The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Page 1 of 8 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

I've carefully read the explanation of Textusa's Last Photo theory of the composite of 3 images and I think...

57% 57% 
[ 78 ]
34% 34% 
[ 46 ]
9% 9% 
[ 12 ]
 
Total Votes : 136

Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Tony Bennett on 14.11.15 0:13

This is a response to Textusa's long post today on the 'Last Photo'.

I am going to put this as neutrally as I can.

I have set out Textusa's latest version of her Last Photo (in black), including quotes from Textusa and her friend Isabel Oliveira in bold blue. 

On the other Textusa thread, 28% so far (out of 178 votes) believe her theory - a 3-photo composite - to be the correct, or best explanation of the Last Photo.

I am running another poll and invite all members just to assess the credibility of Textusa's 'Last Photo' theory - nothing else.

I refer members to Textusa's post if they want to see the considerable details she goes into about the physics, but what it boils down to is this simple statement: 'The Last Photo cannot be genuine because of the vertical images on Gerry's sunglasses'.

I hope my summary of Textusa's theory is both correct and fair, here goes:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      
The new, revised Textusa theory on the Last Photo, dated 13 November 2015

Executive Summary   Someone, maybe Kate, took a photo of Madeleine on her own sometime that week. It wasn’t suitable and had to be altered. A special photo-session was arranged on or about 17 or 18 May at the Ocean Club pool where several photos of Gerry McCann and Amelie were taken. In some photos, Gerry was wearing sunglasses. In one of them, his sunglasses were tucked into the top of his T-shirt, hanging down vertically. The photoshopping was done ‘in studio’ that day. The image of Gerry’s sunglasses hanging vertically had to be substituted during the photoshopping because they didn’t want the photographer’s image to be shown in the ‘Last Photo’.      

1. Someone - Kate or one of the child care workers - took the photograph of Madeleine that appears in ‘The Last Photo’.

My opinion is this. Photo of Maddie [sitting on her own] taken during [the] week, could be Sunday, could be any other day, under the context of [the] holiday. It could even have been taken by the childcare people or by the McCanns. There was a need to to [sic] create family time. The few pics taken of Maddie dictate what can be done.

2. Textusa contradicts this in the very next sentence, saying it is definitely Kate McCann who took the photo: ‘SHE’. 

This probably was the only photo she took around pool.

3. In that original photograph, Madeleine was sitting by the Ocean Club pool on her own. We’ll call this PHOTO A.

4. The photograph could have been taken at any time that week from Saturday to Thursday. After Madeleine was reported missing, it became necessary to create a new, photoshopped image of Madeleine being with other members of her family.

5. That’s because in reality Madeleine wasn’t with her family that week,  they were too busy doing other things. It was important for the McCanns to produce a photograph with other family members also in shot with Madeleine.

It was faked to show a family time that didn’t exist within a family supposed to be enjoying a week long family holiday. The fact that holiday time didn’t exist was, in our opinion, because the parents were there to enjoy adult time with other adults and that’s how they spent most of the time that week.

6. So the McCanns decided to arrange a special photo session by the Ocean Club pool, about two weeks later. This was done either on Thursday 17 May or Friday 18 May.

7. It was arranged for Gerry McCann to be photographed (also on a warm sunny occasion) with Amelie at a position just to the right of where Madeleine had been photographed on the original image. They had to sit themselves down at the Ocean Club pool, and place themselves just to the right of where Madeleine was photographed in PHOTO A.

A photo session by the pool, in the weeks after Maddie disappeared, was arranged to create the idea the McCann family spent time together by the pool. One photo was chosen. After Maddie died, and it could be on the date you say (the heat had passed, media were domesticated to reporting when McCanns gave press conference, clothes and sunlight seem to fit and explains why it took so long for picture to surface), Gerry and Amelie pose for pic.

8. The intention was for a new photo – we’ll call it PHOTO B, to act as a ‘Baseline’ (background) photo, into which the photo of Madeleine could be photshopped.   

9. A photographer took shots of Gerry which included ones of him wearing his sunglasses and another with them hanging vertically on his T-shirt (see below).

10. These shots had to be taken at exactly the right time of day, and in sunlight, so that both the shadow length and its direction fell in exactly the same way as in the original photo of Madeleine taken two weeks earlier (NOT mentioned by Textusa, but this had to be so, for her theory, because the shadow lengths are consistent with each other on the actual Last Photo).        

11. When the (unnamed) photographer/photographic expert(s) looked at the photoshopped image they began to produce, it was one with Gerry wearing his sunglasses. But they realised there was a problem. Because Gerry had been looking straight at the camera, the cameraman was reflected in Gerry’s sunglasses. It was vital that people thought that Kate had taken this photo. So something had to be done about the sunglasses problem.

