The Freeman Rubaiyat Latest Part 2.

 Things Are Not Always As They Seem

The First Appearance Deceives Man...

...Phaedrus

Here we go, Part 2 of this multi-part post that aims to reveal some serious concerns regarding the so-called 'Freeman Rubaiyat the book that lies right at the heart of the Somerton Man mystery.

The first image is of the Whitcomb & Tombs Rubaiyat published in the News on 23rd June 1949:

                          Dimensions: Size: 5.1 X 6.6 inches. Aspect Ratio: 17:22

The image below is of the Whitcomb & Tombs Copy of the Rubaiyat. According to Professor Abbott, it is the book from which the code page and the torn slip came:

Dimensions: Size: 4.8 X 6.65 inches  Aspect Ratio 96:133. this measurement is on the outside dust cover of the book which would be wider than the inner pages especially given the 'yapped' edges of the cover.

This next image shows the page that was published in the News on 28th June 1949

It is a page from within the Whitcomb & Tombs copy as above. You'll note that an in-scale image of the torn slip has been added to this image

Dimensions: Size: 3.75 X 5.5 inches  Aspect Ratio: 15:22. Note that this is the internal measurement of the page from the center line to the outer edge of the page.

Below is the copy of the Code page given by the Police to the Advertiser newspaper in the 1990s and this has been verified, The nurse's telephone number was said to have been found on this code page.

Dimensions: Size 4.5 inches wide X 3.6 inches tall. Aspect Ratio: 5:4.

In these next two images, the in-scale code page was first underlaid beneath the page of the Rubaiyat, and as you can see in this orientation, the code page overlaps the page of the book by around 9mm

A.

In the second image below, I overlaid the in-scale code page image; here you can see that this doesn't work well either. The code page should fit better.

B.

I originally posted on this in 2018, the 'fit' issue puzzled me at the time and I was at a loss to understand why this mismatch should be.

You could argue that the code page was written as shown in image B just above by moving it toward the book's center, but for me, that looks unlikely.


How can this mismatch be? If you call by tomorrow, I will post the answer and it will surprise many. Tomorrow's post has not been published before and I had not intended to publish it ahead of the upcoming book on the case.

When you see the evidence tomorrow, many pieces of the puzzle will fall into place.