Emma Watson Discussion Thread

[Joyconboyz]

View attachment 2229555

I believe what people are saying is there's too many clues that the vibrtator vid is her. Her owning the same shoes, extremely similar body/thighs, wristband, DMCA takedown from Emma's lawyers, etc. At this point you might need help if you cant see there's a high chance the video is in fact her. I'll also add that if you do a reverse search of the internet for that video there is no duplicate anywhere, it is entirely unique.

 

[Cuggie]

I believe what people are saying is there's too many clues that the vibrtator vid is her.
There are NO clues that the video is of her.

Her owning the same shoes,
She has been seen in similar shoes - but not identical...ie 100% different shoes.

extremely similar body/thighs,
Extremely similar = not identical = different = not her.

wristband,
The hairband on the wrist is something every girl with long hair does from time-to-time - it's really not some sort of unique jewellaery that only she has ever worn!

DMCA takedown from Emma's lawyers, etc.
And the proof the video was removed by 'Emma's lawyers'? Non-existent! Just an assumption!

But, here's the thing: even if Emma's lawyers had asked for a take-down...what does that prove? If the video had initially been 'claimed' to be, say, Taylor Swift - her lawyers would have been well within there remit to have the video removed on the grounds of mis-appropriation i.e. a fake representation purporting to be somebody it's not - effectively slander or defamation.

At this point you might need help if you cant see there's a high chance the video is in fact her.
There is NO chance the video is her - YOU need (not help) but to adopt a more crital viewpoint and explore the evidence - or 'lack of' in this case!

I'll also add that if you do a reverse search of the internet for that video there is no duplicate anywhere, it is entirely unique.
Which proves what exactly?!

100% NOT Emma Watson...it's like taking candy off a baby!

 

[Shoestring]

You can't say no chance. There is no more definitive evidence against it being her than for.
All you've done again is to basically say we don't know who it is or isn't and never will.

 

[Cuggie]

You can't say no chance. There is no more definitive evidence against it being her than for.
All you've done again is to basically say we don't know who it is or isn't and never will.

Okay, I kind of agree!

The 'balance of evidence' suggest it's not her.
Plus, from a legal perspective, the "burden of proof" lies wholly on the side of those wishing to 'prove' this is Emma Watson.

If I claimed there is a 40-foot-high gold sculpture of Taylor Swift, on the far-side-of-the-moon, then it's up-to me to prove it - not for you to have to DISPROVE it!!!

That is how the world works, thankfully!

So, unless there's definitive evidence that the video is of Emma Watson, then it's NOT!!
Lies and made-up bull-shit don't require 'disproving'!

 

[Shoestring]

Okay, I kind of agree!

The 'balance of evidence' suggest it's not her.
Plus, from a legal perspective, the "burden of proof" lies wholly on the side of those wishing to 'prove' this is Emma Watson.

If I claimed there is a 40-foot-high gold sculpture of Taylor Swift, on the far-side-of-the-moon, then it's up-to me to prove it - not for you to have to DISPROVE it!!!

That is how the world works, thankfully!

So, unless there's definitive evidence that the video is of Emma Watson, then it's NOT!!
Lies and made-up bull-shit don't require 'disproving'!

No. All a lack of definitive proof actually proves is that there is no proof either way.
You could indeed say that in all probability it isn't her.
But you are not in the position to say it definitely isn't, regardless of your own opinion.
And an alleged 40 foot statue on the moon is hardly the same thing as an actual video visible to everyone.

 

[Preacher]

Okay, I kind of agree!

The 'balance of evidence' suggest it's not her.
Plus, from a legal perspective, the "burden of proof" lies wholly on the side of those wishing to 'prove' this is Emma Watson.

If I claimed there is a 40-foot-high gold sculpture of Taylor Swift, on the far-side-of-the-moon, then it's up-to me to prove it - not for you to have to DISPROVE it!!!

That is how the world works, thankfully!

So, unless there's definitive evidence that the video is of Emma Watson, then it's NOT!!
Lies and made-up bull-shit don't require 'disproving'!

Tell me more about this statue on the moon….

 

[JakeDLM]

Jesus lads take a fucking night off.

 

[Shoestring]

Jesus lads take a fucking night off.

Hi. Welcome to the forum.

 

[Preacher]

Hi. Welcome to the forum.

He’s been here 3 years? You’re welcome is a touch late

 

[Shoestring]

He’s been here 3 years? You’re welcome is a touch late

Better late than never.

 

[Preacher]

Better late than never.

Well that’s it then Shoe, you’re the official forum welcomer

 

[Shoestring]

Well that’s it then Shoe, you’re the official forum welcomer

Woohoo, finally I've got a job I can do from home.

 

[Cuggie]

Tell me more about this statue on the moon….

It's actually 45 feet tall!
And made of gold!

I saw it on a LIST somewhere...She's wearing black shoes - but not the same type as in the no-face dildo video - but good enough, yeah?

But the the ACTUAL PROOF is that Swift had untied her hair for the shoot and slipped her hair-retaining black clasp onto her wrist...no other women have ever done that!

And David, get a fucking life!
You were in nappies when the Fappening happened. The Emma vids have long since been debunked and are NOT HER!!!

 

[Shoestring]

It's actually 45 feet tall!
And made of gold!

I saw it on a LIST somewhere...She's wearing black shoes - but not the same type as in the no-face dildo video - but good enough, yeah?

But the the ACTUAL PROOF is that Swift had untied her hair for the shoot and slipped her hair-retaining black clasp onto her wrist...no other women have ever done that!

And David, get a fucking life!
You were in nappies when the Fappening happened. The Emma vids have long since been debunked and are NOT HER!!!

They have NEVER been officially and definitively debunked to the best of my knowledge, and you constantly saying they aren't her doesn't make it so.

 

[fudefrak]

I believe what people are saying is there's too many clues that the vibrtator vid is her.
There are NO clues that the video is of her.

The video I posted a few pages back shows matching moles. In combination with the other features, it's as good as proven at this point.

 

[dabbadabbadoo]

This has to be the most entertaining clusterfuck of a thread on this forum.

Keep up the good work, you crazy bastards

 

[jss]

HQ I found

Still waiting on the rest of these HQ (not upscale) to drop

 

[Cuggie]

The video I posted a few pages back shows matching moles. In combination with the other features, it's as good as proven at this point.

The video as good as proves that it's NOT her!!!
Different toes, different ears...but lets focus on a few moles that are similar - but ignore the ones that don't fit the narrative!!

David! And all the other fan-boys - stop wanking now, please - it's 100% NOT HER!

 

[pseer_uk]

The video I posted a few pages back shows matching moles. In combination with the other features, it's as good as proven at this point.

Matching Mole - one of my favourite bands

 

[Shoestring]

The video as good as proves that it's NOT her!!!
Different toes, different ears...but lets focus on a few moles that are similar - but ignore the ones that don't fit the narrative!!

David! And all the other fan-boys - stop wanking now, please - it's 100% NOT HER!!

Show us YOUR evidence. You won't because you can't. Yet again you mention feet and ears. But these don't prove your point because they aren't different. And where are these non matching moles? There aren't any.
But perhaps you are just sticking to this line as a wind up, as I've suspected for a while.