|
|
|
The Kennedy
Tree Group Report -
Stringy Bark Creek
28 April 2021
Update;
The Kennedy tree is Dead by Dr David McFarlane
12 months after the KTG group submitted
their 'Kennedy Tree' findings to
Heritage Victoria as being of
archaeological significance, their two reports were evaluated by
several experts, one of whom was well known Dr Kevin Tolhurst who advises Governments on bushfire management
and is a Eco System and forest scientist. After careful
reading the KTG reports with a on site visit, he
proclaimed the KTG tree's biological size had
failed the growth test when compared to the Burman photo tree of 1878.
Click on
K.T.Group image
to read Dr David McFarlane's blog post
" The Kennedy Tree
is Dead "
Read Dr. Kevin
Tolhurst’s critique of the KTG report .pdf -
https://ironicon.com.au/the-kennedy-tree-is-dead-kevin-tolhurst-april-2020.pdf
This expert announcement pretty well echoes exactly what I wrote in
my critique far below dated Dec 2019.
Its a pity Govt authorities cannot take on board the evaluations
of dozens of amateur historians, archaeologists and authors alike.
Surely, after 20 years of squabbling about several Stringy Bark Creek
locations, it is time to organise a full review of all locations
along SBC allowing each party to submit their case to a
selected 'panel of experts' via a recorded public symposium, date,
time and place to be announced. Please watch this space
Thank you
Kevin Tolhurst for bringing sense to the vocal well
meaning ignorant.
24 June 2020
We can thank the Benalla Ensign to run with these stories. It really is
astonishing that fully grown mature people can argue so much for so long
about fundamental things like tree dating, dubious locations, photo
forensics, all based on beliefs. Science, logic and common sense seems
to have taken second place over egos and BS. As much as we can admire
these investigation interests, in the end all published reports need to
stack up and open to scrutiny.
This webpage titled
'de-fencing the ktg-report' - is a play on words, as they are 'de
fending a notion that a Post &
Rail fence
can be seen in the
Burman photo
- re de fencing. The notion that a
steep slope
can be seen at relatively flat ground, the notion that a
twisted tree
PC4 can be seen in the same Burman photo, the
misconception of distances
in the photos, the
age diameter
of a 200 year old tree, are all of great interest, and all these points
need to be considered.
In the end its not who is right or wrong, its about historical
correctness and honesty.
Please click on the image article
by
Benalla Ensign
journalist and editor 'Simon Ruppert' .
10 June 2020
Update
Following a defamatory -'No Respect for History'
article in the Herald Sun 16 March, (aimed at me), I thought it was time
to tell my story. It is hoped sensibilities will prevail and that the
silly-ness of not allowing history students visitation to the real
sites is a doomed wish on the part of all the authorities.
Please click on image article
by
Benalla Ensign
journalist and editor 'Simon Ruppert' .
Below: 'No Respect for History' article was in the Herald Sun 16
March 2020.
It was Leo Kennedy's attempt to make the simple act of metal detection
look like vandalism of a 'sacred site'- please click on image to read
his and my parody, and read who has no respect for history.
24 March 2020
UPDATE
,
After
I posted my You Tube Video recording of raking and metal detecting at
the “Kennedy Tree” several complaints were made to DELWP. After viewing
the video, a DELWP official interviewed me by phone. I confirmed that
nothing of value was detected at the KTG site and it was barely
disturbed. However, I also informed the Official of a find of possible
significance that I made in 2014 with Leo Kennedy when we detected what
I believe to be a more convincing ‘Kennedy Tree’ on the east back of
SBC, of a lead ball, possibly a bullet from a .31 calibre revolver of
the kind used by Ned Kelly.
Click
here or image to read the full report and about the small lead
ball.
24 February 2020, The KT Group
' Kennedy tree site' was given a run over
with a METAL detector by me.
 |
Here is a question-'Did the
KennedyTree Group jump the gun?
Over two days of metal detecting the site was tested for bullet and gun shot lead deep in the ground. You might be surprised to see what we found - Click on the image to see the video. |
10 January 2020, The Kennedy Tree Group
on their Face book page are taking a pause
due to the fires
in North. East Victoria. It is hoped everybody is safe up around there.
While they are so adamant and rejoicing their identifying the 1878
police camp site, one VERY important feature which nine thousand nine
hundred and ninety six people see in the back ground of the Burman
police camp site photo1, is the steepish slope in the back ground, all
except the K.T.Group of four.
1 January 2020 ; A posting by the team want readers to believe
their slope is vegetation and not a slope at all.
