it does look that way. give me a week so i can make a judgment based on data and not on feelings. i need to get my computer out of my backpack. (in another state right now)

• https://i.ibb.co/v3ybcdW/Videoleyout.png
• here is an image of my analysis.
• It took a little over an hour of looking at the video and writing up the document.
• So, the lighting is consistent between the three shots, and the foreground and consistent with the background. They could still have done a green screen but it means that they would have had to do a great job at it. Or perhaps what Disney is doing, which is they use a 3d screen with the unreal engine to create a virtual production environment. this creates consistent lighting much easier than greenscreen and studio lighting.
• The image of of them both together looks kinda strange since its a "scene" shot and a very wide-angle, while the other closeups are a much larger focal length. This is easy to do in real life, but it's poor video directing.
• The mask-like appearance under the neck is from the studio lighting that was setup. its causing a harsh shadow, but its constant within the scene and there is evidence of that lighting within the background.

• As for Biden's performance. He seemed a lot more mentally stable during this interview than normal, he might have been having a good day, been on some sort of drug.
• Its also often that multiple takes within an interview can happen if requested so any major gaffs could be redone.
• After reviewing the video and spending time analyzing the video, although my initial reaction was that the video did look strange, its my understanding based solely on the data, that this video is likely a real video.
• I dont have enough data to determine if the entire scene is actually on a set. That could be possible.
• I dont have enough data to determine if this is the real biden since my data points are from his right side not his left. I do se a few matching datapoints though from the areas that I can see.

Simple bro-whats the scientific method. List the steps and realize youre not doing at least half the steps and really anything at all lolllll. Give me a break. If you use the scientific method from the date of that photo and test it in real time. WHICH YOU DIDNT DO, and because you didn't do that you can't go back and replay time and gather your info again. It was a one time shot and you missed the boat. You're loss and you lose.

• I guess you need to tell that to cold-case detectives. they aren't allowed to used old photos and wrinkle maps anymore.

The Scientific Method.

Ask a question:

• Does this image prove that Biden is fake?

Do background research:

• I collected images going back several decades. This will provide me data on consistent wrinkle maps.

Construct a Hypothesis:

• If this image shows a fake Biden, his wrinkle maps would not match with his previous photos containing the real Biden.

Test

• I first, looked at images an marked data points, then I positioned each image above the other in a position close to the image below it so that as many features of the face would be in approximately that same area.

Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion

-The testing once analyzed showed that there aren't any changes in the wrinkle map that could otherwise be explained through natural or well known processes.

• The conclusion is that this image does not prove Biden is fake.

Communicate Your Results

• I Took a gif, of the data, as well as still images of some of the data-points and posted them here.