TSBD Doorway man - Oswald or Lovelady?

[Albert Doyle]

Doyle, you admit that shade from the lintil is causing slivers of shade over Doorman's t-shirt on both sides. Obviously, it is darkening the t-shirt but not obliterating it. We can still see the margins of the t-shirt very well, and we are not confused.

No, I don't and you know I don't. That's just a crazy contrivance you developed to avoid answering my previous points. As I've already stated it should be apparent to any honest person that I am arguing the exact opposite. That I am arguing that the "sliver" of skin is an unshaded patch of sunlit skin without any shadow on it that you can't account for. Your intellectually perverted need to put words in my mouth to change the obvious meaning of what I wrote is sick. If it is due to a genuine learning disability on your behalf I suggest you refrain from normal forums. They're only going to cause you problems. If you're a deliberate provocateur you know what I wish for you.

Your cross-eyed T-shirt darkening bs above is nonsense. That's just another one of your demented strawmen. The only T-shirt darkening in Marsh is in the spot of the round-neck being shaded by the very bottom of the chin shadow as Lamson correctly cites.

Why should it be any different for chin shade? When you look at that darkness underneath his chin which forms the big expanse of vee, notice that it is consistent throughout. There is no differential between how it looks where it covers his skin as opposed to how it looks when it covers the portion of his white t-shirt that you say is covered. And you claim it is covered so well that it is making the t-shirt look like it is naturally v-shaped- a perfect illusion.

You are arguing from a crazy understanding that doesn't exist in reality. The V-notch is the over-contrasted chin shadow creating the alleged V-neck. It makes no difference if there is or isn't a color differential in there. The over-contrast accounts for its uniformity. As usual, you are using these crazy bogus contrivances to avoid answering for the pertinent differential that is there. That is, the differential between the skin patch and the V-shadow. Like a snake oil carnival hustler you attempt a very sloppy trick of keeping us focused on your crazy crap while ignoring the valid arguments you so visibly can't answer. So go ahead Dr Cinque, answer why there's a difference in color between the skin patch and V-shadow? You're obviously retarded because you fail to realize that if the "sliver" was from the lintel shade, as you claim, then there couldn't be a second shadow caused by the sun creating the V-notch. You attempt a very cheap method of getting around this by claiming therefore the V-notch is caused by the neck of the T-shirt. But reality dictates that you can only do that if you can answer for the differential between the skin patch and the black V-notch. You moronically fail to appreciate that if indeed you are trying to claim the neck area is shaded in lintel shade, and that the V-notch is open skin, then you have to account for why the skin color seen in the sliver area isn't seen in the V-notch area? You are undone by this Dr Cinque and skewered by the logic of your own disingenuous imbecilic arguments.


Let's make it easy for the finger-painting doctor. Answer the single point about the necessary uniform color of the neck front area according to your claim.