[We - Textusa] realised that with the angle (straight ahead) and height (almost the same as photographer) which Gerry is looking at the camera, the photographer had to be reflected in the lens. He or she wasn’t. To hide that could only mean in the original photo it would be visible that the photographer wasn’t Kate.

In a studio, when doing the composition, it was realised that the photographer appeared in the reflection. Another photo taken during that session by the pool where such a reflection didn’t appear was chosen:In "studio" the photographer reflection problem is detected. Probably when the whole picture set up. It needs to be solved. The choice of picture from where to choose from was most likely conditioned with the photographer's reflection. Most pictures would have it. This one didn't because the glasses were on his chest and the angle makes what is reflected to be beneath the horizon line of camera, thus the other side of the border.

12. So now the photographic experts altered the ‘Base’ Photo (PHOTO B) by removing the sunglasses from the photo where Gerry was wearing them - and substituting the vertical sunglasses (PHOTO C) from the photo where he had them dangling from his T-shirt. That is, PHOTO C was shopped on to PHOTO B.  

They simply took the glasses from other image taken that afternoon and [that] was pasted over the original. The picture from here they copied glasses from would be one where Gerry would have them vertically on his shirt, and the reflection being of the opposite border of pool from where he's seating.

What I think was done, was they cut the image by the middle of the frame of glasses from one picture and superimpose it over the image of the same pair of glasses of another picture. As the pair of glasses was the same in both the pictures so the tonalities of the frame in the image from which was taken would be the same as the one of the frame that was superimposed.

The “scar” would be in the middle of the frame and not on the borders lenses/frame nor on the border frame/head. Those borders would be originals. The first from the image from where it was cut and the latter from the image in which it was pasted. Thus me saying it would be very hard or impossible to detect.

13. A considerable amount of highly expert and undetectable photoshopping would have been required to match the photo of Madeleine (PHOTO A, taken between 28 April and 3 May) and the ‘Base Photo’ (PHOTO B). Grass, walls, surface paving, pool, pool tiles, background walls, everything would need to be perfectly matched (None of this mentioned by Textusa).    

14. The three images or put together to create the ‘Last Photo’: PHOTO A (Madeleine taken between 28 April and 3 May – YELLOW), PHOTO B (‘The Base Photo’, taken on 17 or 18 May – BLUE) and finally PHOTO C (Gerry’s sunglasses in a vertical position – WHITE). See pic below:



We believe that this photo is a composite of 3 photos. One taken of Maddie alone, WE DON’T KNOW WHEN, a copy of which appears in the Mockumentary. The other of Gerry with Amelie, which we believe was taken on 18 May. These 2 photos were then superimposed one over the other…We also believe a third photo was used, one where Gerry has the sunglasses hanging vertically on his t-shirt. We suppose it was also taken on 18 May during the session by the pool with Gerry and Amelie.

The lenses of the sunglasses on the composite picture is taken from this 3rd photograph. The reason being that it was the only one where the photographer didn’t appear in the reflection of the sunglasses. In the original it could have been seen that the photographer wasn’t Kate and that detail had to be removed.


16. The date and time stamp must have been altered as well to 2.29pm on 3 May (Textusa doesn’t mention this in her theory however).

17. It  is the sunglasses that prove that the ‘Last Photo’ was photoshopped. That’s because of the physics. The refection shown in Gerry’s sunglasses on the Last Photo could not have happened without photoshopping. The physics proves it.  

Our assessment about the photo having being manipulated is only to [do] with the sunglasses. The reflection on them is physically impossible. We think it is fake not because of any pixel manipulation but because of physics. The reflection in GM's sunglasses is impossible. The photo was photoshopped.


____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14725
Reputation : 2847
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 14.11.15 6:38





A couple of comments from the CMOMM facebook page:

Susan M Gregory
Gerry looks to be wearing the same sun glasses in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBXB_cvdxME&feature=youtu.be


Sally James
The reflection in the sunglasses he is wearing above hasn't distorted. I can see a car in a driveway, right way up.


Link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/JillHavernCompleteMysteryofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/1682768521967634/
avatar
Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 10490
Reputation : 5186
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 6:39

The vertical image is possible and has been proved to be possible.

TextUsa is not a stupid person so what is the game?
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by bobbin on 14.11.15 7:38

@BlueBag wrote:The vertical image is possible and has been proved to be possible.

TextUsa is not a stupid person so what is the game?
I cannot agree that the vertical image is possible.

