Why is this subject so important?Isn't the " reason " more important?
OR is it that the photo is NOT fake?
Finally! Someone dares to ask the ultimate question: AND SO?
What's the purpose of this thread in the first place? Honestly, and with no offense to anyone. Why is it important to debunk the picture? Maybe someone can enlighten us who don't understand it?
As for the picture: I can't see any leaves at all. One of the shots it looks like a reversed reflection of Michael's face lying in the ambulance. On another one it looks like a random patch - perhaps just a dirty window. I don't think there is a way of finding out unless somebody here actually KNOWS. We may be guessing for days and weeks until maybe finally someone hits the head on the nail - but not because it is possible to figure it out but because statistically taken, after some time someone will simply happen to be right.
Back to the picture: has anyone ever thought about the size of the windows of the ambulance and the width and angle of the photograph? I just think it's impossible to get such a wide shot through such a small window if you stick the camera right onto the window to avoid reflection and get a focused picture then I dont see how you could take such a wide shot. Unless, of course...here we go again..it has all been staged, well prepared, camera ready with the right lense and setting. That would probably explain Ben's slip up about that day and the other days and th..the...yeah.
Also what bothers me in terms of distance/angles etc. is the paramedic sitting so near the doors. If you stick the camera onto the window they way it must have been done..then how do you get the paramedic where he is, nicely in the shot, if at the same time the focus is on MJ in the middle of the picture, and clearly this guy cant be sitting outside the ambulance which is exactly how it looks like. Something isnt right here.
Why is this subject so important?Isn't the " reason " more important?
OR is it that the photo is NOT fake?
I think that after 20 months we all know the reasons and are very aware of it. I have been looking at parts of the picture I haven't noticed before and I think TS' point is that he wants us to take a closer look at details like that, to build actual proof that Mike is not dead, or at least that stuff like this is fake. This way it is easier to explain and show to non-believers. Now there are hundreds of theories on the board and we all have our own 'proofs' that stuff is fake, this could get us all on the same page. Facts instead of theories. Piece by piece.
I don't think that proving this picture fake (which we have known sort of since long ago and what has been openly mentioned in the media) and convincing a bunch of non-believers is the point here. There are better ways to prove MJ isnt dead.
So either there's a hidden agenda - that has nothing to do with the actual pic - or I am waiting for something to happen.
I've been reading but haven't joined in this thread before as it very quickly became way too technical for me to follow! I haven't a clue what's possible with computer wizardry in the field of photo alterations etc, other than it appears anything is possible. I'm from the simpler era when 'the camera didn't lie'!
Looking at the wider aspect, with TS implying we should be building actual proof that MJ is NOT dead, it makes me wonder if maybe the lawyers in Murray's trial could do with doing similar: prosecution - prove he's actually DEAD before accusing Murray of anything, defence - prove he's NOT!
I've been reading but haven't joined in this thread before as it very quickly became way too technical for me to follow! I haven't a clue what's possible with computer wizardry in the field of photo alterations etc, other than it appears anything is possible. I'm from the simpler era when 'the camera didn't lie'!
Looking at the wider aspect, with TS implying we should be building actual proof that MJ is NOT dead, it makes me wonder if maybe the lawyers in Murray's trial could do with doing similar: prosecution - prove he's actually DEAD before accusing Murray of anything, defence - prove he's NOT!
Proving a negative fact is almost impossible. There are easy ways to prove MJ is alive - e.g. the CCTV tapes that were supposed to be lost <!-- s:-D -->:-D<!-- s:-D -->
chloead505, I agree there's no way all we see in the pic would be available in that small window and with the space in the vehicle. IMO to see what we see the camera would need a wide-angle lens, which would totally distort the edges all around.
Someone was saying MJ might be in the red car, directing by phone. But then there was the suggestion that he was behind the gates as the slightly bent over ponytailed figure in blue, directing there.
The EMT's bag is in front of the picture. I always learned at drawing lessons back in school, that something that is in front, is seen completely, blocking stuff behind it either partially or completely. Yet the black hooked thing/stripe (what the hell is it anyway) is not behind the bag, it overlaps it a little. Like bec pointed out that the leaves pattern is behind the arm and the sheet, because it was cut off by it, this one is not and actually overlapping an object that is supposed to be in front.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Why is this subject so important?Isn't the " reason " more important?
