So, the program is indeed Mummies Unwrapped. Mike why didn't you confirm that earlier when I asked if it was the program you were referring to?

(04-15-2019 02:02 PM)GustD45 Wrote:  I have to agree with Susan. Just looking at the photographs side by side the shape of the eyes is markedly different; even the shape of the mouth and jaw are different to a significant degree.

Has anyone ever seen these particular photos? I recognize the fake ones in the background, but these so-called "recognition" ones are new to me. Leaving work now to go home and ponder over this hoax. Software programs can produce whatever you want them to produce.

BTW: Just turned down an offer from the Travel Channel to have Surratt House participate in a new ghost program based on Hans Holzer's ghost chasing nearly 70 years ago. We are Chapter 3 (I think) in his Windows to the Past -- and really bad history.

The Philadelphia Inquirer ran this story today:
https://www.philly.com/news/john-wilkes-...90415.html

(04-15-2019 02:12 PM)Anita Wrote:  Thanks Susan. This human's eye agrees with you.

Also, it's important to read and understand what Robert D'Ovidio's is saying in this article.

Agreed about D'Ovidio's message that is carefully inserted in his publicity quote. Make sure to re-read it.

One positive comment about this film - the world-renowned Egyptologist (unknown to me, but that's fairly common), Ramy Romany is very pleasing to the eye... Move over Omar Shariff!

looking at the two photographs in the Inquirer, I say this ...
Apart from the noses, the eyebrows, the mouth, the hairline, yes and even the eyes, ...
I'd say that these two photographs could just about appear to be almost of the same human being ...
provided you squint your own eyes up and view the photos in a shaded room after consuming a half bottle of vodka.

"George’s photo was nearly a perfect match with Booth’s, within the top 1 percent of those bearing similar facial features, said researchers who worked with the creator of the New York Police Department’s first dedicated facial-recognition unit. "

I note that the researchers' names were not printed. If they honestly think that the photos are nearly a perfect match then I think they might usefully consider a change of career.

(Hopefully, I will recall the amount of time I have spent reading this article whenever anybody else calls my attention to anything in The Inquirer)

(04-16-2019 06:43 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  "George’s photo was nearly a perfect match with Booth’s, within the top 1 percent of those bearing similar facial features, said researchers who worked with the creator of the New York Police Department’s first dedicated facial-recognition unit. "

There are those falsely imprisoned based on eye-witness testimony. What's scary is how many innocent victims will be found guilty based on this technology, if indeed it comes up with the results described in the above quote.

(04-12-2019 06:00 PM)Steve Wrote:  A show entitled Mummies Unwrapped will air an hour-long episode entitled Hunting the Mummy of Lincoln's Assassin next Wednesday, April 17, 2019, at 10 PM on the Discovery Channel. With Discovery Channel rerunning the program several times (mostly during the weekend) during the next week (check you local listings for your area's times).

Mike, is this the program you're referring too?

Yes, that is the show.

The article will come out sometime after the show is aired.

I don’t post very often, but I have looked carefully at the two pictures that were included in the article in posts #28 and #33. I agree with everyone else, I do not see much similarity between the faces of those two men.

However, there is one other thing that can be seen, but we must look carefully. If we consider each picture separately and draw a vertical line down through the center of each face, we will find that each picture possesses vertical symmetry. The left side of the face perfectly matches the right side of the face, even down to the smallest blemish.

To obtain that symmetry, the pictures had to be seriously edited because such symmetry does not happen in real life. Just try it. Use photo editing software and edit a facial picture of yourself by splitting it down the center line and then flipping one half over to the other side. The new picture will look somewhat like you, but will be different.

Therefore, if the foundation of this “announcement” and “research” is based on the aforementioned two pictures, as they exist in that article, then that foundation has crumbled under its own weight. It would seem to me that no reliable facial comparison could be predicated on such edited photos. D’Ovidio seems to support that point via his comments in the article. Laurie and Anita have also mentioned D’Ovidio’s comments.

Has anyone seen other photos related to this research? I have not.

Bob

(04-17-2019 02:41 PM)RobertLC Wrote:  I don’t post very often, but I have looked carefully at the two pictures that were included in the article in posts #28 and #33. I agree with everyone else, I do not see much similarity between the faces of those two men.

