The Jack Phillips/Harold Bride picture

[Inger Sheil]

quote:

I am angered by the fact that you suggest I be ignored as if the only post that is welcomed here, are those that agree the picture is not of Bride with Phillips having outside on the dock of the Adriatic prior to going out on the Titanic.

Allison's suggestion has nothing to do with your opinion and everything to do with your manners. Regarding your statement, however - would you care to tell me exactly when you believe this photo was taken of the two men. You say 'prior to going out on Titanic' - when do you propose this was? Are you suggesting that they were on the Adriatic in March 1912? And where do you suggest the Adriatic was when this photo was taken? Please be specific in your response, as this dating and location is crucial to this debate.​

 

[Lucky Forte]

Well anyone that wants to ignore me can very well do so...but that won't make the curiosity go away about the photo. After all isn't that why this post is here in the first place? I am the seeker of the truth and want to put this to rest as anyone else does but will not excuse it away without really knowing any different than what I see in the photo or through the countless books that I have already researched for the answer to this question. I am angered by the fact that you suggest I be ignored as if the only post that is welcomed here, are those that agree the picture is not of Bride with Phillips outside on the dock of the Adriatic prior to going out on the Titanic.

 

[Lucky Forte]

Inger...The books state that the photo was taken on the dock of the Adriatic after the two signed on to go on the maiden voyage of the Titanic. It doesn't state they were working on the ship or that were even on the ship but just that they took the photo together on the dock.

 

[Lucky Forte]

Yes they were Marconi operators but still working through The White Star Line.

 

[Timothy Brandsoy]

Lucky,
As it's been pointed out, many books are just rehashing old information from other books. I doubt there was an intent to deceive, but why reinvent the wheel? That's how this
(mis)information gets propagated. If it's good enough for Eaton & Haas.........it must be true!

Kristina,

There was an excellent program on PBS (see TV Titanic thread) about just that! A forensic investigator compared the earlobes of two people on Titanic. One was a photo from the morgue of an unknown victim, the other was a then recent photo of a passenger who hadn't been recovered.
They didn't match.
As he said "earlobes don't lie!", one was a very definite lobe the other was smooth into the jaw. There was a passing resemblance too. They WANTED it to be him, but alas it wasn't.

Tim B
http://hometown.aol.com/timbrands/Cougar.html

 

[Ben Holme]

Lucky, as you can see, Inger is a step ahead of you, and in more ways than one. If she can quote from your latest, and in doing so, address the weaknesses in the thrust of your argument *before* you posted them (as she has just demonstrated) you must surely recognise the need to exit stage left, and fast? You may have countless books at your disposal, but you can't trump psychic powers, surely?

(Note: if Lucky deletes her post of 16 July, 2003 - 11:43 pm, by comments will be rendered nonsensical and deeply unfunny.)

 

[Lucky Forte]

I'm assuming that this is a typo and you mean to say that you can't help but believe so many books could be right!

Inger don't tell me what I mean to say.

I said what I meant!

You put your post up of your views and I will put mine. I don't accuse you of typo's and what you must mean. It appears to me that it is you that needs to read the post guidelines.

Don't accuse me of disrespect and then disrespect me.

You now seem to have an annoying habit of (copy and paste syndrome) with every one of my post to make sure you criticize any and all that I say here.

I'd say you are indeed attacking my views without a doubt and getting more obnoxious about it with every reply.

 

[Lucky Forte]

I don't feel the need to exit the stage as you put it Ben. This post started with "What I Think"?
That is what I think! The same people can keep on attacking me and adding more just to take the side of some others...I stand tall and proud. In this life there are many things that will be presumed and just because I dare to disagree without any believable proof presented to me other than what I have already researched does not make me an outcast, it just makes me need better proof on the subject. Psychic powers are now the proof huh? LOL One step ahead? Ahead of what? My belief? I see there is a fan club here and that is all that it seems to be. I'll say it again....based on what I have read in the many books and that there was no proof by comparing earlobes or facial structure...I again say I think it is Bride in the photo with Phillips. I see no website of refference to support otherwise from anyone here.

 

[Trent Pheifer]

Lucky,

Believe me I would be right on your side supporting you..if I believed any of your arguments. It is not a case of friends ganging up on the new person.(Look at your other thread you posted) This thread is just getting ugly. I think the reason is your flat denial that Bride is not in the picture. I want to compare it to the whole Titanic/Olympic switch...a theory (with no evidence whats so ever) that it happened.

Shelley to the rescue once again!! Great idea with the forensics!! I saw the same show Tim did and yes its all about the earlobs.

-Trent

 

[Timothy Brandsoy]

I was fooling around with Corel Photo, and in my personal opinion it can't be the same person. I flipped Bride's 'usual' pic, resized it, angled it and made an overlay. The ears don't line up, the ratios of eyes/nose/mouth are wrong and his head is too wide (all else being the same).

How do I upload a photo? I tried!

 

[Melissa E. Kalson]

Hi Inger..
I just wanted to put my opinion in here. I have seen the photo in question. From the rare photos I've seen of Bride, I don't believe that it is him. BTW, you and Parks are just super researchers and have given to this community so much more knowledge and have enriched us all. We have all been blessed by this. And just one other note.. I did read your article about the Olympic/Titanic officers in the photo in the Titanic Commutator (a couple of years ago) and was surprised to learn that. As I had been under the mistaken belief that they were the officers of the Titanic. Your research into that was superb. Once again thanks to you, Parks, and all the other great Titanic researchers. Hats off and God bless you all. Sincerely, Melissa K.

 

[Timothy Brandsoy]

I draw and paint and have done a few portraits over the years. I like to work from photographs usually. Sittings are a pain. While I'll admit people can look very different from photo to photo their basic "map" doesn't change.

As I mentioned i did an overlap of the two photos. When I flipped one the now noncorresponding ears are somewhat alike. They both have lobes. But the Adriatic "Bride" has ears that extend further out at the bottom. The Titanic Bride's ears are more tapered.

But as I said the photo was flipped, so I'd need an ear to ear to compare.


Basic question: How tall were Bride and Phillips?

 

[Susan Leighton]

One of the more important rules of membership to this forum is that we use our REAL names. Is "Lucky Forte" a REAL name? Did his Mama name him Lucky?
This individual is NOT following the general directives of this exclusive message board and the foolish fodder displayed in his posts should be stopped.
....'going to a library', and 'scoping everything in print', and 'based on everything I have read in many books' does NOT count as research. To suggest that an opinion can be reached based on the books one has read is comical,if not down right ludicrous. 'Lucky' has done NO research.

I don't think I have ever seen an interview on The History Channel from the likes of 'Lucky Forte'...but I have seen interviews and footnotes from many of the longstanding members of this forum.
-Susan Y. Leighton

 

[Kritina Johnston]

"Basic question: How tall were Bride and Phillips?"

I don't know precisely, but it does look like they were under the 6" mark (again, I could be wrong, I'm just going by the photo of Jack on the Adriatic, and a photo taken of Harold when he returned to England).

There was a description in the Commutator article about Harold where it was mentioned that he was short in stature. And he himself said in his New York Times interview that he was very small (I take this to be a reference to both his physical frame and his height, based on the context of the words).

 

[Deborah Russes]

Timothy...the PBS program you talk about, is it the same one I mentioned in the Titanic Exhibit thread...I boo-booed when I put it there I believe. I still get a bit confused of where to post what but I am learning.