>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> X <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<...

...This post is not about an Elon Musk social media platform, it is purely about the letter X as found on the Somerton Man code page. It's quite prominent on the page being just to the left of centre and it sits on top of the two lines again in the middle of the page.,,

But what could it mean and what is its significance?

Part of the answer is to put it into context, and in this case, the context is that of a page with lines of letters written on it and said to be associated with the body of the man found on Somerton Beach. The so-called 'Code Page'.

The context also includes the following facts:

• There was no identification found with the body nor in the later-found suitcase associated with the man
• Labels had been removed from the clothing the man was wearing when found
• Despite efforts, the man was not identified at the time nor since
• At an inquest held in June 1949, it was found that the man had died of an unknown poison although there were theories advanced on that subject

In many ways, the event and the related facts bear the hallmarks of an assassination.

And so, within that context, what could the letter X mean?

There is one possible explanation to be found in tradecraft and military parlance. These days it's also found in commercial training scenarios but to my knowledge, not in the 1940s.

'GET OFF THE X'

"Get off the X" is used mainly in military and tactical training. It means you must move quickly from where you are to avoid danger, especially where you are likely to be attacked or ambushed. The "X" represents the spot where you're most vulnerable. Staying there makes you an easy target, you must move to a safer place immediately.

This idea has been part of military training for many years, especially among counter-espionage elements of organisations like the SOE, CIA, FBI, and MOSSAD, as well as the SAS, Green Berets, and US Navy SEALs. You can find more if you search the web using the term 'Get off the X military, intelligence'.

These days, books and trainers use the phrase commercially and often talk about the concept, however, it is more widely known through military biographies and survival guides. It’s all about staying safe by not staying still.

'You have been ambushed/targeted/compromised and must move now or you are finished'

Perhaps a bit dramatic but it could have that meaning in the case of the Somerton Man.

There is another meaning for the X in this case but I will leave that for now...

(I use the words 'could have' quite often because I have no absolute proof that something was used or an event occurred in a specific instance, readers should know that there may be other possible explanations. I recall using the term around 10 years ago when discussing the use of Iodine vapour as a method to lift fingerprints from paper. I was criticised for using the term at the time due to another's lack of knowledge. I think that in that instance, the person concerned believed that Iodine vapour would only work on fresh fingerprints as within 24 hours, which was true to an extent but that period extends to 2 months when you add steam to the process and place the item into a special 'chamber'. There is another post shortly in which we will look again at Iodine vapour and where it could have been used in the SM case)

THE SOMERTON MAN CASE:AN UPDATE… 5 KEY QUESTIONS...

An update…

For some months much of my available time has been devoted to matters related to the Somerton Man case and the impending Inquest. The intervening years since 1948 to this third inquest concerning the man would have been described by some as shrouded in mist and mystery. Personally, I suggest it’s more like a ‘pea souper’.Almost impenetrable. My project will be completed in the next week and posts will re-appear more regularly from the end of this month.

To the Inquest. SAPOL has no doubt, invested significant time and resources in their investigations regarding the identity of the Somerton Man and, given my experiences many years ago, you would have to believe that the last thing the police would want is to have their final report to the coroner, handed back to them for more information. Thus the final document would be extraordinarily detailed with no stone left unturned.

THE 5 QUESTIONS ARE:

1. Will the Coroner be able to clearly identify the man? 
2. Will the mystery of not just who he was but what he was, be resolved once and for all? I say ‘what he was’ because his identity will probably, in my view be inextricably linked to his occupation or activities in life. 
3. Did he end his own life or was it ended by others known or unknown? 
4. Will forensics be able to identify the presumed poison that hastened his death? 
5. Has new information been found that links persons of interest in the case to the events of December 1st, 1948? In the case of the latter, that information would have to, under the brief, point to a possible identity of the man.

In due course, we will all see.....

SOMERTON MAN TAMAM SHUD: AUSTRALIAN SPECIAL WIRELESS GROUP HISTORY....

 Between 1939 and 1947, Australia, with its key allies worked together on the challenging tasks of intercepting and decoding Japanese radio traffic. The work was extended to the interrogation of POWs and agents.

This document provides details of the Australian Special Wireless Group's history, locations, and staff. This group was a major part of the operations of the Central Bureau.

The intention here is to enable serious researchers into the Somerton Man case to gain an understanding of the background activities of various Government agencies throughout WW2 and up to 1947 which may or may not have a bearing on the Somerton Man case:

DOWNLOAD FULL PDF HERE: 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BC5xztSVJ7tgLoS4a55ba0ZpItqdG3I/view?usp=sharing

AWM

The AWM site has numerous images and other insights into the work of the group:

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C244769

DOI:

The Australian Government imposed strict censorship on the media and publications via the Department of Information. Useful Links on the DOI:

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/49256/7/02whole.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Information_(Australia)

Mail Censorship:

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/139316

Press Censorship:

There were quite strict controls over just what may be published in local and National press:

https://www.ozatwar.com/civilian/censors.htm#:~:text=The%20Australia%20Army%20looked%20after,not%20fall%20into%20enemy%20hands.

LATEST NEWS FROM SA POLICE '"FOURTH ARREST IN HISTORIC MURDER INVESTIGATION"....

A DNA OPPORTUNITY YET TO BE EXAMINED. HOW COME IT WAS MISSED?...

 

...What secrets has the torn slip kept since December 1st, 1948?...

