag wrote:That's hilarious.j.rob wrote:BlueBag wrote:Hey j.rob
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Yes. Didn't we agree that it was evidence of photo-shopping?
Seriously, have you crossed it off your list yet?
My mind is open on the subject. I think it is unlikely that there is/was no photo-shopping at all. Very unlikely.
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
My own thoughts and conclusions exactly S&M.Smokeandmirrors wrote:j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:j.rob wrote:Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
But you could argue that about the whole case. Very many things have been in police hands that are incredibly incriminating to Team McCann and they are still walking free. The McCanns are even ambassadors for missing children!
The whole case is awash with tampering, interference and 'fake' sightings. So why would the photos be any different?
What about Tanner-man? What about the jemmied shutters? What about the inconsistencies in the statements? What about releasing a photo of a child looking much younger than Madeleine. What about saying she had a coloboma when she didn't?
It's all games and riddles, imo.
I hear what you are saying. However my gut feeling is that focussing in on the minutiae of individual photographs is a little like looking at the case through the wrong end of the telescope. Yes, there is a bewildering array of weird inconsistencies that on the surface of it should add up to a collection of circumstantial evidence that would warrant a different path for the investigation. However, I personally think it is a mistake to assume that this is because the McCanns in particular have somehow been given extra-special protection. In crude terms they have, BUT given the rather large number of individuals of "elite" type people that have allied themselves to this case, those that WERE in PdL that "whooshed" inexplicably within the first few hours, odd connectiontions and involvement of individuals that warrant investigation for their "activities" and "interests" I truly believe that Madeleines disappearance became of HUGE interest politically because of WHO could be exposed as being involved in CSA / paedophilia. In other words, I believe the evidence points towards whatever happened to Madeleine was an event that COULD blow open a MASSIVE can of worms, and that is why the establishment are playing along with the story which is so riddled with rubbish. Phone records, Gaspar statements, Gordon Brown, Burgau, botched forensics at FSS and so on. They are all dots in the bigger picture IMO.
If the big cover-up is primarily to do with CSA/paedophilia (and of course it may be to do with that as well as other things) then that raises rather horrible questions about the lack of genuine photos of any of the McCann children that week. Or indeed any of the Tapas children that week. Why so few family photos. A big group of friends supposedly on holiday together for a week and no photos or video-footage of their children playing.
So odd.
Why would that be?
I can only think of a few explanations. And they lead to pretty much the same conclusions I am afraid. Something deeply unsavoury was going on that week. And Madeleine may have been, quite literally or at least metaphorically, 'sacrificed to keep a lid on a massive secret or secrets.
IMO. Simply a theory which I hope is wrong.
I hope it is wrong too, but this is where my theory tends to go based on the broader picture. This theory was galvanised by some of the contributors to an auction and associated supporters of Missing People. Lets just say there were a couple of "eyebrow" raisers in there, and the subsequent media furore surrounding allegations against one of them (ageing pop star x 2). In a broader context, in recent months a number of individuals connected to charities involving children have also come under the whole CSA spotlight. Link this also to Labour members previous associations with PIE through the Liberty organisation, secret family courts which are taking away children and putting them in care homes, and the subsequent knowledge that "elites" were abusing these children in an organised way, Jimmy Savile and so on, this establishment pedophile ring is absolutely huge, it's tentacles spread everywhere. There has to be some reason WHY the government are prepared to spend £10m looking into this, yet at the same time "losing" massive dossiers of establishment CSA. Add into the mix the pathetically lenient sentencing of paedophiles and the dismissal of victims who are trying to speak out and it's a very very dark picture emerging.
I too hope I am wrong but it all seems to be stacking up.
All imo
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I hope it is wrong too, but this is where my theory tends to go based on the broader picture. This theory was galvanised by some of the contributors to an auction and associated supporters of Missing People. Lets just say there were a couple of "eyebrow" raisers in there, and the subsequent media furore surrounding allegations against one of them (ageing pop star x 2). In a broader context, in recent months a number of individuals connected to charities involving children have also come under the whole CSA spotlight. Link this also to Labour members previous associations with PIE through the Liberty organisation, secret family courts which are taking away children and putting them in care homes, and the subsequent knowledge that "elites" were abusing these children in an organised way, Jimmy Savile and so on, this establishment pedophile ring is absolutely huge, it's tentacles spread everywhere.
-------------
And of course this raises very worrying questions about charities involving children. And particularly the charity Missing People which has Kate McCann as an ambassador. I mean, that says it all really. Put the fox in charge of the hen coop.
But this has gone off-topic.
Now, back to those pesky pixels and shadows.........
-------------
And of course this raises very worrying questions about charities involving children. And particularly the charity Missing People which has Kate McCann as an ambassador. I mean, that says it all really. Put the fox in charge of the hen coop.
But this has gone off-topic.
Now, back to those pesky pixels and shadows.........
j.rob- Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
@ j.robj.rob wrote:I am afraid it would take a lot more than two 'experts' to persuade me that all of the photos released by the McCanns were genuine photos. The problem is that experts can be paid to dance to a particular tune. Or they may have other agendas. In actual fact, a self-proclaimed 'expert' is, imo, even more likely to have a particular agenda than a layperson. They get paid (often handsomely) to toe a certain line.
