honey "just one more point" laser

------------------
DON'T CLICK HERE

quote:

---

Not that this is any proof that the photo is real, but it is possible to have an open wound that is free of debris.

---

Not to this extent. This isn't a "sliced open" type of wound, but one caused by an explosion or impact, either of which would have left traces of something behind.

- snopes

The primary source of illumination is coming from slightly to the right of the camera lens. The light source is obviously fairly bright, since the camera's shutter speed is fast enough that all the blood drips are photographed clearly with no blurring.

1. Note that the woman's thumb is blurred - an indication that she was moving it while the picture was being taken. But we just said the shutter speed had to be fast in order to freeze the motion of the dripping blood so clearly. The only explanation is that the woman is from a separate photograph.

2. The shadow of the man's head falling on the woman looks artificial. The shadow doesn't follow the contours of any of the features on her face or her clothes, and its density is far from uniform. Compare the uniformity of the shadows falling on the man's own skin to the splotchiness of the shadow falling on the woman. In short, the shadow on the woman appears painted in.

3. The point where her fingers fall behind the top of the blood pressure cuff is also very artificial looking (zoom in on that area if you have the software to do so).

4. My interpretation of this photo is that the man is lying on his stomach in bed, propped up on his elbows. In the far right of the photograph (just past his shoulder), the bed sheet appears visible, resting on his back. But even if the picture was taken with a wide angle lens (which distorts perspective), the woman appears to be too far away to actually be performing any first aid on him (notice she is looking straight down).

5. Would someone please explain to me what is going on in the upper right corner of the photo?. There are "wrinkles" in the wall which match the folds in the curtain below. And while I'm at a loss to explain why this would happen if the picture was a fake, I'm at even more of a loss to explain it if the photo was real. The only thing I can think of is that the background man and the curtain were superimposed after the fact, and the folds in the curtain (which originally ran to the top of the photograph) were too dark to obscure. Shaky, I know, but do you have a better explanation? While we're at it, can anyone who thinks this picture is real explain the sharp vertical dividing line between the two patches of yellow above the injured man's left ear?

Who is the strawman?

My point is:
All you have succeeded in doing is forming an opinion and defending it. While that's very impressive, I don't thing that saying, in essence, "I KNOW this thing I can't prove and am ashamed of anyone else who won't make such a claim" is anything but spurious.
I don't think you have any right to say you're ashamed of anyone who won't claim to know something they don't.

ferminfan fermifan fermifan... there you go with the "I'm ashamed remark" again. I and others have brought up many points to while we believe this picture is fake. While they do not PROVE in any literal sense that the picture is indeed fake, they are certainly thought provoking leads. When I said I'm ashamed of anyone who thinks it is real, It comes from me not understanding how anyone could still side towards it being real after all the comments my side has brought up. How many good points has your side made on how or why it is real? None as I recall. If I'm wrong, please tell me why you think it is real.

Nor do I think your claim is such a feat of logic.
I'm not saying the picture is real or fake. I'm saying that YOU are behaving badly. My arguments about the picture were there to service that message and I still refuse to argue them with you. I HATE a strawman.
Besides, any new support you have for your argument only means you didn't present your argument fully but insulted a bunch of people instead.
Yeah, you're a real Mr. Spock.
fermifan

Well, I wasn't aware this forum was an english tea party! I said once I was ashamed of anyone who could not debunk it within seconds. The truth hurts doesn't it? Based on your logic, if I present good facts which happen to differ from yours I am "behaving badly". Whatever. But I'm still waiting for some actual points from your side. Point = thought provoking comment, not attack on spicymos for taking a different side.

This is an Urban Legend Message Board and all I'm trying to do is prove that this picture is just that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spicymos:
that is soo fake. the blood is to thick and off color. You can tell the flesh effect is made with paper towels. Also, it's apparent the actor is wearing a mask which you will see outlined over his ear. If that's not enough (which it should be) common sense says no one could go through that, sit up with eyes open consious. I'm ashamed of anyone here who couldn't debunk that picture within 2 seconds!!1

---

This is the post I've been talking about. You've presented a lot of arguments since but I'm speaking ONLY of what you said that you felt gave you the right to insult a bunch of people. Whatever it is, it's in THIS post and I can't find it. You referred to the ashamed thing like it's an aside. That comment is WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. That's it.

Everything else is you arguing with a strawman which is easy to do when you are only responding to individual sentences, ignoring that the following sentence or even the rest of the paragragh might be there as a clarifier for the sentence to which you refer because the author was trying to avoid writing a messy, unreadable run-on sentence and didn't think it was necessary to make all of the points she was trying to make before she put down a period.

I told you I wouldn't bicker over the points about the picture. That wasn't my argument. They were there simply to illustrate that you had not
closed the case which might have given you entitlement to insult a bunch of people. I still can't find a way to explain that to you.

