Yes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... Like I said earlier, this is techno-babble. It means nothing.
Yes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo...
If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.
Quote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something?
Quote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).
Quote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).Perhaps you should try demonstrating how editing photos makes NASA untrustworthy, especially when they explain how and why they edit the photos.
So they do not try and hide it and answer any questions about it. You take this as a sign of guilt. Well could you please tell me how an innocent party behaves when the edit photos?
Quote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:22:42 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).Perhaps you should try demonstrating how editing photos makes NASA untrustworthy, especially when they explain how and why they edit the photos.They explain how and why when confronted with evidence of their doctoring. They don't give explanations otherwise. That's the sign of a guilty party.
Quote from: Rama Set on July 08, 2014, 11:38:25 PMSo they do not try and hide it and answer any questions about it. You take this as a sign of guilt. Well could you please tell me how an innocent party behaves when the edit photos?Why would an innocent party have to edit photos to begin with?
Quote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:30:26 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:22:42 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).Perhaps you should try demonstrating how editing photos makes NASA untrustworthy, especially when they explain how and why they edit the photos.They explain how and why when confronted with evidence of their doctoring. They don't give explanations otherwise. That's the sign of a guilty party.Do you explain how and why you doctor every one of your photos?
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.
Quote from: markjo on July 09, 2014, 01:30:37 AMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:30:26 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:22:42 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).Perhaps you should try demonstrating how editing photos makes NASA untrustworthy, especially when they explain how and why they edit the photos.They explain how and why when confronted with evidence of their doctoring. They don't give explanations otherwise. That's the sign of a guilty party.Do you explain how and why you doctor every one of your photos?I have never doctored a photo in my life. I have nothing to hide.
Quote from: Vauxhall on July 09, 2014, 02:46:42 AMQuote from: markjo on July 09, 2014, 01:30:37 AMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:30:26 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:22:42 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:17:16 PMQuote from: markjo on July 08, 2014, 11:14:39 PMQuote from: Vauxhall on July 08, 2014, 11:01:34 PMYes. She clearly states what she was covering up in the photo... So you're saying that the fact that NASA is revealing exactly how and why an image is being manipulated is evidence that they're hiding something? I am simply trying to demonstrate that photo-editing is not beneath NASA. I think I was successful when demonstrating this. Obviously, NASA can edit photos and does so frequently. Maybe RE'ers will stop and think about my words before they claim that NASA is completely innocent again (but I doubt it).Perhaps you should try demonstrating how editing photos makes NASA untrustworthy, especially when they explain how and why they edit the photos.They explain how and why when confronted with evidence of their doctoring. They don't give explanations otherwise. That's the sign of a guilty party.Do you explain how and why you doctor every one of your photos?I have never doctored a photo in my life. I have nothing to hide.Yes you have. http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61743.0#.U7y2kcvn8m8
I cropped myself out of the photo because I didn't want to reveal my face. I request you take that down, please. I will report you.
...Did you forget this already?,,,