God, new and improved

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Jefferson, Sep 28, 2001.

  1. Jefferson

    Jefferson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. Ed

    Ed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. preacher

    preacher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,784
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] Sad but true, thats what the world wants, & unfortunatly most of the churches too it seems. ;)
     
  4. Barnabas H.

    Barnabas H.
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Oldtimer</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2000
    Messages:
    6,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey preacher, what are those rolling and jumping smilies before your solemn statement, "Sad but true......?" Sorry friend, but if you combine the two concepts they become oxymoron in nature. :(

    Now, the link was very interesting. Goes very well with our modern concept of Contemporary Christians, doesn't it? ;)
     
  5. preacher

    preacher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,784
    Likes Received:
    0
    I said those little smilies would get me in trouble! The web page itself, it's design & layout, & some of the remarks, were funny to me. It is a sad situation & I'm sorry you misunderstood my intentions. Please don't tell me I'm not allowed a warped sense of humor at times too! :D ;)
     
  6. Barnabas H.

    Barnabas H.
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Oldtimer</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2000
    Messages:
    6,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    well, we'll forgive you this time - but don't let it happen again! :D
     
  7. preacher

    preacher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Messages:
    1,784
    Likes Received:
    0
    Y..Ye...Yes..Si..Si..Sir!!! [​IMG] [​IMG] Oh! by the way, which am I, an
    OX or a MORON ? [​IMG]

    [ September 28, 2001: Message edited by: preacher ]
     
  8. Barnabas H.

    Barnabas H.
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Oldtimer</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2000
    Messages:
    6,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did you say an ox or a mormon? I figured you were a Baptist. Am I wrong? ;)
     
  9. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    Folks, be not deceived.

    Jefferson is a staunch support of Bob Enyart and ShadowGov. He runs (or has something to do with running) the internet radio station that is affiliated with both.

    I encourage you to visit the Theology Online forums, and check them out for yourselves.

    Personally, I think it's somewhat deceitful of Jefferson to simply come to this board, knowing full well that he doesn't profess to be a baptist, knowing full well that he's not here to debate or discuss but to advertise the website that he has something to do with....

    But don't take my word for it. Check him out for yourselves. And if I'm wrong, show me so that I may apologize.
     
  10. Jefferson

    Jefferson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Don:
    Folks, be not deceived.

    Jefferson is a staunch support of Bob Enyart and ShadowGov.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Correct.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>He runs (or has something to do with running) the internet radio station that is affiliated with both.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Incorrect

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I encourage you to visit the Theology Online forums, and check them out for yourselves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    So do I. A fun time will be had by all.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Personally, I think it's somewhat deceitful of Jefferson to simply come to this board, knowing full well that he doesn't profess to be a baptist,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Incorrect. I attend Victory Baptist Church of Anderson, Indiana.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>knowing full well that he's not here to debate or discuss but to advertise the website that he has something to do with....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I'm here to do both.
     
  11. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    My apologies; I've seen you advertise the KGOV internet radio station before, and thought I read once or twice that you have a show on it, or assist with a show on that station.

    I also had you pegged for a non-denominationalist; my apologies there as well.

    As for "debate and discussion"; well, you have yet to prove that one...the only things I've seen you post so far are that shtoopid photo (shame on you for proliferating that garbage, by the way) and this blatant advertisement for theology online and Bob Enyart.

    Unless, of course, you're posting in the theology discussion forums, which I read a lot but don't participate in...nope, just did a search. You have only two posts that I can find on this entire message board.

    If you're *really* here to discuss and debate, Jefferson, get with it. Otherwise, admit that you had something else in mind, and move on.

    [ September 29, 2001: Message edited by: Don ]
     
  12. Jefferson

    Jefferson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Don:
    the only things I've seen you post so far are that shtoopid photo (shame on you for proliferating that garbage, by the way)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    According to http://www.truthorfiction.com that photograph was not doctored. I've found their research to be pretty reliable.

    [ September 30, 2001: Message edited by: Jefferson ]
     
  13. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    ...and speaking as a person who has doctored photos (I like to put people's heads on other people's bodies, or on animals, or other fun stuff for parties, birthdays, etc.), that photo is doctored.

