Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Paris 'Terror attacks' - Friday November 13, 2015

Simon Shack used the below image to see if these building-features in Rue Amelot match up with those in "Mr Psenny's movie" :

They don't. There's a missing doorway. And no, its absence cannot be explained away in any rational manner. It should be almost pitch black - given the apparent lighting conditions. NO cameras can 'selectively erase' such a thing. Btw, the hanging lady's feet are nowhere near the iron bars at this stage of the animation. And what about the two dudes dangling in the void one floor above? Do they look real to you?

It's case closed. It's a feckin' (poorly-rendered) digital cartoon.

Read the full thread at Clues Forum

A View from the Bog


rodin said...

The doorway is there in both pics, its the lighting that changes from street lights to daylight that makes the door appear to recede at night.

rodin said...

more on above http://truth-zone.net/forum/news-and-current-affairs/66097-paris-shooting-heavy-casualties-alleged.html?start=400#185127

blake121666 said...

I agree with rodin. The movie is very low definition and the angle and lighting are different than the comparison photo. Nothing particularly interesting found here.

Negentropic said...

So, since you two geniuses are so perceptive: who flipped the light off in the room under the woman hanging with one arm from a window ledge with no foot support for 2 minutes?



Is that a "low definition" "lighting glitch" too? Or maybe lights switch on and off automatically when you switch from black & white to color?

What the fuck is she doing out of a window hanging by one arm anyway? Couldn't hide in a closet or something?

The whole thing is ridiculous and done this way to pull the emotional triggers deep in people's subconscious installed with the KING KONG sized jumpers on 9-11.



KING KONG MAN Part II - the 21 foot jumper! - Simon Shack


But let me guess, both of you guys think 21 foot jumpers are caused by "low defintion lighting glitches"

Keep believing your Jew media. They're your friends. And if you don't. Keep believing Press-TV & RT who repeat everything the Jew Media says and only change the whodunnit part somewhat, sometimes as far as a "false flag" like that heroic truth-seeker Alex Jones. As if that makes any difference to the emotional trauma and the fear triggers which paralyze critical thinking in the majority of humans. That makes a lot of sense. lol

slurp said...

Someone even runs out the fuckin' door at 01:20


Itzda Joos said...

Negentropic, did you watch the video slurp posted? Plain to see in that video. But hang on - if EVERYTHING is fake then that's fake too right? I'm not saying it is or isn't but how the hell does anyone who wasn't there to experience it KNOW? The answer is we DON'T "know" - but there is a lot of people who "believe" based on all the "evidence" they think they have that was given to them by someone else who they don't personally know. REAL critical thinking involves what I just said in the last sentence.

Negentropic said...

At Itzdoo Stupid WN's who think the Jews gave them this "anti-immigration" PsyOp for a Christmas present & Trump is Santa Claus too (lol):

If it only takes one instance of proven lying and fakery for a case to be thrown out of a proper court of law, why do you and only you and people like yourself require the Jews to provide you many instances of obvious fakery to be convinced? And in the case of 9/11, many hundreds of faked instances, in order to call it a PsyOp and not a "real" false flag with "real" deaths? Some of you people still refuse to accept 9/11 was a Hoax and still, to this day, claim 3000 "deaths," not a single one of which have you ever proven.

Do you really think that Shack die not watch the rest of that video when he watched it closely enough to find the missing doorway in that frame?

And you don't seem to have bothered to read the rest of the page at the Clues Forum link where that question is addressed:

Having somebody run out of a "doorway" does not in any way prove that a rendering is a real-life capture anymore than an actor coming out of spaceship door in a movie proves a "real solidly built spaceship" (not a digital rendering of solidity) or Keanu Reeves dodging bullets in the Matrix or jumping 20 feet up in the air & kicking somebody in the face proves that was done "for real." Having somebody come out of a doorway is no more proof of "authenticity" than "firefighters" or "a helicopter" in this image


proves that this was a "real" image."

There should be no disappearance of a doorway in any frame if the film is authentic.

The disappearance of the doorway is what proves pre-manufactured digital studio editing and compositing of the imagery, hence Media Fakery.

Capiche or is it still too dense?

Re: Paris 'Terror attacks' - Friday November 13, 2015

Postby Apache on November 17th, 2015, 10:01 am


ElSushi wrote:

Not saying it's real, but that door is definitely there in the video, a person comes out of it at around 1:19.


Indeed, I double-checked that moment and it does seem like someone is coming off this "door" at around the 01:20 mark.

At the 1.20 mark a man does indeed run out of that door and no light from that exit spills out onto the pavement. There's hardly any light at all from that open door spilling out on to the street and it barely lights the recess wall. I expect to see a well lit doorway and at least some detail being shown (even if only for a few seconds). No light onto the pavement from the open doorway = not filmed under the conditions of real darkness using real available light sources.

