|
|
Post by romanruins on Feb 10, 2009 5:49:22 GMT
By the Posts in this Subject Thread Sun King I guess your position is that the last photo evidence you have of the real Paul McCartney on Tour is in Memphis, Tennessee on August 19, 1966.
|
|
|
|
Post by romanruins on Mar 4, 2009 7:44:03 GMT
Toward the End of the Film Magical Mystery Tour the Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band performs (by soundtrack) their 1967 song "Death Cab for Cutie". Part of the Lyrics are "slip sliding down Highway 31" as Cutie and the driver go to their death. If you believe as I do that the Magical Mystery Tour which was filmed over two weeks from September 11, 1967 to September 25, 1967 is a symbolic explanation of events of how Faul took over the role of Paul with the acceptance of the other Three Beatles then "slip sliding down Highway 31" would suggest that the Highway Paul had a fatal crash on was wet from rain. The only Highway 31 that I have found in England, and indeed Britain is A-31 that goes around 100 miles from Guildford to Bere Regis where it merges into A-35 in Dorset. Something that would be a piece of evidence in determining were Paul's was body was found by the "Authorities" would be to find out if it was raining or not on Saturday September 10, and Sunday September 11, 1966. Even a London Newspaper Weather Summary for Mid, and Western- South England that covers those areas would do the trick. I tried the Library, and the internet without luck. If someone with access to a London or English Newspaper Archive that goes back that far could research a Newspaper Weather Summery for the area A-31 goes through on those two Days it would tell us a lot.
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 8, 2010 5:22:54 GMT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ![]() [/img] That Means A Lot Lennon/McCartney Lyrics: A friend says that your love won't mean a lot And you know that your love is all you've got At times things are so fine and at times they're not But when she says she loves you, that means a lot A friend says that a love is never true And you know that this don't apply on you A touch can mean so much when it's all you've got When she says she loves you that means a lot Love can be deep inside, love can be suicide Can't you see you can't hide what you feel when it's real A friend says that your love won't mean a lot And you know that your love is all you've got A touch can mean so much when it's all you've got When she says she loves you that means a lot Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by daveyo on Mar 8, 2010 13:30:08 GMT
Hmmmmm, something is wrong here. We do have the last known photo of the Real Paul McCartney dated on September 16, 1966 attending a shindig and he was holding a wine glass and posed several pics with a couple of other people and this was in England because the tour is finished. So he could not have died in USA and this eliminates this theory right out the window.
The actual last known photo is your proof. After September 16th, 1966, he plum disappeared never to be seen again up to the present time. It is presumed he died within a 30 day period from September to October beginning on September 17 onward. The emergence of the Faul began in November of 1966. So with this in mind, the Real Paul McCartney was killed or died in that 30 day time frame. Added modification> Since we have this last known photo of the Real Paul attending this shindig, it would not surprise me at all that this was and is the date he died whether it being from drinking too much, or mixed with drugs or ? etc. No one knows at present, but I would think it was right after this shindig something terrible happened to him later that night leaving this shindig going into the early morning hours. This date is the last known official sighting of the Real Paul so the rest up to now its been a blank.
How he died or how he got killed is still wide open to debate as no one has stepped forward to explain his disappearance from public view up to the present time. Its very obvious because we got the Faul continuing to carry on the Real Pauls legacy. What burns me up is he the Faul takes the Sir title that was bequeath and bestowed to the Real Paul from the Queen herself. grrrrrrrrrr. This is about as low as anyone can get moral wise.