I have no idea if this applies to PeterM's experts. I am simply pointing out that just because someone who calls him or herself an 'expert' it does not necessarily mean that what they say is the only version of 'the truth'. An expert opinion is just that, an opinion.
Expert witnesses can make a lot of money by toeing a certain line.
Can I just make some things crystal clear.
1. PeterMac's two experts ONLY analysed 'The Last Photo' - no other photos
2. Neither expert was paid, but gave their time voluntarily and in response to a very specific but short set of instructions from PeterMac.
You are right, that all experts' opinions are opinions, but clearly some experts in their chosen fields acquire greater reputations than others, to the extent that one can rely on them.
Martin Grime would I suggest be an outstanding example.
I think if the names of PeterMac's experts ever became known, all would agree that both are top experts.
I think the 'Last Photo' threads have been very informative.
They only become divisive if people at the end of the day are prepared to calmly agree to disagree.
I trust that if any discussion continues, it will be without sniping and point-scoring.
P.S. I have examined my eyebrows and there is no black line or any other colour immediately above them
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
BCB and j.rob, and anyone else interested in this line, perhaps so as not to do too far off topic here, I'll start one in members lounge about the broader issue of establishment cover up, as we are witnessing with the CSAinquiry fiasco at the moment. It is definitely worth considering in light of the £10m spent so far and the clear obfuscation of the issue we are seeing unfolding right now. Hope to see you there! (Establishment Cover-ups re:CSA)
____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors- Posts : 2458
Activity : 2685
Likes received : 25
Join date : 2011-07-31
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I knew I was wasting my time.j.rob wrote:BlueBag wrote:That's hilarious.j.rob wrote:BlueBag wrote:Hey j.rob
Do you think we resolved the white/black patch between Amelies arm and side?
Yes. Didn't we agree that it was evidence of photo-shopping?
Seriously, have you crossed it off your list yet?
My mind is open on the subject. I think it is unlikely that there is/was no photo-shopping at all. Very unlikely.
It's always the same.
jeanmonroe also hasn't had the good grace to acknowledge the explanation.
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I think this is a very powerful point, and I did make it earlier, maybe on one of the other 'Last Photo' threads.Smokeandmirrors wrote:May I gently ask, for those that feel these images are composites of sort, or have been interfered with, apart from the known dishonesty of WHEN they were taken, what would be the actual purpose of such tampering? If the disappearance, for arguments sake, was a carefully orchestrated event and the pictures part of the deception, why would the McCanns create a series of photographs which could so easily be exposed to be "fakes"? Surely they would KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt that it would be tantamount to a confession of guilt. Wouldn't tampering with the photographs to that extent, pictures which would end up in police hands, be tantamount to a burglar deliberately not wearing gloves in order to ensure their fingerprints were left at the crime scene?
Why take the risk when no-one would really notice a change in the date and time of the photo?
And on that point, it has been argued that the excessive number of words by the McCanns to try and 'prove' that it was the 'Last Photo' is suspcious...details about the exact time, whether Portugal and the UK had the same time zones, the hair bead being carefully being taken out when Madeleine was put to bed that night etc.
Similar considerations apply to the 'Tennis Balls' photo.
But the other thing that has always bothered me about those who see photoshopping everywhere in the 'Last Photo' is the sheer number of different claims made that this photo has been photoshopped.
The 'photoshopping brigade', if I may use that term, disagree massively amongst themselves about what has or has not been photoshopped. Here is a list of some of the photoshopping claims made for the 'Last Photo':
* whole of Gerry shopped in
* whole of Madeleine shopped in
* all three shopped in to the pool
* just Madeleinee's head shopped in
* someone used high tech photoshopping of shadows to make sure they were were all consistent with each other and with the height of the sun
* Amelie's arm cut out
* Madeleine's arm cut out
* Madeleine's posture not natural
* white and black item between Gerry and Amelie proves it's been photoshopped
* Gerry looks like he's floating
* Gerry's arm doesn't look right
* nor does his thigh
* sunglasses reflctions prove that he wasn't there
* dandelion shadows not consistent with the others
* bougainvillea didn't flower that time of year
* Madeleine not wearing clothes for being by the pool
* absence of emotional contact between the three of them
* sun too high and shadows too short for that time of year
* the photo was taken on a previous holiday
...and so it goes on. Seemingly endlessly...
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Even when you nail it by leading them through a process of critical thinking and analysis they still don't acknowledge it.Tony Bennett wrote: white and black item between Gerry and Amelie proves it's been photoshopped
It's sad.
BlueBag - your tone can sometimes be patronising and dismissive - even rude. It's not necessary, and doesn't tend to promote polite and respectful debate on the forum. Please consider your choice of words, thanks - admin
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Yep.
It's doing exactly what was intended.
Producing an area of debate that takes all of us away from the core issues of what happened to Maddie and how the crime was committed.
Those are the issues that really matter.
It's doing exactly what was intended.
Producing an area of debate that takes all of us away from the core issues of what happened to Maddie and how the crime was committed.