OR is it that the photo is NOT fake?
I think that after 20 months we all know the reasons and are very aware of it. I have been looking at parts of the picture I haven't noticed before and I think TS' point is that he wants us to take a closer look at details like that, to build actual proof that Mike is not dead, or at least that stuff like this is fake. This way it is easier to explain and show to non-believers. Now there are hundreds of theories on the board and we all have our own 'proofs' that stuff is fake, this could get us all on the same page. Facts instead of theories. Piece by piece.
Yes I agree. I think this is a much needed skill that we will be utilizing beyond the hoax, beyond anything to do with MJ, and that we will be using to scrutinize what the media feeds us as reality.
Put on your student caps people and learn to find the truth within your world!
I'm sure I saw a video of the ambulance backing out that showed the red car wasn't in the right position to be reflected in Ben's photo.
OK, so back to the ambulance. <!-- s --><!-- s -->
You are right - compared to the movies we were presented, we may doubt where and how the photos were composed.
We should consider a little bit more material.
Remember the EXIF data of one of the pictures showed 12:08 as creation hour.
That's 18 minutes before the ambulance allegedly arrived.
This is the video of the "proof picture" which is only proving the fact that several takes were executed but not the fact that Christopher Weiss shot that sequence of photos: he's in bright sunlight without any tree shadows as seen on the famous pictures:
[youtube:3sixzsrm]
Evenstad is not saying the truth stating in the video he could see Michael's face through the window. He was not there in front of the side window - at least not in the material we saw. He was not even the one shooting the "proof" photo, since he was not down the street. He was also not at the window in the "proof" photo and also not in the Hollywood TV video. Ben was sitting in his car, the red Toyota Prius, while the ambulance backed out. You see this for a second (1:36) in the Hollywood TV video when the video filmer is running back to his car.
The "proof" photo is showing the yellow shirt guy taking the photo in the middle of the road (and not the red shirt guy from the video who stood in front of the yellow shirt guy there). The angle of the camera of the yellow shirt guy is even wrong. Impossible to shoot the picture like this. Only the red shirt guy could have shot it, but in the Hollywood TV movie, he's running away too fast and DOESN'T EVEN LOOK into the window but turns his head to the left.
This is the exact way how to NOT shoot a good sequence of pics.
It's getting better: in an interview, Weiss stated this:
Yeah, and did you notice his so called offhand comment…
“We couldn't see inside the ambulance,” Weiss continues “For all I knew when I was taking the pictures, Michael could have been sitting up on a gurney with oxygen on It's like he knew what was going on inside it…..
(credit to Morgana on MJHD.com, July 27, 2009)
In another video about the ambulance picture, Ben is telling more fairy tales.
Watch the seconds as of 1:14 - the video keeps hanging in on that blurry something and is showing the red car again (and the wall behind it - see the leaves even would have had to move 7 feet forwards to come close to the car front and become part of a mirroring thingie - photoshop... <!-- s --><!-- s -->)
[youtube:3sixzsrm]
Why would a cristal clear video have to be hanging in on a blurry somethingie for seconds?
Now thanks to international interest, someone saved the TMZ video version for us:
The tourist bus is parking in parallel to the fire truck, not close to the pylones as in the Hollywood TV movie. Please watch for the shadows, they are much longer now than in the Hollywood TV movie, watch the crack in the middle of the road and compare both films.
In the Hollywood TV movie, there's no shadow at all in sight in the middle of the road, the garbage bins and the folks at the back door are in sunshine.
In the TMZ movie, the ambulance backs out into the shadow of the trees at the right side of the street.
Coming back to the role of the red car in the "reflection" of the tinted side window.
The red Toyota Prius (Ben Evenstad's car that he reportedly had lent for joyrides to Michael) was parked right in front of the gate when the ambulance backed out, when the water ran through the house some days later (see thread on TIAI Feb 14 redirect) and when the mourning fans gathered (see video TS_comments cited - at the last two occasions: parked at Monovale).
Seems that its owner still was around that address all the time - despite the fact that the owner allegedly had passed away and was - to be honest - not a hot selling target anymore.