Although the doorway does disappear behind the pipe at a certain viewing angle, a viewing angle 2 floors up, at no 14, should not make the recess disappear behind the pipe and it wouldn't get rid of the shadow on the recess wall anyway. If the recess of the darker double door area can be seen, then so should the smaller exit. Please look at the black and white gif that Simon has posted of that doorway - if that recess has a shadow during the day what sort of camera does Mr Psenny have to be able to make that shadow disappear at night? Simon's gif shows that the doorway disappears and should be there at the viewing angle shown on Mr Psenny's footage.

For me, Simon has once again proved media fakery.

blake121666 said...

The resolution is very low and there is no lighting in that entryway. Nevertheless, you can see the darkness enter into the entryway at the sidewalk level throughout the video. That entryway is there throughout the video. Look to the right of the downspout at the sidewalk level and you see that there is a walkway into that entry.

Regarding the light going out at the 2nd floor window: yes, the light went out. What is so remarkable about that? Maybe something knocked it out - like a bullet or shrapnel? Maybe someone flipped the switch? Maybe the light just died at that particular time? Maybe a fuse blew? Are you saying the light going out implies other than just that?

You generally don't see the light spilling out of any of the windows. Why do you expect to see it spilling out on to the pavement when the guy opens the door and runs out? The door is about 2.5 ft back from where you're looking at the sidewalk. It only opens fully for a blink of an eye and the resolution of that camera is so stinko you can hardly even make out the woman's arms hanging on to the ledge of a lit window.

The double door area is obviously lit from behind. The single door entryway is obviously not. How are you going to get any shadow with the little light? You can see the outline.

You are expecting too much from such a low-res video.

Negentropic said...

Low-res/Hi-res, same shit we heard about 9-11 for 9 years until the hi-res re-release of most of same images in 2010 made even more of case for fakery than the crap deliberately put out low-res before.

What I want to know is what offer he couldn't refuse they made to that prick in Queens of the Stone Age to go along with this scam & mix-up his crappy side-band into it? The perps were definitely going for the redneck demographic, the same crowd that listens to Guns & Roses & Foo Fighters, those type of 90% white-demographic bands. They probably did tests and figured out that the redneck stoner rock-listening public was more "awake" than the rap-listening wiggers dumbed down by the dumbest music & decided to PsyOp the fuck out of them by involving one of their "heroes" in the personage of Josh Homme into it. Except that Homme wasn't at the gig:


More very obvious and totally busted fakery:

Cloned midget heads in the Bataclan crowd:



And after the PsyOp they threw the WN's a bone by "closing the borders." This is to PsyOp the WN's a limited hangout of course. They'll find out what the hook was for this bait soon enough.

Re: Paris 'Terror attacks' - Friday November 13, 2015

by simonshack on November 18th, 2015, 5:53 pm

CitronBleu wrote:I'd be very happy to know what you think about these images you posted.

Dear Citronbleu, this is a case of "dunno-where-to-start", so rather than cover all of the things that are wrong with these images (which would rapidly become a tedious affair), I will just point out a couple of things which 'do it for me' as far as the composited nature of these images is concerned.

- That greyscale area in the midst of that background crowd (an area of the image highly saturated in reddish hues) is a tell-tale sign of sloppy crowd-compositing. It simply isn't anything that would be part of a real / legit photograph. As it is, I remember detecting similar 'greyscale-area-fails' in other (blatantly composited) crowd-imagery some years ago (right now I can't recall in what context that was - but I shall try and find those old examples which should be stored on some external drive of mine).

- I think that my "cloned Midget heads" speak for themselves - this is of course also something oft seen in sloppy crowd-composites. Sure, the rightmost midget-head is slightly smaller (as it's meant to be further away from the camera) than the one at left - but this is precisely what may / will happen when trying to convey a sense of 'depth' to such crowd-composites.

- A last thing worth mentioning is the apparent, disproportionate amount of redheads in that background crowd layer which, quite frankly, I don't think can be justified / explained away by the reddish spotlights seen in that zone of the 'Bataclan theatre'. If it were a lighting issue (coloring the people's hair in strong red hues), than ALL of the folks in that area should have their hair 'dyed red' - which, of course, is not what we see here.


Itzda Joos said...

Hey Neges, I said "I'm not saying it is or isn't". That was my main point really. Not saying you or anyone else is right or wrong because I simply CAN'T ie. it is impossible for me to be conclusive. I question EVERYTHING and try and find answers but there are some answers that will always remain elusive no matter how much time you put into trolling through screeds of info ON THE INTERNET for hours and hours. That is a FACT and more of a FACT to most of us here than any other. That is all.

Erik Paul said...

HELP! Somebody throw me a line before I drown in this slurry of Negentropic verbiage! Cal Coolidge he ain't.