Daveyo
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 9:01:33 GMT
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 9:25:04 GMT
![]() [/img] [/img] ![]() [/img] [/quote] Book reviews -- Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification edited by Mehmet Yasar Iscan and Richard P. Helmer Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification, edited by Mehment Yasar Iscan and Richard P. Helmer. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1993. 258 pp. $64.95 (hardcover). Forensic Analysis of the Skull is a compilation of papers that grew out of a 1988 workshop directed by Helmer in Kiel, Germany, titled, "Advances in Skull Identification via Superimposition." The papers cover a diverse array of traditional, revised, and unique identification methods. The workshop attracted an international group of anthropological, medicolegal, computer science, engineering, and other specialists addressing current and long-standing problems in forensic craniofacial analysis. This book creates an arena for those experts to share both standard and high-tech state-of-the-art developments that are typically published in isolated journals and are unknown or poorly understood by many forensic specialists faced with similar problems in identification. The book is divided into five well-integrated sections of sixteen chapters, yet no chapter depends on another. Part 1 provides both essential and anecdotal background by highlighting human craniofacial growth and evolution and, more important, by exploring the rich historical attempts at skeletal-soft tissue associations. Part 2 includes a somatometric analysis of the face and head correlated to body constitution using anthropometric data and the pivotal relationship of these data to photographic comparisons. Part 3 emphasizes the anthropological canons for assessing age, race, and sex from both a purely morphological analysis and a detailed craniometric analysis of the skull to demonstrate individualization. A three-dimensional modeling procedure using computed tomography, originally pioneered for surgery of craniofacial anomalies, is described for use when skulls are damaged or incomplete. Part 4 details the most recent high-tech developments in skull-photograph superimposition. These include everything from the fine-tuning of existing methods, such as achieving precision in skull-picture angulation, to performing several methods of computer-based shape analytical morphometry. The final section describes the promise and shortcomings of both traditional (i.e., radiographic, artistic) and new(er) approaches (i.e., ultrasound, palpation) in facial reproduction. Part 5 concludes with a comparative evaluation of a double-blind test of facial reproduction and its degree of reliability. Gruner provides an excellent history beginning in the late nineteenth century with the craniofacial interpretations of German anatomists reconstructing famous individuals (e.g., Bach, Kant, and Haydn) rather than the more recent forensic applications these techniques evolved into. This comprehensive introduction equips the reader with an appreciation for the technical development of a variety of apparatuses and how those early inventors and investigations devised, modified, and tested the limitations of the first administered superimpositions. Iscan's introduction to methods of photographic comparison is one of the more informative chapters in the volume, reflecting his long-term commitment to these problems. It provides a detailed and comprehensive assessment of three approaches: morphological assessment, photo anthropometrics, and photographic-video superimposition. Iscan admirably demonstrates the inherent limitations of all these techniques and warns that other brands of analysis should always accompany results gleaned from these methods. Novotny et al. explain how anthropologists ascertain age, racial affinity, and sex from skeletal remains. Although a review for most physical anthropologists, this chapter and the previous chapter by Iscan merit the cornerstone position in the introduction section of the book rather than the superficial chapter on craniofacial growth and evolution. And, although Novotny et al. recommend a morphological approach, their eschewal of the rewards of routine craniofacial discriminant function analysis is perplexing. Also, the omission of cementum annuli as an option available to forensic anthropologists is equally perplexing. And, even though it is one of the more high-tech methods discussed in the book, the computed tomographic production and milling procedure described to produce precision skull models (used in reconstructive craniofacial surgery) is the most impractical chapter from an economic standpoint. The most detailed and complex methodological contributions in the text belong to the long-standing and compelling techniques in craniofacial identification: skull-photograph superimposition. Included are not only essential technical tricks but also five chapters crammed with pictures of the contraptions and complex setups devised to accurately and repeatedly perform these analyses. The availability of such methods presented in this step-by-step manner decreases the discouragement that often accompanies unguided efforts. Such a suite of methodological standards and methods provides a ready basis for laboratory setup. findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199604/ai_n8734800/![]() [/img] Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 9:41:52 GMT