I am the only one taking umbrage with your post here. "My side" is quite effectively contained within my person and, since I've created something of a quagmire here, I'm going to apologise and duck out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jow Kewl:
Would someone please explain to me what is going on in the upper right corner of the photo? There are "wrinkles" in the wall which match the folds in the curtain below. And while I'm at a loss to explain why this would happen if the picture was a fake, I'm at even more of a loss to explain it if the photo was real.

---

I think spicy was being pretty light hearted and I certainly don't think he/she was insulting anyone.

And now back to tonight's film....

quote:

---

Originally posted by moonlight:
I think that the curtain extends up beyond the edge of the photo. The wrinkles above are probably the top part of the curtain, made out of mesh or something similiar. There is nothing visible holding up the curtain as it is shown (like curtain rings or a track) so I am pretty sure it extends. Even if it is a fake background, this would make some sense.

---

I considered that possibility when I was trying to make sense of the picture. What stumped me was that the hypothetical mesh material seems absolutely transparent except for the folds - there are no light reflections or anything. It also seemed strange that there were no discontinuities in the folds across the boundary between the mesh and opaque area. There would probably have to be a seam of some sort there, plus the opaque material would be heavier than the mesh.

I've never seen a curtain made with mesh at the top (which means nothing), but I suppose its purpose could be to allow light and air to enter the curtained off area, and make the patient feel less boxed in.

Of course, the (solid) curtain could be supported by a rod threaded through a hem at its top, but that wouldn't explain the "wrinkles" in the wall then anyway. Your explanation is probably correct. To put it another way, your explanation is plausible enough to discount the wrinkles as evidence of forgery.

quote:

---

Originally posted by snopes:
Not to this extent. This isn't a "sliced open" type of wound, but one caused by an explosion or impact, either of which would have left traces of something behind.

- snopes

---

That was pretty much the first thing that occured to me when I saw this - if this is real, his face has been pretty much "blown open" from inside - what does that have to do with a motorcycle? And where's the residue from the blast/injury? Has this wound been cleaned? And for an injury that extensive & traumatic, whould you have the time to meticulously clean the wound, prop them up and take photos of them before loss of blood and/or shock cost the victim his life?

I just can't imagine this could possibly be real.

quote:

---

Originally posted by fermifan:
I told you I wouldn't bicker over the points about the picture. That wasn't my argument. They were there simply to illustrate that you had not
closed the case which might have given you entitlement to insult a bunch of people. I still can't find a way to explain that to you.

I am the only one taking umbrage with your post here. "My side" is quite effectively contained within my person and, since I've created something of a quagmire here, I'm going to apologise and duck out.

Everybody, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to clog up the thread like this.
Spicymos, if you want the last word, take it. It's all yours.

---

You say I insulted people as if I just talked badly about your mothers. Look, it's only a stupid picture, I don't really care whether or not I can convince anyone it is fake.

But it's a good thing that you apoligised for "clogging up the thread". Everyone knows threads are reserved for only the finest of life changing statements!

A. We have to admit the "motorcycle" pic has caused a lot of email, it being one of the most disconcerting things people have ever seen. We called it "Motorcycle" because it arrived as motorcycle.jpg, but it is more likely an attempted shotgun suicide. The man lived. An attorney wrote us demanding that we take the picture down, but was unable to provide enough details for us to comply with his request.

Uh.. yeah, what do we make of this?

honey "my hat is now in the ring" laser

I can certainly think of a number of reasons why there is no evidence of high tech intervention, not the least being that in the real world we don't all live in the USA or within spitting distance of a well-equipped trauma centre. There are many places in the world (and I include parts of Australia in that statement) where a person suffering traumatic injury would be taken to the nearest available medical treatment (however limited that might be) and simply have to wait for transportation to more specialised care.

Photographs are taken of unusual injuries, even in well equipped medical facilities - for teaching purposes, to record the original injury for reference at a later date, and probably sometimes just for voyeurism - and they are rarely of professional photographic quality.

Is the photo real or is it faked? I don't know. I've seen photos which are real distributed in a similar fashion, appearing on multiple gore sites with differing explanations and without attribution.

I am posting a link to a collection of photos which are real. The vast majority have some kind of attribution and have been lifted from medical or forensic science journals. They are in many instances absolutely horrific and I would discourage anyone with a weak stomach from even taking a peek. The point I wished to make is that some of the most horrific photographs in this collection look "fake" and have also been circulated on the net with differing explanations; it is only the attribution to credible sources which can get the mind to begin to grasp that the horror is real.

I find it easier to accept that the "man with face blown off" photograph mightbe real than I find it to accept that the accidents, injuries, and crimes portrayed in credible publications have happened to my fellow human beings.

The link - once again, NOT for the squeamish - www.stl-online.net/thc/med

re"I don't want to believe either"prise

PS if I mess up the sig, forgive me - first time I've used ubb instead of HTML

------------------
Age shall not weary them,
Nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning
We will remember them.

[This message has been edited by reprise (edited 11-10-2000).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardo:
This might sound stupid (could have some explanation I'm not thinking of) and it's OT, but saharvey, why in the world would the army assume that all women have weaker stomachs than men?

