Great video about images vs Daguerreotypes of Joseph and Hyrum

[Vort]

I'm no expert, nor do I play one on the internet. But I found this rather convincing.

[mikbone]

https://www.fromthedesk.org/joseph-smith-photo-forensics-2023/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=joseph-smith-photo-forensics-2023

Im still heavily on the side of authentication.  

I didnt even finish watching the video.  The author does not understand that a death mask has no tone in the facial muscles.  When taking a daguerreotype the subject has to remain still for a prolonged time.  It ain't a iPhone picture.

If you have ever seen a person that has over done botox injections to appear younger and  has instead completely lost the ability to display any facial queues you might begin to understand that a death mask will not have normal wrinkles as compared to a prolonged picture pose.

Edited June 14, 2023 by mikbone

[Carborendum]

 

[mikbone]

May want to review this video if you are interested in science & measurements instead of opinion.

 

[Vort]

7 hours ago, mikbone said:

May want to review this video if you are interested in science & measurements instead of opinion.

 

mik, did you watch the previous videos? Because they were not mere opinion.

[mikbone]

On 6/15/2023 at 9:38 PM, Vort said:

mik, did you watch the previous videos? Because they were not mere opinion.

Watched the first one.  Opinions.  Subjective info.  He is an artist and really cares about period correct attire.

The one I posted uses rulers, computers, image processing etc. 

The conclusion of your video is that the daguerreotype in question is of Hyrum.  There is no commentary in church history of Hyrum ever having had sat for a pic…  

The conclusion of Curtis Weber is that the daguerreotype is highly likely of Joseph and that the painting was done post mortem using the daguerreotype, death mask, and possibly Joseph’s 2nd son Fredrick as a stand in model. 

The first hour of the video is of the skull analysis of both Joseph and Hyrum.  Pretty convincing.

An artist’s opinion vs. forensic data…

 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by mikbone

[mikbone]

I’m still irritated.

Here is my real problem with David Lindsey and people who think like him.

He does not understand the character of Joseph Smith.

Lindsey said, when he saw this picture,

Surely this must be Joseph. 

But no freaking way.  This is a politician.  A man who is practiced in compromise, pulling the wool over the eyes of the public and carefully delivering statements to help others interpret his version of the truth.

And how can he state it fits the death mask?!

He is seeing what he wants.

Joseph had grit.  @ seven he had a bone window cut into his tibia without anesthesia, by demand.  @ fourteen  he wrestled with both Satan and God.  He was a farmer and performed manual labor on many occasions.  He was in fist fights.  Tarred and feathered twice.  He spoke with a slight whistle from a tooth he lost in one encounter.  He told the truth and stood his ground.  Was in over 200 legal suits.  Imprisoned on multiple occasions.  Spent time on the run from the law.  Lost multiple loved ones.  Served in the military.  Oversaw the collapse of a bank.  Was publicly and privately slandered by many including friends.

The above is reality.  This happened to Lincoln’s countenance during the Civil War.

We might want Joseph Smith to look like this…

But more than likely, he looked like this…

We have the provenance, the forensic science, and common sense.

 

 

[mikbone]

This also bothers me.  The swoopy pomaded sideburns carefully styled anteriorly.  I’ve never seen it done in person.  And only associate it with Joseph Smith drawings.

Lindsey’s painting also highlights it.

It isn’t a thing.  I have short hair, but if I let it grow out, it will start to curl just as seen in the daguerreotype.

Its just unruly hair.  Joseph didn’t go to the stylist on a weekly basis.

 

[mikbone]

https://ensignpeakfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Skulls-and-Crossed-Bones-A-Forensic-Study-of-the-Remains-of-Hyrum-and-Joseph-Smith.pdf

The above is a scientific paper wherein Curtis Weber refutes an earlier claim that the 1928 exumation of Joseph and Hyrum's remains had been mis-idntifited. 

The following paragraph lists the errors that had been made by a couple of do-gooders using opinions instead of science.  

