13-01-2011, 06:22 PM
Charles,
Thanks for your contribution here.
First, let's begin with a general proposition:
Humans have a remarkable ability to distinguish faces at least in part because it is a very important social skill. Faces have dimensions that are quite similar, yet we can distinguish among them in the ordinary course of events rapidly and efficiently (accurately), that is, "holistically," i.e., faster and better. We are far better at this task than most, if not all, within-category discernment. There is considerable research about this ID skill existing from two months on and it engages vast amounts of the brain:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_perception[/FONT]
plus the difficulties with scientific and computer applications in facial recognition make our "human computers" look very good.
Second, that leaves me with the sad conclusion for now that reasonable people can disagree about particular close calls from photos in face perception, there being an irreducible subjective element we must live with until new data helps to narrow the zone of disputation in particular cases like Conein.
That said, everyone can play the face perception game, though some will inevitably be better than others if we did some testing. Apparently, there is no correlation between this skill and IQ, given no brain damage, so that won't tell us anything.
Third, I do not object to your general opinion about intel/ops and false sponsors being present, even if we cannot prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. I agree with you on Conein and Morales being unconvincing photo ID matches. But Hemming is different, that is a "lock" IMO based on instant first impression. I looked for more photos and the others confirmed my initial reaction. The Altgen image is very clear and it matches the Hemming photos on the web. I'm so confident that if I were a prosecutor and wanted to prove to the jury that CIA agents were present in Dealey Plaza, I'd lead with the Hemming photo. In other words, I'm confident 12 impartial and true citizens would agree. That's a different audience to persuade than researchers and advocates at DPF! If I had been Jim Garrison back in the day, I would have had Hemming arrested immediately upon receiving this info and interrogated. Alibi? He wouldn't have one that could withstand investigation plus the positive incriminating evidence would fall readily to hand, I strongly suspect. In any event, you do not agree with me on the Hemming face ID but what can I say? Look at more Hemming photos and see if you still find it unconvincing. Maybe you already have, and our difference persists and that's OK.
On Rip Robertson, I find that an excellent match but there is only one photo to compare with the Altgen image (inadequate data) so it does not rise to "convincing." But what is presented makes it a likely match, again IMO.
I do not have an opinion on the other cases you mention except for the tramps but I'll reserve that for another occasion, it's off-topic right now.
Thanks for your contribution here.
First, let's begin with a general proposition:
Humans have a remarkable ability to distinguish faces at least in part because it is a very important social skill. Faces have dimensions that are quite similar, yet we can distinguish among them in the ordinary course of events rapidly and efficiently (accurately), that is, "holistically," i.e., faster and better. We are far better at this task than most, if not all, within-category discernment. There is considerable research about this ID skill existing from two months on and it engages vast amounts of the brain:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_perception[/FONT]
plus the difficulties with scientific and computer applications in facial recognition make our "human computers" look very good.
Second, that leaves me with the sad conclusion for now that reasonable people can disagree about particular close calls from photos in face perception, there being an irreducible subjective element we must live with until new data helps to narrow the zone of disputation in particular cases like Conein.
That said, everyone can play the face perception game, though some will inevitably be better than others if we did some testing. Apparently, there is no correlation between this skill and IQ, given no brain damage, so that won't tell us anything.
Third, I do not object to your general opinion about intel/ops and false sponsors being present, even if we cannot prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. I agree with you on Conein and Morales being unconvincing photo ID matches. But Hemming is different, that is a "lock" IMO based on instant first impression. I looked for more photos and the others confirmed my initial reaction. The Altgen image is very clear and it matches the Hemming photos on the web. I'm so confident that if I were a prosecutor and wanted to prove to the jury that CIA agents were present in Dealey Plaza, I'd lead with the Hemming photo. In other words, I'm confident 12 impartial and true citizens would agree. That's a different audience to persuade than researchers and advocates at DPF! If I had been Jim Garrison back in the day, I would have had Hemming arrested immediately upon receiving this info and interrogated. Alibi? He wouldn't have one that could withstand investigation plus the positive incriminating evidence would fall readily to hand, I strongly suspect. In any event, you do not agree with me on the Hemming face ID but what can I say? Look at more Hemming photos and see if you still find it unconvincing. Maybe you already have, and our difference persists and that's OK.
On Rip Robertson, I find that an excellent match but there is only one photo to compare with the Altgen image (inadequate data) so it does not rise to "convincing." But what is presented makes it a likely match, again IMO.
I do not have an opinion on the other cases you mention except for the tramps but I'll reserve that for another occasion, it's off-topic right now.