That's the implication I got from your post - since it might scare the women (but it could never scare the men) so they don't show it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricardo:
This might sound stupid (could have some explanation I'm not thinking of) and it's OT, but saharvey, why in the world would the army assume that all women have weaker stomachs than men?

That's the implication I got from your post - since it might scare the women (but it could never scare the men) so they don't show it.

---

That is the message I got too. Puhleese! I work at an animals shelter which means that I see (and smell) rotting flesh, maggots, bloody stool... Part of the job is also decapitating animals suspected of being rabid.

And, to substantiate the topic, we had a cat come in a couple months ago with half of it's face missing. It was still meowing.

Ka"hooah"min

quote:

---

And IMO, it's not nearly as gross as that 'Jumper' picture snopes posted way back when.

Jenn

---

What "jumper" picture?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kamin:
Don't be too hard on saharvey, it sounds like the Army Reserve's position not his. I was an Army Medic and the active Army had that same 'good ol' boys' attitude that ladies couldn't handle the job as well as the 'men.' (I loved it when someone proved them wrong). I've known enough women I'd take into combat to watch my back to know that the Army is full of crap.

Ka"hooah"min

---

I know, did not mean to give the impression that I was going off on saharvey. It was just a ludicrous opinion in this day and age and that was my objection. Not trying to shoot the messenger (although if you give me Pillsbury biscuits in the tube and a hot car I could scare the poop out of him! )

quote:

---

Originally posted by IrateDwarf:
Oh NM I found the link...ewww...sick...

---

dammit, where? I want to see it too but the link never worked. Now it's really driving me nuts

quote:

---

Originally posted by megaira:
Allie, I'm going to go ahead and assume that "open face" originally started circulating because some nfbsk decided to make a point about wearing helmets. Aka, if you crash without a helmet, the pavement will remove your face for you. Which, technically is true, but if pavement dermabrasion were the case, there'd be more consistancy to the wounds (from what I've read, I'm not lookin!) -aka, the eyes and tounge would be mutilated as well. As well as I doubt he'd escape without dirt/gravel, etc. being worked in there as well... and it would not JUST be his head.

Meg "rambling" aira

---

Not QUITE true. My hubby's best friend was in a motorcycle crash last November. He was wearing his helmet and his face was still messed up. I neve saw (nor do I want to) the pictures they took for evidence. He was slowed down for construction traffic on the interstate, and an older couple on their way to Charlotte from FL slammed into him at around 70 mph. He flew over the vehicle in front (I think a Blazer) and the Blazer dragged him a hunred feet or so. When he hit, his helmet came off (I think due to a broken jaw. It's hard to stay on when there's nothing for the strap to hold onto), ergo all the facial injuries. I have not looked at the pics discussed, but I just wanted to comment on the fact you can still be messed up while wearing a helmet. He was lucky, because a Dr & Nurse, traveling separately (and on unrelated business) saved his life at the scene. The Dr either intubated him/emerg. trachyotomy (sp?) so he wouldn't drown. He was in intensive care for 3 weeks, and is recovering well. Other than the fact he will never work again.

And the people who ran him down wanted to do nothing more than to catch their flight home. Could have cared less they almost killed a man & totalled their rental car ::GRRR::

[/rant]

They saved the most unbelievable for last. It was the sad story of this Siberian man who was viciously mauled by a bear while he was outdoors in the woods. He actually felt and heard his face being eaten on by the bear. He somehow found the will to stagger to the home of a neighbor who called the victim's wife. The only reason why they recognized him was because of his clothing. He was rushed to a hospital where the doctors didn't think he'd make it through the night. He did, and was eventually moved to a more modern hospital where he eventually recovered his strength.

Unfortunately, the damage the bear did was SEVERE. The victim was a very handsome man with a beautiful wife and two kids. His disfigurement was horrible and extreme and they showed it. The man had somewhat of a forehead, but everything between the top forehead and his lower jaw was completely gone. His right eye was gone, and his left eye, while still usable, was slanted inward due from the ferocity of the attack. He had no nose and only a hole where his upper jaw area used to be for his tongue. If you looked from the side, there would be a "divot." This would have been an even more gruesome picture than the one being discussed on this board. For 4 years he lived as a recluse in his own home and neighborhood, fighting depression and suicide. I was struck by how his wife and kids stuck with him through the ordeal.

Well, don't yell at me, I'm only 14 and I didn't even look at the link, but from the way you described it, I have an idea...

Maybe he was trying to commit suicide and put the gun in his mouth and shot off part of his jaw, face, whatevers missing.. Just an idea.

This is my first time posting here. I've been reading this thread and I thought that I would put in my two cents. I haven't looked at the picture, but everyone's discriptions were enough. There was one point that kept bothering me and I'm surprised that no one has picked up on it.

If this picture is real why haven't we've seen it on the news or in the newspapers? Even the tabloids would have a field day with this!