1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Conspiracy theorists or hoaxers are suggesting that MH17 was actually the same plane as MH370, and as part of their "evidence" have noted a window that was there in a 2005 photo of the plane was actually blanked out in the crashed plane. This was quite conclusively debunked by noting that the window was blanked out after 2006, up to the present day. See:
    https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...h-17-actually-did-have-a-covered-window.4004/
    [​IMG]

    Despite this being debunked, the hoaxers are now claiming that photos of MH17 have been edited to make it look like the window is there.
    http://humansarefree.com/2014/07/busted-mh-17-was-in-fact-lost-flight-mh.html

    [​IMG]

    Now this theory makes very little sense when you know the plane actually had that window. Why would they want the plane to look like it did in 2005? Is someone simply creating photoshopped images to spread conspiracy theories?

    No. The image is actually not Photoshopped. It's a different image taken a few days later after the window cover has been removed - possibly to check what is underneath.

    The "Photoshopped" image is this one from Reuters:
    [​IMG]

    In the photo comparison above, the dark window does actually look like a photoshopped oval, however looking at the larger image from Reuters, you can boost the levels and see the edges of the window, and grass underneath:
    [​IMG]

    There are plenty of other photos of the same piece of wreckage. Some show it with the cover in place,

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    And later photos show it without.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Here it looks like the cover might have been bashed in with a sledgehammer -there seems to be the crumpled cover inside
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2014
    • Like Like x 4
  2. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    This seems to originate from 'Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist'.
    He has acknowledged the window renovation explanation, but now insists the position of the flag has been altered to line up with the edge of the window for some reason. I don't follow the argument.
    (can't find the 'bunk' tags)
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: Jul 27, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    It confusing because it seems so self-evident a matter of perspective, but to him it's an impossible anomaly only explainable by photoshop.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    they look exactly the same to me.
     
  6. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Yes, it's really unclear what he even thinks is wrong. It seems to be a common mistake/technique, using really small photo to demonstrate things.

    Here's the wreckage corrected for perspective. Unfortunately you can't correct for curvature, so it's not perfect, but you can see it's a match for 9M-MRD (MH17)

    [​IMG]
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Pierre

    Pierre New Member

    Mike.....You appear to be very protective of any questions asked regarding MH17 and in this case focus on the blanked out window forward of the Starboard RH door under the flag and yet you say nothing about the other window aft of the same door......maybe someone would like to enlighten us as to why the blank is not a blank.....maybe someone would say it was also knocked out with a sledgehammer........I am sure someone will confirm that is the possible case but there again maybe someone's 10 year old son could offer their expert opinion.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 30, 2014
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  8. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    It's Mick not Mike, and he focuses on that window because that is what the claim of fakery is based on.
    What is it about the other window that requires an answer exactly?