https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/185651414389/no-claim-the-photos-are-of-archie
Dear Skippy and fellow Anon’s… UK Unriddler here.
It occurs to me that we may have overlooked something in trying not to overlook something else.
I think can all agree that the (USA) Mother’s and Father’s Day posts are odd… Something doesn’t sit quite right but we can’t definitively put our finger(s) on what.
Firstly, let me say that the size and angle of the feet in the American Mother’s Day post was bizarre, not necessarily “fake feet” but certainly not (natural according to general consensus) a natural position for such a new baby.
Then we had the gushing words, (in summary to all mums… Everywhere, dead or alive).
Contrast that to father’s Day where the words are limited to Harry. Not even a mention of his own father PC let alone to All Dad’s everywhere" as Kensington Palace wrote (while posting photos of PW with PL and PC repesctively).
Was this do we didn’t question the absence of any acknowledgement of MM’s ghosted father? Just three years ago she gushed on social media about him on Father’s Day and in the blink of an eye she has shunned him (we are led to believe…) for one tiny PR mistake. Pot meet Kettle!!
This baby’s face seems drastically smaller than the baby we saw in Harry’s arms six weeks ago (the baby that was already 2 weeks overdue). This appears to not be the face of a two month PAST full term baby. I accept the hand is closer to the camera but NOT by much (notice the thumb is resting on baby’s cheek?).
However the thing we may have overlooked .. ?while © signs are in place, this simply means the rights of the photo belong to whoever is named.
Eg: IT *DOESN’T* MEAN THAT THESE ARE PICTURES OF ARCHIE… or his feet, or her hands, or his fingers and Harry’s hands. We ASSUME it is, but actually the words do not say this is the case.
It’s like searching for a stock photo that suits the text you want to give.
We must look closer at the gaps, the empty spaces and read between the lines rather than be simply (but understandably) confused and focused on the pictures that do not seem quite right. Our eyes often see what is off with an image even if we can’t pinpoint it straight away.
In this case I doubt the photo is of Harry and Archie (or at least the one we were presented with). There is an assumption on the part of the audience that goes uncorrected by @ SR. When Archie was shown back in May he was considerably larger than the baby in this photo. Bear in mind we know Meghan was overdue (Harry confirmed it) and not premature delivery, so how can “Harry’s” hand be SO much bigger than Archie’s head six weeks later? Unless Archie was premature and this was a photo taken before the world thought he was born?
On that note: there’s nothing to state the photos are recently taken either.
The feet we saw in the US Mother’s Day post were too big for a week old baby and we noticed that. The forget me nots convinced people it was Meghan and Archie but it was never actually stated.
The questions continue… Trust your instincts.
Post time 17-6-2019 06:29 PM
Author
. Ummah sana CSI gambar dedek kwaci nak tunjuk bukti photoshop. Tengoklah kalau i buang tebiat jadi rajin kah nnt i check balik gambar ni.
