Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Revised Forensic Results, Including The Amped Software Diagnoses.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Click image for larger version

Name:	fenn-h-fourier.jpg
Views:	170
Size:	1.82 MB
ID:	282039
    A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
    It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

    Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

    Comment


    • Which photo is fenn_h?

      Comment


      • What became of the person contacting Kpro that said they also did this for a living...and would take a look at the photos??

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Spoon View Post
          Which photo is fenn_h?
          Click image for larger version

Name:	fenn_h (1).jpg
Views:	155
Size:	150.1 KB
ID:	282096
          A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
          It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

          Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by NadiyaM View Post
            What became of the person contacting Kpro that said they also did this for a living...and would take a look at the photos??
            There is one other besides Kpro & Mike's connection . I gave them everything I possibly could and they are doing their thing.
            Last edited by OH!!; 05-02-2021, 09:24 PM.
            A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
            It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

            Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

            Comment


            • Can be enlarged.
              This test still read "Okay" after I cut and pasted the two coins into the image. This prompted me to reread the manual and that is when I noticed this test has to be done manually, by process of elimination. The brightness would not eliminate and 4 other test confirmed this.
              Click image for larger version  Name:	ELA.jpg Views:	1 Size:	2.29 MB ID:	282971
              Last edited by OH!!; 05-04-2021, 10:16 AM.
              A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
              It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

              Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

              Comment


              • It's not reading manipulation, its reading possible manipulation. You really need to test a baseline(s) photo (one that you know has no manipulation and a few with various forms of manipulation) to REALLY know how to interpret the results like a professional, like Michael.

                After last night I believe 95% of the community feel the conspiracy theories need to stop at this point.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by djjmciv View Post
                  It's not reading manipulation, its reading possible manipulation. You really need to test a baseline(s) photo (one that you know has no manipulation and a few with various forms of manipulation) to REALLY know how to interpret the results like a professional, like Michael.

                  After last night I believe 95% of the community feel the conspiracy theories need to stop at this point.
                  This is no conspiracy theory. I have spent many hours studying this software. You mentioned in my other post that I need to try with other photos. This is exactly what happened above. It proved the manipulation.
                  272 photos that Forrest Fenn placed on the internet are already going through the Amped Authenticate software process. I will then be adding 122 more. This is to compare every single photo and find out exactly what took place as far as metadata manipulation, etc. The summary will be a very strong point.
                  Last edited by OH!!; 05-04-2021, 10:43 AM.
                  A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
                  It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

                  Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by OH!! View Post

                    The summary will be a very strong point.
                    lol, not strong enough.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Space Hopper View Post

                      lol, not strong enough.
                      I agree with you. To me, when someone does any type of research in support of their own confirmation bias, they're going to post results that they believe will only support such biases. However, those 'results' usually aren't correct, because the research began and finished with bias.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by OH!! View Post

                        This is no conspiracy theory. I have spent many hours studying this software. You mentioned in my other post that I need to try with other photos. This is exactly what happened above. It proved the manipulation.
                        272 photos that Forrest Fenn placed on the internet are already going through the Amped Authenticate software process. I will then be adding 122 more. This is to compare every single photo and find out exactly what took place as far as metadata manipulation, etc. The summary will be a very strong point.
                        You've already admitted to having a bias to Forrest and his photos. Until you: 1) Study non-Forrest photos and 2) At a minimum single-blind your analysis to remove that bias, any results you provide will be inconclusive at best. This isn't my opinion, this is a standard rule in any type of analysis. You're going through the software and providing comments with the assumption that Amped DOES NOT provided false positive results EVER. What you need to do, since you have an open communication with Amped Software, is send them an email and ask them if their results are 100% undeniable proof (that you are stating) and if the software ever gives false positives and what they would look like.

                        Pretend there are instructors with a black belt in Karate and you're interrupting the class and disagreeing with their process because you studied Bruce Lee's book. You know you're right because Bruce Lee was the greatest martial artist ever and you really, really put in a lot of work to read his book and practice his moves. But you have minimum experience in the field and know nothing of the other arts. Who do you put your money on winning in a fight?

