That's Hillary. It's not a body double.

Yesterday at the 15-year-anniversary 9/11 Memorial event, after Hillary Clinton collapsed like the Twin Towers that were brought down by her Saudi Arabian owners, she was rushed away from the scene, propped up against a column like a toy, then dragged unresponsively into a van, losing her shoe along the way.
We all know this. We all saw it.
In case you missed it somehow, here's the video:

This isn't an isolated incident. It happened after a chain of events that have raised serious questions about her health, including a 4 minute-long coughing fit:

... where she was seen "hacking up a lung" (as they say), chewing on it, & then spitting it into a glass to conceal it:

 Even before this, she was photographed requiring assistance to make it to the top of a small staircase

And apparently a handrail was installed at Joe Biden's house in preparation for her visit:

 

And she did appear to depend on it. 

And let's not forget her fall in 2012 which resulted in a concussion that apparently left her unable to answer questions about her email scandal or her understanding of national security protocol.

So there's really nothing surprising here, just making sure we're all on the same page: the bitch is half dead. And in my non-medically-trained opinion, that makes her unfit to lead. 

That's right: I just conceded that I have no medical training. It's not needed or relevant to this case, as I'm making no medical claims.

The issue here is what happened after she was rushed away in the van. She disappeared for an hour & a half, and then re-emerged from her daughter Chelsea's apartment building, appearing relieved & in visibly better condition. Was there an emergency clinic set up inside for the uber-wealthy 1st female candidate for President of the US? Maybe. I don't know what happened inside that building. I don't claim to know. The only people who do know what happened in that building were IN that building.

Upon her re-emergence, a conspiracy theory was born: the idea that it wasn't her coming out of the building. It was allegedly a 'body double'. 

I asked the people who were spreading the rumor why they were spreading it.  One twitter user, @ballincrazy responded. "It's fun". I disproved his version of the theory, shamed him for spreading lies, then he deleted the tweets & blocked me

as liars often do when I prove them wrong.

Now let me pause here & give you a little background on myself & what qualifies me to question this theory. First and foremost, I'm a skeptic. I don't believe shit until it's proven. I grew up studying 2 things that I consider relevant to this "body double" conspiracy theory:
1) magic
2) hoaxes -- UFOs, ghosts, mystery lights, PT Barnum, & all that.
I ate that shit up as a kid, & the older I got, the more fun it was to catch the lies. Don't buy it? Test me.
How is this relevant? Because it means I know bullshit. In fact, one of my all-time favorite shows is called Bullshit! by the magicians/debunkers Penn & Teller, which they debunked all sorts of bullshit.

Now, as an adult, I work in digital graphics & video. I'm an animator by trade, but I'm skilled in special effects and video effects, & I'm currently doing digital portraits for a living. Why is that relevant? Two reasons:
1) I know digital images & what can be done to them,
2) I know how to spot subtle details in faces.
Aside from that, I also have experience in various types of security work. I'm not a security expert, per se, but I don't have to be for this discussion. The experience merely helped me notice some things that the conspiracy theorists are conveniently leaving out of their arguments.

Ok -- let's get on with the theories & debunking them.

 Claim 1: 'That's not Hillary. That woman is too skinny'.

If someone has the skill to photoshop a pic of Hillary into another pic of Hillary, then it follows that they also have the skills to scale an image along its X axis to make it appear skinnier.
 In my opinion, unnaturally thinner. In the pic above, the dark blue version has been scaled down along the X axis by nearly 30%. How do I know? Because I scaled it back up by nearly 30% to produce this version (and I did the opposite for the light-blue-suited Hillary for comparison):

Notice she's much more natural looking in the version I scaled up.
This is amateur stuff.
Skinny Hillary theory: Debunked.

Claim 2: That's not Hillary. Look at the nose & chin

Ok, first off: Before & after what, exactly?
As far as I can tell, there is no footage of her from that before the collapse event. (Honestly I suspect there IS footage, but I haven't seen it. If anyone has it. please send it my way. I'd LOVE to see the event that caused her to be removed to the van area in the first place. I imagine its quite damning for her career. But I haven't seen it yet.)
She's wearing the same outfit. She's facing the same direction, she's the same distance from the street in all pics. There is no reason to suspect some of these pics are before & & some are after her collapse event. If they are, someone needs to provide proof. (That's you, fury.news.)

The second flaw in this claim is that her chin is somehow different. But look closer. It's the same chin in all pics. The on the lower right appears to be different, but it's also the only one in which her head is tilted down, which causes the loose skin of her double chin to shift toward the front of her face. Check out the pic above it -- the other "before" pic. It's the same chin as the other two shown in the "after" pics. Because her head is titled at nearly the same angle.

As for the nose, it's virtually the same response as above. Her nose sort of appears to be different in the so-called "after" pics. They're also the only pics where we see her nostrils, which could mean 2 things: 1) that her head is titled slightly more to her right in the 'after' pics, or 2) those photos were taken from a lower angle than the so-called' before' pics. And viewing objects from different angles, naturally causes them to appear different.

I shouldn't have to do this, but I know some of you are confused so you'll default to a type of doubt that's as ill-informed as your belief in the 'body double' theory. So let's use a pyramid as an example: viewed from the side, it's a triangle. Viewed from the top or bottom, it's a square.