![]() [/img] It may very weel easy to understand now, why is so hard to believe what eyes can see ,see?. that eyes like wontly easy see what mind rejects to understand or concieve.Book reviews -- Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification edited by Mehmet Yasar Iscan and Richard P. Helmer Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification, edited by Mehment Yasar Iscan and Richard P. Helmer. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1993. 258 pp. Forensic Analysis of the Skull is a compilation of papers that grew out of a 1988 workshop directed by Helmer in Kiel, Germany, titled, "Advances in Skull Identification via Superimposition." The papers cover a diverse array of traditional, revised, and unique identification methods. The workshop attracted an international group of anthropological, medicolegal, computer science, engineering, and other specialists addressing current and long-standing problems in forensic craniofacial analysis. This book creates an arena for those experts to share both standard and high-tech state-of-the-art developments that are typically published in isolated journals and are unknown or poorly understood by many forensic specialists faced with similar problems in identification. The book is divided into five well-integrated sections of sixteen chapters, yet no chapter depends on another. Part 1 provides both essential and anecdotal background by highlighting human craniofacial growth and evolution and, more important, by exploring the rich historical attempts at skeletal-soft tissue associations. Part 2 includes a somatometric analysis of the face and head correlated to body constitution using anthropometric data and the pivotal relationship of these data to photographic comparisons. Part 3 emphasizes the anthropological canons for assessing age, race, and sex from both a purely morphological analysis and a detailed craniometric analysis of the skull to demonstrate individualization. A three-dimensional modeling procedure using computed tomography, originally pioneered for surgery of craniofacial anomalies, is described for use when skulls are damaged or incomplete. Part 4 details the most recent high-tech developments in skull-photograph superimposition. These include everything from the fine-tuning of existing methods, such as achieving precision in skull-picture angulation, to performing several methods of computer-based shape analytical morphometry. The final section describes the promise and shortcomings of both traditional (i.e., radiographic, artistic) and new(er) approaches (i.e., ultrasound, palpation) in facial reproduction. Part 5 concludes with a comparative evaluation of a double-blind test of facial reproduction and its degree of reliability. Gruner provides an excellent history beginning in the late nineteenth century with the craniofacial interpretations of German anatomists reconstructing famous individuals (e.g., Bach, Kant, and Haydn) rather than the more recent forensic applications these techniques evolved into. This comprehensive introduction equips the reader with an appreciation for the technical development of a variety of apparatuses and how those early inventors and investigations devised, modified, and tested the limitations of the first administered superimpositions. Iscan's introduction to methods of photographic comparison is one of the more informative chapters in the volume, reflecting his long-term commitment to these problems. It provides a detailed and comprehensive assessment of three approaches: morphological assessment, photo anthropometrics, and photographic-video superimposition. Iscan admirably demonstrates the inherent limitations of all these techniques and warns that other brands of analysis should always accompany results gleaned from these methods. Novotny et al. explain how anthropologists ascertain age, racial affinity, and sex from skeletal remains. Although a review for most physical anthropologists, this chapter and the previous chapter by Iscan merit the cornerstone position in the introduction section of the book rather than the superficial chapter on craniofacial growth and evolution. And, although Novotny et al. recommend a morphological approach, their eschewal of the rewards of routine craniofacial discriminant function analysis is perplexing. Also, the omission of cementum annuli as an option available to forensic anthropologists is equally perplexing. And, even though it is one of the more high-tech methods discussed in the book, the computed tomographic production and milling procedure described to produce precision skull models (used in reconstructive craniofacial surgery) is the most impractical chapter from an economic standpoint. The most detailed and complex methodological contributions in the text belong to the long-standing and compelling techniques in craniofacial identification: skull-photograph superimposition. Included are not only essential technical tricks but also five chapters crammed with pictures of the contraptions and complex setups devised to accurately and repeatedly perform these analyses. The availability of such methods presented in this step-by-step manner decreases the discouragement that often accompanies unguided efforts. Such a suite of methodological standards and methods provides a ready basis for laboratory setup. Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 9:59:41 GMT
