...THE HIDDEN CODES...
The image above is of the torn slip of paper which was found tightly rolled up and pushed down into what was known as a 'secret' waistband fob pocket of the trousers worn by the Somerton Man when found on the beach on December 1st, 1948. This image was taken using reflected infrared and bright sunlight. I suggest that you look closely at each of the letters that you see on your screen. You will see that very small letters and numbers have been skillfully written into each of them. These micro letters and numbers have now been found to be NIHILIST cipher, a cipher created and used by the Soviets throughout WW2.More on that later in this post.
When found the slip didn't look like the image above it looked more like this image below:
The image above was taken under a microscope at Adelaide University in 2010 I believe. The good people at Adelaide University were given access to the slip for examination by ex-Detective Sergeant Gerry Feltus, a well-respected ex-SAPOL officer who once had the Somerton Man Cold case file on his desk.
Below are the actual dimensions of the slip, approximately 4.7 cm in width. not very large at all :
That makes the size of each letter between 3.0 and 5.0 mm in height and varying in width from 3.5 mm to 5 mm approximately.
Importantly the University's examination had as its focus the nature of the paper on which the phrase TAMAM SHUD was printed.
Interestingly, they were not looking for any concealments which, as you can now see, were very clearly there.
The recovery technique as mentioned earlier, was to use a combination of reflected infrared light followed by a separate photograph taken in bright sunlight.
Was this a new technique? No, not at all, In fact, I first read of the method after I had found what appeared to be hidden writing within the letters of the Somerton Man code page. I actually found it within a 2011 released FBI document dealing with secret inks and concealments.
Here's a copy of each of the 4 pages of the 2011 FBI-released document, it describes 50 different methods of concealment known and used 100 years earlier in 1911.
Page 1:
Page 2:
Page 3:
Page 4:
Item 44 discusses the use of microscopic writing across the face of postage stamps.
SUMMARY
This post and its contents show the enormous number of ways in which messages were and possibly still are concealed. The torn slip example shows a Soviet code was probably in use. I suggest that you first examine it thoroughly on screen, then download the image of the torn slip at the head of the page and examine it closely for yourselves.The precise methods I used is as follows:
1. Use the high-resolution source image from the Adelaide University
2. Print this image out a small size using an inkjet printer set to high quality and print it out onto bleed-proof paper. Do not touch this paper leave it on the printer output tray for about 10 minutes to enable it to properly dry.
3. When dry, take the image and a reasonable camera, an iPhone or Samsung S9 + or better, and, using an infrared lamp placed at varying angles, take some images of the printed-out TAMAM SHUD phrase. Then upload that to your computer or print directly from your camera if you have that facility, making sure that you once again print it out on an inkjet printer set to high quality and on bleed-proof paper and allow it to dry thoroughly in place.
4. Take this image in bright sunlight and take numerous photos at various angles from the front view and use the sunlight as a backlight. You should be able to see the results in your viewfinder immediately. Print it out as previously described and examine it.
For those wondering about my absence, it is just a well timed break.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I do not believe that Carl Webb is the Somerton Man, the evidence says that it was an espionage incident.
Carl is no more the Somerton Man than the Somerton Man was his wife’s grandfather. Professor Abbott’s statements are not credible and, in common with earlier claims, they have not been substantiated.
Consider this, the dna claims were made on the basis of a single 5cm length of hair with root attached. In the testing process my understanding is that the single sample would have been destroyed. Thus all That exists is a report from Astrea which was then modified and manipulated by Professor Abbott to back up his claim.
Forensic procedures call for between 5 and 8 strands of hair with follicles for testing. Right now there is no hair and the professor is relying on his reputation to carry the day.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to see the earlier dna test results from Astrea, the ones the the professor discarded as being of no use. I suppose we will have to take his word for that.
There is a publicly available recording of the Professor stating that the Somerton Man had anodontia, the same dental condition as Robin. He went on to refer to the inquest document and the words of Dr Dwyer except they weren’t Dwyers words, he had the good Doctor saying that you would notice the condition if the Somerton Man were to smile. The truth of the Doctors words is the exact opposite as anyone who has read Dwyers statement would tell you. Once again we see manipulation of facts.
In another incident, I was sent a photo file of the Verse 70 from the Boxall Rubaiyat by the professor telling me that the file was the best to use because of its resolution. On examination, the copy that he sent me had been considerably modified, the fine details of the writing had been smudged out and overwritten. That verse 70 may yet be called as evidence.
So, is the professor truthful and honest or is he intellectually corrupt?
I’ll now head back to my break. Not much longer to wait now.
Well Mr.Cramer, it seems you may have a point. That is of course if indeed the Professor used the words you mentioned in relation to Dr Dwyers comments about the Somerton Man’s teeth. It would be hard for the Professor to say he misunderstood it or made a mistake. I have read the inquest document again just now and you are correct in that Dwyer made it clear the teeth were missing and that is what would be noticeable if the man were to smile or laugh. How could he misinterpret that?
ReplyDeleteHere’s the video link. The mention is made at 21 minutes and 46 seconds.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJUZHIlteMs
Another link:
ReplyDeletehttps://tamamshud.blogspot.com/2020/10/the-somerton-mans-teeth-myth-busted-and.html
What an exciting find, not. Apparently, according to Colleen, one hair from within the clump of hair samples came from a dead person. Fancy that, there must have been a dead person in the morgue of all places.
ReplyDeleteHow about we clarify a few things. Some days ago I raised the issue of the hair samples that didn’t make the grade, one of ever eager trolls seized on that and put the question to Colleen which resulted in a ‘go nowhere’ answer. Realistically all of the answers given have that same destination. The Adelaide city morgue between December 1948 and June 1949 was a very busy place with no real safeguards against cross contamination between all kinds of evidence including the corpses and bits of bodies. There is no way known that the hair samples sent to Astrea can be traced directly to the Somerton Man and I suggest that is the reason why Dr.Xanthe Mallet made her statement. For that same reason, there is at this stage no proven link between Carl Webb and the Somerton Man. All that exists is an unproven claim from a person with a known history of making unproven claims.
ReplyDeleteThe time to celebrate success is when the evidence uncovered by SA forensics team is made public by the Coroner and that evidence will either prove that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man or it won’t.
As I read it and based on that which is currently known, Carl Webb is not the Somerton Man.