New Glyph Discovery

[iNteRn]

Why can't we just see this one as a "possible" Gylph and keep looking?

[gunluva]

Screw all that. The fact remains that this image existed BARG. (Before ARG)

[Sir Topham Hat]

So did the ones on the Halo main page where we found the first glyph. They were altered.

[iNteRn]

So this one is 100% NOT an "official" gylph?

[Sir Topham Hat]

It is up to the viewers interpretation. The outcome of that interpretation isn't particularly important, so view it how you will.

[Avateur]

It will become official when something else goes down. It's like the broken glyph that we found originally on halo3.com: What's its purpose? So far, nothing. It didn't do anything for us. Everything changed when we found the comic, and even then that first glyph isn't doing anything for us.

This glyph may be a real glyph, or it may not, but again it may have a purpose to be reclaimed later.

[iNteRn]

That's what i meant. Let's just keep this one as a possible one, that won't hurt anyone, right?

[Sir Topham Hat]

It is up to the viewers interpretation. The outcome of that interpretation isn't particularly important, so view it how you will.

[iNteRn]

If you think you found a glyph, but you have to blow it up in photoshop, rescale it, warp it, and draw the glyph yourself from memory... odds are it isn't really there.

You just had to, didn't you?

[Tural]

So it should technically just be included with the other glyphs for consideration and individual interpretation.

It should not be included because it is not confirmed. Every image in the official list is 100% confirmed to be a glyph. There is no disputing whether or not they exist.

Right now, the argument is simple: I have presented logical explanations of how the lines appear, and how they are manipulations of the original artwork, as well as clearly shown you that the image has been there since Halo3.com launched (And because the other image was altered later, we have only this to assume: All glyphs on Halo3.com were added after the ARG started. This is the only assumption we can logically make, because it is the only thing we have to base and beliefs on). Your entire argument is based solely on the assumption and belief that you see it. There is no evidence to show that it is a glyph and not a result of a poor resolution and manipulation. On the other hand, as I've said many times, I have evidence to show it is not a glyph. Right now, it is evidence vs. assumptions.