Craniofacial Anthropometry. Prof/Dr Brian A Rothbart's Site for Researchers ![]() [/img] Photos courtesy of Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal en (endocanthion): the inner corner of the eye fissure where the eyelids meet eu (eurion): the most lateral point on the head ex (exocanthion): the outer corner of the eye fissure where the eyelids meet ft (frontotemporale): the most medial point on the temporal crest, identified by palpation fz (frontozygomaticus): the most lateral point on the frontozygomatic suture g (glabella): the most prominent point in the median sagittal plane between the supraorbital ridges gn (gnathion): in the midline, the lowest point on the lower border of the chin obi (otobasion inferius): the lowest point of attachment of the exteral ear to the head obs (otobasion superius): the highest point of attachment of the exteral ear to the head op (opisthocranion): the most prominent posterior point on the occiput po (porion): the most superior point on the upper margin of the external auditory meatus with the head in the Frankfort horizontal plane n (nasion): the midpoint of the nasofrontal suture sn (subnasale): in the midline, the junction between the lower border of the nasal septum and the cutaneous portion of the upper lip t (tragion): at the notch above the tragus of the ear where the upper edge of the cartilage disappears into the skin of the face tr (trichion): the midpoint of the hairline v (vertex): the highest point on the head with the head in the Frankfort horizontal plane zy (zygion): the most lateral point on the zygomatic arch Farkas, LG and Munro, IR (1987) Anthropometric Facial Proportions in Medicine. Charles C Thomas: Springfield, 344 pp. Kelly KM, Littlefield TR, Pomatto JK, Ripley CE, Beals SP, Joganic EF (1999) Importance of early recognition and treatment of deformational plagiocephaly with orthotic cranioplasty. American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 36: 127-30. Kolar, JC and Salter, EM (1997) Craniofacial Anthropometry. Practical measurement of the head and face for clinical, surgical and research use. Charles C Thomas: Springfield, 334 pp. Abstract Craniofacial anthropometry has become an important tool used by both clinical geneticists and reconstructive surgeons. Yet little attention has been paid to the potentially serious problem of measurement error. This paper examines intra-observer measurement error and precision (also called repeatability or reliability) for 52 commonly used anthropometric variables of the head and face. Two factors proved critical to reliability: magnitude of the measurement in question and the degree to which its constituant landmarks could be readily identified. Thus, all of the measurement variables with means above 10 cm proved to have good or excellent reliability. In contrast measurement variables with means below 10 cm were more likely to have poor reliability. This trend was especially evident in variables with means of 6 cm or less where 18 of the 20 variables in this range had poor reliability. The least reliable variables were those like philtrum breadth, columella breadth, and nasal root breadth that combine small magnitude with difficult to define landmarks. While these results suggest that it may be prudent to avoid using craniofacial variables with small dimensions this may be neither practical nor desirable. In such cases repeat measurements may be the best means for optimizing reliability. Ward RE, Jamison PL 1991. Measurement precision and reliability in craniofacial anthropometry: implications and suggestions for clinical applications. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol;Jul-Sep;11(3):156-164. Prof / Dr Brian A Rothbart Researcher, Specialist in the Elimination of Chronic Pain Private Practice, Multidisciplinary Clinic Albano - Rome Italy #39 06/930.4942 Source:http://rothbartsfoot.info/CranialAnthro.html Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 10:21:32 GMT
"A clue for you all": "and in the end"... Theres no fact being a proove of the death of Paul ...  ![]() [/img] Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 10:27:17 GMT
![]() [/img] That Means A Lot Lennon/McCartney Lyrics: A friend says that your love won't mean a lot And you know that your love is all you've got At times things are so fine and at times they're not But when she says she loves you, that means a lot A friend says that a love is never true And you know that this don't apply on you A touch can mean so much when it's all you've got When she says she loves you that means a lot Love can be deep inside, love can be suicide Can't you see you can't hide what you feel when it's real A friend says that your love won't mean a lot And you know that your love is all you've got A touch can mean so much when it's all you've got When she says she loves you that means a lot Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah Can't you see, yeah[/quote] Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 10:41:00 GMT
![]() [/img] The Walrus was "also" Neil ( .-..post Paul´s last aparition ...as Himself.) Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 10:49:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 10:54:54 GMT
![]() [/img] BAR CODE Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 11:04:05 GMT
![]() [/img] Same head shape. Attachments:
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 9, 2010 11:05:52 GMT
![]() [/img] Same Body. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by daveyo on Mar 10, 2010 8:13:45 GMT
Hi Teish
What are you trying to say and to point out here. Paul is not Neil, and Neil is not Paul. I am talking about the real Paul OK.
