Slideshow image

Since your web browser does not support JavaScript, here is a non-JavaScript version of the image slideshow:

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

Why Fact-check? Why preserve a visual record?

The Website Written as a Book
1: Science and Subjective Viewpoints
2: Toward Accurate Collapse Histories
....2.1: Progressive Floor Collapses in the WTC Towers
....2.2: General Global Characteristics of Collapses
....2.3: Mathematical Basis of ROOSD Propagation
....2.4: WTC1 Accurate Collapse History
....2.5: WTC2 Accurate Collapse History
....2.6: WTC7 Accurate Collapse History
3: WTC Collapse Misrepresentations
....3.1: Purpose of the NIST Reports
....3.2: NIST WTC1 Misrepresentations
....3.3: NIST WTC7 Misrepresentations
....3.4: NIST WTC2 Misrepresentations
....3.5: Reviewing the Purpose of NIST and FEMA Reports
....3.6: Bazant Misrepresentation of Collapse Progressions
....3.7: Block Misrepresentations of Collapse Progressions
....3.8: AE911T Misrepresentations of the Collapses
4: Scientific Institutions Can Be Unaware of Contradiction
5: Reassessing the Question of Demolition
....5.1: The Case of WTC1
....5.2: The Case of WTC2
....5.3: The Case of WTC7
6: WTC Collapse Records Studied as Meme Replication
....6.1: Meme Replication in Technical Literature
....6.2: Meme Replication in Mass Media
....6.3: Meme Replication in Popular Culture
....6.4: John Q Public and the WTC Collapse Records

WTC Twin Towers Collapse Dynamics

Official, Legal Attempts to Explain Collapses

Academic Attempts to Explain Collapses Reviewed

On the Limits of Science and Technology

WTC Video Record

WTC Photographic Record
WTC1 Attack to Collapse
WTC2 Attack to Collapse
Fire Progression, WTC1 North Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 South Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 East Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 West Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 North Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 South Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 East Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 West Face
Debris: WTC1 Around Footprint
Debris: WTC2 Around Footprint
Debris: From WTC1 Westward
Debris: From WTC1 Northward
Debris: From WTC2 Eastward
Debris: From WTC2 Southward
Debris: Plaza Area, Northeast Complex
Debris: Hilton Hotel, Southwest Complex
Debris: General, Unidentified Locations
Damage to Surrounding Buildings
Perimeter Column Photo Record
Perimeter Columns: Types of Damage
Core Box Columns: Types of Damage
Complete Photo Archive
Other Major 9-11 Photo Archives
The 911Dataset Project

WTC Structural Information

Log In


Remember Me

Online Misrepresentations of the WTC Collapses

Forum, Blog Representations of the WTC Collapses

The Book Tested Through Experiments

Miscellaneous Notes, Resources
FAQ for Miscellaneous Notes
History Commons 9/11 Timeline
The 911Dataset Project
Skyscraper Safety Campaign
First and Largest 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Key Words in Book and Website
Trapped Within a Narrowed False Choice
Vulnerability and Requestioning
On Memes and Memetics
Obedience, Conformity and Mental Structure
Denial, Avoidance (Taboo) and Mental Structure
Taboos Against Reviewing the Collapse Events
Extreme Situations and Mental Structure
Suggestibility, Hypnosis and Mental Structure
Awareness and Behavior
Magical, Religious, Scientific Cause-Effect Relations
The Extreme Limits of Mental Dysfunction
Orwell's "Crimestop", "Doublethink", "Blackwhite"
William James, Max Born: Science as Philosophy
Plato on Self Reflection and Mental Structure
Rewriting History, part 1
Rewriting History, part 2
On Smart Idiots

New Ideas in Education

Studies of a Falsified Photo, Part 3

Studies of a Falsified Photo, Part 3


A Case of Bad Photoshopping.

The enlarged image shown above is of beam #1 in the picture presented by Steven Jones, the very first picture that he shows in his paper mentioned before.

Steven Jones has personally assured me that this photograph is authentic.

We can immediately spot 4 photoshop mistakes in this picture.