I mean, NPG had shot "THE" photo and Ben still was not satisfied? (Or suspicious or what?)
What do we see on that photo?
The lined-up garbage bins - and a red Toyota Prius parked in a cop protected area. Huh?
What was it looking like on June 25, 2009 in the afternoon according to life.com: http://www.life.com/image/88688298
No red Toyota Prius that day. Hidden behind the truck?
I think the car and its driver are much more interesting than the ambulance photo as such.
How come a red Toyota Prius was present in a closed area with cops presence the day after the alleged passing of Michael Jackson?
Btw, behind the Prius a dark SUV was parked (the type Michael used) and the license plate is also visible in the Hollywood TV movie.
Was the master watching and directing the takes from the outside?
Just asking.
Grace this is a great post. I've realized why I'm so focussed on the red car - if its in the hoax photo then its not random. It means something.
Can someone please answer this;
Who do you think owns the red car and what model is it?
Is anyone renting Carolwood now? and
Has anyone seen a car parked in the garage at Carolwood, is it the owners car?
So it's been determined that June 25, 2009 was 9282 days from January 27, 1984 which also happened to be 9282 days from August 29, 1958. And someone had pointed out that 9+2+8+2 = 21 or 7+7+7. Weird, right? And on Jan 27/84 there was another ambulance/stretcher photo:
There were other photos that day but this one is in the ambulance (I think).
Here's the video that US weekly somehow got a hold of shortly after Michael's "death". Michael being the one who had been in possession of the tape. If you haven't seen in, don't watch it if you get upset easily.
[youtube:3lfjkqt0]
Here's the ambulance photo clearly showing the "9"...think 999 being the inverse of 666, or turning the pyramid upside down.
And the pepsi fire...showing an upside-down pyramid over Michael's head!
Michael surrounded:
And again:
Just some strange parallels from Michael's "death" date and the exact "mid-point" of his life. And I really think Michael has been planning the hoax since then.
I don't know, maybe this is one of the flimsy theories TS was talking about. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> <!-- s --><!-- s -->
I hope it doesn't appear insensitive because that's not my intent and I know the pepsi fire has been discussed at length but I was just thinking about it and maybe it has something to do with the ambulance photo, or other events from June 25th. Who knows, maybe it's just another coincidence that there was an ambulance photo taken on both of those days...
TS_comments wrote:
I’m going to make one more introductory comment here, before taking a deep dive into the evidences regarding the ambulance photo, and the hows of the hoax. In this process, I don’t want anyone to accept or reject what I present merely because of who presents it; as I have always said, go by the evidence itself—regardless of who presents it.
To put it another way: I may challenge true theories, and/or I may lend support to false theories. In fact, I will usually have at least two different theories for each step. And as we follow the theories: we may find one hitting a dead end, while another flows nicely with no serious difficulties.
Most importantly, I want to inspire critical analysis; even more important than the subject itself, is how you approach it. Unfortunately, many hoax investigators have gone down the road of supporting the hoax with very flimsy evidence at best, and often just plain incorrect evidence. This type of approach does not help anyone; it only makes unbelievers ridicule us as crazy (well, maybe we are <!-- s --><!-- s --> ). But seriously, we want to go by solid evidence that will challenge unbelievers, and perhaps even hold up in a court of law.
Critical investigation means to approach the subject as if you were trying to DISPROVE the hoax—not trying to come up with anything and everything imaginable to support the hoax (or supposedly support it). And if you TRY to disprove something, but can’t find any reasonable way around it, then you PROBABLY have some good solid evidence. Also, if you have at least two or more strong evidences pointing to the same conclusion, then that is most likely the truth. But it’s not a good idea to base any conclusion on only one piece of evidence, even if it seems to be a fairly strong point.
Yea I am crazy so it is ok. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> I wonder which False theory you lent support to and the mice followed the cheese, lol <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> That includes the leaf theory.
Where did this pic come from originally? This is a smoke screen pic. It is used to distract people from what may have really occured. This pic is an illusion to make you think that the yellow shirt guy took the pic.
I posted the original pic that Entertainment Tonight put online and it is a clear pic. That's the starting point. The other four pics posted above have been altered and effects were added to each pic in different degrees of alteration. Maybe those pics are not the original and they were taken at wider shots to be altered later. Another smoke screen. I tried to be the non-believer and post evidence that would be in favor of this being a real event. It seems I was on that boat alone. I read that most have still continued to try to find evidence to support the pic being fake and not the other way around.
