An update: I present to you.....

[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.

[Brian Van Horn]

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.

[bmarlowe1]

>> 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.

As usual you are wrong, my assessment was correct. Below we have a young PW, smiling a bit and what do you know, his nose tip points distinctly downward. Can you see that Mr. Van Horn?

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

>> 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.

As usual you are wrong, my assessment was correct. Below we have a young PW, smiling a bit and what do you know, his nose tip points distinctly downward. Can you see that Mr. Van Horn?

Bwahaha!

Let's see. Look at your picture and the 1945 Yankees picture. Notice a huge difference in the nose and, no, it is not due to angle or smile.

Also, you didn't answer my request which I will again post:

"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."

You have a wonderful dichotomy of blathering (incorrectly) on one subject while avoiding another.

No hard feelings.

[bmarlowe1]

>> Let's see. Look at your picture and the 1945 Yankees picture. Notice a huge difference in the nose and, no, it is not due to angle or smile.

Looks about the same as the young PW smiling photo

>> 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.

There is absolutely no visible difference in the ear.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

>> Let's see. Look at your picture and the 1945 Yankees picture. Notice a huge difference in the nose and, no, it is not due to angle or smile.

Looks about the same as the young PW smiling photo

>> 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.

There is absolutely no visible difference in the ear.

Oh, my goodness. LOL!

Would you agree the pictures are about the same size and distance from Paul Waner in both photos?

Just asking. Again, just asking.

[bmarlowe1]

>> Would you agree the pictures are about the same size and distance from Paul Waner in both photos?

Again, in English please

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

>> Would you agree the pictures are about the same size and distance from Paul Waner in both photos?

Again, in English please

It is in English! LOL!

Let's try this again. Would you agree since you literally lined up these photos they are just about the same size and that the pictures were taken from about the same distance away?