It's a reasonable question to ask is it not? This slip contains more than one secret and in this post, we'll examine just one of them, but first a question...

Supposing it was you heading for the beach at Somerton on 30th November 1948, perhaps you were being pursued and perhaps not but whatever the case, you had made a decision to hide this small slip of paper that for some reason you had decided to tear out of a copy of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. 

As you can see, it was a fairly small item, 4.7 cm according to this image that was used, I believe, by Stuart Littlemore in his 1970 broadcast of the Somerton Man story. That would make the width of many of the elements of each letter around the 1 mm mark, some were a little larger. But our focus for today at least is not the size of the letters.

Today we are thinking about the process that the man used to hide this slip. Freshly removed from the page of the book, he had chosen a good hiding place, according to the Adelaide Wiki on Leonard Douglas Brown, the hiding place was a 'secret pocket' and the nurses's phone number was written on the back of the book in 'really tiny lettering'. This is the website link to that page:

https://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/wiki/index.php/Leonard_Douglas_Brown

(Today Google has started to block access to the site because they judged it to be an 'unsafe' site. Be that as it may, we must continue.)

So, the decision to hide the slip and just where it was to be hidden, has been made. First, he would roll the slip up very tightly, (so tight in fact that Cleland had to use a pair of tweezers to extract it from its hiding place) and then he pushed the rolled-up slip hard down into the crease (seam?) of the pocket such that a cursory pat down would confuse the slip with the seam. All done?

Not quite. The question I have for you is straightforward enough. If you were to roll the slip up tightly and conceal it, what steps would you take to stop the rolled-up slip from unfurling and thus risk revealing its presence? Think about it a second or two which is probably what he would have done.

Spit. Not a comment, that's what he likely would have done, he would have used saliva to hold the slip together knowing that as it dried it would help bond the paper and keep it in its rolled-up state.

DNA 

Here's the thing, there are basically two kinds of DNA that can be retrieved from paper, touch DNA, such as you obtain from fingerprints for example, and DNA from bodily fluids as in Saliva. The latter is of most interest because touch DNA deteriorates in a matter of weeks or perhaps a little longer, and would no longer be a viable option for recovery of the same.

In contrast, saliva from the backs of postage stamps and envelope flaps has yielded good-quality DNA samples from as far back as the 19th Century. Here's one link but there are more:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073821004497

So there we have it, there is a chance that the rolled-up Tamam Shud slip carries the most important DNA sample of all concerning the Somerton Man case.

To be clear. It is not known for certain that the  Somerton Man rolled up the slip before placing it in the pocket of the trousers he wore that day but it seems probable. It is not known for certain that he used saliva in the way I have described here. It is, however, a 50/50 chance that he did. In other words, either he did or he didn't and it is a far better position than we have ever had before. Timing is everything.

Consider that concealing this rolled-up slip of paper could probably have been the last thing he did before puffing his last cigarette.

The search now switches to a hunt for the slip wherever it may be.

I hope you find this interesting, there are more interesting items yet to be revealed on this blog very shortly.

I am amongst those who missed this, so I can't claim immunity but I found it eventually, in recent times in fact. However, there are far better-qualified people than I, leading academics amongst them, who should have had a handle on this years ago but it is not the case. How come?

THE SOMERTON MAN'S LEGEND....

 

What constitutes a ‘Legend’ ?

Let’s start with the Oxford dictionary definition: 

A traditional story is sometimes regarded as historically correct but not authenticated or substantiated. As in “The Legend of King Arthur".

Similarly, we often refer to sporting heroes as ‘legends’ or append it to the names of the famous and describe their exploits, good or dubious, as 'legendary'. But the ‘legend’ that we could append to the “SOMERTON MAN’ has an entirely different meaning

I say ‘could append’ because there is no certainty about the accuracy of what I am about to describe. It based on what I have learned about the world's second-oldest profession, the science, art and practice of espionage

In the world of spies and espionage, the term LEGEND refers to the story that a field agent may 'wrap' around his real identity, his biography in a way.

Here's an outline, by no means complete of what you might expect in a spy 'Legend'

1. History.
To commence the legend, the spy must have a convincing story about his or her past, their date and place of birth, and names of parents, siblings and relatives. People they knew at school or had worked with. Details about the town where they grew up, employment history. And all of this and more would be accompanied by the relative documents, fake of course. People who were employed to provide these documents were known as 'shoemakers'. One such person was Jacob Golos, a soviet spy who left this world in 1943 due to a heart attack, or so it is said. Read more here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Golos

Another though the less well-known case is that of Kay Marshall, a key figure in the Smeet up with a man in Adeakripov spy case in Australia in the 1960s, Kay had in fact been recruited by ASIO and she was to meet up with a man in Adelaide outside the Maid and Magpie hotel in Norwood. The purpose of the meeting was to hand over a high-speed or burst transmitter to a contact who had been described to her by Skripov. It is this man who went by the name of Stanislaw Kilanski, supposedly a Polish immigrant but in reality, was an 'illegal' soviet agent and member of the Communist Party in Adelaide. the meeting failed to occur and Kilanski had spotted the ASIO surveillance camera. Some days later he was found hanging from a tree in an Adelaide park. His death was at first thought to be suicide but later found to be a murder case. It is generally thought that Kilanski was not his real name and his whole story was a fabrication, he had a 'legend' tailor-made for him. You can view the video of the case here:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-12/spy-kay-marshall-intelligence-mystery-cold-war-australia/12531120

2. Possessions. Planning to the minutest detail is required in the building of a legend. For example, a man who was had as his 'cover' the identity of an itinerant worker who took on basic work be it on a cattle station or in a printer's workshop would have all the trappings that would be expected of such a man. His clothes may be neat and tidy but with one or two repairs, his shoes would be clean, and his pockets would have a range of normal everyday items, cigarettes, matches, a comb, and some chewing gum. You could even throw in a few travel tickets, or random items. Everything would appear to be as normal as possible. When it came to his clothes though, he might want to remove the labels and anything that would identify him or where he had been on his travels, spies were known to do this if they knew they were heading into a dangerous situation.