My honest evaluation is that the original pic was done with the wax dummy and EMT's and it was staged (including faking a real intubation tube on the dummy) and it was taken before 6/25/2009. Then the scene is set to make it look as though the pic was taken on the day of death. Everything is an illusion.
[youtube:1e7y6jur]
Uh is it just me or is the ambulance attendant to the left doing a real funky thing with his hand. Maybe I'm just seeing wrong.
I thought I was seeing his pot belly facing towards the right of the picture which would have him facing toward the other attendent. Yet his elbow is faced the same way. <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> Look at the position of his hand on MJ and where his elbow is. Either this guy is double jointed or what I think is his belly is a hump in his back or his butt? <!-- s --><!-- s -->
Just wondering if the leaf pattern was there just to draw our attention to the backwards arm?
*edit* now that I look at it I'm not sure... maybe he's sitting and hunched over which would make sense because the badge appears to be on the left arm on both of them... so never mind. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
Uh is it just me or is the ambulance attendant to the left doing a real funky thing with his hand. Maybe I'm just seeing wrong.
I thought I was seeing his pot belly facing towards the right of the picture which would have him facing toward the other attendent. Yet his elbow is faced the same way. <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> Look at the position of his hand on MJ and where his elbow is. Either this guy is double jointed or what I think is his belly is a hump in his back or his butt? <!-- s --><!-- s -->
Just wondering if the leaf pattern was there just to draw our attention to the backwards arm?
*edit* now that I look at it I'm not sure... maybe he's sitting and hunched over which would make sense because the badge appears to be on the left arm on both of them... so never mind. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
I thought about that but I did try that position myself and it's probable. My assumption is that he's trying to reach for something else while compressing the chest. Of course...to make the scene more authentic. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
...Where did this pic come from originally? This is a smoke screen pic. It is used to distract people from what may have really occured. This pic is an illusion to make you think that the yellow shirt guy took the pic.
I posted the original pic that Entertainment Tonight put online and it is a clear pic. That's the starting point. The other four pics posted above have been altered and effects were added to each pic in different degrees of alteration. Maybe those pics are not the original and they were taken at wider shots to be altered later. Another smoke screen. I tried to be the non-believer and post evidence that would be in favor of this being a real event. It seems I was on that boat alone. I read that most have still continued to try to find evidence to support the pic being fake and not the other way around.
My honest evaluation is that the original pic was done with the wax dummy and EMT's and it was staged (including faking a real intubation tube on the dummy) and it was taken before 6/25/2009. Then the scene is set to make it look as though the pic was taken on the day of death. Everything is an illusion.
I was just about to post something similar, but checked to see if anyone had said it first. You kinda sorta did. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> Yes the event of MJ's death and ambulance ride was staged, but I was going to suggest that MJ ALWAYSrehearses his short films, so why would he not rehearse this segment of his Greatest Show on Earth Movie? I believe there were two stagings. The event and the photograph itself.
We have all been going with the idea that someone hurriedly tried to capture the money shot from a vehicle in motion.
The BEST time to get the shot(s) MJ wanted, would be during the frame by frame, stop motion direction of the DRY RUN. Doing it this way, gives the DIRECTOR time <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> to TAKE the time to get everything in the shot he wants:
Every possible version of every possible purposeful reflection, can all be taken in the same light and this visionary would be able to know then, whether or not the only way to get something in THAT shot is to edit it in, later. Of course, "later" STILL being PRIOR to the event, in order to have it ready. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
We saw one picture and a video ONLY all these months, until TS showed us four stills.
I bet there were 100s <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> of pictures taken, to be able to work with, just of the scene, not to mention miscellaneous leaf silhouettes to be added later!
Someone <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> spent too much time on this photo (creating it). This is the reason WE need to to take the time to investigate it! It is not just a captured moment in time. There is some subtext there...
One other thing: even with tinted glass, all the ambulances I have seen have interior lighting, the likes of a carnival concession stand. It is stark bright white light; autopsy table light; "the better to see you with" kind of light ( <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> to quote a famous wolf, stalking a famous little girl in a red riding hood...).