In more recent years, a small controversy has arisen over the 1928 identification of the remains of Hyrum and Joseph. At the 1994 Mormon History Association conference in Park City, Utah, Ron Romig and Lachlan Mackay presented their belief that the martyrs’ remains had been misidentified in 1928—that Hyrum’s remains are mistakenly buried under Joseph’s grave marker, and vice versa. They had arrived at this conclusion after conducting “primitive comparisons” between the 1928 skull photographs, Joseph’s death mask, and the Scannel daguerreotype, a purported photographic image of Joseph Smith taken in life. They noted a “striking correspondence” between Joseph’s death mask, the daguerreotype, and the skull identified in 1928 as Hyrum’s. The following year, Shannon Michael Tracy published In Search of Joseph, a book containing evidence supporting this conclusion. In 2008, Tracy refined and expanded his evidence in a second book, Millions Shall Know Brother Joseph Again: The Joseph Smith Photograph. Furthermore, Joseph and David Lyon concurred with Tracy’s findings in their analysis of the Carthage Jail crime scene in an article which appeared in a 2008 issue of BYU Studies.

Finally, there is no discussion of the tibia of Joseph Smith.  It would have been obvious from examination of the prolonged osteomyelitis and likely partial growth arest of the bone.  I am sure that the team that exumed the skeletal remains in 1928 would have recognized Joseph's deformed and remodeled tibia. 

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by mikbone

[Carborendum]

20 hours ago, mikbone said:

Here is my real problem with David Lindsey and people who think like him.

He does not understand the character of Joseph Smith.

Lindsey said, when he saw this picture,

Surely this must be Joseph. 

But no freaking way.  This is a politician.  A man who is practiced in compromise, pulling the wool over the eyes of the public and carefully delivering statements to help others interpret his version of the truth.

And how can he state it fits the death mask?!

This goes to show how little you paid attention to those videos. 

If you pay that little attention to what Lindsley actually said, can we really believe you did proper due diligence in your critique of his findings?

[Carborendum]

21 hours ago, mikbone said:

The above is reality.  This happened to Lincoln’s countenance during the Civil War.

I'm not sure if you've been to a civil war museum or any Lincoln museum.  But one interesting statement that I heard in one such museum is that Lincoln looked like he was dead already.

One expert on death masks and life masks looked at his life mask and absolutely would not believe it was a life mask.  He said something like

Quote

I've seen and made over a hundred death masks and life masks.  And I know the difference.  I tell you with absolute certainty that this is a death mask.

He then went on to point out the differences between a life mask and a death mask, thus proving the object he was looking at was indeed a death mask. And he indicated that even stress or old age never creates these features.  So, it had nothing to do with his lifestyle.

Unfortunately for him, the mask came with a historical custody and date of creation (which was quite a while before his death).  Regardless of his expertise (which everyone around him granted) he was just plain wrong.

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

This goes to show how little you paid attention to those videos. 

If you pay that little attention to what Lindsley actually said, can we really believe you did proper due diligence in your critique of his findings?

Can you point out the things he said that display any scientific objective data?

There are standards of scientific rigor.

It has been proven over and over that “professional opinions” are not worth the paper that they are written upon.

[Carborendum]

1 minute ago, mikbone said:

Can you point out the things he said that display any scientific objective data?

There are standards of scientific rigor.

It has been proven over and over that “professional opinions” are not worth the paper that they are written upon.

Do you even know what I was referring to?  You should take a look back at your own post that I quoted from.

[mikbone]

17 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Do you even know what I was referring to?  You should take a look back at your own post that I quoted from.

No. Can you plz be specific?

[Carborendum]

18 hours ago, mikbone said:

No. Can you plz be specific?

 

On 6/18/2023 at 2:06 PM, mikbone said:

Here is my real problem with David Lindsey and people who think like him.

He does not understand the character of Joseph Smith.

Lindsey said, when he saw this picture,

Surely this must be Joseph. 

But no freaking way.  This is a politician.  A man who is practiced in compromise, pulling the wool over the eyes of the public and carefully delivering statements to help others interpret his version of the truth.