However, there is one other thing that can be seen, but we must look carefully. If we consider each picture separately and draw a vertical line down through the center of each face, we will find that each picture possesses vertical symmetry. The left side of the face perfectly matches the right side of the face, even down to the smallest blemish.

To obtain that symmetry, the pictures had to be seriously edited because such symmetry does not happen in real life. Just try it. Use photo editing software and edit a facial picture of yourself by splitting it down the center line and then flipping one half over to the other side. The new picture will look somewhat like you, but will be different.

Therefore, if the foundation of this “announcement” and “research” is based on the aforementioned two pictures, as they exist in that article, then that foundation has crumbled under its own weight. It would seem to me that no reliable facial comparison could be predicated on such edited photos. D’Ovidio seems to support that point via his comments in the article. Laurie and Anita have also mentioned D’Ovidio’s comments.

Has anyone seen other photos related to this research? I have not.

Bob

Excellent critique - thank you so much! Wish that could be told to every curiosity seeker that will be watching this program over the next few months.

I’ll probably watch it although it’d better have DNA evidence to convince me that the mummy is actually Booth... which it won’t have.

‘“Facial characteristics can be like a fingerprint, but much depends on “the quality of the photos,” said D’Ovidio. “That’s a huge factor. The best samples are taken in controlled environments. You’re not going to get 90 percent accuracy if you have photos of questionable quality.”‘

Absolutely. And the John St. Helens picture was damaged straight down the face. Not to mention that it looks as though only one side of both men’s faces are being compared, and humans do not have completely identical facial features on both sides (one eye brow is often lower, chins often have curves, etc). That adds to the unreliability.

EDIT: And Robert LC beat me to the punch!

A short promo of the show, about 1 minute long.
I did notice from watching one previous episode of this show, the host always has his hat on, like he's trying to be a modern day Indiana Jones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_eCN4jpRxo

Anybody can look at those pictures and see it's not the same person. I don't care what the software says. I imagine every person on this forum would be 100% open-minded to serious, credible information that Booth escaped. But when you have people who have studied the assassination professionally and as a hobby for DECADES and have yet to see that serious, credible information, you can't give them a hard time when they approach something like this with skepticism. I believe that if it is ever proved that Booth escaped, it would light this forum up like nothing else. I have no doubt that the skeptics would admit without shame that they were wrong, and everybody here would dive in head first to re-write the history books. Don't blame the skeptics for being skeptical, for having learned their lesson. Blame whoever or whatever failed the skeptic time after time after time.

(04-18-2019 11:05 AM)jonathan Wrote:  Anybody can look at those pictures and see it's not the same person. I don't care what the software says. I imagine every person on this forum would be 100% open-minded to serious, credible information that Booth escaped. But when you have people who have studied the assassination professionally and as a hobby for DECADES and have yet to see that serious, credible information, you can't give them a hard time when they approach something like this with skepticism. I believe that if it is ever proved that Booth escaped, it would light this forum up like nothing else. I have no doubt that the skeptics would admit without shame that they were wrong, and everybody here would dive in head first to re-write the history books. Don't blame the skeptics for being skeptical, for having learned their lesson. Blame whoever or whatever failed the skeptic time after time after time.

Thank you, Jonathan, for a very good comment. Despite what some folks here think, we skeptics have benefited from a good deal of serious research into the subject of the mummy that has gone on since the days of Finis Bates first claims.

One thing that this show - and all others that have attempted to tell the mummy story - failed to mention is the physical description of "David E. George, The Mummy." If I am remembering correctly, it was nearly six-feet-tall with blue eyes. And, I believe that description was first given by the undertaker.

I would also like a lesson on whether or not human eyes are mummified. For some reason, I have always thought that the eyes were the first part of the human anatomy to break down after death; but the two photos always submitted of this one show wide-open eyes!

One other thing about the show (you're lucky 'cause I could say more...) was the several references to the mummy being in Pennsylvania in the 1970s. It might have been at some point in its eternal life, but I'm pretty sure that it was residing in Alexandria, Virginia, in the late-70s and early-80s because some of us were in communication with its then-owner -- who later disappeared also.

