IMAGE FORENSICS, A SAD TRUTH REVEALED: UPDATED 15th JUNE 2020

THE COMPARISON

TWO IMAGES, ONLY ONE IS CORRECT:

The image below is from the exact file as used for the example in Feltus's book The Unknown Man. Five areas have been highlighted wherein you will find micro written code within the cursive strokes.

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO SEE A LARGER VERSIO

This image below is a close up from the image of verse 70 supplied by Professor Abbott, you'll see that it has been tampered with, the letters have been partially 'painted' over with the colour grey. and the edges of the letters have been darkened. Not what you would expect from 'faded' writing.

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO SEE A LARGER VERSION

VERSE 70 ALF BOXALL BOOK
Per Gerry Feltus

Above is the original photograph as per e Gerry Feltus Book,e Unknown Man.

Below is an image that has been examined using a forensic analysis tool:

The highlighted areas in the image above have been marked to show where there is an immediately obvious presence of microcode. Apologies for the low quality of the mage to the left, I will improve that.

1. The edge of the book to the left for example shows horizontally written strings of numbers in a column. 
2. The marked edge at the left-hand base of the book again shows microcode but deliberately written at an angle. 
3. The Fez on the illustration on the left page shows a series of letters and numbers whilst the grape bunch again shows numbers written in. 

• All of these examples are not clearly visible with the naked eye, some show up well under strong lighting, and some, as per the left column the base and the fez, show up using the forensic examination tools.

That establishes the role of the book as being one that was used to train others in the various concealment techniques.

A SECOND IMAGE

Some years ago I was sent another image of the Verse 70 page, it was basically the same page but, as you will see in the images below, the microcode examples had been deliberately obscured and the illustration of the lady with the Fez had had its levels altered so as to appear totally black over the lady with the fez and her outlines. When I asked why the details were no longer visible, I was told that they must have faded.

The image below shows the wording has been 'painted' over to deliberately obscure the presence of micro writing, not only that but the writing had also been 'darkened' at the edges in an effort to hide any remaining detail.

For comparison, below is an image taken from an untouched though highlighted excerpt from the authentic copy of verse the 70 inscription, the word 'Spring':

I was honestly disappointed to see the results of this effort to hide the presence of code in this way. The person concerned had access to the very best of equipment that would have readily revealed the micro writing. In my view, that person deliberately decided against it and chose instead to deceive others.

The 'darkening' technique was also used on the Fez in the altered version of the inscription.

I then put this altered version through the forensic analysis process, and here is the result:

There's more work to do but in the image above, you can see the outlines of microcode in the areas highlighted and it is recoverable.

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

Here's an image put forward by Nick Pelling of the Cipher Mysteries blog, dated 2013, of the same Verse 70 photograph supplied by Professor Abbott. You will see that this image also shows the grey markings. I repeat, the verse 70 image was tampered with in an effort to conceal the microcodes:

Whilst most of the microcode has been obliterated, there are still examples left even in this image. Importantly, with the right equipment, we may be able to recover the 'obliterated' details, that's next on the list.

There are two kinds of Infrared that can be used, one is reflected and the other is luminescence. Here's an example of what infrared luminescence can do:

And here is the link to the Pelling example: 

EXIF FILE

Here's the EXIF file information for the tampered version of Verse 70. (An EXIF file accompanies most digital images unless the facility is removed by the author. In this case, the person who took the photograph neglected to remove it, and thus the evidence is available to us:

Facts:

• From this file we can see that the camera used was from an iPhone 4S, the iPhone 4 was released in 2010.
• The original photograph was taken at 8.52 pm on Wednesday 31st October 2012
• This original photograph was then modified on Thursday, November 1st, 2012 at 7.15 pm.
• The photograph was then stored on a Macintosh PC with an OS version of 10.7.4
• A Flash was not activated

I used the most recent version of Paint.net, version 4.2.12, this software was released within the last 7 days, to prepare the image for loading to this blog page.

