Photoshopped "chemtrail" images on Geoengineeringwatch.org

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Summary: several of the photographs on Geoengineeringwatch.org purporting to show "chemtrails" and "geoengineering" are actually montages, often using copyrighted photographs. This video (credit to @skephu) shows several examples:


[Note: After the video was posted, GeoengineeringWatch.org removed all the manipulated images from their web site. The links given her go to the current versions, and are followed by an archive.is link to the original]

Geoengineeringwatch.org is currently promoting a talk^ to be held in Redding, California, this month. The page includes an image of the auditorium where the talk will be held, showing contrails in the sky behind it:

A reverse image search reveals that the original image used^ contained no contrails:



Careful examination shows beyond doubt that the images are identical, except for the replacement of the background:



The manipulated image is also used in a flyer for the event^:


Here are links to the other examples shown in the video:

San Luis Reservoir, California

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-continues-to-rob-rain-from-where-it-is-most-needed/ (http://archive.is/66ayB)

Original image, by Ken James/Bloomberg, from http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/14/local/la-me-pc-president-obama-drought-fresno-20140213 (http://archive.is/VkamC)




Sundial Bridge, Redding, California

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/major-northern-california-event-will-expose-global-climate-engineering/ (http://archive.is/pm93l)

Original image, copyright Santiago Calatrava, from http://www.thegroundmag.com/santiago-calatrava-an-interview-with/ (http://archive.is/F4Q6p)




Shasta County Administration Center, Redding, California

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/shasta-county-update-on-heavy-metal-contamination-the-legal-ramifications/ (http://archive.is/1GfYO)

Original image by Joe McGarity, from http://www.fantompenguin.com/2013_10_01_archive.html (http://archive.is/C4mH2)




Jungo Flat, Nevada

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/engineered-drought-devastation-is-wreaking-havoc-on-four-continents/ (http://archive.is/kXuLY)

Original image, by Scott Haefner, from https://www.flickr.com/photos/scotthaefner/ (http://archive.is/bgOBn)



Crop-dusting plane, Palouse, Washington

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/monsantos-chemical-assault-against-the-web-of-life/ (http://archive.is/MF9cI)

Original image, by Carolina K Smith, at Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-56054167/stock-photo-agriculture-a-low-flying-yellow-biplane-crop-duster-sprays-a-farm-field-in-the-palouse-region.html (http://archive.is/NIOdp)

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Some further examples, not included in the video:

Hospital emergency sign

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/veteran-health-department-official-speaks-out-on-climate-engineering-dangers-again/

Original image, by Les Palenik, from Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-9126694/stock-photo-emergency-sign.html?tpl=77643-108110&irgwc=1




And the image used to advertise Geoengineering Watch Radio

Not quite the same category, but another modified image used without permission:

Geoengineeringwatch.org link: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/7282015-geoengineering-watch-radio/

The original image, by Bailey/AirTeamImages, shows am ordinary passenger airliner, an Emirates Boeing 777, leaving contrails. From here: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Emirates/Boeing-777-21H/0718260/L/



This image is also used in a David Dees illustration which is widely used by Geoengineering Watch and other chemtrail sites, for example: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/what-the-hell-are-they-spraying-on-us/

 

Auldy

Senior Member
Marc is suspect of foul play, censorship and abject incompetence? Well, that is correct, just its not his current targets that are guilty of such ineptitude.
 

MikeG

Senior Member
I read the comments on one of the above links:

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/major-northern-california-event-will-expose-global-climate-engineering/

I imagine the reaction to seeing the photoshopped images will run along the lines of this person posting there, who had his blood tested:

View attachment 14209


And here is the handwave:

View attachment 14210
Wow. Just wow.

So the absence of evidence in a lab result is "evidence" of foul play?

btw, Dane Wigington's comments on chelation seem contradictory. According to him, a chelation protocal [sic] is necessary to dislodge the metals? But successful chelation removes the toxic metals so they don't appear on a test?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Wow. Just wow.

So the absence of evidence in a lab result is "evidence" of foul play?

btw, Dane Wigington's comments on chelation seem contradictory. According to him, a chelation protocal [sic] is necessary to dislodge the metals? But successful chelation removes the toxic metals so they don't appear on a test?
Yes, you should have done chelation, which would make the metals appear, unless the metals didn't appear, in which case the chelation made the metals disappear.

But we're veering off topic here.
 

deirdre

Moderator
Staff member
But we're veering off topic here
plus chelation with no medical oversight can be eextremely dangerous. I'd hate for people reading this thread to think... "hhmm.. good idea .. think ill start popping this stuff for 6 months too" cause Wigington says so :(
 

Leifer

Senior Member
Back to the topic....
Someone brought up what could be viable explanation for "photoshopped" images in the header of an article....well, to a point though....

dane_photoshop_1.jpg dane_photoshop_2.jpg

I need to word this correctly.....
I think there is what could be called "a line of demarcation" as to how much (or little) a suggested image is to be inferred as "a suggestion of the topic", like a cartoon-ish graphic where elements are greatly exploited in order to add graphic/emotional/suggestive impact. Or simply placing some other unrelated image that "elicits a vague but understandably analogous notion" of the underlying text that follows. This does happen in blogs, and other news articles..... and we do not always question it.