                        Instead of studying up on Amped, take a pause, and study up on Confirmation Bias. - "He demonstrated that people have a tendency to seek information that confirms their existing beliefs. Unfortunately, this type of bias can prevent us from looking at situations objectively. It can also influence the decisions we make and lead to poor or faulty choices."

                        But it's a good start you admit there's no conspiracy theory involved with the photos. I agree.
                        Last edited by djjmciv; 05-04-2021, 12:38 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ThanosSnappedtheChest View Post

                          I agree with you. To me, when someone does any type of research in support of their own confirmation bias, they're going to post results that they believe will only support such biases. However, those 'results' usually aren't correct, because the research began and finished with bias.
                          Yup, the whole reason behind an expert is to back up the claim. Michael probably knew some of the tests would not bring conclusive results, so ignored them.

                          Robert gambled and lost. His credibility has evaporated.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by djjmciv View Post

                            You've already admitted to having a bias to Forrest and his photos. Until you: 1) Study non-Forrest photos and 2) At a minimum single-blind your analysis to remove that bias, any results you provide will be inconclusive at best. This isn't my opinion, this is a standard rule in any type of analysis. You're going through the software and providing comments with the assumption that Amped DOES NOT provided false positive results EVER. What you need to do, since you have an open communication with Amped Software, is send them an email and ask them if their results are 100% undeniable proof (that you are stating) and if the software ever gives false positives and what they would look like.

                            Pretend there are instructors with a black belt in Karate and you're interrupting the class and disagreeing with their process because you studied Bruce Lee's book. You know you're right because Bruce Lee was the greatest martial artist ever and you really, really put in a lot of work to read his book and practice his moves. But you have minimum experience in the field and know nothing of the other arts. Who do you put your money on winning in a fight?

                            Instead of studying up on Amped, take a pause, and study up on Confirmation Bias. - "He demonstrated that people have a tendency to seek information that confirms their existing beliefs. Unfortunately, this type of bias can prevent us from looking at situations objectively. It can also influence the decisions we make and lead to poor or faulty choices."

                            But it's a good start you admit there's no conspiracy theory involved with the photos. I agree.
                            Because I am certain of manipulation, I am 100% positive that there is manipulation as I have proved it over and over again. I've known this for almost 4 years. So at this point there is no changing my mind as I am certain of it. Does this make me bias? maybe I used the word bias incorrect, but nothing, I mean nothing will ever change my mind because of what I have learned. If you've followed my work from the beginning then you would understand, but most only know bits and pieces and they base their theory on that alone. I started this 4 years ago and have kept it up that long, only not as much back then. It doesn't bother me that people are haters of my work, it actually keeps me motivated to move forward. The deeper I dig, the better it will be when the truth finally comes out.
                            A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
                            It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

                            Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by OH!! View Post

                              Because I am certain of manipulation, I am 100% positive that there is manipulation as I have proved it over and over again. I've known this for almost 4 years. So at this point there is no changing my mind as I am certain of it. Does this make me bias? maybe I used the word bias incorrect, but nothing, I mean nothing will ever change my mind because of what I have learned. If you've followed my work from the beginning then you would understand, but most only know bits and pieces and they base their theory on that alone. I started this 4 years ago and have kept it up that long, only not as much back then. It doesn't bother me that people are haters of my work, it actually keeps me motivated to move forward. The deeper I dig, the better it will be when the truth finally comes out.
                              The whole search community know/believe those photos have been manipulated. Most/all the photos in the books have too. Very few dispute it.

                              So what? And...? Now you have found out, a little late in the game I might add, what's your play?

                              Comment


                              • Here is Forrest nickel he kept in his pocket. This photo was taken 6 months before the chest was found. This tells me that the camera data on the photo that reads manipulation is probably correct.
                                More than likely it was this iPhone X that took the photos at the table.
                                Click image for larger version

Name:	iPhone-x-nickel.jpg
Views:	147
Size:	436.3 KB
ID:	283448
                                A good forger attempts to deceive the naked human eye.
                                It's part of the challenge in the game he plays.

                                Deceiving science when it is done thru guidelines and in expert hands is however, practically impossible!"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X