We will first focus on what we have labelled "inexplicable hanging material" in the above photo.

This inexplicable material had appeared only for this picture, which the photographer claims to have taken on 9-27-01. It didn't exist before this time and it apparently disappeared just after this picture was taken.

Please recall that there is an object just behind beam #1 which we call "object A".

In the series of 3 pictures shown above, please note that you can see this hanging material in the first picture only.

The 2 pictures on the right are known to have been taken on 10-3-01.

In the pictures below we can see object A from the opposite side.

These pictures were all taken before 9-27-01.

Can you see the mystery material hanging from object A?

But the reader may wonder if this mystery material is not from some object in the debris further in the background, behind object A.

This cannot be because there was only empty space behind object A and the distant damaged building in the far background, WTC 5.

You will be able to see this in the following pair of photos.

The first of these pictures was taken at just about the exact same position and orientation as the falsified photo in question. The camera was facing east. You can see WTC Building 5 in the distant background.

The photo on the right was taken before 9-27-01 from almost exactly 180 degrees in the opposite direction as the first picture. The camera is facing west. You can know that it was taken from almost exactly the opposite direction by noticing how object A is aligned with beam #1.

That giant golden ball in the foreground is the sculpture which was in the center of the plaza. This tells you that the photographer was actually closer to WTC Building 5 than they were to where the North Tower used to be.

You can see that there were no highly protruding objects between the photographer and object A. Therefore the mystery material couldn't be located behind object A in the picture Steven Jones uses in his paper.

So if this mystery material (shown circled in pink in the above photo) is not hanging from object A, and if it is not something in the rubble located behind object A, what is it?

It is a part of the background which the photoshop artist didn't realize he had to erase when they were digitally extracting these object from the background.

It is a photoshop mistake.

The artist didn't do a clean job while altering the image and accidentally left in part of the background.

It was an honest(?) mistake. They couldn't have known where object A ended and where WTC Building 5 began in the image.


No Visible Background

Please notice that in the previous image comparing Beam A from 3 photos, only the original photo Steven Jones presents in his paper has no background whatsoever.

Where the hell did the New York skyline go?

Most gentle and reasonable reader, don't you see a little problem here?

In fact, the only background remaining is the small part of the remains of WTC 5 the photoshop artist manipulators forgot to edit out.


The discovery that the very first photo in Steven's paper is indeed a forgery generates more questions than it answers.

Why would well organized people plant false photographic evidence of incandescent material among the WTC rubble within the 9-11 Truth Movement?

Consider the second photo that appears in Steven's paper, claimed to have been taken by the same photographer as the first, shown below.


Considering that the photo under examination (the fake one) is of a much better quality than the one above and was "taken" by the same photographer, why should we believe anything in this second photo?

And yet this is the best photographic proof of incandescent metal Steven offers us in his paper.

Or, even worse, consider a third photo Steven presents as evidence, shown below.

As this author mentions elsewhere, this photo could win first prize for the single most blurry, poorest quality evidenciary photo within the entire 9-11 Truth Movement. And yet this is what Steven presents as his best evidence.

This isn't a church, folks.

It is our duty to present better evidence than this.

So Who is Trying to Lead Us in the Wrong Direction?

The 9-11 Truth Community must realize that there are some very tricky people (lacking conscience) with a mountain of money that wish to steer our research in the wrong direction.

Space beams and no planes are just some of the more obvious examples.

But what about angle-cut columns and exaggerated claims of molten metal within the WTC rubble?

What about twisting the sighting of a small amount of incandescent substance falling from the 82nd floor of the northeast corner of WTC 2 into some global "thermite" collapse theory?

This twisting of facts is infinitely more devious than some space beam claims by Judy Wood can ever be.

Friends, think about it.
Note: In response to this photo study, only 2 people have claimed to find the mystery beam #2 within photos of the rubble.

You can see their claims and my proof that their claims are physically impossible here

Created on 09/14/2007 11:08 AM by admin
Updated on 03/25/2008 12:59 AM by admin
 Printable Version

Copyright © 2008 WiredTech, LLC
phpWebSite is licensed under the GNU LGPL