I do not think Dane's "combined photos" cross that line enough....as they are not obvious as "graphic art", and certainly people believe the photos to be real. There-in lies the problem, and the deception.
 
Last edited:

Auldy

Senior Member
If geo-engineering is as prevalent and obvious as Dane attests, then surely there must be thousands of great photos of such that exist without the need to Photoshop chemtrails/geoengineering into existing photos?
 

deirdre

Moderator
Staff member
I do not think Dane's "combined photos" cross that line enough....as they are not obvious as "graphic art", and certainly people believe the photos to be real. There-in lies the problem.
it's certainly dancing on the edge, considering he is making false statements, and using people's health to instill fear (which the pictures do) and he is asking for donations to combat this mythological fear.
Let alone it's illegal to alter another's photos without written permission.
I consider it outright deception as there really is no reason to do it. If he wanted people to "look inside" he could use real contrail photos.
Not sure it completely qualifies as false advertising though, but it's real close.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
It may be worth also identifying the images used by Geoengineeringwatch.org which are not Photoshopped, but which are presented as having something to do with climate engineering when they don't.

For instance, the picture on this page: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-watch-global-alert-news-july-25-2015/

is taken from a New York Times video on Agent Orange. It shows aircraft flying at low altitude spraying defoliant in Vietnam:

upload_2015-8-5_11-12-42.png



The photograph used here: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/climate-engineering-contamination-and-aerotoxic-syndrome/

shows both exhaust contrails and aerodynamic contrails behind a commercial airliner. It was taken by a Flickr user, jpro747, but is no longer available on Flickr. (However the same user does have lots of photos of contrails still available to view.) The image was saved on contrailscience.com here: http://contrailscience.com/aerodynamic-and-rainbow-contrails/

 

dlandelle

Member
The original image of the auditorium in California is 450 x 297 (http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Auditorium.png)
The animated GIF has been scaled-up to 718x472 or so, and compressed (paletized) by the GIF format.

I have been working in media, and seen a number of times the contrary : a blue sky "added" to a picture ;-) Anything is photoshoped from the beginning ;-) crop, gamma, saturation, hdr, blue sky ... or clouds, depending on the message ;-)
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
The original image of the auditorium in California is 450 x 297 (http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Auditorium.png)
The animated GIF has been scaled-up to 718x472 or so, and compressed (paletized) by the GIF format.

I have been working in media, and seen a number of times the contrary : a blue sky "added" to a picture ;-) Anything is photoshoped from the beginning ;-) crop, gamma, saturation, hdr, blue sky ... or clouds, depending on the message ;-)
Yes, the GIF was resized to overlay and match the two images. That doesn't alter the basic message though.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
When shown these images, Russ Tanner (of globalskywatch.com, who frequently collaborates with geoengineeringwatch.org), initially denied that the images had been fabricated. He claimed that they were different shots taken at different times.

upload_2015-8-5_14-1-5.png



However he now says that he has spoken to Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch, who admits that the images were faked but doesn't see anything wrong with that.

upload_2015-8-5_14-0-12.png
 

skephu

Senior Member
He also wrote this:
upload_2015-8-5_15-30-1.png

(permalink)
However, the Shasta school building was not a thumbnail but an image inside an article.
Also, when he claims that drought is caused by geoengineering and then he inserts a photo of a dry area with contrails photoshopped above it, this is more than just a "thumbnail". People view it as evidence.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
It is disturbing that photoshopping is considered morally acceptable by the leaders of the Conspiracy. They feel it is perfectly justified because their mission to awaken the masses to their religion is more important than strict adherence to the truth. What a slippery slope we are seeing they are willing to slide down without a second thought.
 

Balance

Senior Member
I like that cicrcular "logic" - the (faked) sky clearly shows they were taken at different times, therefore not faked. o_O

Hats off to him for later fact-checking and puvlicly admitting his "mistake" though. Yes, damage limitation time methinks.

I must admit to how suprising a simple idea (to show the blatant photoshopping) can have such a profound effect. HIFIVE!

ETA: Perhaps the (perceived) threat to his bottom line (donated income) is a powerful ally in this battle?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
He also wrote this:
View attachment 14235
(permalink)
However, the Shasta school building was not a thumbnail but an image inside an article.
Also, when he claims that drought is caused by geoengineering and then he inserts a photo of a dry area with contrails photoshopped above it, this is more than just a "thumbnail". People view it as evidence.
One of Russ's claims is that contrails have been digitally inserted into old books, movies and TV shows.

upload_2015-8-5_14-50-53.png


http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=14818#.VcIUaPlVjrw

This (which he has never provided any evidence of happening, by the way!) is propaganda, a "disinformation assault", he says. But apparently when the chemtrail side do it, it's all fine as it's just an illustration of a "concept".
 