The deception would even extend to a suitcase deposited at a railway station, it too would be filled with nothing extraordinary, some hand-crafted bits and pieces and clothing.

Collectively, the items on his person and the suitcase contents are known as 'litter', put there to allay suspicion if caught. It was all part of the 'legend'.

By now of course you will have seen that all of these things could apply to the Somerton Man. A very ordinary working man who, apparently ended his life on a beach at Somerton in South Australia.

But, and it's a big but, two mistakes were made. Mistake 1 was the fact that the left luggage ticket was missing, nowhere to be found and 2, and perhaps the most telling of all, was a tiny scrap of paper with the words TAMAM SHUD typeset on to it, rolled up tightly and pushed well down into a concealed, secret, waistband fob pocket of the trousers the man was wearing when his body and clothing were subsequently examined. Why would he have done that? What was so special about that scrap of paper that it had to be concealed in the way that it was? The answer as per previous posts, is that on that tiny scrap of paper was some information, so valuable that he was killed for it.

The man died and the presence of a 'legend;, is a strong possibility but not, as yet, a probability. Dead spies tell no stories. and the legend is no more. Until that is, we completely crack the codes that were found and associated with him.

THE SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY: THE TORN SLIP WITH MICROCODE REVEALED... #900

 

...In earlier times numerous articles have been posted here discussing how the letters  TAMAM SHUD contained microwritten letters and numbers which, it seems, are part of a cipher.

TWO CIPHERS

Two ciphers were identified by an online code identifier:

The first was the MORBIT cipher, it was based on a blend of Morse code and standard letters/numerals. We extracted several letters from the Morbit cipher: 'MTBI... NETP ', this was an exciting development as those letters were to be found on the third line of the code page and were in that general sequence.

The second was the NIHILIST cipher a variation of which was in use by the Soviets during WW2 and it also caused some excitement because in the process of attempting to decrypt the strings of information the word or name, MENTIES or possibly MENZIES cropped up. But that was all we have been able to get thus far.

The question arises, how could the letters and numbers be from different ciphers. The answer is that one code was used to cover another, a double encryption. This technique was used in WW2 and was referred to by a recent discussion by a Director of the Bletchley Park Museum when discussing the Pigeon cipher which attracted a lot of attention some years ago. One way of achieving this was to simply write one cipher over the top of another which could be done using different inks for example.

The image at the top of this post shows the presence of numerous letters and numbers which are a little difficult to view but still visible.

Across the crossbar of the T, you can see strings of numbers and letters:

...the numbers are:  5392358535823

Next, we have the upright of the T which is interesting, I see the numbers are written across the upright, from left to right, this makes them very small in size, around .3 mm in height but still very doable:

 ....the numbers are from the top juncture: 45  M53  W34  H33 55 154  X35. 

From there the numbers are arranged in the lower curved element of the T as shown in the next image.

But first, a look at an unusual aspect of the upright contained coded letters/numbers:

In this image of the upright, we have what appears to be a different set of numbers to the set in the previous image, reading left to right.

The characters in the upright now appear to be: 335343950. Told you it was interesting :)  


You can see how the characters overrun the outline of the typeset letter T which is also apparent in the letter as it appears in the phrase TAMAM SHUD:

The image above was printed on an Epson, inkjet printer using quality pigment-based inks. You can see the outlines of the cipher in each of the letters in TAMAM SHUD if you look closely, zooming in does not provide a better view.

Finally, let's look at the curved or 'toe' end at the base of the upright:

The characters in this part of the T are: 91333 as I see them.

SUMMARY

This is just the first of nine letters in the phrase. In the letter T, we have identified 46 characters including the second option set from the upright section.

According to the gurus of the cryptology world, 46 characters are simply not enough to get a meaningful decryption. So this work goes on and the rest of the letters with characters will be published as soon as I get sufficient time.

THE TAMAM SHUD MYSTERY: DID CARL 'CHARLES' WEBB RUN AWAY TO SEA?.... (Update 1, 2. 3, 4,)

 

This post has its beginnings, the photograph of a youngish Carl 'Charles' Webb. This image is taken from the larger family and friends group photograph published on the ABC News platform in 2022.

I wondered at the time how a young man from regional Victoria could get such blond hair especially when the earlier image of him in a soccer team photograph showed his hair to be a darker colour?

The immediate thought was a result of spending many hours in bright sunlight. Either that or just maybe he had been at sea, as a merchant seaman perhaps. That led to a search of records for merchant seamen and that in turn led me to the crew list for the SS Golden Sun where I found an Able seaman in 1931 by the name of Carl Webb on the crew list, his date of birth was similar but his height was just 5 feet 8 inches.

