I am not sure these tests are to be trusted. I remember clearly having seen the 3 tornados (off the coast of India if I remember well) on TV. Bush with his book upside down was also in Farenheit 9/11. Faking a photo is relatively easy, but why on earth would a news channel fake a whole video of a tornado ?
Well those aren't necessarily the same tornados. Yes, having three tornados occurring next to each other IS possible, but they are saying that the photo isn't real. The three tornados occurred in the Gulf of Mexico not India.
With the Farenheit 9/11 doc. That too can be modified. It's easy to do in videos. Why? you ask. Because Michael Moore has been caught in many lies. 9/11 has a lot of them. Why not make Bush look worse by having his book upside down? If you have ever seen Bowling for Columbine, you will see a cartoon resembling South Park. Even though the creators of South Park refused to do the cartoon, Michael Moore paid animators to create a South Park cartoon, Which is easy to do, without the consent of Matt Stone and Trey Parker. Michael Moore is just plain dishonest.
I don't know where you're getting the news video of the tornado, since it is not mentioned in the test.
I also posted the picture of the fake see-through-skirt on JREF. There are other such pictures, and although I haven't seen the real stuff I don't see why it wouldn't exist.
No one is saying that it's impossible for it to exist. Again, they are saying that the photos are a hoax. Also, the photo on the test is not "see-through", they are supposedly air-brushed on the skirt. The hoax was that the picture of the buttocks was digitally put on the picture instead of air-brushed on. In other words, the original picture (without modification) would only contain a picture of a woman wearing a normal looking skirt.
The satellite image of the sun setting over western Europe or that of the blackout over the North-East USA could be possible too (even if those particular photos aren't).
Again, all they are saying is that the picture is a hoax. The Hoax Answers page regarding the sun setting over Western Europe said: "A beautiful picture, but it's a composite of a number of different satellite photos."
No one is saying or implying that it's impossible.
Why would they consider them all hoax ?
They consider the Pictures as the hoax. They are digitally modified, and it's asking if you can tell if they are modified or not.
However, I cannot believe the photo of the double decker bus that fell into a hole in the road, because not a single window is broken and there is no apparent damage to the front of the bus, which would be impossible unless they had carefully laid the bus with ropes from a helicopter (and even so, I have doubt).
Well, you would have to know how hard the impact was before you can say that. Also, perhaps there was damage to the front of the bus but is not visible due to the angle of the bus and how far the front is in the ground. Besides, it didn't drive into the hole. It sunk. Making the impact not as serious as it would be if it drove into the hole.
You can believe it or not. But that websites sole purpose is to debunk things, not to *fool people.
*the test is not to "fool" people but rather to see how well you do in determining the validity of a photo.