These are two different people here. There is one piece of evidence that is a dead ringer which proves it cannot be so. Yes we all know the McCartney line from the fathers side of which the male genes pick up and hardly the mothers which is usually for the girls, and the family line of the fathers side all have a genetic factor which is two of them. One is for glasses and the other is the receding hair line. So if the real Paul was to be alive today, he would be wearing glasses and would also be looking very close to like his father. The real Paul's brother is a prime example and he definitely looks closer to his dad today.
A lot of British people do look close but there is always something that tips you off if you look at them instantly and you can spot it too at a certain area.
I stand by what I say and that Neil is not the real Paul, and the Real Paul is not Neil by a long shot.
Daveyo
|
|
|
|
Post by romanruins on Mar 13, 2010 21:12:04 GMT
Daveyo is setting up a straw man argument in His last post. Lic. Teish is making an coherent presentation that the Real Paul could be using Neil's ID at times working at Apple Corp.
1.) If you look at the photo's Teish provides as Evidence from this site they are of Neil alone on a Public Street. HE IS BALD in the photos.
2.) The fact that He is not wearing Glasses in the pictures doesn't mean he doesn't use glasses, and Teish makes no such suggestion.
It is indeed unarguable "that Paul is not Neil, and Neil is not Paul" wow.
Neil had Five children by a wife of around Thirty Years.
Paul's Father's name was James, and his Brother's name is Michael, and the similarities are not as absolute as Daveyo claims, from available pictures. I don't remember seeing a photo of James earlier than in his sixties.
Cheers,
Ruins
|
|
|
|
Post by daveyo on Mar 14, 2010 5:17:50 GMT
Hi Ruins
The reason I said that real Paul is not Neil is the ear comparison. It does not match. We all need to have some foundation to prove identities and not fly all over the place. One person says its Billy Shears being the Faul, another says its William Shepard being the Faul, and vice versa etc. Sun King pointed this out a long time ago. Another example is many say Paul died either in some helicopter accident or plane crash, or car accident or shot to death etc and etc.
We need to band together and have a strong foundation to present the official known proof by authentic examples. Sun King did this by showing Billy Shears ears to the Faul as of today and those ear comparisons definitely match. I am almost positive that the Faul just so happens to be the Billy Shears. Where do you see this > on the legal comparisons section under the topic of reference documentations. A lot of people question the proof and many come up with their questions regarding such proof. Understand. Instead of weakening the position that this fabulous site has, we need to strengthen it and support it and stand by firm with the strongest possible evidence that this site can muster to withstand the incredible test that is being thrown upon it.
You and I know that the Real Paul definitely has been replace. No doubt about it. At least many of us are in agreement on this issue. None of us know the real reason why!!!! We don't have any evidence to tell the world why? None of us know how the real Paul died. We don't have any proof of this either. We need something solid to answer those two statements I just mentioned here. Without this we have very little to go on and that is a fact.
However we can also agree on this > In about another 5-10 years max the real Paul has to be Officially dead. He will be pushing near 80 years old > 10 years from now. We do know pretty much of the genetic genuine history of the McCartney line and to our knowledge I am going on its past history of longevity and most of them have died by age 75 years old. So this gives us another 5 years give or take. The odds of the real Paul showing up in a authentic manner from here on out is almost zilch.