21 hours ago, Carborendum said:

This goes to show how little you paid attention to those videos. 

If you pay that little attention to what Lindsley actually said, can we really believe you did proper due diligence in your critique of his findings?

18 hours ago, mikbone said:

Can you point out the things he said that display any scientific objective data?

Since you asked, I'm going to walk you through it.

Mik: You said that you were really bothered when Lindsley said that the photos of the senator "surely looks like Joseph."  You even went so far as to say "no freaking way."  

Carb: I pointed out that you really didn't pay attention to what he said.  I was trying to draw attention to the fact that Lindsley said that phrase sarcastically.  He was implying that many others thought that, but not him.  He was trying to convey how easy (and how erroneous) it is to take pretty much any photo from that era and decide that it looks like Joseph.

Mik: You asked for scientific data. 

I didn't talk about the scientific data.  I was pointing to the fact that you went into it with your mind so biased, that even that sarcastic statement was accepted as his real opinion.  Granted, the difference in his tone was very subtle since he seems to be a pretty laid back guy.  But if you just listened long enough to get what he was saying, you would clearly conclude it was sarcasm. 

And you emphasized it with such vehemence that I could just see your blood boiling.

But, yes, he did point to scientific evidence.  But you can't accept something that you won't listen to.  And when you're already that biased, you're not listening to anything... as is evidenced by that fact that you didn't even follow the conversation you and I have been having here.

[mikbone]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

 

Since you asked, I'm going to walk you through it.

Mik: You said that you were really bothered when Lindsley said that the photos of the senator "surely looks like Joseph."  You even went so far as to say "no freaking way."  

Carb: I pointed out that you really didn't pay attention to what he said.  I was trying to draw attention to the fact that Lindsley said that phrase sarcastically.  He was implying that many others thought that, but not him.  He was trying to convey how easy (and how erroneous) it is to take pretty much any photo from that era and decide that it looks like Joseph.

Mik: You asked for scientific data. 

I didn't talk about the scientific data.  I was pointing to the fact that you went into it with your mind so biased, that even that sarcastic statement was accepted as his real opinion.  Granted, the difference in his tone was very subtle since he seems to be a pretty laid back guy.  But if you just listened long enough to get what he was saying, you would clearly conclude it was sarcasm. 

And you emphasized it with such vehemence that I could just see your blood boiling.

But, yes, he did point to scientific evidence.  But you can't accept something that you won't listen to.  And when you're already that biased, you're not listening to anything... as is evidenced by that fact that you didn't even follow the conversation you and I have been having here.

Well, I do have a busy schedule so, sometimes I don't have time to watch 4-5 hours of youtube videos...

I did listen to the first hour of his ramblings in the background and didn't notice any science.  And I did search and post his painting of Joseph Smith that reminds me of both the senator and this painting of Jesus Christ. 

If you watched the video that I posted, the researcher (Curtis Weber), actually does science.

https://ensignpeakfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Skulls-and-Crossed-Bones-A-Forensic-Study-of-the-Remains-of-Hyrum-and-Joseph-Smith.pdf

The above is an article proving that Joseph & Hyrum's skeletal remains were not mis-identified.  And this week, his article should be published on the daguerreotype.  

 

I have read much pseudoscience (including expert opinion) and scientific papers.  The difference is quite easy to distinguish.  

Can you point out any scientific methods that David Lindsey used?  

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by mikbone

[mikbone]

Father’s Day gift!!!

[Vort]

51 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Father’s Day gift!!!

Hyrum's looking good!

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Vort said:

Hyrum's looking good!

 

[mikbone]

Confirmation bias

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

One of the best books I ever read.

 

[RAB]

On 6/18/2023 at 1:06 PM, mikbone said:

 

We might want Joseph Smith to look like this…

But more than likely, he looked like this…

We have the provenance, the forensic science, and common sense.

 

 

I actually prefer the latter.  He is more real. That is a man who has seen some stuff, has been through the ringer, and is still standing with jaw firmly set. That is a man who is a rough stone rolling. There is an indomitable will and definitely some pain behind his eyes.