    Truth or Fiction apparently doesn't have the experts to figure this out. Look at their review of the tourist on the World Trade Center; not one mention is made of the fact that the right wing of the aircraft (as the plane is facing you, as in the photo, it would be the left wing) has a distinctive "smudge" around it. In most digital editing programs, this is called the "smudge" tool; it's used to smooth the line of a super-imposed image. Blowing up the visitor's picture clearly shows this smudge. You can tell most from the fact that the smaller buildings distinctly show dark areas that are windows; in the smudge area, those are blurred and not distinct at all.

    There are several problems with the photo you posted a link to, and Truth or Fiction's web site analysis of it. First, T or F doesn't claim it to be truth or fiction; apparently, they have been unable to completely confirm it. Second, the Associated Press, who are given credit for the black and white photo, web site has absolutely nothing on this photo. Third, T or F gives a link to a CNN site filled with videos, but doesn't give you a clue as to which one to look at. Fourth, in the T or F article, it's stated that the photographer shot the AP photo right after the first tower was hit; but in the photo, both towers are billowing smoke (what's the story?). Fifth, again, speaking as someone who has had some experience with doctoring photos, and some experience with researching and debunking hoaxes, this AP photo has some interesting shadowing problems--such as, the smoke that contains the "face" is decidedly different than the rest of the smoke coming from either of the towers.

    Jefferson, in times like this, the LAST thing anyone needs is fear-mongering....
     
  14. p

    p
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Preacher, tell the truth now, those face icons you used above are charismatic faces, aren't they?

    LOL

    In His Steps,

    Alex Peterson
    II Corinthians 10:5
     
  15. p

    p
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    On the "last pic taken from the trade towers" hoax:

    According to truthorfiction, the photo is doctored.

    I, too, have a lot of experience with doctoring photos.

    It's a fake, and they even say so.

    There is extensive pixelization around the plane and the 09-11-01 insert.

    Also, the guy on the observation deck is dressed for winter. The forecast for that day was in the 80s.

    The shadows from the plane and observation deck do not coincide.

    And last, but certainly not least:

    Only one tower had an observation deck. The plane that hit that tower was a United plane.
    The plane in this picture is an American Airlines plane.

    All this (and much more) is readily available on the truthorfiction.com web site.

    In His Steps,

    Alex Peterson
    II Corinthians 10:5
     
  16. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    Actually, Alex, we're discussing the photo of the "face in the smoke."

    I firmly believe that one, too, is a fake. The Truth or Fiction web site is stating that they don't consider it truth or fiction yet, just not a hoax.
     
  17. Jefferson

    Jefferson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don:

    Last night ABC's "Inside Edition" aired a segment on "the face in the smoke." Here is a transcript:

    Anchor Babe: Is it true you can see the face of the devil in the smoke pouring out of the World Trade Center? Paul Boyd sorts through what's fact and what's internet fiction.

    Boyd: As we try to put the attack on America in perspective, we're forced to consider images and issues once unthinkable. And while confronting life after September 11th, we're now often distracted by strange stories and bizarre pictures.

    Photographer: I just started taking photographs because that's what I've always done."

    Boyd: Mark Phillips is a professional free-lance photographer who took pictures of the burning World Trade Center from his Brooklyn home. But take a look at one of his pictures. Do you see anything . . . well . . . unsetteling? Some people believe there's a demonic face in the smoke. Mark didn't realize this until he sent the picture to the associated press and someone phoned and asked . . .

    Photograper: Do you know you have the face of the devil in your photograph?

    Boyd: But is this a camera trick or a hoax?

    Photographer: I've got a long reputation in this business. There's no way I'd concoct a hoax like this.

    Boyd: And no one has evidence that this photo is a fake.

    Author: It's like when you look at clouds when you're a kid and somebody says they see a horse up in the sky and all of a sudden you see a horse up in the sky too.

    Boyd: Thomas Crauwell is an author and urban legends expert. He believes the photo is real.

