Claim by bobbin that she has definitive proof that the 'last photo' has been manipulated - based on her understanding of Grade 8 Mathematical Geometry tests - THREAD LOCKED

 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Above is the video of the ‘forum expert’.

This expert closed his video with the statement that anyone NOT accepting his experiment and claiming that the reflection in Gerry’s sunglasses is impossible (re the last photo) were either ‘shilling, paid to discredit this photo, trolling or they are pig ignorant’ the choice being ours to decide.

There is another option, namely that those NOT accepting the above experiment as being valid, can be right to do so.

There was a period in history when the flat-earthians declared that any people believing the world to be round were wrong.

In the polls on the Maddie case, there are more people who in their gut instinct feel that the image in Gerry’s sunglasses in the last photo is incorrect and therefore it must have been manipulated into place rather than occurring naturally.
It is always a sound reaction to trust gut instincts even if it takes a while to find definitive proof to support the belief.

Here is that definitive proof.

I found it in grade 8 Mathematical Geometry texts and although complex, I have tried to reduce it to everyday common language.

Firstly, an explanation of the X and Y axes and how a page/an image, may be cut in two, for reflective purposes.

The X axis is Horizontal.
It is almost exclusively used to refer to a line going horizontally, from left to right, as it were. Cutting a view in two, along a horizontal line will give a top and a bottom part.

The Y axis is Vertical.
It is almost exclusively used to refer to a line going vertically, from above to below. Dividing a view vertically will give a left hand and a right hand side.
 
Quote from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
·  A [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] swaps all of the x or y values across the y- or [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], respectively. It can be visualized by imagining a mirror lies across that axis.
·  A vertical reflection is given by the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] y = −f(x) and results in the curve being "reflected" across the x-axis.
·  A horizontal reflection is given by the equation y = f(−x) and results in the curve being "reflected" across the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Source: Boundless. “Reflections.” Boundless Algebra. Boundless, 21 Jul. 2015. Retrieved 15 Nov. 2015 from [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
end quote.

Across the X axis, and a Vertical reflection.
This means that a vertical reflection is like a lake. The houses on the other side of the lake from the viewer will appear to be copied, but upside down in image. Top to bottom, head to toe.

Across the Y axis and a horizontal reflection.
This means that a horizontal reflection will be like standing in front of a mirror. If you raise your left hand in front of the mirror, it will look, in the mirror, as if you have raised your right arm, and vice versa. The image is reversed, but in the sense of Left appearing to be Right, and Right appearing to be Left.

The photo of Gerry is of a vertically sitting person, looking full front onto the person with the camera, the picture ‘taker’. The distance is a good few meters between the ‘taker’ and the subject.

Gerry’s view/ the view from behind the lenses of the glasses would be one of the pool immediately below, rising up in his field of vision, this would be followed by the poolside wall, and in the mid picture range, with grass beyond towards the tennis courts (which dropped away) and possibly some roofing of buildings beyond, with sky in the upper part of his view. His sideways views would be of the landscape to left and right in his field of vision.

His view of the scene then, would be that which is contained in his field of view.
The closer he would be to an object, the smaller his range of vision would be, the further back he would be from an object, the larger his range of vision.

With a distance to the ‘taker’ he would have a good picture of the lower area of vision, namely the pool, then the park, the ‘taker’ him/herself and beyond, upwards, sideways.

Put a transparent screen in front of Gerry’s eyes, he will still have the same field of vision.

If the screen is reflective, as well as translucent, then the same image seen by Gerry, will be reflected also in the reflective material.

The difference in view would be that, what the onlooker, looking at the reflection, would see with his left eye, would be what Gerry is seeing with his right eye, and vice versa.

If the onlooker were to go around to the back of the translucent, yet reflective screen, and join Gerry’s head, the onlooker would have the same view as Gerry, seeing with the left eye what Gerry is seeing with his left eye and vice versa.

So if Gerry were seeing a flat level of water (pool) flat/horizontal grass area, flat/horizontal top edge of tennis court chain-link fencing, horizontal line of roof tops, horizontal line of ocean (if visible) joining sky, then the images showing on the two lenses of Gerry’s glasses would need to be horizontally laid across both lenses, as if replicating the field of vision seen by Gerry.