Get it now?


Nose & Chin theory: Debunked

Claim 3: That's not Hillary. Those are different ears.

Remember the part about how you need to prove these are pics of Hillary before & after her collapse? Still applies. There is no reason whatsoever to believe these were taken 90 minutes or more apart. If they were, you need to prove it. It's not a matter of what I believe. If you prove it, then you prove it, & there's nothing I can do but accept the proof.
But it doesn't end there.
This is where my skills as a portrait artist come into play.
Ears are like fingerprints or vaginas: no two are exactly the same. They have the same parts, but subtle differences in thickness, curvature, size, & placement of the individual parts make one person's ear easily discernible from another person's. For Hillary, notice the close proximity of her tragus to her antitragus (outlined in orange for reference, below), resulting in a deep, almost pinched appearance in both pics.

Look at as many pics of Hillary's ears as you want. That's a specific characteristic of her ears. Her "body double"  won't have ears that look like that.
Different ears theory: Debunked. 

Claim 4: That's not Hillary. This person is wearing different earrings.  

Once again, we have to ask: what makes you think these pics were taken before & after her collapse? There is NOTHING whatsoever to indicate that. If you think they were taken before & after the collapse, then the burden is on you to prove it.
And also: what the hell makes you think those aren't the same gold double-hoop earrings? They look exactly the same, just turned at a slightly different angle. Since the image is so grainy, here's a 3D model I created to illustrate how the different angles give an ever-so-slighlty-different appearance:

Come on. You people should already know better than this.
Different earring theory: Debunked.  


Claim 5: That's not Hillary. Those people have different fingers. 

Again, we have an image where one pic is scaled down along the X axis to give the appearance of being thinner. So I scaled it back up by 25% to get it back as close to normal as is possible under the current conditions:

Now, there's something else going on here that -- if you're truly paying attention -- you should have noticed with no problem: they're different hands. One is left, one is right. True, a person's hands are symmetrical. That is, if the index finger is longer than the middle finger on the left hand, it will also be longer on the right hand.
And many "body double" conspiracy theorists are making that very claim:

What's up with it? Again: different pose, different viewing angles. Same Hand.
Pic on right: taken from below, hand arcing back (convex), slightly turned away (supinated )
Pic on right: taken on the same level, hand arcing forward (concave), slightly turned toward viewer (pronated).
The effect you're seeing when her index finger appears to be longer is called foreshortening. I'm not going to go into a detailed lesson on that, so here's a link to someone who already has.

Also, not really relevant, but interesting to note the pic on the right was (once again) scaled down along the X axis.

Long finger theory: Debunked. 


Claim 6: ???

Honestly, I don't know WHAT the claim is here. It was tweeted with this text:

"Hilary Clinton Doppelgänger Update: A better comparison with more teeth exposed on the "After" image (right)"

What do we have to ask ourselves here?
You should have this memorized by now: How do we know these pics were taken before & after her collapse? And once again, the answer is: We have no reason whatsoever to believe they were.
The teeth look the same to me. I don't know what that's all about.

But more importantly, there are several features that identify the fact that this is the same person, no matter when they were taken.  Here are just a few. How many others can you spot?

 


Claim 7: That's not Hillary. There was no security outside Chelsea's apartment.  

Yes, there was. 

No security theory: Debunked.


I should not have had to go through all this. Each one of these claims is just as ridiculous as the next.
What really concerns me is that the majority of these claims are coming from Trump supporters. It made me realize that just because I made my decision to vote for Trump based on logic, reason, & critical thinking, it doesn't mean all his supporters possess those skills.  In fact, I've received so much opposition to my argument that it appears that there a lot of voters who even despise critical thought. There's one group of complete idiots who got so mad when I proved one them wrong that they've spent the past day creating sock puppet accounts with the apparent sole purpose of babbling nonsense on my timeline in what appears to be some sort of pathetic & misguided attempt at vengeance. (So I muted them. Simple enough solution)

As with any political movement, there are people who will wander into the fold looking for nothing more than acceptance, even at the risk of getting involved in something they don't understand. And that's fine. But at least be willing to not be dumb. When someone proves you wrong, take the lesson & be better for it. I'm just trying to do my small part to create a society where people can think critically so we don't have to keep relying on the dumb superstitious or emotional reactions that made life so shitty in the past. If you want to Make America Great Again like it says on your hat, then fucking MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Don't be afraid to learn from someone who knows better. Don't harass someone for teaching you. That shit just sets us all back as a society. THat's how Black Lives Matter keeps spreading their bullshit. That's how SJWs & liberals keep getting away with theirs. They're counting on your ignorance & your belief in superstitions.

IF YOU BELIEVE I'VE MADE AN ERROR IN MY ANALYSIS, THEN YOUR JOB IS TO SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE I'M WRONG. AND YOU NEED TO PROVE IT.
I WON'T LISTEN TO YOUR BITCHING OR TROLLING.
AND I'VE DONE MY HOMEWORK, SO DON'T EXPECT ME TO DO YOURS.
BUT IF YOU HAVE A SOLID ARGUMENT, PRESENT IT TO ME ON TWITTER @CounterCouncil.