• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Lee Harvey Oswald photo: Fake or old technology?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 4644
  • Start date Start date
He is wearing a thick sweater which would scruntch like that when he pushes his hand against his chest.

Not fake. Use common sense.
 
Originally posted by: DonVito
Isn't there also film of that shooting? I could swear I've seen it.
Click to expand...

Im a n00b at life, 22. Never seen it, but there could be.

PS: When I'm wearing my tinfoil hat the photo looks even more fake!!!!!!!!!
 
Originally posted by: Winchester
He is wearing a thick sweater which would scruntch like that when he pushes his hand against his chest.

Not fake. Use common sense.
Click to expand...

Sorry you COOLGUY it looks fake and so does the gun.
 
Funny, the gun in the picture that was used to shoot Oswald, was sold for $225,000 in an auction not to long ago. btw Jack Ruby is the name of the man who shot him, just in case your IQ is not up to par. Damn VA people dont know crap.

 
Originally posted by: PCTweaker5
Originally posted by: Winchester
He is wearing a thick sweater which would scruntch like that when he pushes his hand against his chest.

Not fake. Use common sense.
Click to expand...

Sorry you a$$h0l3 it looks fake and so does the gun.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they faked the video too moron. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: PCTweaker5
Originally posted by: Winchester
He is wearing a thick sweater which would scruntch like that when he pushes his hand against his chest.

Not fake. Use common sense.
Click to expand...

Sorry you a$$h0l3 it looks fake and so does the gun.
Click to expand...

1) consider the source. These frames may have been messed with to make the image more 'clear'
2) the 'ultra high res' is AFTER the fact... the orig wasn't that high res, so you're only making a fvcked up original larger.
3) Are you proposing that Oswald wasn't shot?..... wtf... where are you going with that... Is he in an homosexual marriage with Hitler in Argentina?
 
Originally posted by: jtusa4
That pic looks heavily airbrushed/photoshopped.
Click to expand...



Dude you are talking about over 40 years ago...they did not have that technology. Hell I didn't see my first computer until I was in College in '82 and the prehistoric p.O.S read punch cards 😉

Ausm
 
Ok let me make something clear.

The high rez image is directly from the AP
 
Originally posted by: Ausm
Originally posted by: jtusa4
That pic looks heavily airbrushed/photoshopped.
Click to expand...



Dude you are talking about over 40 years ago...they did not have that technology. Hell I didn't see my first computer until I was in College in '82 and the prehistoric p.O.S read punch cards 😉

Ausm
Click to expand...

Yeah, because someone couldn't have scanned it in and edited it sometime in the past 20 years. I wasn't aware a picture had to be worked on at the same time it was taken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top