No flash needed; through basic tinted glass, it would probably have been about as light as the picture we saw first. I always thought the photo was fake for this reason only---WAY too badly lighted to be a real "emergency in progress" vehicle. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
I am reading everything and the more I read the less I know.
Someone I think had a point saying that we can't get such a wide image of the inside of the ambulance from so near. I don't know for sure, I think it depends of the type of camera.
For me the reflection of the red car is some sort of proof that there was an original picture taken.
If there was a dummy - that implies the paramedics are in the hoax and this can't be imo.
it makes me wonder if maybe the lawyers in Murray's trial could do with doing similar: prosecution - prove he's actually DEAD before accusing Murray of anything, defence - prove he's NOT!
They are not going to discuss whether or not MJ is dead because the reason why they are meeting in court is the prerequisite assumption is that he is dead (X).
It's like a sentence thrown out into the air:
"This (X) happened and you, accused, have a share why it happened or have even been causing this with 100% responsibility."
They will be discussing if the contribution of the individual was sufficient to cause the consequence (X).
It is like
"The vase was found broken in the living room and somebody blamed YOU, accused, to have done this since you have been present in the room all the time."
It is not questioning whether the vase was broken at all or who else could have done it or whether the accuser was lying.
These questions would have had to be answered before calling the case to court.
As (X) is an accepted steady precondition factor, court discussions will not dance around (X) but around how (X) did happen.
The surprise would be that
- the picture of the broken vase was giving somebody else's vase,
- the picture was faked thus false evidence,
- the police sur scène was not properly investigating and documenting,
- the individual in the living room was not alone,
- it was the cat, an earthquake or the wind who broke the vase
- (X) did not happen, the vase was not broken (the vase might be reappearing in court to participate in a family photo with the stuffed toys and all friends - I hope for a HUGE party, Michael...).
In Michael's case I would assume the vase had an impersonator, collapsed either due to a supersoaker or cream cake fight, Bubbles was coming back, the Barnum circus was walking through his living room and one of the elephants happened to wag its tail or that the vase was in fact a white rabbit illusion in a smokescreen. <!-- s --><!-- s -->
I hope we will have a lot of fun once court time starts.
Hopefully we will all be able to watch the show live (or at least recorded) in the web.
And dont't forget to read through the trial documents beforehand to understand all the pricks and twists. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
We saw one picture and a video ONLY all these months, until TS showed us four stills.
Nope, not true. All the variants were available in the web (since they were published by different tabloids) and even discussed in detail in several forums. Check out the archives. It's all there in depth and width. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Why is Michael on red stretcher, i think it's not common.
When a patient laying in a ambulance the're always on that white bed (underneath the red stretcher in the still photo).
I agree with some of you i think it was a setting picture, because the interior of the ambulance doesn;t match the ambulance interior of the video( interior of the 71 ambulance).
for excample: the paramedics seat is on the wrong side if you compare, and is'nt common for a paramedic to sit on the left side of the patient?
It's not possible to mirror the interior when you don't get the whole image( one side picture).
i think the patient is always laying in the ambulance with his head towards the driver the paramdics who is on front of the head of the patient is sitting with his back towards the driver.
Yes, a bit more of the leaf pattern goes behind the paramedic’s arm in Ambulance2; but this is a very slight difference, compared to how far the red car has moved. And if the leaf pattern is inside the ambulance (not a reflection): then this slight difference can easily occur from a slight movement in the paramedic’s arm, and/or a slightly different camera position. But if the leaf pattern were part of the background image, then there is no explanation for why it does not move to the right just as much as the red car moves to the right.
I think it's quite clear the leaf pattern is not a reflection, but I'm not sure it is not part of the background because yes indeed it doesn't move that much to the right like the red car but this can be because the red car is outside the ambulance, in the front of it, but the leaf pattern is inside, in the back, in a closer plan.....it's really difficult to figure out how much an object is moving to the left or to the right in a moving car according to the distance between that object and the point where the picture is taken from, I mean the camera.
I think the closer an object is to the camera the more it moves to the right than the objects that are far away <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> I'm not sure of it, but in this case the leaf pattern, if it is part of the background, it's closer to the camera than the red car, so it should change its position more than the red car. Instead, it is changing its position less than the red car.