    (Crauwell then explains 3 other World Trade Center stories he thinks are hoaxes)

    Boyd: Meantime, Mark Phillips continues to say that what appears in his photo is in the eye of the beholder.

    Photographer: I took a photograph. You're gonna look at it. You're gonna decide what it shows yourself.

    Inside Edition did a piece which debunked 3 out of 4 WTC stories. The only story out of the 4 they let stand as not a hoax was the photograph of what appeared to be a demonic face in the smoke.
     
  18. Don

    Don
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,539
    Likes Received:
    208
    Oh, Jefferson; that's TOO funny.

    Inside Edition is a King World show, not ABC. It's distributed to ABC, CBS, NBC, WB, and UPN, among others.

    Where'd you get the transcript from? I"d like to take a look at it.

    'Cause I sure ain't finding diddly about it on their web site....

    I've sent Inside Edition an e-mail asking them when they aired this report.
     
  19. Jefferson

    Jefferson
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don:

    I don't usually watch the show. I was channel surfing and came upon a promo of the segment on our local ABC affilliat so I assumed it was an ABC show.

    It is not Inside Edition's transcript of the show. They don't have transcripts of I.E. I know because I would have much rather preferred to copy and paste the transcript instead of copy it word for word from my VCR to this forum after I recorded the show. I couldn't find the transcript on the web so the next thing I knew I was hitting "pause" on my remote control about 50 times while transcribing it myself. What a pain. That's what I get for being a slow typer.

    [ October 01, 2001: Message edited by: Jefferson ]
     
  20. p

    p
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2001
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don wrote:
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Actually, Alex, we're discussing the photo of the "face in the smoke."

    I firmly believe that one, too, is a fake. The Truth or Fiction web site is stating that they don't consider it truth or fiction yet, just not a hoax. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I looked at that one, too. Now that one, I could not see any evidence of it being doctored.

    I could not find pixelization or smudge pixels that were incongruent to their surroundings.

    Unless someone could prove where I missed it (I am capable of being wrong. It doesn't bother me), I would contend that the photographs of "a face in the smoke" are real.

    I am not playing twilight zone music here. I am only looking at the evidence I can see.

    Usually doctoring is not all that sophisticated. In cases where it is well done, the photograph has to be tailor-made for the fudge factor (doctoring).

    If you will bring both photos up in your favorite picture manipulation tool, and look at them side by side, it becomes obvious.

    The "top of the tower" pic is obviously faked because of the numerous anomalous factors previously listed.

    On the "face in the smoke" picture, none of this is obvious at all (even when blown up to the point where a pixel is the size of my little fingernail).

    But, I could be wrong. I only await the evidence to the contrary. The evidence I have been able to observe leans toward authenticity.

    As Baptists, we have a natural tendency to discount the spectacular or sensational as it pertains to spiritual matters.

    I don't think it's necessarily a bad guideline, but we have to remember that it is only a guideline.

    Spiritually sensational things do still happen, albeit not that often.

    If they happened every day, they wouldn't be called miracles, they would be called regulars (Chuck Swindoll).

    So, without debating that, I will stay with the evidence I can poke a pointy stick at.

    So, that's 2 for, 1 against. On the opinion breakdown, it works out something like this:

    One is going on the integrity of various media he is quoting as sources with no personal technical backup. (That's great, that's 98% of the world, this isn't a knock.)

    Two are going upon direct physical, technical interpretation of the evidence.
    Both of these hold opposite views of the evidence. Now any person who goes with a technical bias has to form an opinion on said findings based upon the technical expertise of either party.

    I have been a programmer, programmer/analyst, systems/analyst (10 years), and web site designer (4 years). I don't know if that constitutes experience for some people. It may not. It does involve extensive picture manipulation and pixelization clean up.

    There may be someone out there with more experience. There always is. And no two of us egg heads ever agrees on anything.

    That's why your computer has to be rebooted 6 times a day. :eek:

    LOL!

    In His Steps,

    Alex Peterson
    II Corinthians 10:5

    [ October 01, 2001: Message edited by: petersonalexw ]
     

Share This Page

Loading...