Quote:
Originally Posted by bmarlowe1
>> Just ignore the evidence that I gave on this on two different posts.
You continue to blather imprecise nonsense
>> By the way, feel free to check out Paul Waner's nose on the 1926 exhibit and the 1945 Yankees picture. Clearly appreciable difference in the nose long before the age
Really, do you read the posts? Seems not. "Age 70" was tied to ears, not noses, though noses are also fairly stable thru middle age. And in any case I addressed your nose comment back in post 73.
|
LOL!
Here we go.....again. Thank you for the laughter.
Let's see if we can simplify this for you. 1926 exhibit. No, hook nose. 1945 profound hook nose.
Your answer from post 73:
"The noses in the 1926 exhibit and the Yankee and Pitt photos are consistent. For some people, especially those with large noses, just starting to smile or grimace will case the nose phlange and nostrils to pull up at an angle relative to the tip of the nose. This is evident in the Pitt. and NY images and is exaggerated in the Pitt image because his head is tilted forward. In the 1926 image he is expressionless and the camera is slightly low (his head is tilted slightly back relative to the plane of the camera."
Now, that is blather. The point that you are blathering around is that there is a profound difference in the nose. The distinct difference is because of age not because of a beginning smile or tilt of the head. The evidence is right in front of you in the difference between the 1926 exhibit and the 1945 Yankees picture.
Also, please look at the ear in each photo. Notice a difference? Remember, we're talking about ages 22 to 23 as opposed to 41 or 42. Not 70. Still, that's only an additional difference of over two and approaching three decades beyond the Yankees picture.
Go ahead. Blather.
No hard feelings.