(See the full post here: https://tamamshud.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-somerton-man-mystery-able-seaman.html?sc=1712997228360#c4974871455864778245

I undertook extensive research with numerous communications with US authorities and archives. The result was negative.

Some historical background to this information. In the 1920s which, if proven correct, was when Carl or Charles went to sea, the press was filled with stories and accounts of young men who ran away or went to sea, a great adventure.  The press was not he only influencing factor, the airwaves were filled with sea shanties as gramophone recordings were plentiful.  Going to sea was a definite 'thing' in those years. A search of TROVE using the search term 'ran away to sea' is all it took to confirm a suspicion.

Carl Webb or Charles Webb?

Recently, on reviewing the Carl Webb story, it struck me that I should have also been searching for a 'Charles' Webb, moreover, to be totally objective, the dates I should be searching should include dates after 1948.

Within 20 minutes I came across pages of references to a seaman called 'Charles Webb'. So many in fact that it quickly became obvious that I was more than likely dealing with several different people of that same name and, as it happens of similar birth dates. 

I needed a differentiation, I needed to break that long list by qualifying the entries even further. The simplest way was to look for the names of crewmen who were not registered as American citizens but had their records listed as British or English citizens. In those years, Australians were issued British passports and regarded as British citizens.

Charles Webb a British citizen yielded several results and he had the same year of birth.

Significantly, some of those instances were for voyages that occurred after 1948.

Here are some of the crew lists recently found in rough date order, you will be able to view the progress from beginnings as a pantry hand to an  OS (Ordinary Seaman), AB (Able Seaman), and QM, (Quarter Master)

1. This first Crew List dated 1949 is interesting firstly because it is dated 1949, secondly because it arrived in NY from Venezuela and thirdly because the Charles Webb listed is recorded as being German:

2.  This next list contains the name Charles Webb and is dated 1949 but Charles is noted as a 'failed to show ' seaman:

3.  Dated 1947, a key year, this note is a list of the known races allowed to be employed on US-registered ships. Note that Australia is not included: 

4. Next, the Crewlist of the ship CARMANIA, the interesting feature of this list is that it contains Charles Webb's Seamans Identification card number: 1047141. He is marked down as British. Uncertain about his position though. He was in the right age bracket,  his height was 5 feet 8 inches. Strangely, many of the Charles Webb records I have looked at have the height listed between 5 feet 6 inches and 5 feet 8.5 inches. The year is 1929.

I will upload more later today time permitting.

Does that mean that our Carl 'Charles' Webb took off and went to sea around 1921-22 at the tender age of 16 or so? At this stage, it is a possibility but not a probability.

TAMAM SHUD: THE CARL WEBB HEIGHT ISSUE REVIEWED & UPDATED...A surprising set of results..

 

...This post is a result of reviewing the earlier ones regarding the estimated height of Carl Webb. I had missed an important factor in the calculations, simple as it may sound, I had not made an allowance for the fact that in the family photos of Roy and Carl fo the fact that they had their mouths slightly open. They were in fact smiling.

Odd as it may seem when a person smiles, their mouth opens slightly and the jawline drops measurably. 

In the image of Roy above, you can clearly see that his mouth is firmly closed and his height dimension is based on that fact.

Let's run through the information:

1. His known full height according to the Military record on the NAA site was 5 feet 8.5 inches or 1734 mm.

2. A known dimension in this photograph that we can use is the ruler alongside Roy, it shows his height with markers at 3-inch intervals.

3. For the purposes of this post, I have assumed that the 3-inch divisions are measured between the marked lines and not central to each line.

4. The onscreen measurement for the marked 3-inch division is 7.5 mm thus 1 inch equals 2.5 mm, a ratio of 1 inch to 25 mm or 25.4 mm to 25 mm

5. Roy's on-screen head height is 23 mm which when converted to real size using our ratio is 233.68 mm or 9.2 inches

6 We can now calculate a ratio for Roy's head height to full height by dividing his known recorded full height by the head height as in 1734 mm divided by 233.68 mm, giving us a head to full height ratio of 1:7.42

We can carry Roy's known head dimensions forward into the family 'group of 4' photograph seen below:

There is a fair bit of information on the above photograph so I numbered each point to minimise any confusion

1. By dividing the known head height dimension for Roy, 233.68 mm, and then measuring and dividing the photograph height of Roy's head, 41 mm, I arrived at a ratio of 1:5.7

2. Next I measured Carl's head dimension on the photograph which was 42 mm

3/ I then adjusted the head dimension to allow for the fact that Carl's mouth was open.

4. This meant that to get a more accurate dimension of Carl's head we needed to deduct the 2 mm as shown above. 2 mm doesn't sound a lot but when you use it to calculate Carl's full height, it can add 1 inch or more to his estimated actual height. In this case, our adjusted photograph head measurement for Carl is 40 mm. We can then multiply that by our ratio of 1:5.7 which gives us an adjusted Actual height of Carl's head of  228 mm.

5. The next calculation is based on the assumption that Carl's head height to full height ratio is the same as Roy's which is 1:5.7. The calculation is 228 mm X 7.42 which equals 1691.76 mm or 5 feet 6.5 inches, shorter than Roy by a full 2 inches.

6. The apparent difference in height of 2 inches was a puzzle, it relates to an extent because Carl is standing a little further away from the camera lens than Roy. This is a measurement we do not have and it adds an issue of perspective view. An adjustment of 1.5 inches should be made to account for this difference in height between Carl and Roy This gives us an estimated height for Carl of 5 feet 8 inches. 