As pointed out, one error made by the researcher when attempting to simulate the sunglasses was that he used flat mirrors instead of curved sunglasses.

I further pointed out, that the only way a 'straight' line could be found 'vertical' in reflection would be if Gerry were sitting with a straight edged pool on his left hand side.

Given the curve of the pool, and as demonstrated by textusa's new explanation, with the green blocks showing the curvature of the round pool, one would have to see a 'reverse' shaped letter C in the reflection.

bobbin

Posts : 2051
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 7:48

Nonsense, it wasn't a flat mirror.



A curve reflected in a curve can give a straight line.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 7:51

AND.... why the hell complicate matters with unnecessarily photoshopping sunglasses (and shadow of sunglasses)?

Yes... the shadows.

Amazing attention to detail.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by bobbin on 14.11.15 8:10

Tony, in purporting to present another 'neutral' poll, may I say that it is totally useless in terms of 'neutrality'. 

The questions purport to 'what' precisely ?

Are you asking us to declare that Textusa is 'right' on all accounts ? is 'wrong' on all accounts ? and of course NONE of us can KNOW, including you, what happened. Therefore theoretically, everyone should answer 'I don't know.'

One would hope that a 'thread' would be all about discussion, stimulating new thoughts, bringing new insights to the table, and an over-simplified 'Yes, No, Don't know', does no merit to the deep levels of analysis which contributors can and do offer.

Your poll and new thread takes us away from the new material that has recently been developed in the former thread. This new one detracts from proper discussion, and will leave the former material, out of sight to those who seek to breakdown the confusion and concealment in the case of a little girl who just disappeared off the face of this earth.

Of course this forum has its fair share of shills. It would not be a credit to this forum if it did not attract violent shilling intervention, however, one must guard against hidden agendas.

The 'truth' is what matters, not 'point scoring' and to reduce this forum and discussion to a determination to see your own theory accepted, as opposed to someone else's, is not worthy.

The former poll was quite adequate. It gave people an option to decide the critical issue, namely, do we consider the photo a fake.

If we accepted Textusa's propositions in full, or if we did not accept them in full, we still had the option to declare that we think the photo a fake, and could then seek out and find reasons for holding this view.

This new poll of yours (and I was developer of questionnaires for Market Research for a long time) forces people to give an 'untrue' answer.
That is known as 'skewing' the results. Quite patent and unworthy.

It is quite possible that you have developed this new 'skew-worthy' poll because your theory was constantly beaten in the former more representative poll. Why have you not given the same options as before, and why have you started a new thread when the other one was perfectly adequate and getting deeply into worthwhile analysis.

bobbin

Posts : 2051
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 8:17

@bobbin wrote:It is quite possible that you have developed this new 'skew-worthy' poll because you theory was constantly beaten in the former more representative poll.
Peter was attacked yesterday.
Tony's turn today.

The fact is that sound logic has shown that TextUsa's "theory" is nonsense and that in fact the image in the glasses is possible.

Have you looked at the shadows yet by the way?

Amazing.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/lastphotohighres2.jpg

(VERY HI_RES IMAGE).
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by hogwash on 14.11.15 8:57

QUOTE: The lenses of the sunglasses on the composite picture is taken from this 3rd photograph. The reason being that it was the only one where the photographer didn’t appear in the reflection of the sunglasses. In the original it could have been seen that the photographer wasn’t Kate and that detail had to be removed.
UNQUOTE


Why would a photograph have to be photoshopped to remove Kate as the photographer? What would be so wrong if she was seen in the reflection of the sunglasses?
avatar
hogwash

Posts : 209
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2015-09-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by HelenMeg on 14.11.15 9:58

@bobbin wrote:Tony, in purporting to present another 'neutral' poll, may I say that it is totally useless in terms of 'neutrality'. 

The questions purport to 'what' precisely ?

Are you asking us to declare that Textusa is 'right' on all accounts ? is 'wrong' on all accounts ? and of course NONE of us can KNOW, including you, what happened. Therefore theoretically, everyone should answer 'I don't know.'

One would hope that a 'thread' would be all about discussion, stimulating new thoughts, bringing new insights to the table, and an over-simplified 'Yes, No, Don't know', does no merit to the deep levels of analysis which contributors can and do offer.

Your poll and new thread takes us away from the new material that has recently been developed in the former thread. This new one detracts from proper discussion, and will leave the former material, out of sight to those who seek to breakdown the confusion and concealment in the case of a little girl who just disappeared off the face of this earth.

Of course this forum has its fair share of shills. It would not be a credit to this forum if it did not attract violent shilling intervention, however, one must guard against hidden agendas.