Last of all the real Paul has not shown himself to the public's eye or been found alive all these years since the fall of 1966 to the best of everyone's knowledge notwithstanding those who really know the actual truth itself. This may sound crazy to you and to others, but if by per se chance that somehow somebody gets lucky to locate and discover the Real Paul etc, alive today and walking all around us what are the odds of this happening? Like Teish is trying to say here being Neil. Look at the ears and its a dead giveaway OK. The real Paul's ears will not change or adjust itself in such a way to look like Neil. Therefore we must stay on the reality plane and the authentic proof plane otherwise this forum will fall apart and everybody will think this forum is hogwash etc. The original intent of this forum I do believe is to expose this coverup to the best of its ability and try to present the best evidence to prove such, in a way that people can find a means to accept the ultimate shock that happens when they realize this is true.
On the last statement if you can find Michael with a side pose showing his left ear, then compare it to his father. You can also see the structure of the skull layout it pretty much does match with the real Paul and Michael. Other people besides me have also said get the DNA to prove it and we all know the DNA is the gold standard for positive authentic identification of individuals. The big question is how to get it from Michael, and how to get it from the Faul!!!!
If we get this far, then we need to hopefully find the body of the Real Paul and cross check it with Michaels DNA. That is how it should be done to verify everything. After this the rest will follow. But we need to get all this BEFORE they cremate themselves. Once cremated everybody is SOL.
Ahhhh, your turn Ruins and Teish. If you need to cut me to pieces OK go right on ahead, but I stand on what I say and want the truth > thats all. Just the reality truth. Fair enough.
Daveyo
|
|
Lic.Teish
Contributor
There's nothing you can't see that isn't shown
Posts: 161
|
Post by Lic.Teish on Mar 17, 2010 2:28:28 GMT
Hi Dav.
Please read these if you want to understand the EVIDENCE that you CAN´T see.:
Book reviews -- Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification edited by Mehmet Yasar Iscan and Richard P. Helmer.
Forensic Analysis of the Skull is a compilation of papers that grew out of a 1988 workshop directed by Helmer in Kiel, Germany, titled, "Advances in Skull Identification via Superimposition." The papers cover a diverse array of traditional, revised, and unique identification methods. The workshop attracted an international group of anthropological, medicolegal, computer science, engineering, and other specialists addressing current and long-standing problems in forensic craniofacial analysis. This book creates an arena for those experts to share both standard and high-tech state-of-the-art developments that are typically published in isolated journals and are unknown or poorly understood by many forensic specialists faced with similar problems in identification.
The book is divided into five well-integrated sections of sixteen chapters, yet no chapter depends on another. Part 1 provides both essential and anecdotal background by highlighting human craniofacial growth and evolution and, more important, by exploring the rich historical attempts at skeletal-soft tissue associations. Part 2 includes a somatometric analysis of the face and head correlated to body constitution using anthropometric data and the pivotal relationship of these data to photographic comparisons. Part 3 emphasizes the anthropological canons for assessing age, race, and sex from both a purely morphological analysis and a detailed craniometric analysis of the skull to demonstrate individualization. A three-dimensional modeling procedure using computed tomography, originally pioneered for surgery of craniofacial anomalies, is described for use when skulls are damaged or incomplete. Part 4 details the most recent high-tech developments in skull-photograph superimposition. These include everything from the fine-tuning of existing methods, such as achieving precision in skull-picture angulation, to performing several methods of computer-based shape analytical morphometry. The final section describes the promise and shortcomings of both traditional (i.e., radiographic, artistic) and new(er) approaches (i.e., ultrasound, palpation) in facial reproduction. Part 5 concludes with a comparative evaluation of a double-blind test of facial reproduction and its degree of reliability.
Gruner provides an excellent history beginning in the late nineteenth century with the craniofacial interpretations of German anatomists reconstructing famous individuals (e.g., Bach, Kant, and Haydn) rather than the more recent forensic applications these techniques evolved into. This comprehensive introduction equips the reader with an appreciation for the technical development of a variety of apparatuses and how those early inventors and investigations devised, modified, and tested the limitations of the first administered superimpositions.