So maybe yes, the leaf pattern is not part of the backgound, but this means it was inserted in the original picture <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ?
Because if it is not a reflection and not in the background, what else can it be but photoshoped into the original pic?
So you're saying the 911 wasn't real and those men in the pic are actors? That means the ambulance is also fake? Or the ambulance is real and it was rented by MJ team for his fake death movie?
Sorry but I really don't know what to think.
But at least the red car was there and was real right?
All I can say is ...I've been reading this entire thread the past few days and feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall. I don't use Photoshop so I have no idea what is possible with that software. I am not a professional photographer so have no idea what is possible with tinted windows, angles, flashes, lenses, depth of field etc etc...all I know is that I see weird f'n shite in this ambo photo....faces, letters, images of god knows what......always have always will.....
Having had my above rant <!-- s --><!-- s --> ........perhaps it was photographed way way earlier than 25/06/2009 ...many times over to get it correct ....then images layered/photoshopped (or whatever) into it to "create" what the media was fed and what was blared all over the world. Maybe the pics of what is shown on 25/06/2009 outside Carolwood with the red shirt guy/yellow shirt guy/red car etc etc was all just a set up to make it look like this "dying" pic of Mj was taken on that day.
Why do I feel like I'm back in 2009...about August sometime?
Looking at the Ambulance1 again......if the photo was taken from so close to the window, how could it capture such a clear reflection of the red car, the wall, the ground, the trees <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Because I think the closer the camera gets to the window the less reflection of the outside it catches.
It's like when you look at an window ....when you are not very close you see reflection but when you come near it you see inside and less to none reflections <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Comments
Finally! Someone dares to ask the ultimate question: AND SO?
What's the purpose of this thread in the first place? Honestly, and with no offense to anyone. Why is it important to debunk the picture? Maybe someone can enlighten us who don't understand it?
As for the picture: I can't see any leaves at all. One of the shots it looks like a reversed reflection of Michael's face lying in the ambulance. On another one it looks like a random patch - perhaps just a dirty window. I don't think there is a way of finding out unless somebody here actually KNOWS. We may be guessing for days and weeks until maybe finally someone hits the head on the nail - but not because it is possible to figure it out but because statistically taken, after some time someone will simply happen to be right.
Back to the picture: has anyone ever thought about the size of the windows of the ambulance and the width and angle of the photograph? I just think it's impossible to get such a wide shot through such a small window if you stick the camera right onto the window to avoid reflection and get a focused picture then I dont see how you could take such a wide shot. Unless, of course...here we go again..it has all been staged, well prepared, camera ready with the right lense and setting. That would probably explain Ben's slip up about that day and the other days and th..the...yeah.
Also what bothers me in terms of distance/angles etc. is the paramedic sitting so near the doors. If you stick the camera onto the window they way it must have been done..then how do you get the paramedic where he is, nicely in the shot, if at the same time the focus is on MJ in the middle of the picture, and clearly this guy cant be sitting outside the ambulance which is exactly how it looks like. Something isnt right here.
I don't think that proving this picture fake (which we have known sort of since long ago and what has been openly mentioned in the media) and convincing a bunch of non-believers is the point here. There are better ways to prove MJ isnt dead.
So either there's a hidden agenda - that has nothing to do with the actual pic - or I am waiting for something to happen.
Looking at the wider aspect, with TS implying we should be building actual proof that MJ is NOT dead, it makes me wonder if maybe the lawyers in Murray's trial could do with doing similar: prosecution - prove he's actually DEAD before accusing Murray of anything, defence - prove he's NOT!
Proving a negative fact is almost impossible. There are easy ways to prove MJ is alive - e.g. the CCTV tapes that were supposed to be lost <!-- s:-D -->:-D<!-- s:-D -->
Someone was saying MJ might be in the red car, directing by phone. But then there was the suggestion that he was behind the gates as the slightly bent over ponytailed figure in blue, directing there.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."The truth usually lies hidden somewhere in the details.
Yes I agree. I think this is a much needed skill that we will be utilizing beyond the hoax, beyond anything to do with MJ, and that we will be using to scrutinize what the media feeds us as reality.
