Qkano (aka Bob T) said:
PS: Bush's eyes really are too close together
Hi Bob,
You just can't leave it at that! Is this an opinion, a value judgement or
scientific evidence? And what are the implications?
Let's first deal with your use of the word "really". This is a very strong
word. It stands right upfront in your statement, as if it were necessary to
CRRRUSSSHH DOWN any doubts or objections even before the full content of the
statement ("too close together") was formulated. Do you fear that your
statement might not hold true under close scrutiny?
Now, when you say "too close together" you must have some sort of reference
point against which to assess the relative closeness of the eyes. Despite
my deep respect for you, I just can't take your word on this.
I would be grateful if you could point to your sources (anthropomorphic
studies, etc...) on standards for assessing proper eye-to-eye distance.
There is also the question of whether there might exist any differences in
the standards for leaders and those being lead? I would kindly ask if you
could state in which percentile Bush's distance falls. I would also ask
that you document your sources on the measurement of Bush's actual
eye-to-eye distance.
But the fundamental issue has to do with the implications of your statement.
Why is it so important to know if Bush's eyes are (or not) too close or too
far apart from one another? Are you concerned about double vision or
failure in stereoscopic vision?
Would your concerns be of sufficient magnitude as to require initiation of
an impeachment procedure?
Remember, this is a photo-discussion list after all. Should you not focus
on relevant issues such as parallax?
Regards from Canada, ... -:)
Guy
P.S. Are you concerned that vision might be impaired by interference from
the nose? In which case, you might need to assess where the Bush nose
stands in relation to standards. I would suggest that you search for any
significant changes in the length of the said nose.