A FINAL PHOTOGRAPH

There is one more photograph to examine which is a close-up of Carl in which we can measure an item that we can use to more accurately calculate Carl's full height. The main photograph from which the enlargement of Carl's image is the larger friends and family group taken on the same day as the 'group of 4' Webb family photograph.

The image on the right was deliberately darkened so that the collar outline could be clearly seen.

As in the previous images, there is a fair amount of information in the images.

I have used the estimated length of the collar on Carl's shirt to act as a known dimension from which we can then take measurements of Carl's head dimension and estimate his full height from that point.

1. The image to the right shows the ruler against the length of the collar on Carl's shirt. I researched but was unable to find an exact match to the style of the shirt worn by Carl and Roy, I found one or two similar examples. No dimensions were given so I have estimated the length of the collar based on the width of Carl's shoulders and general appearance. The measurement of the collar was 43 mm which equalled 154 mm actual length of the collar. The scale was 1:3.58

2. Using the collar length as the known object in the image I first measured Carl's right ear at 23 mm which when extended using the scale of 1:3.58 gave an ear height of 82.34 mm or 3.24 inches.

3. Next, I measured Carl's full head height in the photograph, I made an allowance for the fact that Carl was smiling and thus his jawline dropped by 6 mm which was then deducted from the head measurement of 66 mm in the photograph. Finally, using a scale of 1:3.58 calculated earlier, I arrived at an estimated height for Carl of  1718.5 mm or 5 feet 7.5 inches.

SUMMARY

I have used estimates in calculating the dimensions of Carl's head, ear, and full height. These were carefully considered and as the final results show, both examples were within 1 inch of each other, which gives me confidence that this exercise is on the right track. 

Based on this work,  I believe that Carl Webb; was probably no more than 5 feet 8.5 inches in height.

The issue now to be faced is the height of the Somerton Man which was initially put at 5 feet 11 inches but is now thought to be less. From calculations done here in recent posts, he was likely 5 feet 10 inches in height. A discrepancy of just 1.5 inches would need to be accounted for.

Is it possible that somewhere in the exercise, a miscalculation has occurred? I would have to answer yes it's possible but I have also checked and rechecked every step.

TAMAM SHUD. THE SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY IS ABOUT THE CODE AS IT ALWAYS WAS. AN UPDATE AND A MILESTONE…

 

Firstly, my apologies for the delays, it has been a busy time both personally and in respect of research activities surrounding this blog.

As the headline suggests, the code has been front and centre with interesting new developments. New information and techniques made possible by improved technologies have led to some fascinating insights into the code and its meanings. More soon.

It does not mean that the issue of the identity of the Somerton Man has been left behind, far from it. There will be a time in the not-too-distant future when I will be in a position to reveal more on the latter subject.

For the moment that’s where things are, a Somerton Man code update very shortly and more on his identity in due course.

As for the ‘milestone’, last week and according to Google blog stats, this blog passed through 1 Million page visits since we started here in 2013.

The majority of visitors come from the USA followed by Australia, UK, Germany, France and Russia and so on. 

The audience is from all parts of the world with 80 plus countries listed. More than 70% of the audience are return visitors. 

We get between 500 and 1800 visits a day, for example, so far this month we have been extra busy with more than 7000 visits recorded.  In March we had 34600 visits,

There is increasing interest in particular posts related to the code and to the identity issue.

My sincere thanks to everyone who has visited over the years, your interest and support is greatly appreciated. Without that, the blog simply wouldn’t be here.

Gordon

CAN THIS MAN SHOW US THE TRUE HEIGHT OF THE SOMERTON MAN?

This is a photograph of Professor, later Sir John Burton Cleland, taken at the Adelaide Railway Station while heading off on a field trip in 1934.

In this post, we examine how we might extract information from this photograph and use it to establish a reasonable estimate of the height of Professor Cleland and from that point, establish an estimated height of the Somerton Man.

 

The thought on how we might achieve the goal of establishing a height from this photograph came from this excerpt from the document known as 'Cleland's notes', I will include a download link for the notes later in this post  I should point out that the notes are not the full copy some parts of it have been removed before it was made available.

Here's the excerpt:

This paragraph tells us that the jacket worn by the Somerton Man on the day his body was found indicates that it fitted Professor Cleland, except for it being tight to button up.

For that jacket to fit Professor Cleland, indicates that both men were the same or very similar height.

KNOWN OBJECT DIMENSIONS

To calculate the sizes of objects or people from within an image, we must have an object or objects of known dimensions within that image. In that regard, this particular photograph has several objects that could fulfill that role.

In this standard-sized image, 8 " X 10" as per the file on SA State Library, I have marked several objects that we can measure and use that photo measurement to calculate the approximate height of Sir John.