JRBids

Senior Member
Hats off to him for later fact-checking and puvlicly admitting his "mistake" though. Yes, damage limitation time methinks.
I think that was a PM.

In any event, if Dane or anyone is is illustrating one of their blog articles with a photoshopped "chemtrailed" sky, and the article is about how "chemtrailed" the sky is, it's definitely deceptive.

If I write a blog article about home prices going up, and illustrate it with a photo of a mansion with a dollar sign on it, it does not imply that YOUR house is worth what the mansion is.

In the example of Dane, it is illustrating that "THIS" is what the sky looks like. "This" is a photo of they sky, and it is NOT.
 

JRBids

Senior Member
Pretty sure Virgin did an advert using The Railway Children footage and they put contrails in the sky (as well as new virgin trains and stuff).

Obviously that means any old media showing contrails persisting has been doctored since it was made.

There's a thread about it here -> https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-chemtrails-inserted-into-films-footage-reused-in-modern-advertisement.t2545/
Russ and his followers are accusing [someone] of inserting contrails into broadcast movies, say, Smokey and the Bandit or whatever. Virgin's alteration was an advertisement. Totally different. The movie The Railway Children still doesn't have contrails in it.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Pretty sure Virgin did an advert using The Railway Children footage and they put contrails in the sky (as well as new virgin trains and stuff).

Obviously that means any old media showing contrails persisting has been doctored since it was made.

There's a thread about it here -> https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-chemtrails-inserted-into-films-footage-reused-in-modern-advertisement.t2545/
That wasn't an old film being altered and presented as original, though, as the discussion you link to makes clear. That one instance has mutated into the original film supposedly being altered, along with any number of other films, if you believe the chemtrail mythos.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The movie The Railway Children still doesn't have contrails in it.
Yes it does :)

However that is in the original film (along with several other contrails). No contrails were added to the film.

But the Virgin Trains usage is not at all comparable. Dane has used a large image of the David Marr Auditorium in the middle of an article, without any indication that it was altered. The original has a lovely blue sky, just like the sky on most days in Redding. A blue sky did not fit the message he was trying to convey, so he altered it.
 

JRBids

Senior Member
Oh sorry, Mick, I thought they'd added them for the advertisement. So they were just in there as an anachronism then.
 
Good luck arguing your point with a conspiracist. Your rebuttals would not wash with them. One example is all that is required to cast doubt on everything.

Fortunately for you lot I'm not a conspiracist. Just highlighting what you'd likely get if you tried to argue there's no evidence of what he suggests.
 

JRBids

Senior Member
Good luck arguing your point with a conspiracist. Your rebuttals would not wash with them. One example is all that is required to cast doubt on everything.

Fortunately for you lot I'm not a conspiracist. Just highlighting what you'd likely get if you tried to argue there's no evidence of what he suggests.
Having debated evolution/creationism on the evolution side, I am well aware how attached the believers are to their fantasy--if one thing in the bible is untrue, the whole house of cards falls.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member
Pretty sure Virgin did an advert using The Railway Children footage and they put contrails in the sky (as well as new virgin trains and stuff).
Yes, and modern buildings on the horizon. It was an intentional juxtaposition of old and modern concepts, not to trick people into thinking "chemtrails" are normal.
 

JFDee

Senior Member
A thought for those defending the photoshops: dramatization is still manipulative, regardless of the montage components being real.

Who knows if the trail backgrounds were not actually enlarged to make the trails appear more threatening?
Combining a zoomed trail image with a wide-angle foreground image would distort the proportions and make the trails loom closer.
 

skephu

Senior Member
A thought for those defending the photoshops: dramatization is still manipulative, regardless of the montage components being real.

Who knows if the trail backgrounds were not actually enlarged to make the trails appear more threatening?
Combining a zoomed trail image with a wide-angle foreground image would distort the proportions and make the trails loom closer.
This is probably true for this image:

It almost looks like a death ray destroying the building.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
A thought for those defending the photoshops: dramatization is still manipulative, regardless of the montage components being real.

Who knows if the trail backgrounds were not actually enlarged to make the trails appear more threatening?
Combining a zoomed trail image with a wide-angle foreground image would distort the proportions and make the trails loom closer.
Buildings are typically photographed with a wide angle lens, looking up, and most of the more dramatic contrail photos are zoomed in on a low distant part of the sky. So it's quite hard to get a dramatic photo of a building with impressive contrails behind it.

Especially in Redding, where contrails are rare in the summer.
 

skephu

Senior Member
Well, we've had an effect on him :)

However, now he uses photos out of context. For example:
upload_2015-8-5_23-29-42.png

Google search identifies this image as a reservoir in the UK:

And the blurb for the photo says:
 

skephu

Senior Member
He just googled "drought reservoir", and didn't notice that the link actually says "there is no drought at all near this reservoir" :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top