Like I said, can you say with absolute confidence that those photos don’t exist in some obscure Flickr account somewhere? You truly believe you can account for absolutely every photo of… clouds… that exists?
Wasn’t this exactly the same thing that happened with George News? People assumed that the photos were unique, until someone found the raw photos in the random account of some random military photographer or something?
I just can’t accept on faith that a photo from one of the most photographed planes on the planet with hundreds of photographers cycling through it all the time is smoking-gun proof.
So a Google image search could not find the photo set of clouds, but somehow Ron Watkins tracked it down? What did he do? Just look through millions of private Flickr accounts until he found the exact same unpublished photo set? Come on man - think!
Google can find photos that have been searched and are searchable. The more buried a photo is, the harder Google will have finding it.
I know, because I’m running a reverse image search on a concert photo I took of my favorite singer over a decade ago. It is stored in an album on a Flickr account that I abandoned. No results.
Something without easy faces… like clouds… would be even more difficult. No easy features to match.
On the other hand, finding an unpublished photo of Trump just requires you being a bit of a news junkie and dedicated to the craft of posting as Q. Just pick a few AF1 photographers and check out their portfolios.
Please, please do not trust Googling shit as a way to verify the truth about anything.
I am not sure you understand the window proof. The original Q account posted a photo of clouds from an airplane. Google Image Search and 4chan autists could not find this photograph on the Internet prior to Q posting it, suggesting it was an original. Months later, when Q posted from his new account, he verified the tripcode change by posting a second photo from that series clearly taken a few seconds later, but from a different position. Subtle variations between the photos proved they were two different photos from the same period. This then raises the question: how could an imposter have a second photo in a series of original photos by Q?
Like I said, can you say with absolute confidence that those photos don’t exist in some obscure Flickr account somewhere? You truly believe you can account for absolutely every photo of… clouds… that exists?
Wasn’t this exactly the same thing that happened with George News? People assumed that the photos were unique, until someone found the raw photos in the random account of some random military photographer or something?
I just can’t accept on faith that a photo from one of the most photographed planes on the planet with hundreds of photographers cycling through it all the time is smoking-gun proof.
So a Google image search could not find the photo set of clouds, but somehow Ron Watkins tracked it down? What did he do? Just look through millions of private Flickr accounts until he found the exact same unpublished photo set? Come on man - think!
Yes.
Google can find photos that have been searched and are searchable. The more buried a photo is, the harder Google will have finding it.
I know, because I’m running a reverse image search on a concert photo I took of my favorite singer over a decade ago. It is stored in an album on a Flickr account that I abandoned. No results.
Something without easy faces… like clouds… would be even more difficult. No easy features to match.
On the other hand, finding an unpublished photo of Trump just requires you being a bit of a news junkie and dedicated to the craft of posting as Q. Just pick a few AF1 photographers and check out their portfolios.
Please, please do not trust Googling shit as a way to verify the truth about anything.
I am not sure you understand the window proof. The original Q account posted a photo of clouds from an airplane. Google Image Search and 4chan autists could not find this photograph on the Internet prior to Q posting it, suggesting it was an original. Months later, when Q posted from his new account, he verified the tripcode change by posting a second photo from that series clearly taken a few seconds later, but from a different position. Subtle variations between the photos proved they were two different photos from the same period. This then raises the question: how could an imposter have a second photo in a series of original photos by Q?