The comparison image above shows the face of the Somerton Man as rendered by Daniel Voshart. As per previous posts, the post that follows is not in any way a criticism of Daniel or his responses.
As indicated in the image by the two arrows, there are two canine teeth when, in a normal set of teeth, they ought to be lateral incisors.
Here's an image of what they should look like:
...and here's the comparison:
Next, here's the image of the diagram created by Dr. Dwyer after the autopsy on the Somerton Man alongside the wax impression made to match the diagram:
And finally, below is an image of how these two missing teeth look in a real human subject:
The gaps are where the two lateral incisors would normally be but are missing, as numbered and indicated by Doctor Dwyer in his statement about the Somerton Man.
It is this effect that Doctor Dwyer was talking about in his statement to the coroner, here's the excerpt:
That statement is unambiguous, you cannot interpret it in any other way, when the man smiled you would notice the missing teeth.
I exchanged emails with Daniel Voshart, the man who created the render shown at the head of this post and pointed out the issue. He responded and here are the copies of the emails, I wouldn't normally do this but the situation demands that it be called out. Once again, this post is in no way to be interpreted as reflecting on Daniel's integrity. I am really saddened that he has been brought into this issue, it's unavoidable as you will read in the email extracts below:
Email 1.
Email 2.
Email 3.
Professor Abbott's quotes in highlight. Note the exact words, 'If you were to see the man smiling you would not see any gaps in his teeth'.
Now compare them with the words in the next email below this one marked Email 4. In the court document there is absolutely no mention of him smiling, talking yes and laughing yes. But, 'Anyone looking at him in the ordinary way, if he were to laugh, would notice the teeth were missing.'
Email 4.
This is wrong, these emails show that the truth has not only been twisted it's been deliberately misrepresented, I can see no other explanation.
Why would Professor Abbott say something that is so clearly and obviously untrue? He has a reason.
What do you think?
Hello Gordon, to be objective about this you will need to view and display a lot more images that show cases of untreated or pre-treatment congenital hypodontia where the lateral incisors are missing. The obsession today with orthodontic treatment in the quest for the 'perfect smile' aside, permanent adult teeth can take on a very wide range of dental arrangement. Picking one contemporary image that fits the narrative is not being thorough on this matter.
ReplyDeleteSurely, I will do research today, if you have a link or two perhaps you could post them as well? What got my attention were the words, 'Anyone looking at him in the ordinary way, if he were to laugh, would notice the teeth were missing'
ReplyDeleteThat said, showing more images, (and I will take your advice on that), as you describe is something you would expect that Professor Abbott would have done? He hasn't, instead he picked an image that fits his narrative.
Thanks for the input, much appreciated.
My main interest in this is in establishing the likely facial appearance of people with whatever condition had affected Somerton Man. Being that it may according to some be an inhereted condition, which means that if I find pictures of people vicariously associated in time, proximity, or association displaying a similiar deformity in facial appearance then I can do a genealogical search to confirm the deformity afflicting family members and look for someone going missing in the 1940s.
ReplyDeleteI this specific instance with the teeth, some of this is a bit ambiguous. Hopefully an exhumation will occur and a diagnosis of his condition can be made and a whether he has DNA evidence of an inheretible condition.
There are many people who's photographic images show similarities in appearance deformities, caused by known conditions, for instance Stuart Seborer's 1939 photograph shows similarities in ears, and as he has a small mouth and recessed jaw suggestive of a condition affecting the facial bones and thus teeth such as pierre robin sequence, which is not genetic, or sicklers which is genetic, etc.
The more information that becomes available to confirm the condition and it being a genetic mutation and the range of expression of it in facial appearance, the more likely we can find SM via genealogical searching of family trees of people whos photographs display the same condition.
Pete, this would make a good post by itself if you like?
ReplyDeleteIt would make a great book of all the fascinating characters discovered along the way, but no one would buy it unless the Somerton Man is found at the end. ;) Although I might put up a page on my WordPress site detailing how the genealogy searching works.
DeleteGood idea, I'll put a link in, please let me know.
ReplyDelete