I thought I'd show this composite I prepared. It shows a bent tree they
call PC4- that is not even seen in the Burman photo yet they are
sure it is, but their claim to show this area some 500m north of the
Kelly tree where they say the 'SLOPE' is. I ask, are you convinced of
their slope? This PC4 tree is supposed to be seen in the Burman
photo below.
They reckon the slope behind the standing man is the same ground behind
the group of four. Can you see it ????
Please click on image to enlarge.
 |
 |
Now take a look where PC4 is located on a
scale map of the area- Yet all PC1,2,3,4 trees have to fit in the 20 m
diameter circle, yes they are serious ! Yet
that is the true scale area into which all the logs, trees have to fit
including a steep slope ridge only 45 meters from where the photo was
taken, at the two huts site No1 on map below. Yet, their scenario
would require 4 times the area of '1', see figure 5 below not even
counting PC4 twisted tree that can't fit the circle by 100 metres.
Based upon true science and photography, photos do not lie, except when
digital pixelation changes tree leaves into post and rail fences (which
the KTG also like to see). However, just as a photo captures an image
and placement of things all through a tiny glass lens, this arrangement
can also reconstruct a scene. In 2009 I decided to reconstruct the
Burman photos with model logs, and just as what is seen when Burman
clicked the camera shutter, I was able to align the important parts of
the photo as below. A 3m grid was used for distance of two posts of hut
and a standing man's height.
This image above is a true scale layout gleaned
from the Burman photo. At right see PC1,2 and 3 in 20m circle. This
simply means the KTG scenario is way out and those trees they have
identified have nothing to do with the police camp..
28 December 2019 : ~ The Kennedy Tree Group report ~
In around June Noeleen Lloyd, Adrian Younger, Tony King and Jim Fogarty
had presented their Kennedy Tree Group (KRG) report document to the
authorities;
their claim
to finding the 'Police camp site at SBC, and the Kennedy tree. The
authorities were DELWP, Heritage Victoria, and the Vic Police Museum- all except
people who take a serious interest in these places. However, according to
local newspaper Wangaratta Chronicle, the authorities had not replied.
On
their dedicated Face Book page (linked left) their numerous
tree findings all along SBC, they were very reluctant to telling Wang readers how they came to
make such conclusions. And despite being told of their supposed
findings 10 months ago to me and and small group while we attending a police ceremony at SBC, this
team did not want to share their finding with anyone that might shine
the light on their presumed claims. Well I thought, thats fine don't
share the knowledge -lets
wait and see what the've got, and if it all stacks up then I will congratulate
them when they
show me I was wrong. Numerous offers of help failed primarily on
the basis of mis-trust, I was told 'we might steel their thunder', well
that was a sign of respect. But then they had set the
14th December for their presentation where they would hand out their report to
those prepared to attend at Greta Hansonville way up in
N.E. Victoria. This place is some hundreds of KM from most
of us down south. Many queried why their report could not
be made available online prior to the 14th Dec so that their stupendous findings
could be openly discussed.
Their claim to have identified the very same Kennedy tree
as shown in the Burman photo (below) is interesting as Leo Kennedy and
myself had worked hard on finding this site during early 2014. I called
this the Leo
tree with him standing in front. This Leo tree might well be the
TRUE Kennedy tree because its on the EAST bank of SBC, whereas the KTG
have their tree on the west bank and by the most
primary of sources
is incorrect as-,
the Sergeant's body was found to the East of Stringy Bark Creek, and on
the opposite side of the creek to where Const Scanlan's body was found.
Their~The KTG Report~ 'became publicly
available online after
their presentation , so we also make it available here for your easy access.
You can view it or download by placing your mouse on the
link and right click- then select destination folder and left click.
There are two files-
SBC Police camp Report.
the other
The Kennedy Tree at SBC report.
Now that I have read their
report,
I say 'Oh my golly gee willikers',
are they serious ?
I want to begin with this Leo Kennedy tree from our 2014 investigation
so you will understand what my pictures are all about. At the time Leo
and I
identified one large tree selected not for its size but the terrain on
which it stands, a flattish space of 8 metres around about with slight rising
background as seen in the Burman photo (below) and the relative distance from the
police camp as from the Two Huts site as being the Police camp. We
crossed the creek from there to sus out every nook and cranny. You will see reason why
the photo below of Leo was taken - to make a tree diameter comparison.
The picture below
shows a simple comparison, first by accepting that both men centre and
at right are of
similar stature ( which I believe they are) and the similar distance in front of their tree.
