To prove that it wasn't altered from the original? Sorry but I still remember evangelists trying to pass off bird fetus pictures for human fetuses to make their point. Once bitten, twice shy.
Who's to say this was little more than a blue that they added more distinguishing features? It's not just the media and government that will try to manipulate you.
To prove that it wasn't altered from the original?
It wouldn't. There is nothing suspicious about 1955 analog, black and white photography producing decent resolution. You may as well be doubtful of the age of the 'Mona Lisa' based on its resolution. It's just nonsense.
What we are looking at above is the digitized version of an analog photograph. Why would it have low resolution?
To prove that it wasn't altered from the original? Sorry but I still remember evangelists trying to pass off bird fetus pictures for human fetuses to make their point. Once bitten, twice shy.
Who's to say this was little more than a blue that they added more distinguishing features? It's not just the media and government that will try to manipulate you.
It wouldn't. There is nothing suspicious about 1955 analog, black and white photography producing decent resolution. You may as well be doubtful of the age of the 'Mona Lisa' based on its resolution. It's just nonsense.
The Mona Lisa is well known for having lost much of its color and detail over the years so that's not a great example.