In the calculations, the final output variance is +/- 1 inch

Here's the objects list:

From the top:

• The face height, the known median height of a face as in the point central to the left and right eye to the point of the chin is 120mm.
• The strap attached to the pouch is estimated at .5 inches in width
• A wider strap attached to the canvas shoulder bag is estimated to be 1 inch wide. (I measured the two and the narrow strap is one-half the width of the wider one)
• The binocular case is an unknown dimension
• The small leather pouch I estimate to be 6 inches wide. ( I used the narrow leather strap to gauge this dimension)
  
• To the right of Sir John, we see a luggage ticket attached to the canvas bag, the estimated width is 4.5 inches plus the header element of .5 inches.
• In Sir John's hand, a second luggage ticket lies flat on the rectangular carry case.
• The rectangular carry or instrument case is by my estimation and some calculation based on the other objects, 7.5 inches wide by 15 inches deep. ( the width is one-half of the height of the case)
• I looked at the ladies' shoes as a possibility but the image is not sharp and they are at a slight angle which adds complexity and therefore additional room for error. Similarly for Sir John's shoes.
• The buttons on Sir John's cardigan and on the sleeve of his jacket need to be more specific for our purpose.
  
• With great respect to the late Sir John, you note that he has a middle-age spread, this may explain the issue of the SM jacket being difficult to button.

I have used the instrument case as the base known object.

Median Height information, head height: 225 mm. Full height ratio is 1:8. + - 8 mm

JBC Measured full height on photograph + 208 mm ( Allowance made for shoe heel height)

JBC Measured face height = 15 mm  

The instrument case estimated known object height =15 inches or 381mm The object measured height on the photograph = 45 mm. Ratio 1:8.5. 

Using the instrument case example, JBC full height = 208mm X 8.5 = 1768 mm or 5 Feet 9.5 inches +/- 1 inch.

CONFIRMATION: 5 Year SCIENTIFIC STUDY CONFIRMS THAT THE RATIO OF HEAD HEIGHT TO FULL HEIGHT IS 1:8, (.14) CARL WEBB CANNOT BE THE SOMERTON MAN...

... VITRUVIAN MAN
&
THE SOMERTON MAN CASE...

THE RATIO's...

;;;Read how this 5 year scientific study of 63375 males and 1375 females proves that the ratio of head height to full height is 1:8 thus proving that Carl Webb cannot be the Somerton Man... (.14:1)

The Vitruvian Man shown above was drawn by Leonardo da Vinci and it was based on the work of Vitruvius 20 BCE, who was the author of De Architectura a 10-volume work with the third volume focusing on body proportions or, as in the case of our recent posts, on ratios.

da Vinci created the Golden Ratio, 1.618 or 'PHI'. Each part of the body in this scheme, the height of the head, for example, is related to the full height of a body in a ratio of 1.618.

A SCIENTIFIC STUDY

A study occurred between 2011 and 2016 at a US Air Force base in San Antonio, Texas and using a 3D body scanner, it measured 63,623 men and 1385 women between the ages of 18 and 21, it was named:

Revisiting Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man Using Contemporary Measurements

The study was created by leading academics and, using a 3D body scanner it compared ideal body proportions represented by Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man with contemporary body proportions of young adult men and women, USAF recruits.

The full results are available by the link below, for this post, we will look at one important find. The study found that the ratio between a man's head height and his full height was 1:8. This is the ratio used on this blog to establish that Carl Webb was 5 feet 8 inches tall. Furthermore, the height of the Somerton Man was similarly calculated and he was found to be 1803.2 mm tall or 5 feet 11 inches. Carl Webb was a full 3 inches shorter than the Somerton Man. 

This find substantiates the claim made by this blog yet another reason why Carl Webb could not be the Somerton Man. 

Here's the link to the NCBI website containing more details:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7284298/

What happens from here now rests with the SA Coroner, SAPOL, and their Forensics team. There are still numerous questions yet to be answered in the Somerton Man case but this find represents compelling evidence to support the claims made here.

* NOTE. Men's growth period normally ends around 18 years of age but some continue into the 21-year age group.

THE SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY; CALCULATING THE TRUE HEIGHT OF THE SOMERTON MAN....UPDATE WITH NEW IMAGE AND INFORMATION... April 10th 2024...

 

...CALCULATING THE TRUE HEIGHT OF THE SOMERTON MAN...

Those familiar with the Somerton Man case will know that his body was measured on the day it was discovered and it was found that he had a height of 5 feet 11 inches.

In this post, the same technique used to calculate Charlie’s height has been applied to the body of the Somerton Man to verify his height based on the photograph you can see above. The photograph shown is from the 1949 inquest, I have added the information on the photograph for those who would like the detail.

HEIGHT CALCULATIONS 

(based on the Researchgate document)

In the image to the right above, I have added a ruler set to measure the height of the man's head.  In this scaled-down image, you can see that the ruler indicates the man's head measures 7 cm from top to chin. By multiplying the head height by 8,  we arrive at the scaled-down full height of the man 70 X 8 = 560mm

The man's head should measure 1/8th of his full height thus to arrive at the man's actual full height we divide the 5 feet 11 inches (1803.4 mm) known height by 8 giving us a head height of 225.45 mm. which by default gives us our full height of 1803.4 mm (5 feet 11 inches)

To calculate the scale for this image we simply divide the actual full height by the scaled-down photograph height as follows:

1803.4 divided by 560 = 3.22 our scale for this image is therefore 1:3.22

This exercise had two purposes, firstly to verify the height of the Somerton Man and secondly, to prove the validity of the Researchgate technique. Both objectives have been met.

UPDATE: April 10th 2024

In the image below you can see that according to the data, SM had an ear height of 73.02 mm. In the latest post dated 10th April, Carl's ear height is shown as being 82.34 mm in height mm in height, more than 9 mm larger than that of the Somerton Man.