Now let’s move this on to the specifics of the reflection seen in the left lens of Gerry’s glasses in the last photo.

Both flat-earthians and instinctives agree the imagery to be pool side and pool water.
So let us consider these two elements as cream coloured and blue coloured.

Now those who say that the glasses were photographed in an upright position, namely hanging off Gerry’s T shirt neckline, will see cream at the top and blue underneath.

Let us say the shape of the hanging sunglasses is like a glass bottle and the colours are like oil (cream coloured) and water (blue coloured) in a glass bottle.
The oil floats to the top.

If we now turn the bottle onto its side, in order to replicate sunglasses lying horizontally across Gerry’s nose and eyes, what happens to the distribution of the oil and water.
Yes, it settles out flowing horizontally.

Every photo of sunglasses worn perpendicular to the face of an upright person, looking face on, will show reflection of the lines in the true image of the field of vision.
That is, if a vertical door jam is in the field of vision, it will be vertical in the reflection. If a horizontal lake, field, sea horizon is in the field of image /vision it will be horizontal in the reflection.

What has appeared in the last photo is the equivalent of the left eye lens of the hanging glasses (possessing all the cream colour/the oil) being shifted from the vertical plane, to be placed horizontally, without understanding that the reflected image would flow and settle horizontally across both lenses and not be restricted to 'vertical' in one lens only.

Conclusion.

In the video above, the expert does not replicate the conditions of the last photo.

Anyone knows that holding a mirror and tilting it around will change the reflective view considerably. Whether tilting a mirror or moving around a fixed mirror object, the effect of changing perspective is the same.

The ‘expert’ takes pictures, purporting alignment to the toilet paper with a vertical image in the ‘not sunglasses’.
BUT he does it often times from a very close up position,
from a face tilted towards the toilet paper,
and from a position above the model’s head, as opposed to full face on.

At times he is almost vertically above the plastic lens, (veering towards 90 degrees above).

Yet the vertical door in the room and door jam, the horizontal skirting board, the reflection of the string holding the left lens in place, show much more accurately what the true reflective behaviour is, of independent items in reflection.

Shifting all of the constants is not good research and will not replicate the conditions of the sunglasses in the last photo.

The common experience of the instinctives is that when they are looking at reflective sun glasses, the sun glasses will reflect the scenery behind them, as if they were looking at the true image themselves but with left eye instead of right and vice versa.

Since the brain is able to take two images from two eyes and combine them in the visual processing part of the brain to deliver one image, then left/right handedness, are merely spatial awareness considerations. They do not change or alter the ‘content of the imagery’.

The laws of mathematical geometry confirm the instinctives’ belief.

Weren't you complaining just the other day about a second thread being created to discuss the Last Photo because it diverted us away from the original thread?

So now you've started a third thread?

I swear... no one will read that wall of text.

Get'emGonçalo wrote:Weren't you complaining just the other day about a second thread being created to discuss the Last Photo because it diverted us away from the original thread?

So now you've started a third thread?

I didn't want this information to get lost in the midst of the sort of useless commenting that can see pages pass out of sight.



[ Thread locked. Members & guests are referred to the video referred to in the OP: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

which clearly explains how vertical images can be produced on sunglasses - Mod ]

----------------------------

Knitted's post added by Admin:

Knitted wrote:For some time I've seen the Last Photo as one of the key 'Smoking Guns'. I think Richard's latest documentary has done a most thorough job in pulling together all the relevant information relating to that specific important topic and putting it into one single place. 

Since the Last Photo attracts a disproportionate amount of misinformation and obfuscation (...just read the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on this forum, locked by Admin back in November, to see what I mean) it is clear to me that it is indeed a forgery in that part of its EXIF Metadats, specifically its 'datestamp', has been altered to provide 'proof' that Madeleine was alive on the afternoon before her reported disappearance...and that certain people do not want this easy to grasp fact exposed 

Therefore, if it's of any interest in moving future debates and discussions forward that relate to the specific topic of the Last Photo, I've taken some of the high-level bits from Richard's documentary and stuck them together into a 15min mini-video and popped it on YouTube, (along with links to this site, Richard's full documentary and the McCannfiles in the notes section).

Link: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]