The 'truth' is what matters, not 'point scoring' and to reduce this forum and discussion to a determination to see your own theory accepted, as opposed to someone else's, is not worthy.

The former poll was quite adequate. It gave people an option to decide the critical issue, namely, do we consider the photo a fake.

If we accepted Textusa's propositions in full, or if we did not accept them in full, we still had the option to declare that we think the photo a fake, and could then seek out and find reasons for holding this view.

This new poll of yours (and I was developer of questionnaires for Market Research for a long time) forces people to give an 'untrue' answer.
That is known as 'skewing' the results. Quite patent and unworthy.

It is quite possible that you have developed this new 'skew-worthy' poll because your theory was constantly beaten in the former more representative poll. Why have you not given the same options as before, and why have you started a new thread when the other one was perfectly adequate and getting deeply into worthwhile analysis.
What you say is true Bobbin. The poll should allow for the same options as previous one - otherwise results will be skewed. Also, again I agree that the previous thread contained much worthwhile discussion which will now get buried in the background. Why?

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 208
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 11:28

Worthwhile discussion?

TextUsa is 100% wrong.

Plain and simple.



There was lots of BS about missing arms and chin shadows though... all debated before (along with ghost dogs under the chair)... all shown to be nonsense.

The question is why are people bringing this stuff back as if it's new.

It isn't. I linked to lots of threads that shows the previous times. 

The only thing questionable about that photo is the claimed date.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

textusa last photo

Post by willowthewisp on 14.11.15 11:31

@Get'emGonçalo wrote:



A couple of comments from the CMOMM facebook page:

Susan M Gregory
Gerry looks to be wearing the same sun glasses in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBXB_cvdxME&feature=youtu.be


Sally James
The reflection in the sunglasses he is wearing above hasn't distorted. I can see a car in a driveway, right way up.


Link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/JillHavernCompleteMysteryofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/1682768521967634/
Hi Gogetemgoncalo,
When was this video taken and by who,Jon Corner?
I have just watched the video clip, what is interesting in the video is the useage of the disappeared child Ben Needham as an example?
Gerry seems to be very knowledgeable about future laws on child abuse in this clip and refers to laws on Pornography from different Countries, also to note the amount of times he, Gerry reiterates Abduction?
This site knows who has a close friendship with Big Jim, former CEOP Governer?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1986
Reputation : 791
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 12:02

The hilarious thing is that no one will explain why there was a need to move the glasses AND create shadow effect of glasses on face and shirt (amazing) AND create the arms of the glasses over the ears (from a 4th photo presumably) instead of simply removing the sunglasses altogether.



Bonkers.

This is just total mischievy and the people pushing this crap are up to no good.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Verdi on 14.11.15 12:14

@BlueBag wrote:The hilarious thing is that no one will explain why there was a need to move the glasses AND create shadow effect of glasses on face and shirt (amazing) AND create the arms of the glasses over the ears (from a 4th photo presumably) instead of simply removing the sunglasses altogether.



Bonkers.

This is just total mischievy and the people pushing this crap are up to no good.
My thoughts exactly - why go to all that trouble, just remove the damn sunglasses!

If it wasn't so exasperating it would be hilarious - second thoughts it is hilarious.  Certainly made me laugh, don't think I've ever read such a convoluted reason for thinking a photograph to be fake.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 6771
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 12:19

Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Verdi on 14.11.15 12:22

In essence, it would appear that Textusa's latest theory update is designed to reinforce her fixation with 'swinging'.  I fail to see the necessity for introducing a happy family portrait to indicate special time with the kids, when the McCanns have openly admitted leaving their children every day at the crèche and every night alone in the apartment.

ETA:  The sunglasses look a bit girly to me + obviously cheap rubbish so who knows what sort of reflexion might be created by an inferior lense.  Anyway, who's to say he was looking at the photographer - the buxom aerobics instructor may have been in the vicinity strutting her stuff!

Absolute nonsense from beginning to end.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 6771
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by MRNOODLES on 14.11.15 12:43

@BlueBag wrote:The hilarious thing is that no one will explain why there was a need to move the glasses AND create shadow effect of glasses on face and shirt (amazing) AND create the arms of the glasses over the ears (from a 4th photo presumably) instead of simply removing the sunglasses altogether.



Bonkers.

This is just total mischievy and the people pushing this crap are up to no good.

Cos Jez had a black eye innit  laughat

Seriously,  all this fannying around with 3 different pictures.  It's just too complicated and the evidence just isn't there.
avatar
MRNOODLES

Posts : 731
Reputation : 281
Join date : 2013-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 12:44

FOUR pictures not three.

