Once again – because it probably won’t be the last time – I find something offered up as having evidentiary value on an important issue but for me doesn’t, and to what end? To entertain and enthrall, likely, or to deceive and mislead, highly likely.
I refer to a photo offered up on ufo-blogger.com with a question about its authenticity. While ufo-blogger was not so quick to challenge its authenticity, saying that
“Given the source, we would assume the photo is authentic, and correctly dated to c.1940. Indeed, an Error Level Analysis suggests the image was not digitally tampered with, or at least that if it was, the author was smart enough to normalize the error across the whole thing. It’s a good job, if it was a job. And again, given the source, we would assume it was not a job.”
I, on the other hand, after only a few minutes analysis, concluded that the photo had been tampered with.
It doesn’t matter what he’s wearing or what camera he has in his hands, as most of the ‘anonymous’ comments focused on. What matters is that this photo has been tampered with, it’s a fake. And it is easily seen if one pays attention to the details, and without the need initially for Error level analysis.
If one looks carefully at the shadow detail on the alleged time traveler and everyone else, and especially look at the shadow on the time traveler’s left cheek, then check the left ear and the eye-brow on the left side of his face where it meets the forehead immediately above the sunglasses – if they are sunglasses -, one can see that the shadow is wrong and the facial aspects are incorrect, for a human. There are other features besides these that look ‘odd’.
I declare, for those who may begin thinking that I might be something that I am not, that I am not sceptical about the possibility of time travel. I am sceptical of the photo’s authenticity not of the possibility of time travel. If ufo-blogger is implying that the photo is authentic then I am simply challenging the logical conclusion ufo-blogger came to based on a weighted acceptance of an Error Level Analysis and the source of the photo. Based on my analysis of the features I mentioned above and others, I am concluding that the photo has been tampered with and therefore lacks authenticity, and not for any other reason.
As for the photos evidentiary value in relation to time travel, I cannot say one way or the other. I suggest the reader talks to Stephen Hawking given that he is the scientist who claims that time travel is possible. I am not a physicist.
Update (02/01/2011): UFO-Blogger didn’t post my comment on the photo and the photo is still posted on the site. That’s funny.