Background

The previous post covered the technique with which we could accurately calculate the height of Carl ‘Charlie Webb. This exercise aimed to prove or disprove the claim made by Professor Abbot that the man named ‘Charlie’ in the 'family group of 4' photograph was the ‘Somerton Man’.  The technique relied upon the known height of Roy Webb, Charlie’s brother, obtained from his military service records clearly showed, both written and in a photograph taken at the time that Roy had a height of 5 feet 8 inches. Subsequently, and based on Roy’s height we calculated Charlie’s height which was also put at 5 feet 8 inches +/- 1 inch. That result disproved Professor Abbot’s claim regarding Charlie as the Somerton Man’s height is known to have been 5 feet 11 inches, approximately 3 inches taller than the man Charlie shown in the family group photograph.

THE SOMERTON MAN MYSTERY. CARL WEBB WAS 5 FEET 8 INCHES TALL....THE EVIDENCE... HE CANNOT BE THE SOMERTON MAN...UPDATED 9th MARCH 24

The Carl Webb story has always had a ring of doubt around it, for me at least. 

Something was very wrong about several things including the ear shape not matching that of the Somerton Man and the facial features had the same issue, Carl Webb's face simply does not match the face of the Somerton Man.

Recently I watched a documentary on Aerial reconnaissance from WW2. Specifically, this documentary was about German V2 and V1 rocket sites.  I watched and listened as the movie progressed and the 'mechanics' of the technology were explained.

One aspect was how they calculated the wingspan of a small 'aircraft' on the ground. Via intelligence operatives, they already knew the wingspan of this particular aircraft type, it happened to be a V1 rocket, and that wingspan was 20 feet. The aerial photography showed several objects on the ground and a sharp-eyed WRAF lady picked out a small object, it had an aircraft shape and she was able to calculate the wingspan of 20 feet.

The calculation was made based on the height of the aircraft camera from the ground surface. The term used is 'photogammetry'.

In a way, we are in a similar position with the photograph of the Webb family which includes Roy, Charles, and Grandpa While Grandma is as important as all of them are, we will not include her height details as they're still being determined. However, we do know the height of Roy Webb, 5 feet 8 inches,  and I believe that somewhere we have the height of Grandpa Webb. Carl Webb the man claimed by Professor Abbott to be the Somerton Man, would be, according to the Professor, 5 feet 11 inches tall. This latter measurement applied to Carl Webb which we are about to prove needs to be corrected.

Using Roy Webb's military photograph shown here:

I have actually set for our purposes the datum point as being the top of Roy’s head. This would make Roy closer to 5 feet 8 inches as shown in this photograph. I am using millimeters as the metric.

ROY WEBB METRICS

1. Roy Webb's Height as per this image is 5 feet 8 inches = 1727.2 mm

2. This height was applied to the family image and, as per the photo-reconnaissance example, the height of the object, in this case, Roy's head, was taken and measured on the image, being 52 mm from the top of the head to the point of his chin.

3. The next step is to use the helpful tool found on the Researchgate website that shows how a person's overall height relates to the height of their head which is estimated to be a factor of 8 times head height to full height.:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Body-proportions-the-height-of-a-person-is-about-eight-times-his-her-heads-height-the_fig2_224674276

Obviously, the family photograph at the head of this post is much smaller consequently Roy's head measurement of 52 mm needs to be 'scaled' against the actual height such that the 52 mm on the photograph becomes 215.875 mm in reality which gives us a scale of 4.15:1

So, multiplying the 215.875 mm by eight as described in the Researchgate example, we get our 1727.2 mm, Roy's actual height as explained earlier.

CARL WEBB METRICS

 1. Using the same formulae as we did for Roy Webb, we multiply Carl's family photograph head measurement of 52 mm by 8 which equals 416 mm.

2. Next we need to apply the scale factor of 4.15, thus 416 mm X 4.15 which gives us a total of 1726.2 mm (rounded) or 5 feet 8 inches, this is Carl's height based on the family photograph. 

3. This measurement would make Carl the same height as Roy, as in 5 feet 8 inches. There is a question as to whether Carl and Roy are effectively standing next to each other or whether Carl is a little further back than Roy. This is about the distance between the camera and the subject. An allowance should be made for that factor and I suggest .5 to 1 inch in additional height for Carl. That makes Carl 5 feet 9 inches tall.

I am more than happy to accept input on this technique, all that anyone needs to do is to test it. 

Given that the Researchgate method is correct we have shown that Carl Webb was 5 feet 8 inches tall. The Somerton Man was 5 feet 11 inches tall.

This calls into question the claim that Carl Webb was the Somerton Man.

THE TAMAM SHUD CASE: AND SO DETECTIVE, WHAT DO YOU THINK HAS HAPPENED HERE?.... A COMPARISON PHOTOGRAPH & MULTIPLE NEW CLUES? UPDATE 2, 7th March 2024

...Facts are powerful. They can change minds, inform decisions, and lead to progress. So, let's focus on the truth - first impressions and just the facts...

In December of 1948, a man was found dead on a South Australian beach not far from the sites of Atomic and other weapons development centers and at a time when the world was teetering on the brink of war again. And in Australia, the future of the country itself was under threat of a Communist-inspired insurrection. A civil war was on the cards. 

