| Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The eXif Files | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 26 2010, 07:49 PM (1,611 Views) | |
| MAC | Aug 26 2010, 07:49 PM Post #1 |
|
What is to made of all this then? From the CNN Memorial archive (apparently many of them removed now). Do we finally have a smoking gun here.. or too good to be true? Could the perps have been so stupid as to overlook this? eg,.. Mark Bingham, ATTACK AIRLINES VICTIMS, taking a picture day/last edit date August 30th 2001 ? All written in the same file.   More here from Jayhan; Lewin Example More On Bingham Now, you don't have to agree with Phil's conclusions at this point.. but this is really something isn't it? Or is this old news and it's all been dismissed? MAC |
 |
 
|
| shure | Aug 26 2010, 08:13 PM Post #2 |
Administrator
|
BS from Jayhan is not a smoking gun. |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 26 2010, 09:39 PM Post #3 |
|
What an unexpected knee-jerk reaction  .. dismissed and dumped in the disinfo pile... strewth  I'd appreciate it if somebody could explain why the exif data thing is BS? That's not meant sarcastically.. i guess you've all looked into it already and figured out it's nothing? Does seem too good to be true after all. Is there another thread about the exif stuff i can read and become enlightened? Thanks fellas! Peace. MAC |
|
|
|
| broken sticks | Aug 26 2010, 10:57 PM Post #4 |
|
don't know MAC. where's the exif data source (the photo) from exactly? |
|
|
|
| The Authenticator | Aug 27 2010, 04:48 AM Post #5 |
|
First (1), there is no EXIF data in the photos (linked) posted above. Second (2), The photos are not the originals. Third (3), What you are looking at is IPTC info, in which the handlers (caption writer) from the AP inserted the info that you are reading. Four (4), IPTC information is different from EXIF information.
It is not BS. If anyone tells you otherwise, then considerer them BS. |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 10:10 AM Post #6 |
|
Broken Sticks I first caught onto the Exif/IPTC data anomaly listening to Jayhan and McWilliams on Fetzer Part2; Fetzer re Exif/IPTC Data I've done an edited version of the audio with only the exif/IPTC stuff.. can upload it somewhere? The Daniel Lewin photo i've copied from the link via LetsRoll; Lewin http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/people/1359.html The Bingham photo also via LetsRoll link to here; Bingham http://web.archive.org/web/20020111141251/http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/people/1607.html If you go direct to the CNN Memorial, as i've just done, you'll notice Bingham's photo has indeed been removed; CNN Memorial Page http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/lists/by-name/page8.html The screenshot i used in my first post is my own after i opened Bingham's photo using Exif Reader, which i d/l from here; Exif Reader http://www.takenet.or.jp/~ryuuji/minisoft/exifread/english/download.html I've just grabbed a screen cap of Lewin's photo data from the photo i d/l from the the above Lewin link;  I don't know if it was Jayhan who found this out originally, will have to check. Hope this helps as a start. MAC |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 10:28 AM Post #7 |
|
The Authenticator Thanks for those corrections. 1. Yes, the exif data is missing. I don't think it's suspicious, i've tried opening other 'non-9/11' related photos and the exif doesn't open in those either. 2. The above screenshots are mine. The original from the CNN for Bingham and others are now missing. I downloaded the photos from the links. 3. Yes, the IPTC data. But it's the 'Exif' Reader which opens that data, so i referred to it as that for convenience. I'm no expert on metadata anyway. 4. Ok. But i guess the IPTC data is the relevant part it seems (it contains the 'Taking a picture day' info with the photo title). Might the Exif data hold something as interesting? No, i don't think it's BS at this point, it really seems like something. How might this be debunked i wonder? Peace. MAC |
|
|
|
| shure | Aug 27 2010, 10:39 AM Post #8 |
|
Administrator
|
The exif data and IPTC data on Mark Bingham's picture says May 1 1776. Exif Reader:  Zoner Photo Studio: exif data:  IPTC data:  |
|
|
|
| shure | Aug 27 2010, 11:06 AM Post #9 |
|
Administrator
|
 Using "Exif Reader" for Lewin's photo above. The IPTC data shows that the picture was taken today!  |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 11:27 AM Post #10 |
|
