05-02-2011, 12:07 PM
Jack, I assure you that I never said or implied that "AGING CAUSES THE EYEBROWS TO MOVE CLOSER TOGETHER." Further, I've dismissed the "distance between eyebrows" part of your analysis because distance between eyebrows in the (anchor) DP photo cannot be reliably discerned.
What I say is that the photo of the older Adams, as in photo 4, is a ringer for the DP man, an absolute ringer. You don't deny that, do you? And I agree with Allan that Adams photo 4 is not the same Adams as in photo 2 by your reasoning! Now that's pretty crazy IMO. You might dismiss it as a debating tactic but it illustrates a weakness in photo ID when age differences really matter. At least we agree that age can make a big difference in photo analysis. That's why comparison of photo 4 vs. DP photo is so important, far more important than photo 2 vs. DP photo, namely, it removes most if not all of photo identification error due to a substantial age difference. That's a nice scientific advantage. It means trying to take age issues out of the ID problem, trying to narrow the problem and get closer to an "all else equal" comparison.
On squinting, I have no quarrel with your observation that squinting causes vertical wrinkles, as I said before, though it also causes a transverse furrow to form or deepen in my case too. I agree squinting is not the primary explanation for the man's facial expression in the DP photo.
Yes, I see you put the vertical furrow to good use in the Montoya/Frenchy ID case but that adds little to the present debate. As they admonish us in the investment world, past performance is no guarantee of future results. Well, that's a little too harsh. I love a worthy opponent like Jack, especially since we agree on so many other things!
What I say is that the photo of the older Adams, as in photo 4, is a ringer for the DP man, an absolute ringer. You don't deny that, do you? And I agree with Allan that Adams photo 4 is not the same Adams as in photo 2 by your reasoning! Now that's pretty crazy IMO. You might dismiss it as a debating tactic but it illustrates a weakness in photo ID when age differences really matter. At least we agree that age can make a big difference in photo analysis. That's why comparison of photo 4 vs. DP photo is so important, far more important than photo 2 vs. DP photo, namely, it removes most if not all of photo identification error due to a substantial age difference. That's a nice scientific advantage. It means trying to take age issues out of the ID problem, trying to narrow the problem and get closer to an "all else equal" comparison.
On squinting, I have no quarrel with your observation that squinting causes vertical wrinkles, as I said before, though it also causes a transverse furrow to form or deepen in my case too. I agree squinting is not the primary explanation for the man's facial expression in the DP photo.
Yes, I see you put the vertical furrow to good use in the Montoya/Frenchy ID case but that adds little to the present debate. As they admonish us in the investment world, past performance is no guarantee of future results. Well, that's a little too harsh. I love a worthy opponent like Jack, especially since we agree on so many other things!