The Silver Spring, Maryland, owner was the one who invited our former Surratt Society president to view the mummy and flat-out told her it wasn't Booth. Frankly, I thought I would throw up at the ending when that poor, mutilated mummy was shown and had no relation to the story. And then, Indiana Jones (who never changed his clothes) feigned semi-anger and ordered his camera crew to leave. "Robert" must have been paid a good sum to invite this program into his personal sideshow...

(04-18-2019 05:24 AM)Gene C Wrote:  A short promo of the show, about 1 minute long.
I did notice from watching one previous episode of this show, the host always has his hat on, like he's trying to be a modern day Indiana Jones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_eCN4jpRxo

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

"Facial Characters can be like a fingerprint, but much depends on the "the quality of the photos..." That's a huge factor, the best samples are taken in a controlled environment. You're not going to get 90 percent accuracy if you have a photo of questionable of printing."

" George's photo was nearly a perfect match with Boot's, within the top 1 perfect of those barely similar facial features, said researchers who worked with the creator of the New York Police Department's first
dedicated facial-recognition unit. What's more, he was within one pixel
of having the same eye structure."

Those two paragraphs above have several flaws.

1) The image John Wilkes Booth used, and no image has to my knowledge photographed ever sitting facing forward.
2)The most allowable difference for a photo match would normally be about 0.5% (that's half a percent).
3)The image of David E. George is mutilated to the point that is doubtful and (like Booth) is tilted back.
4)Booth's eyebrows are horizontal with lateral eyebrows (frontozygomatic) drooping. George's don't.
5)Ears cannot be measure tilted back. Ears equal finger prints.
6)Booth's face has a chin furrow, George doesn't.
7)Angle of the lower jaw. Booth has a rounded jaw, George has a square jaw.
8)Booth has lower eyelids at the lowest midpoint.
9)David E. George has false eyes, when you see a photo of him in the
chair (embalmed any number of times) with a newspaper. Rather macabre.
10)Undertaker W.B. Penniman: "I never was able to see any striking resemblance between the body and the tin type...Finis Bates is the only man who ever tried to convince me as the real identity of this bird."

(04-18-2019 04:38 PM)Houmes Wrote:  

(04-18-2019 05:24 AM)Gene C Wrote:  A short promo of the show, about 1 minute long.
I did notice from watching one previous episode of this show, the host always has his hat on, like he's trying to be a modern day Indiana Jones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_eCN4jpRxo

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

"Facial Characters can be like a fingerprint, but much depends on the "the quality of the photos..." That's a huge factor, the best samples are taken in a controlled environment. You're not going to get 90 percent accuracy if you have a photo of questionable of printing."

" George's photo was nearly a perfect match with Boot's, within the top 1 perfect of those barely similar facial features, said researchers who worked with the creator of the New York Police Department's first
dedicated facial-recognition unit. What's more, he was within one pixel
of having the same eye structure."

Those two paragraphs above have several flaws.

1) The image John Wilkes Booth used, and no image has to my knowledge photographed ever sitting facing forward.
2)The most allowable difference for a photo match would normally be about 0.5% (that's half a percent).
3)The image of David E. George is mutilated to the point that is doubtful and (like Booth) is tilted back.
4)Booth's eyebrows are horizontal with lateral eyebrows (frontozygomatic) drooping. George's don't.
5)Ears cannot be measure tilted back. Ears equal finger prints.
6)Booth's face has a chin furrow, George doesn't.
7)Angle of the lower jaw. Booth has a rounded jaw, George has a square jaw.
8)Booth has lower eyelids at the lowest midpoint.
9)David E. George has false eyes, when you see a photo of him in the
chair (embalmed any number of times) with a newspaper. Rather macabre.
10)Undertaker W.B. Penniman: "I never was able to see any striking resemblance between the body and the tin type...Finis Bates is the only man who ever tried to convince me as the real identity of this bird."

It is so good to have your comments, Blaine, because you have been in the fight to disprove this myth as long or longer than I. More importantly, you have the broad experience of years in the medical field as well as a coroner to back up your statements.

One question - what is the history of glass (fake) eyes? Were they around in 1903?