1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    This photo of the second explosion appears to show someone on the roof of a building, this has been pointed to as something suspicious:



    However, the building is 755 Boylston, a luxury apartment building, and that area is the common roof deck shared by the apartments:



    Hence it's entirely expected that someone would be up on the roof, watching the Marathon. Since this is the second explosion, it's likely they were walking towards the front to see what the noise was, and then the second bomb went off.
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 9
  2. Drew

    Drew Active Member

    Nicely and thoroughly debunked, Mick.

    From an InfoWars article suggesting that the presence of a man on the roof supports the idea that authorities "must have known" about the impending attack.

    As the Daily Mail reports, “A picture posted on Twitter shows an individual walking on the roof directly overlooking one of the blasts at the Boston Marathon.”

    The fact that this individual is in such close proximity to the blast clearly suggests that he is either one of the perpetrators behind the attack or a police officer detailed with carrying out surveillance duties as part of the bomb drill. [Emphasis added] ​
    It's a textbook deployment of the classic CT rhetorical tactic — fallacy of false choice. Present an explicit either/or pair of assertions while leaving dozens of more likely explanations unsaid.

    There's no reason to assume this is anything other than a spectator. Perhaps to people used to suburban or rural environments, the presence of a man on a rooftop may seem strange. This is not the case in urbanized areas, especially at big public events. It's not even unlikely here that the man could be police. In NYC at similar events, I'd expect to see NYPD on rooftops for crowd surveillance.

    Aside: Did anyone catch the InfoWars dude at the Deval Patrick conference last night? (Video here). Did any one else enjoy how Patrick shut him down with a simple "No. Next question" as much as I did?
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    Thank you. People I know straight away say he is watching the bomb. I said we live in a three-d world not a two-d picture. Let's look closely at what the picture is. Warren Stewart Perth west aust
  4. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator

    I don't understand this?
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Unregistered is thanking me for debunking the photo. He says he knows people who immediately claimed that it was a man watching the bomb going off. He says he told them that you can't infer that from the (2D) photo, as the bomb is down the street (it's a 3D world), and the explosion would not even be visible from that vantage point (you can draw a line-of-sight in 2D from the man to the explosion, but if you draw it in 3D then the view is blocked by the building). He advises people to study the photo more carefully. Finally he signs off with his name and location. :)
    • Like Like x 2
  6. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator

    Cheers, it was too cunning to be understood.
  7. Warren Perth

    Warren Perth New Member

    Sorry about the first reply. I was in a rush. What Mick writes is what I should have witten. People see a photo and don't look closely at the different perspectives. They look at a video and are told what to look for. That's all they see. There will be arguments and discussions about this event and even CTs about everything. I look at all and listen to all. Make my own mind up. Warren Perth
  8. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 16, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1