Put on your student caps people and learn to find the truth within your world!
Grace this is a great post. I've realized why I'm so focussed on the red car - if its in the hoax photo then its not random. It means something.
Who do you think owns the red car and what model is it?
Is anyone renting Carolwood now? and
Has anyone seen a car parked in the garage at Carolwood, is it the owners car?
There were other photos that day but this one is in the ambulance (I think).
Here's the video that US weekly somehow got a hold of shortly after Michael's "death". Michael being the one who had been in possession of the tape. If you haven't seen in, don't watch it if you get upset easily.
[youtube:3lfjkqt0]
Here's the ambulance photo clearly showing the "9"...think 999 being the inverse of 666, or turning the pyramid upside down.
And the pepsi fire...showing an upside-down pyramid over Michael's head!
Michael surrounded:
And again:
Just some strange parallels from Michael's "death" date and the exact "mid-point" of his life. And I really think Michael has been planning the hoax since then.
I don't know, maybe this is one of the flimsy theories TS was talking about. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> <!-- s
I hope it doesn't appear insensitive because that's not my intent and I know the pepsi fire has been discussed at length but I was just thinking about it and maybe it has something to do with the ambulance photo, or other events from June 25th. Who knows, maybe it's just another coincidence that there was an ambulance photo taken on both of those days...
Just throwing that out there!
<!-- m -->http://www.photoshopessentials.com/phot ... ens-flare/<!-- m -->
Where did this pic come from originally? This is a smoke screen pic. It is used to distract people from what may have really occured. This pic is an illusion to make you think that the yellow shirt guy took the pic.
I posted the original pic that Entertainment Tonight put online and it is a clear pic. That's the starting point. The other four pics posted above have been altered and effects were added to each pic in different degrees of alteration. Maybe those pics are not the original and they were taken at wider shots to be altered later. Another smoke screen. I tried to be the non-believer and post evidence that would be in favor of this being a real event. It seems I was on that boat alone. I read that most have still continued to try to find evidence to support the pic being fake and not the other way around.
My honest evaluation is that the original pic was done with the wax dummy and EMT's and it was staged (including faking a real intubation tube on the dummy) and it was taken before 6/25/2009. Then the scene is set to make it look as though the pic was taken on the day of death. Everything is an illusion.
[youtube:1e7y6jur]
I thought I was seeing his pot belly facing towards the right of the picture which would have him facing toward the other attendent. Yet his elbow is faced the same way. <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> Look at the position of his hand on MJ and where his elbow is. Either this guy is double jointed or what I think is his belly is a hump in his back or his butt? <!-- s
Just wondering if the leaf pattern was there just to draw our attention to the backwards arm?
*edit* now that I look at it I'm not sure... maybe he's sitting and hunched over which would make sense because the badge appears to be on the left arm on both of them... so never mind. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
I thought about that but I did try that position myself and it's probable. My assumption is that he's trying to reach for something else while compressing the chest. Of course...to make the scene more authentic. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
I was just about to post something similar, but checked to see if anyone had said it first. You kinda sorta did. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> Yes the event of MJ's death and ambulance ride was staged, but I was going to suggest that MJ ALWAYS rehearses his short films, so why would he not rehearse this segment of his Greatest Show on Earth Movie? I believe there were two stagings. The event and the photograph itself.
We have all been going with the idea that someone hurriedly tried to capture the money shot from a vehicle in motion.
The BEST time to get the shot(s) MJ wanted, would be during the frame by frame, stop motion direction of the DRY RUN. Doing it this way, gives the DIRECTOR time <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> to TAKE the time to get everything in the shot he wants:
Every possible version of every possible purposeful reflection, can all be taken in the same light and this visionary would be able to know then, whether or not the only way to get something in THAT shot is to edit it in, later. Of course, "later" STILL being PRIOR to the event, in order to have it ready. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
We saw one picture and a video ONLY all these months, until TS showed us four stills.
I bet there were 100s <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> of pictures taken, to be able to work with, just of the scene, not to mention miscellaneous leaf silhouettes to be added later!
Someone <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> spent too much time on this photo (creating it). This is the reason WE need to to take the time to investigate it! It is not just a captured moment in time. There is some subtext there...