SUMMARY

From these images, it's been demonstrated that there was a concerted effort by a prominent person in the Somerton Man case research to deliberately stall the work and mislead genuine researchers. This same person worked in conjunction with others on this task. It's time to come clean.

In the next post, there will be an image that strongly links this Alf Boxall version of the Rubaiyat to the Somerton Man Code Page.

BEWARE OF INSECURE SITES

You should note that numerous blogs are marked as "Not secure', this is problematical especially considering the Troll traffic that currently uses that blog.

Here's an explanation of the risks you run when visiting an insecure websites:

For Visitors Information

The reason you are seeing the “Not Secure” warning is because the web page or website you are visiting  is not providing a secure connection. When your Chrome browser connects to a website it can either use the HTTP (insecure) or HTTPS (secure).

Any page providing an HTTP connection will cause the “Not Secure” warning. You should avoid conducting any sensitive transactions on these pages—such as logging in, providing personal information, or payment information—browsing insecure sites could put you at risk if you are viewing information that is dangerous or not condoned in your country.

As a visitor, you cannot fix the cause of this warning. The only way to solve the issue is for the website operator to obtain an SSL certificate and enable HTTPS on their site. This will allow your browser to connect securely with the HTTPS protocol, which it will do automatically once the website is properly configured.

If a site you frequently use is displaying the “Not Secure” warning, you should contact them and ask them to start supporting HTTPS. You can also try manually replacing HTTP with HTTPS in the URL, as some sites may have partial support for HTTPS but don’t offer it by default.

Note that even with basic browsing over HTTP—such as looking at recipes or reading news—what you are looking at can be monitored, modified, and recorded by entities, such as your ISP or government. This effectively means you do not have any privacy when browsing such pages. On public Wi-Fi networks, like at a coffee shop or airport, there is an additional risk from ‘local attackers’—other computers on that network—which are able to view and monitor the pages you are looking at, the information you are sending them, and what you are searching for.'

                                 ALWAYS LOOK FOR THE 'NOT SECURE' WARNING IN THE BROWSER BAR

Some sites are home to a few trolls, some using multiple names and identities, and that increases the risk that you run given its 'Not secure' status. Known trolls on that site use multiple IP addresses and identities. 

The multiple IP address issue, better known as 'Dynamic IP Address' or 'VPN', is very concerning because this facility is not mostly used by legitimate businesses and entities. It is however used regularly by hackers, spammers, trolls, those engaged in Phishing activities, and even by child traffickers and pedophiles. For example, a troll could embed themselves in a non-secure site and readily access your personal details as you log in, capture your personal information, and then either make use of it themselves or onsell/share it with others of unsavoury intent. THEY CAN DO THIS EVEN IF YOU JUST VISIT THE SITE.

The 'John Sanders' troll, for example, uses this Dynamic IP/VPN facility. In the 2019 year the 'John Sanders' troll had 17 different IP addresses at a minimum and used 4 or more different names/identities. This troll actually sells his services as a 'researcher'. He uses another blog to launch personal and defamatory attacks on those who displease him or perhaps those who he is paid to attack. His Internet Service Provider in Vietnam is FpT telecom, Ho Chi Min City. He is not the only troll in the Somerton Man space using that service. One agency I spoke with informed me that they had 2000 + records against the name John Sanders.

Here is a list of the IP Addresses used by the 'John Sanders' troll in 2019:

118.68.102.126

1.54.186.38

1.52.75.95

42.116.61.220

58.186.192.51

1.54.95.246

42.118.233.169

42.118.233.155

183.80.198.119

1.54.187.220

1.52.75.208

42.113.38.125

113.22.254.94

1.53.143.137

1.53.209.156

118.68.101.203

1.53.143.128

TAMAM SHUD BLOG IS A SECURE SITE

For visitors to this blog, you will see the lock sign in the browser bar, this means that the site is secured, it is actually a Google-owned service. Trolls of any kind are not allowed on this blog, they never have been nor will they ever be.

PLEASE BE CAREFUL.