RIP Liz. :(
I took a break, and let things settle down a bit. It really doesn't bother me if people make jokes about me, or laugh at me, etc; if I was easily offended, then I would've been gone from here a long time ago! Nevertheless, the statements that some have made about respect are worthy of consideration; not so much for my sake, but in a general sense, because there are some people who are easily offended. Remember, this is "All for L.O.V.E."
It's true that this is a very serious subject we are investigating; but it's also true that a good laugh helps to make it more enjoyable, and keeps us from getting burned out. This is what I meant when I said "enjoy the ride"; I did not mean that I was taking the subject lightly, or that I would be playing games with anybody—just for my own fun. I have never done that, and I never will!
I am going to let you in on another little secret. The leaf pattern is not the most important part of the investigation. Then why did I start with that, and why do I repeatedly bring it up? Because it is a very good example of how to investigate—and more importantly, how NOT to investigate. And in this one sense, the leaf pattern is extremely important. Because if you use the wrong methods with the leaf pattern, then you will probably use wrong methods in other areas of investigation—and that is when it becomes very important.
Take for example the face that people have seen in the leaf pattern. It is great to have and use good imagination in investigation; we should imagine any and all possibilities, on everything that we are examining. It is okay to imagine a face, or letters, OR LEAVES!!! But don't stop at that point! Once you have a theory, then you need to try and DEBUNK YOUR OWN THEORY! And let others try to debunk it.
And if you come up with a theory that has at least two strong points in support of it, and nobody can debunk those strong points; and if nobody can come up with any other strong theories: then you PROBABLY have found the truth. It is easy to see what we want to see; but it's not always easy to see the truth. MJ wants us to learn how to see the truth: "the truth will prevail"!
Take for example the shadows on the red car. This is one strong point, nobody has debunked, on why the ambulance photo was staged. But this is not the only strong point, in support of the photo being staged. Furthermore, even with the shadow, I added a second and closer picture of the shadow versus sunshine on the front left wheel area {http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18053&p=310880&#p310880}. So there are two strong evidences of the shadow aspect alone; and the shadow aspect alone is only one of more than two strong points about the ambulance photo being fake (and staged). This is how you build strong investigation.
Nobody has yet even made a serious attempt to debunk the shadow differences on the red car. Souza said maybe a local whirlwind; but of course she was just joking. It is theoretically possible, but very unlikely; furthermore, even if there was a whirlwind, we could probably find evidences of it in the video and/or the series of still pictures (with a whirlwind, even a split second would make a big difference in the shadows on the car—and you could probably hear it in the audio track).
Also, being early afternoon, the sun would be high in the sky; so something moving on the ground would not be in the right position to block the sunlight on the red car. It would have to be something in the sky; but clouds move too slowly to change the shadows that much in a few seconds. Maybe an airplane flew by just at the right second to block the sun! Again, extremely unlikely; and even if that's what happened, you could probably hear it (and/or see evidences of the shadow moving rapidly, while the pap was running with the camera).
I'm not trying to go back and discuss the red car and shadows again in great detail; but I am trying to show an example of solid investigation. Some have mentioned over-analyzing (the leaf pattern, etc). Many people are not used to heavy investigation; and if they don't want to do it here, that is their choice. But the leaf pattern certainly has not been over analyzed, at least not in the sense of going way beyond establishing a solid theory—because NO solid theory has been established yet! It is possible that with some things, we will not be able to establish any solid theory; and if something comes to that, then so be it. But I don't think we are at that point yet with the leaf pattern.
I already gave four strong points why it's not a part of the background image {http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18053&p=309086&#p309086}. However, did anyone give two or more strong reasons in support of there being an intentional face in the image (and not an imaginary face, like seeing things in the clouds)? Did anyone try to debunk the face idea? Did anyone try to debunk the theory that the pattern is Photoshopped? And were there at least two strong reasons why it is Photoshopped?
Could it be a reflection of natural leaves during the staged photo shoot? That would answer why they don't move with the background image (red car); but it would probably indicate an outdoor staging, which would be an unnecessary high risk. Also, in that case the pattern should overlap the paramedics arm (not go behind it).
Did anyone try to debunk the idea that it is an intentional leaf image? Did anyone notice that in my very first post about it, I referred to is as "a leaf-like pattern" {http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=18053}? Has anyone noticed that the leaf shapes are somewhat random, and not very artistic? This would be expected if it was a reflection of natural leaves; but the reflection theory has some problems.
Could it be nothing more than an optical illusion, resulting from the combination of multiple lights and shadows—all bouncing off of the somewhat random, yet mostly circular ambulance interior pattern? If you take two overlapping circles, the area that overlaps will be shaped roughly like a leaf. Has anyone noticed that the "stem" of the main leaf pattern goes vertical, in exactly the place where the paramedics arm shadow hits the ambulance compartment wall?
I am giving far more questions here than answers; but again, far more important than the leaf pattern itself, is how we approach the process of investigation. Yet it may have a degree of significance, in the current question of whether or not ambulance #71 was used for the staged photo (and therefore whether at least some of the paramedics are involved in the hoax).
I do want to get back to the paramedics, the FBI, etc; and hopefully we can move on to a new level soon. But I really felt that most people still were not getting the basic concept of critical analysis. I hope that it comes through clearer now, and that we will not forget to challenge our own theories—this is the only way that we can expect the truth to prevail! :)