One other thing: even with tinted glass, all the ambulances I have seen have interior lighting, the likes of a carnival concession stand. It is stark bright white light; autopsy table light; "the better to see you with" kind of light ( <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> to quote a famous wolf, stalking a famous little girl in a red riding hood...).
No flash needed; through basic tinted glass, it would probably have been about as light as the picture we saw first. I always thought the photo was fake for this reason only---WAY too badly lighted to be a real "emergency in progress" vehicle. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
Someone I think had a point saying that we can't get such a wide image of the inside of the ambulance from so near. I don't know for sure, I think it depends of the type of camera.
For me the reflection of the red car is some sort of proof that there was an original picture taken.
If there was a dummy - that implies the paramedics are in the hoax and this can't be imo.
It's like a sentence thrown out into the air:
"This (X) happened and you, accused, have a share why it happened or have even been causing this with 100% responsibility."
They will be discussing if the contribution of the individual was sufficient to cause the consequence (X).
It is like
"The vase was found broken in the living room and somebody blamed YOU, accused, to have done this since you have been present in the room all the time."
It is not questioning whether the vase was broken at all or who else could have done it or whether the accuser was lying.
These questions would have had to be answered before calling the case to court.
As (X) is an accepted steady precondition factor, court discussions will not dance around (X) but around how (X) did happen.
The surprise would be that
- the picture of the broken vase was giving somebody else's vase,
- the picture was faked thus false evidence,
- the police sur scène was not properly investigating and documenting,
- the individual in the living room was not alone,
- it was the cat, an earthquake or the wind who broke the vase
- (X) did not happen, the vase was not broken (the vase might be reappearing in court to participate in a family photo with the stuffed toys and all friends - I hope for a HUGE party, Michael...).
In Michael's case I would assume the vase had an impersonator, collapsed either due to a supersoaker or cream cake fight, Bubbles was coming back, the Barnum circus was walking through his living room and one of the elephants happened to wag its tail or that the vase was in fact a white rabbit illusion in a smokescreen. <!-- s
I hope we will have a lot of fun once court time starts.
Hopefully we will all be able to watch the show live (or at least recorded) in the web.
And dont't forget to read through the trial documents beforehand to understand all the pricks and twists. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Nope, not true. All the variants were available in the web (since they were published by different tabloids) and even discussed in detail in several forums. Check out the archives. It's all there in depth and width. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
We are just returning to the basic elements.
When a patient laying in a ambulance the're always on that white bed (underneath the red stretcher in the still photo).
I agree with some of you i think it was a setting picture, because the interior of the ambulance doesn;t match the ambulance interior of the video( interior of the 71 ambulance).
for excample: the paramedics seat is on the wrong side if you compare, and is'nt common for a paramedic to sit on the left side of the patient?
It's not possible to mirror the interior when you don't get the whole image( one side picture).
i think the patient is always laying in the ambulance with his head towards the driver the paramdics who is on front of the head of the patient is sitting with his back towards the driver.
I think it's quite clear the leaf pattern is not a reflection, but I'm not sure it is not part of the background because yes indeed it doesn't move that much to the right like the red car but this can be because the red car is outside the ambulance, in the front of it, but the leaf pattern is inside, in the back, in a closer plan.....it's really difficult to figure out how much an object is moving to the left or to the right in a moving car according to the distance between that object and the point where the picture is taken from, I mean the camera.
I think the closer an object is to the camera the more it moves to the right than the objects that are far away <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> I'm not sure of it, but in this case the leaf pattern, if it is part of the background, it's closer to the camera than the red car, so it should change its position more than the red car. Instead, it is changing its position less than the red car.
So maybe yes, the leaf pattern is not part of the backgound, but this means it was inserted in the original picture <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> ?
Because if it is not a reflection and not in the background, what else can it be but photoshoped into the original pic?
To challenge your statement, then you must accept that the 911 call was real. Real Emts come from real 911 calls.
Sorry but I really don't know what to think.
But at least the red car was there and was real right?
Having had my above rant <!-- s
Why do I feel like I'm back in 2009...about August sometime?
Because I think the closer the camera gets to the window the less reflection of the outside it catches.
It's like when you look at an window ....when you are not very close you see reflection but when you come near it you see inside and less to none reflections <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->