The arms of the glasses must have come from another photo.

Innit.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by rustyjames on 14.11.15 12:52

@Verdi wrote:My thoughts exactly - why go to all that trouble, just remove the damn sunglasses!

If it wasn't so exasperating it would be hilarious - second thoughts it is hilarious.  Certainly made me laugh, don't think I've ever read such a convoluted reason for thinking a photograph to be fake.

Agreed.  And they go to all that trouble, doing such a great job that renowned experts can't spot the photoshopping, yet mess up and get the reflection wrong.

rustyjames

Posts : 293
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-10-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by bobbin on 14.11.15 13:37

@BlueBag wrote:Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
you ask "Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?" I don't know but it's a pretty crap job.

The left ear one looks really feeble, with a mushy pink/grey area bleeding into the rim of the glasses, through and over the line of sunshine. They should have been as shiny as the right hand side, with sun in that position. A rushed job by an inadequately skilled photo-shopper, not realising that the photo would ever come under such close and relentless scrutiny

Must have got them cheap down the market, or from the odds and sods box at the local girl guides bring and buy stall.

bobbin

Posts : 2051
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Tony Bennett on 14.11.15 13:44

@bobbin wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
You ask "Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?" I don't know.
bobbin: "I don't know".

Exactly.

And neither does Textusa.

So, back to the keyboard again, Textusa - for your theory to stand up, it now has to be a composite of FOUR photos, not three.

Which effectively means that everyone who has so far voted 'Textusa is right' in this poll is...well...wrong.

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14725
Reputation : 2847
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.15 13:47

@bobbin wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
you ask "Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?" I don't know but it's a pretty crap job.

The left ear one looks really feeble, with a mushy pink/grey area bleeding into the rim of the glasses, through and over the line of sunshine. They should have been as shiny as the right hand side, with sun in that position. A rushed job by an inadequately skilled photo-shopper, not realising that the photo would ever come under such close and relentless scrutiny

Must have got them cheap down the market, or from the odds and sods box at the local girl guides bring and buy stall.

You're having a laugh.

Seriously.

I think you do this because you think it's funny.

Or other reasons, I don't know.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4399
Reputation : 2218
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by bobbin on 14.11.15 13:54

@BlueBag wrote:Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
@BlueBag "Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?"

Now that you've drawn everyone's attention to it, did they in fact photo-shop 'arms' in.

I can see the bulbous plastic of the right hand arm sitting snugly on Gerry's right ear, but I cannot see an arm sitting on Gerry's left ear, just his ear, and a void with the wall and grassy knoll behind.

Yes, it is quite laughable isn't it, verging on the ridiculous, if only it weren't so serious. All to prove that their disappeared little four year old daughter must have been enjoying a lovely sunny day, on holiday, sitting at the pool with her loving family.

bobbin

Posts : 2051
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by bobbin on 14.11.15 14:01

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@bobbin wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?



What is TextUsa's theory for the arms of the glasses?

One of the most stupid theories going and doesn't stand up to more that a few seconds thinking about.
You ask "Where did they photoshop the arms of the glasses from?" I don't know.
bobbin: "I don't know".

Exactly.

And neither does Textusa.

So, back to the keyboard again, Textusa - for your theory to stand up, it now has to be a composite of FOUR photos, not three.

Which effectively means that everyone who has so far voted 'Textusa is right' in this poll is...well...wrong.

@Tony Bennett "Which effectively means that everyone who has so far voted 'Textusa is right' in this poll is...well...wrong."
Which is why your new poll with only Yes No or Don't Know is such a futile waste of time. It does not allow for people to say they think the last photo is fake, it only permits people to accept the whole Textusa package.

What a sad reduction of forum discussion, to play it all around whether we believe Textusa 100% or not at all.

As I said earlier, the poll should read 100% "I don't know" because save the people who produced this photo, no one can know.

bobbin

Posts : 2051
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Textusa's revised theory, published 13 November, of The Last Photo - explained for further discussion

Post by Grande Finale on 14.11.15 14:12

Hi,
I have just voted number two that Textusa is wrong. Anyhow it is the date of the image that is important !!

I think the problem with the vertical glasses image, well it's a battle between what your
senses are telling you should be seen and the scientific logic behind what you are actually
seeing. Having looked into this again the reason that the vertical image IS possible is
because GM's glasses are perfectly flat in the vertical plane unlike everybody else's LOL
(As per the red line on this photograph !!)

[/URL]
avatar
Grande Finale

Posts : 139
Reputation : 62
Join date : 2013-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 8 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum