|
Post by leeb on Aug 19, 2022 13:55:25 GMT -5
Unfortunately the price of the tintype brought a thousand pictures of Billy into the equation. Pictures have to have a paper trail and provenance. The croquet picture was authenticated by kagins (I have spoken with Don) but fell by the wayside, landscape didn't marry up. I'm just stating that any old west picture that "looks like Billy "isn't. You can't compare with things that have no provenance or sarcasm!
|
|
|
Post by paddyrobertstx on Aug 19, 2022 14:19:44 GMT -5
Absolutely I was jury asking as you seemed certain it had been dismissed as not BtK. There's a lot of open questions around pictures etc So I appreciate your response as I keep.going with my research all views are welcome
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Aug 19, 2022 14:47:32 GMT -5
I think it is better to assume that any picture is “not” Billy until it is proven that it is him. Rather than assuming any picture that has any kind of resemblance to him “is” him or is “likely” him until it is proven not. Then the question becomes, “What does it take to be worth further study?” I say it takes something more than just a possible “looks like him” scenario. Otherwise we’d be spending an inordinate amount of time debating all the hundreds of pictures that have been identified as such.
|
|
|
Post by paddyrobertstx on Aug 19, 2022 15:54:18 GMT -5
Absolutely! There's so many supposed photos and stories floating around it's hard to keep track. Usually they fall down sooner or later though
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Aug 19, 2022 17:23:29 GMT -5
I think it is better to assume that any picture is “not” Billy until it is proven that it is him. Rather than assuming any picture that has any kind of resemblance to him “is” him or is “likely” him until it is proven not. Then the question becomes, “What does it take to be worth further study?” I say it takes something more than just a possible “looks like him” scenario. Otherwise we’d be spending an inordinate amount of time debating all the hundreds of pictures that have been identified as such. There is no doubt that is the most reasonable and correct scientific way to approach all these alleged Billy photos. And the only way a photo can be proven to be Billy is when it has been officially accepted as authenticated. So what could it be that makes a photo be worthy of further study? I think the Gaubert photo is a good example of one such photo that has something in it that calls for further study. The Chavez lookalike has the exact same eyes, eyebrows, nose, hairline and scars as the real Chavez.
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Aug 23, 2022 8:03:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Sept 1, 2022 16:46:38 GMT -5
Welcome Antonio. You've hit on the one thing that gives me the most doubt about Brushy. But there are two possible explanations for the discrepancy in the appearance of the earlobes. First, one of the ears in the tintype is so badly distorted it's really not possible to determine the shape of the earlobe and the other one has what I believe is a dark sport right where the lobe joins the face that is deterioration of the photo. Second, Billy was standing in front of a metal stand that is designed to keep the subject from moving while the photo is being exposed. You can clearly see the bottom of that behind his feet. The top part would have been a U shaped support placed behind his head which might have been pushing his ears forward giving them a different shape. It's probably not possible to prove either of these theories but they are very real possibilities. I just feel in view of all the other evidence that supports Brushy's story and the remarkable similarity of all the other facial features that one or both of those two reasons for the appearance of the earlobes is likely true. Even so, if you have something pushing the ears the lobes wouldn't detach from the face like that. I agree that all the other evidence does support Brushy's story. And I want to believe him. But if the tintype is indeed BTK, I don't think the tintype is Brushy. When Brushy was first interviewed didn't he say that his step brother was Billy or something to that affect? Maybe that is the truth. And maybe he got his story from his step brother who was indeed Billy and he did survive and told Brushy all about it. Details and all....
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Sept 1, 2022 17:31:27 GMT -5
In this photo Billys earlobes are not detached. Actually, they look exactly like Brushys earlobes. View AttachmentThat looks a lot like this picture of the supposedly BTK on a horse.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Sept 7, 2022 11:07:19 GMT -5
Welcome Antonio. You've hit on the one thing that gives me the most doubt about Brushy. But there are two possible explanations for the discrepancy in the appearance of the earlobes. First, one of the ears in the tintype is so badly distorted it's really not possible to determine the shape of the earlobe and the other one has what I believe is a dark sport right where the lobe joins the face that is deterioration of the photo. Second, Billy was standing in front of a metal stand that is designed to keep the subject from moving while the photo is being exposed. You can clearly see the bottom of that behind his feet. The top part would have been a U shaped support placed behind his head which might have been pushing his ears forward giving them a different shape. It's probably not possible to prove either of these theories but they are very real possibilities. I just feel in view of all the other evidence that supports Brushy's story and the remarkable similarity of all the other facial features that one or both of those two reasons for the appearance of the earlobes is likely true. Even so, if you have something pushing the ears the lobes wouldn't detach from the face like that. I agree that all the other evidence does support Brushy's story. And I want to believe him. But if the tintype is indeed BTK, I don't think the tintype is Brushy. When Brushy was first interviewed didn't he say that his step brother was Billy or something to that affect? Maybe that is the truth. And maybe he got his story from his step brother who was indeed Billy and he did survive and told Brushy all about it. Details and all.... There are varying degrees of attached vs. non-attached earlobes. Brushy's right ear has some degree of detachment. I do believe something pushing it forward would make that earlobe appear larger. His left ear is more attached, but that is the ear that is really not even visible in the tintype.
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Sept 8, 2022 0:52:53 GMT -5
The most likely explanation is, as Wayne said, distortion of the photo. Its not possible to determine if the one visible earlobe is detached or if it only looks like that due to deterioration of the tintype. There are dark spots all over and it certainly appears one of them is just where the earlobe would attach. The other explanation I don't buy. I have attached earlobes and they don't become detached when pressed forward. One other possible explanation I can imagine is the curls of hair sticking out around the ear creates an illusion of a detached earlobe.
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Sept 8, 2022 14:29:32 GMT -5
I believe also along with the other points, made by Wayne and ronnback, when the camera takes a shot at the face looking straight ahead sometimes the fullness of the cheeks or side of face could cover the view of the earlobe’s attachment or detachment to the face. In this photo of Brushy to me his earlobe looks a little detached to me, the bottom of the earlobe does not look completely flush to the side of the face in other words in this photo, and Brushy’s head is not facing straight at the camera.
|
|
|
Post by antonio on Sept 16, 2022 17:43:00 GMT -5
The most likely explanation is, as Wayne said, distortion of the photo. Its not possible to determine if the one visible earlobe is detached or if it only looks like that due to deterioration of the tintype. There are dark spots all over and it certainly appears one of them is just where the earlobe would attach. The other explanation I don't buy. I have attached earlobes and they don't become detached when pressed forward. One other possible explanation I can imagine is the curls of hair sticking out around the ear creates an illusion of a detached earlobe. I can see the hair being a real possibility. The pic below shows a man who does look a little like the tin type and does resemble a young Brushy a bit. He does look to have a kind of lazy eye if you will as well. However he doesn't look Irish to me. Now the one you posted previously and the man on the horse along with the man with a fiddle i've seen before look like they could possibly be Irish. But who knows from blurry old pictures.
|
|