Those are the issues that really matter.
Dr What- Posts : 249
Activity : 286
Likes received : 35
Join date : 2012-10-26
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I beg to differ 100%.Dr What wrote:Yep.
It's doing exactly what was intended. Producing an area of debate that takes all of us away from the core issues of what happened to Maddie and how the crime was committed.
Those are the issues that really matter.
The issue of the date of the 'Last Photo' strikes at the very core issue of whether, as for example Dr Goncalo Amaral believed, Madeleine was still alive at the 'high tea' at 5.30pm on 3 May.
It would be hard to find a more fundamental issue than that for anyone investigating the case.
And PeterMac has put together a great deal of very interesting and persuasive evidence - not proof of course - on this crucial topic.
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
I think your list hits the nail square on the head Tony, at least in my opinion. I know it is highly unlikely we'll all agree on this issue (which has been debated for years) and there is no intention on my part to get into a row about it, I just cannot see any logical justification for pursuing that idea, or any logical reason why a completely mashed up picture would be released in the full knowledge they'd be fully exposed in a heartbeat.
I rather think that any perceived anomalies could be because we are not seeing the original image anyway, it has been reproduced, or that so many porkies have been told along the way by Team McCann that it has become second nature to see deceit where there may be none.
I rather think that any perceived anomalies could be because we are not seeing the original image anyway, it has been reproduced, or that so many porkies have been told along the way by Team McCann that it has become second nature to see deceit where there may be none.
____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors- Posts : 2458
Activity : 2685
Likes received : 25
Join date : 2011-07-31
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Tony.
You have misunderstood me.
The issue of the pics is very important.The veracity of these pics is paramount.
My observation is that the energy taken by some posters here to continually disagree with other posters is a waste.
It is a deliberate attempt by some to prolong an area of debate that has no hope of resolution.Some agree that they are fake.Some disagree that they are fake.No-one will convince the other side otherwise.
The only party that benefits from this circular argument are those who do not want the spotlight to fall on other areas of debate.
Tie the enemy in knots and let it devour itself.
You have misunderstood me.
The issue of the pics is very important.The veracity of these pics is paramount.
My observation is that the energy taken by some posters here to continually disagree with other posters is a waste.
It is a deliberate attempt by some to prolong an area of debate that has no hope of resolution.Some agree that they are fake.Some disagree that they are fake.No-one will convince the other side otherwise.
The only party that benefits from this circular argument are those who do not want the spotlight to fall on other areas of debate.
Tie the enemy in knots and let it devour itself.
Dr What- Posts : 249
Activity : 286
Likes received : 35
Join date : 2012-10-26
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
Apologies.BlueBag wrote:BlueBag - your tone can sometimes be patronising and dismissive - even rude. It's not necessary, and doesn't tend to promote polite and respectful debate on the forum. Please consider your choice of words, thanks - admin
But when I see patent nonsense I'm like a bog with a bone.
I'm a bit OCD.
What kicked this off was being told not to mention any "silly theories" about focal lengths... yeah.. right.. (hence the Father Ted video).
That person is no longer with us... oh wait...
I think "the last photo" is extremely important and get quite annoyed at the continuous attempts at distraction about it over nothing (which has been demonstrated so in this thread).
I'm a combative debater.. I can't help it, I was made that way.
I think the truth and critical analysis is important. Opinion means nothing if it doesn't hold water.
Guest- Guest
Re: Analyzing position of sun in last photo
No-one asked TB or Bluebag to spend hours - days - trying to kill all photoshopping discussion. I notice that PeterMac keeps out of it, as he says the important and obvious point of agreement is that the photo is fake.
TB and Bluebag' s idea of debate is to say "I disagree with the findings" 50 different ways or come up with ludicrous theories like "Amelie's eyes are a bit open" or "That thin black line is a shadow of Gerry's arm (!)".
Neither has explained, despite being asked repeatedly, why they are so rabidly against all photoshopping debate. What drives their endless and rather futile rebuttals?
TB and Bluebag' s idea of debate is to say "I disagree with the findings" 50 different ways or come up with ludicrous theories like "Amelie's eyes are a bit open" or "That thin black line is a shadow of Gerry's arm (!)".
Neither has explained, despite being asked repeatedly, why they are so rabidly against all photoshopping debate. What drives their endless and rather futile rebuttals?
juliet- Posts : 579
Activity : 609
Likes received : 8
Join date : 2011-06-21
Page 8 of 15 • 1 ... 5 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 11 ... 15
Similar topics
» Former Ullapool teacher struck off for indecent images
» 'The Last Photo': The key questions
» 60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo (the 'MAKE-UP '/ Lolita photo)
» The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video
» 60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo (the 'MAKE-UP '/ Lolita photo)
» 'The Last Photo': The key questions
» 60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo (the 'MAKE-UP '/ Lolita photo)
» The NEW Tennis Balls Photo Thread - 'Photoshopped photo created on 5th May', claims YouTube video
» 60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo (the 'MAKE-UP '/ Lolita photo)
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: Photographs of Madeleine McCann's fateful holiday
Page 8 of 15
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum