"A couple of things stick out as being immediately wrong with this photo. First off, look at the line that separates the lower half of the photo and the upper half (where the smoke begins). It looks a bit too perfect and too distinct to be a natural hill top." "More importantly, however, check out the direction of the shadows in the lower portion of the picture. Note that the Sun is behind and to the left of the photographer. Shadows are being cast upwards and backwards of the buildings. However, check the mountain behind the smoke. What's missing? The dark smoke does not appear to be casting any shadow on the mountain behind it. Now, granted, the mountain in the background could be farther away than in appears in the photo, but things just don't seem to add up. "
Smoke rises from Arab Saleem area, near Nabatiyeh, in southern Lebanon during an Israeli air raid, August 2, 2006. (LEBANON)
02 Aug 2006 REUTERS/Adnan Hajj
If that's not the fakest ever. No... they've done worse.
Gives a new meaning to smoke and mirrors. /s
Also, some of the buildings on top of the hill are projecting upwards into the smoke, would would indicate that the top half was not a cut and paste, but may be a legitimate picture. The pixilization of the top part of the landscape next to the smoke is consistent with the fading of sharpness and detail as it should be, compared with the sharper bottom part.
I think I'd give the photo a pass.
The critique of this image misses one of the more obvious cues of fakery: perspective. If this is a genuine, undoctored photo, just how large are those trees behind the smoke?