See other Miscellaneous Articles
Title: SARA PALIN RUMORS OF BREAST ENHANCEMENT I.E., "BOOB-GATE"
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://supportbordercontrols.blogsp ... -breast-enhancement.html#links
Published: Sep 27, 2010
Author: CLIFYLQ
Post Date: 2010-09-27 23:30:44 by Itistoolate
Keywords: None
Views: 616
Comments: 75
(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#1. To: Itistoolate (#0)
i bet that's photoshopped.
Yeah. Photoshopped. If you look through all her public photos, you could probably find that exact facial shot. Someone went pawing through a vast amount of pictures to find some big-boobed woman whose skin tone matches Palin's and in lighting that matched the Palin face. Of course, you can manipulate with Photoshop more directly but that is the classic method to fake photos. And if that's a current photo, then why is it only in lo-res, very grainy? Even cellphones take better pictures. You often see this lo-res stuff in fake celebrity photos. That's why you only ever see UFO photos in lo-res, apparently the aliens know better than to show up if you have a camera newer than an 1873 model.
lol....you're putting WAY to much thought into this critical analysis of an "obvious photoshop" CT.
I always found fake photos interesting. Fake celebs, UFOs, BigFoot, etc. Strangely enough, photos of these things are always blurry. That's because the aliens and BigFoot never get anywhere close to a camera with a decent lens apparently. Or it's so no one can prove in court that anyone deliberately published a hoax for profit. Fake photos are an interesting genre though. Both the people who make them and the rubes who swallow it whole.
#29. To: TooConservative (#6)
Not always. Additionally, oftentimes the object is luminescent, moving, and is seen at night, thus many cameras have difficulty adjusting the focus fast enough to capture a sharp image. Here's an example of a video of a UFO seen over Nellis Test Range in Nevada, where the object, after approaching the camera, was apparently purposely hiding in front of the sun in the sky in order to obsure itself from view.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#3. To: christine (#1)
#5. To: TooConservative (#3)
#6. To: abraxas (#5)
lol....you're putting WAY to much thought into this critical analysis of an "obvious photoshop" CT.
Replies to Comment # 6. Strangely enough, photos of these things are always blurry.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.