Iscan's introduction to methods of photographic comparison is one of the more informative chapters in the volume, reflecting his long-term commitment to these problems. It provides a detailed and comprehensive assessment of three approaches: morphological assessment, photo anthropometrics, and photographic-video superimposition. Iscan admirably demonstrates the inherent limitations of all these techniques and warns that other brands of analysis should always accompany results gleaned from these methods. Novotny et al. explain how anthropologists ascertain age, racial affinity, and sex from skeletal remains. Although a review for most physical anthropologists, this chapter and the previous chapter by Iscan merit the cornerstone position in the introduction section of the book rather than the superficial chapter on craniofacial growth and evolution. And, although Novotny et al. recommend a morphological approach, their eschewal of the rewards of routine craniofacial discriminant function analysis is perplexing. Also, the omission of cementum annuli as an option available to forensic anthropologists is equally perplexing. And, even though it is one of the more high-tech methods discussed in the book, the computed tomographic production and milling procedure described to produce precision skull models (used in reconstructive craniofacial surgery) is the most impractical chapter from an economic standpoint.
The most detailed and complex methodological contributions in the text belong to the long-standing and compelling techniques in craniofacial identification: skull-photograph superimposition. Included are not only essential technical tricks but also five chapters crammed with pictures of the contraptions and complex setups devised to accurately and repeatedly perform these analyses. The availability of such methods presented in this step-by-step manner decreases the discouragement that often accompanies unguided efforts. Such a suite of methodological standards and methods provides a ready basis for laboratory setup.
|
|
munner
Welcome new member
Posts: 1
|
Post by munner on Sept 2, 2010 5:24:31 GMT
I have just joined, so please forgive me for repeating what I am sure has been said many times before. I had a friend who was a DJ at a local station. We would often join him late at night on his shift. After, we put the Beatles LPs on the turntable and spun them backwards. The messages there were very obvious, moaning "Paul is dead" and "Poor Paul",etc. Has there ever been a reasonable explanation for this? To me, it was proof that Paul was indeed dead, and I have believed that ever since. Did any of the other Beatles ever give a rational explanation, other than laughing it off??
Thanks for your patience, gang!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mistermustard on Sept 2, 2010 8:56:52 GMT
Munner:
It should be a sure thing that the Beatles were entirely aware of what they were doing with the backmasking. Aleister Crowley was a huge champion of backwards writing and speaking. He also appears on the Sgt Pepper cover multiple times. I find it to be more than a coincidence that the backmasked PID clues come after Sgt. Pepper even though the Beatles first started backmasking on "Rain."
So to answer your question, no there was never a rational explanation that I am aware of. That said Lennon always like to say (and this is a bit of a paraphrase) "Nothing ever happened by accident. We were always aware of what we were doing." Kind of interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by katiemae on Nov 28, 2010 18:09:53 GMT
The one thing no one has mentioned about the Paul/Neil comparisons that I've read here, is that the eye color is blue-grey on the man "Neil" and I believe that JPM had hazel eyes (just like mine) which are green and brown. It's very difficult to get hazel eyes to photograph in any other color but either greenish brown, or brown. What say you all??
|
|
|
|
Post by khamira on Nov 28, 2010 20:52:27 GMT
This whole PAUL/NEIL story is nothing but crap and Ive said it before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Nov 28, 2010 23:38:23 GMT
The one thing no one has mentioned about the Paul/Neil comparisons that I've read here, is that the eye color is blue-grey on the man "Neil" and I believe that JPM had hazel eyes (just like mine) which are green and brown. It's very difficult to get hazel eyes to photograph in any other color but either greenish brown, or brown. What say you all?? Do you know about scleral lenses? www.vampfangs.com/Contact-Lenses-s/6.htmwww.unrealfx.nl/vifit.htmlThere you can read:"the final scleral lenses test fitted into the actors eyes" |
|
