Anyone seen this before??

[GUT]

Well Hello Mr. Kotter!!

Don't you mean "Welcome Back"?

[belinda]

I can see a face no more.

P.S. I love Horshack who doesn't?

Could you make the picture a little smaller?

[packers stem]

I can see a face no more.

P.S. I love Horshack who doesn't?

Could you make the picture a little smaller?

Hi Belinda
Have a look on the mobile instead of a laptop/desktop
It'll make it more compact.As it's a photo of the pic from my mobile I had to upload it from there and it makes it look to big on a laptop. If it looks too big just pull it away from you slightly

[packers stem]

I've tried the original made smaller but no contrast changes so don't know how it's going to appear
This is exactly as it appears on the wall

[packers stem]

So now if you're viewing on a mobile you can punch/squeeze the image to the size you want

[richardnunweek]

If I look out of my lounge window, I can see what looks like a jockey , riding a horse, but in reality its only the wind blowing a couple of branches.
Regards Richard,

[packers stem]

If I look out of my lounge window, I can see what looks like a jockey , riding a horse, but in reality its only the wind blowing a couple of branches.
Regards Richard,

Hi Richard
I see the scepticism totally. I spotted it Thursday lunchtime and I posted it last night. I thought the same at first..but it's there.It doesn't go away,it's in the picture and once you've spotted it properly it is as clear as anything.
It's not blood splatter, it's not a light anomaly.To me it looks like two sketches.Think maybe it needs enhancing properly and the trained eye of an art historian to decide.
If it was just a one off with nothing around it i wouldn't have posted it but it's two...one above the other

[Rosemary]

Let's play "Spot the Baphomet" !

Then it's a Templars conspiracy. Sorry, my crone eyes see vague nothings that sometimes look like facial hair but I don't see a woman, either on the iPad or iPhone. *sigh*

[GUT]

Then it's a Templars conspiracy. Sorry, my crone eyes see vague nothings that sometimes look like facial hair but I don't see a woman, either on the iPad or iPhone. *sigh*

Nor I.

But I repeat the question I asked earlier....

Even if someone drew in Mary's (well actual McCarthy's) wall SO WHAT?"

[GUT]

Even if he signed his little sketch it proves nothing.

[packers stem]

Even if he signed his little sketch it proves nothing.

Would depend who sketched and who signed it dont you think.
Surprised you all still can't see it... Good job you lot weren't Joe Barnett eh
Some bunch of super recognisers you've all turned out to be....eyelashes,nasal hair,toes,fingers yet you can't see a picture of a woman's face and a gargoyle??

[GUT]

Would depend who sketched and who signed it dont you think.

Nope.

And do you have any proof who sketched it.

[GUT]

Some bunch of super recognisers you've all turned out to be....eyelashes,nasal hair,toes,fingers yet you can't see a picture of a woman's face and a gargoyle??

not really.

Big difference between recognizing something you've seen every day and something someone else claims to see in a pattern, or a cloud or even (dear old Dale) in a painting of flowers.

[packers stem]

Nope.

And do you have any proof who sketched it.

Of course not!! and i'm pleased you've accepted it's a sketch
The point is,if an art expert says it is a sketch isn't it something important due to the possibility that it could have been the work of the killer.
I mentioned earlier in the thread that it could have been Kelly who sketched it but it remains a possible something that's not been picked up on.Do killers not occasionally leave a clue behind?
We've always wanted physical evidence to discuss,this could end up being so,so why the constant negativity towards it?
I know what i see there and it's changed my thoughts completely.If anyone wishes to ignore it,of course they can do so but that wont make something that has appeared disappear...

[GUT]

Of course not!! and i'm pleased you've accepted it's a sketch
The point is,if an art expert says it is a sketch isn't it something important due to the possibility that it could have been the work of the killer.
I mentioned earlier in the thread that it could have been Kelly who sketched it but it remains a possible something that's not been picked up on.Do killers not occasionally leave a clue behind?
We've always wanted physical evidence to discuss,this could end up being so,so why the constant negativity towards it?
I know what i see there and it's changed my thoughts completely.If anyone wishes to ignore it,of course they can do so but that wont make something that has appeared disappear...

Sorry but NO I do not accept its a sketch, if so it was done by a 3 year old.

I've also not seen anything by an Art Expert that says its a sketch. And even if he did, what was he shown?

The negativity is because I can see no way that it's physical evidence of anything, by that token lets discuss what sort of wood the partition was made if, that too is physical evidence, and that too adds not a jot to the case.

Or do what you are trying to do and make something not there appear.