Jeff 1776.. that's good. Where did you get that copy from? What Reader is that? I'd like to open the photo i have using that too, just to check for myself. It looks like something from Shack.. however, Shack would write VICSIM wouldn't he? Not VICISM as written in those screenshots of both the exif data and the IPTC data? I don't think Shack is dyslexic. Strange Ah.. 'author' Jeff.. silly me  Did you download form the CNN archive link and open in Exif Reader.. you should see the same data as i posted in my first post. Is your problem with this 'Phil Jayhan'? Look.. 1. There's the exif/IPTC data 2. There's the exif/IPTC data and Jayhan's take on it. Can't you just focus on number 1, Jeff? Why would you not want to look into this? If it really goes somewhere, that's fantastic for '9/11 truth', isn't it? If it goes nowhere.. then so what? We'll keep going, right? I'm happy to see a serious debunk. Thanks pal. MAC |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 11:28 AM Post #11 |
|
Ok.. 'Zoner Photo Studio' |
|
|
|
| shure | Aug 27 2010, 11:52 AM Post #12 |
|
Administrator
|
I changed the data with Zoner Pro then uploaded the photos to show just how easy it is to manipulate the data. I remember discussing this photo data issue years ago and it went nowhere becasue the exif or iptc data really isn't proof of anything and certainly isn't a smoking gun. To me this is just another one of Jayhan's wild goose chases. Phil Jayhan is the self proclaimed king of the "pod" people and likes to credit himself with pointing out all the problems with UA flight 175 (which there are none). He will tell you about his smoking gun proof that there were no jumpers on 9/11 and what we were actually seeing are "robotic dummys" being shot out of the WTC to look like people were jumping. Phil is now rehashing this picture data nonsense and mixing it in with Shack's "no victims on 9/11 becasue they were all ficticious "VICSIM's". They even used Ari Fleischer and Mike Rivero's pics to concoct the fake victims list. Mac, please knock yourself out with all the "information" Phil Jayhan puts out and see where it leads you. A good conpsiracy theory is always more interesting than the truth! |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 11:54 AM Post #13 |
|
WTF? I'll assume you're not just f*** about here? Something is weird. Are we using the same Exif Reader? We seem to be. I've downloaded the Lewin photo again from the link and opened in ER (which anybody else can do and verify for themselves) and once again get the same info re Taking a picture day 11-09-2001;  I don't know what's going here? Any takers? Can somebody download the photos from the same links and see what you get once you open it in Exif Reader.. thanks. MAC |
|
|
|
| MAC | Aug 27 2010, 12:25 PM Post #14 |
|
Ok, I'm relieved.. thought you were trying to make me look bad, or something. "I remember discussing this photo data issue years ago and it went nowhere becasue the exif or iptc data really isn't proof of anything and certainly isn't a smoking gun." Then why couldn't you just say so? I hate these head games.. why do that? So Jayhan was going on about this some time ago? Can you remember when? I'd like to check that out. Yea, i know about Jayhan's 'robot dummies' and all this other stuff.. Fleischer/Rivero, etc.. and his support for Shack's crap. But i try to look at things separately first, regardless of the messenger, just in case there's something to it. That's a fair approach is it not? So anyway, the Exif data can be manipulated.. Ok. Getting somewhere. However.. Bingham's photo is still missing from the CNN Memorial page... And the copy i downloaded is from the CNN site isn't it? The CNN logo is in the URL. How did Jayhan manipulate that one? I don't get it. Yours is a copy, i can see that. Jeff.. listen up mate.. you don't know me, i understand that, we've never really talked on this forum, but for the record, i'm not a bullshitter, i'm genuine. I have no desire to "knock myself out" with anybody's info. I'm not interested in "good conspiracy theories" for the sake of them either. In fact i hate them. They're annoying. But hey.. i don't believe the 9/11 official story.. i wish i could. I was interested in the Exif/IPTC data thing.. not in Phil Jayhan's general theories. Peace. MAC |
|
|
|
| shure | Aug 27 2010, 12:55 PM Post #15 |
|
Administrator
|
I wasn't playing head games, I was trying to show how easily the data can be manipulated and I think I proved my point. It wasn't Phil who was going on about this some time ago, I remember an email exchange about this, with, I think, Wefairy, Nico and some others several years ago. Phil just picked up on it again and is spamming it as new smoking gun evidence. I never said Jayhan manipulated anything, I just said it was easy to do. It could have been manipulated anywhere down the line, including having the wrong information (date, time, etc...) set on the digital camera when the photo was taken. Good to hear  I agree Ok, well I think we can conclude that the Exif/IPTC data thing is not a smoking gun because there are many reasons for it besides a 9/11 conspiracy! |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Drama Club · Next Topic » |
12:39 PM Jul 13