[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
Date: 6/14/03
Time: 1:11:24 AM
Remote Name: 68.73.58.136
Jean,
“Smarts” have nothing to do with it. It’s a question of specialized knowledge. Sometimes the smarter you are the “wronger” you’re going to be if you don’t have that knowledge.
Ford Motor Company lost 6.5 billon dollars in two years because it got rid of to many of its older workers in Design and Engineering and hired a bunch of kids with 4.0 grade averages in college who don’t know squat about putting a car on the road. They look at a problem and come to an intelligent conclusion that’s obvious, credible and wrong. The older modelers and engineers looked at the same problem and came to the same wrong conclusion years ago. Then they learned something that wasn’t apparent in the problem and came to the right conclusion.
The same principle applies to hundreds of issues and thousands of specific applications. Sometimes the differences in issues and applications appear to be insignificant when it’s crucial. Some things that look right are wrong. Some things that look wrong are right. Sometimes the difference appears to be huge (like the pants that seem to be going backward) but it IS insignificant. You have to see the same issues repeatedly (some of which occur only once every five or ten years) to know what you’re looking at.
Small differences in where the lens of your camera is relative to the bookshelf (up, down, side, fore and aft) can make a big difference in what you can measure in the snapshots. Just looking at them side by side won’t necessarily tell you what you need to know.
On the other hand, if the pictures appear to be identical except for the shoes, you can scan them and scale them until O.J. is the same height and see if they overlap line for line. If a wrinkle in his clothes a background object appear to be in the same relative position in both pictures you might get the same result by measuring a part of O.J.’s body relative to the object. If you blow up the pictures you might even be able to single out a distinctive pebble or a blade of grass that you can measure (make sure that your ruler is dead horizontal or vertical). If you find that reference object and the measurements are the same, you know that one photo is a fake. Both of them could be fakes.
Caution: Only a lazy cheat would fake a photo this way. I would alter parts of O.J.’s body, shift him to the left or right by three or four feet, fart around with his hair, wrinkles in his clothes and distinctive bends in the grass and then fake the shoes. –Jasper