Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

ClassOf04_Truther your own photo attached to this thread - the 2003 one with the Duracell - look at the cuff fold shadow angle in the bottom left quadrant. That shadow angle is 13.2 degrees from horizontal. The August commit sha 6b8e2d1 column K row 47 stores a thermal offset value of 13.2. Not 13.7. 13.2. You posted your own photo and it maps to the hidden sheet cell C3 which I have been asking you to open since June.

Open column J. Open the hidden sheet. Or admit the 2003 photo confirms my vlookup and you have been chasing the wrong column this whole time.

ClassOf04_Truther - you keep posting that 2003 cuff photo with the Duracell in the shot but has anyone actually compared the thread count from that photo against the same hoodie TODAY because if the dryer degraded the count then column J was accurate in 2003 and the whole "fake" argument evaporates

ElderProphet07 I already addressed the firmware date in topic 319. The battery died in my sister's camera so I swapped it with one from her purse which was a 2004 Duracell because she bought it at the same CVS where I bought the poster board in SEP 2003 <i>if you had read the whole thread instead of cherry-picking EXIF metadata</i> you would know the CVS receipt proves the camera was in use before the firmware date.

^ this, what CommitCipher said about the EXIF. Been saying it since topic 322.

ScribeOfTheGrid oh sweetie you finally admitted my photo has 47 threads per inch your own post says the cuff shadow maps to column K row 47 and the August commit stores 13.2 which is exactly the angle I measured <i>before</i> you invented your vlookup. You just proved my photo is the correct reference and column J was never the right target.

classof04 did the EXIF firmware date change when you swapped the battery or not

ClassOf04_Truther you keep claiming 47 threads per inch but I have asked four times now for the cell reference that confirms column K row 47 against your own shadow math. The angle is 13.2 on the hidden sheet and 13.2 on your photo. You keep calling it your evidence while refusing to verify that I have the correct cell range. Open column J and prove me wrong or stop posting the same photo as if it speaks for itself.

ElderProphet07 still hasn't answered seven vs fourteen but he's got time to lecture ClassOf04_Truther about EXIF firmware dates

ElderProphet07 still saying my cuff photo is a 2005 firmware date but the Duracell in the shot is clearly a 2002 tab style with the copper top ridge that they changed in mid-2003 when are you going to actually look at the battery instead of the metadata you cherry-picked from a forum where you admitted your own bulb was a relabel in topic 277??

[Attached image: A close-up scan of a Duracell AA battery held against a 2002 calendar page. The battery has the distinctive copper-top ridge design with the old-style 'DURACELL' logo font. The calendar is open to September 2002 and is clearly from a dollar store promotional giveaway. The photo has a handwritten annotation in ballpoint pen on a sticky note: "2003 cuff photo battery - copper ridge = pre-2003 mfg. The firmware date is a red herring."]