This man had no means of identification on him and just a few items including two tickets, one train and one bus, a packet of Army Club cigarettes which contained 7 of the Kensitas brand, a part box of matches, two aluminum combs, a part packet of 'Juicy Fruit' chewing gum and sixpence in coins; labels had been removed from his clothing, and an autopsy revealed that he had been poisoned but the type of poison was never clearly identified. The examining doctor who performed the autopsy made a chart of the man's teeth, it recorded the fact that 18 of his teeth were missing.

And now let's add more facts to this picture. A copy of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is later found not far from that beach. When the book was examined, indentations on its back page were revealed. The indentations formed the shape of handwritten letters arranged in 5 lines, other markings on the page did not appear to have any particular meaning. The letters were believed to be a code of some kind.

Two telephone numbers were also found on the back page of the book which were written in 'really tiny lettering and under the code' according to a Detective who took part in the original investigation. One of those numbers belonged to a nurse who happened to live minutes away from where the man was found. The same nurse when questioned said that she had given a copy of the Rubaiyat to an Australian Army Lieutenant some 3 years earlier whilst she was employed as a trainee nurse in Sydney. This Army lieutenant was later to agree that he had been in Intelligence during his Army service. 

One last clue is that sometime after the autopsy and before the inquest held into the man's death, a mall piece of paper was found tightly rolled up and pushed well down into a secret fob pocket located on the inside of the waistband of the trousers the man was wearing when he was found. The two words typeset onto this slip of paper were TAMAM SHUD. The shape of this slip which had been torn out of its original page of a copy of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. was found to match the shape of a torn section in a copy of a book of that title that was handed to the Police by an unnamed local businessman not long before the inquest was held.

You have just read the core facts of the Somerton Man case. Now imagine that you are a seasoned detective who had the experience of serving through the years of World War 2, (this was a time when State Police through their 'Special Branch operations, worked alongside Australia's intelligence services.) Or perhaps you are a Special Branch officer who was in regular contact with the Intelligence services.

What would be your "First thoughts." about these circumstances and facts? What do you think may have taken place? Your first thoughts are important, they are unpolluted by scenarios and theories, and first impressions really count. Now prepare 5 questions you would ask of those involved...

UPDATE: IMAGE ADDED...
A Result...

In the earlier post, we looked at the core evidence in the case, essentially the core facts. I have received a few responses, and one was quite interesting in that it quoted and attached an image from a 1949 article from the 'TRUTH' newspaper. Sadly it doesn't provide a link or a date and a quick search does not show any results for that headline. I am happy to include that here as the article's date could be significant.

Having said that, all is not lost. I followed the link that led me nowhere but I found an article with an image that might contain two new clues.

1.

Here's the image below, let me know if you can spot them:

The article can be found here:

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/168961380?searchTerm=Somerton%20Mystery%20Deepens

2.

In the image marked 2 above, I have 'flipped' the photograph of the man in the Truth article and placed it alongside the Somerton Man post-autopsy image to demonstrate a single fact, the fact is that in the Truth image marked '1' immediately above this image, it seems we are actually looking at the Somerton Man's left ear.

In the image marked '2', I have placed it so that you can see the differences that substantiate the claim that we now may have a photograph of the left ear. For this comparison, I carefully placed each image such that various points on the head of both images were properly aligned, and the nose, the chin, and the eyes were lined up and measured.

We can show differences between the left and right ear as you would expect. Most people would know that our ears are often very similar, they are not perfectly matched, as is the case in these images. The differences are as follows:

1. The right ear shown in the autopsy photo, is slightly lower on the head than in the press photo from Truth newspaper.

2. The width of the right ear on the autopsy photo is approximately 3 mm wider at its widest point compared to the Truth photograph which is of the left ear of the Somerton Man.

3. Interestingly, the facial detail of the post-autopsy photograph is noticeably different. That could be the result of the 'reconstructed' image created by Police photographer Jimmy Durham mentioned in the press on December 4th, 1948

4. The bump on the forehead of the post-autopsy photograph is not seen in the press photograph. That could be the result of either, the reconstruction work done by Jimmy Durham or alternatively, it may have been done by the staff at Truth. I noticed that they had given the subject a decent hairstyle.

Once again, here is the photograph I believe to be of the Somerton man taken from the left, showing his left ear. This is the first time this has been shown. It was always there waiting to be found.

The question is, Why is all of this important?

It's important because we can now better compare the Somerton Man's left ear with Carl Webb's.

I need to qualify the claim made here. We are dealing with an old press photograph and, apart from the fact it was published by the Truth newspaper which has something of a chequered history it is a little hazy, I was careful in doing the alignment of the two images to ensure that the sizing and positioning is correct as I could make it.

It is reasonable to assume that there were other photographs taken of the man before Jimmy Durham's reconstruction work and that the photographs shown in the press at the time were the unaltered ones.

I will organise a video showing various ratios and comparisons and post it here when time permits.

Another interesting aspect of this latest research relates to the height of the Somerton Man. Studies suggest that there is a ratio of 1:8 between the head height of a subject and their full height. In the case of the 'Somerton Man' we know that his height on the slab was 5 feet 11 inches. His head height would therefore be 71 inches divided by 8 which would make his head height approximately 8.875 inches. Here is a link to a site with more information on the subject:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Body-proportions-the-height-of-a-person-is-about-eight-times-his-her-heads-height-the_fig2_224674276

When it comes to Carl Webb and family photographs, there are some heights known, including Roy Webb and Carl's father. Perhaps someone could take on the task of assessing Carl's height based on his imputed face height?