From that set up a ratio of
tree diameter to figure height can be fairly accurately gauged. The growth difference
over 140 years since the Burman photo was taken, suggests our Leo tree
being around 40%
bigger in diameter at waist height, see white line. This 40% may still
be questionable because this only represents a 60 cm increase in
diameter if this Leo tree was the Kennedy tree, - I will explain later.
Using a perspective grid
drawn over the Burman photo we can see a perspective cube around at the left man's
size.
I decided at ground level a foot line direct from the right mans boot to the foot of
the tree as the start of a cube which worked out about the same as the
man's height. The cube around him was determined by his height at 167
cm squared. The proportions look about right. Then another cube was
added to his right, to encompass part of the tree base.
It also happens that the man's height matches the distance on the
ground, thus we can estimate that the 1878 tree was around 3 foot or so
in dia at shoulder height,
with an average estimate of - 110 cm dia across. Then we add 40% = 154
cm or 1.54 m across being the tree behind Leo is around 1.6 metres in diameter,
actually 1.57m. So this
tree could fit the age and size if it was only 1.1m dia at waist height
(as the white lines in the
above images
indicate). Note the red line represents the
right man's height 'in perspective'. We can ignore the taller man at
left but
concentrate only on the drafted cubes around the man at right.
Please click on the image below to
see full size image.
This image is to demonstrate simply how a perspective grid and calculations can provide meaningful measures. However the KTG team have determined the Burman photo tree was only 75.5 cm, while I calculate blue line at 104 cm.
Okay, then now lets meet - The Kennedy
tree group. :
At
left, Tony King, Adrian Younger, Noeleen Lloyd and Jim Fogarty.
Disbelieving 17 years of serious research by dozens of historians to
identify the true site of the police camp at SBC, Tony and Adrian
thought they had seen a tree that looked like the one in the Burman
photo. Noeleen asked her friend Jim for botanical advice on trees as he
is an expert in landscape garden design, and
after identifying certain vegetations and tree species, they grouped and were so convinced they had found the
Kennedy tree, they used that tree as a starting point to find where the
police had camped,- all based upon trees exclusively seen in the ' two Burman
photos'.
Unfortunately though they ignored primary source material such
as land topography in the photos as primary sources, as well as the location of two huts
fireplaces, then the general lay of the land -slope including a swampy
bit of ground to the north
of the police camp, and their findings are all to do with look alike trees.
( not a good look if you ask me)
The problem with
their tree today is
it's still the same size as in 1878 ?
Left image: This is their tree made to look like the old
Burman photo tree.
The KTG team have creatively placed life size 'men' cut outs near their
chosen tree, and photographed the scene to replicate the Burman photo
as above.
This is well done, but for what purpose?
Obviously to convince the viewer that this tree looks like the one in
the photo- so perhaps it is, but to go to that trouble without further in depth
investigations before making their announcement public is a recipe for
ridicule, and could have been avoided if other peer group parties had been consulted, and only then
should a report have been put out.
As similar thing happened when I instigated a proper investigation after
coming across the two fireplaces. I invited what became the
CSI@SBC team, but there was a condition
that no report be put out until all involved agreed to one place where the
police had camped.
However, most readers will know the story, three of the group were so convinced by
Linton Brigg's conviction as being near the Kelly tree and the place where the
police had camped, they published
their report without considering our agreement, and the CSI team have been
the butt of ridicule ever since. So this new team of experts will also
have to wear the brunt of their sloppy research, and have to explain to
the public their poorly conceived theories.
The following images will demonstrate their supposed
Kennedy tree is seriously flawed.
Image below:
You will see the 'men figures'. I have transferred them from the
Burman photo (by photo shop) to illustrate they are near the correct size as KTG
team have placed them, all except for the man on left, he should be
higher up, and the little man set too far back brought forward.
This three part image demonstrates the flaw in their argument.
Conclusion:
Their tree is the same size as the 1878 Burman photo. But how can that
be after 141 years?
Click on the image below to see full size.
Now take a look at this next set of images: The centre image shows Tony
King and Adrian Younger shoulder to shoulder in front of their Kennedy
tree. Notice on the image (right) where their outline is traced against
a much bigger three. Then also notice
on that unrelated tree, they sought to show its size and age- but this one
is more likely the correct size because 3 and more figures can span its
diameter cross section, and yet their K tree spans only two of them.
The yellow text above right reads; "This is not the proposed Kennedy tree
but one that shows considerable size and age. We can see one tree can
shoulder 3 and 1/2 persons where as their Kennedy tree only two persons.
The above big tree (at right) is said to be more than 2 m Dia and 360
years old while their K tree is estimated at 230 years old. One then
wonders how the supposed K tree at far left can be the tree if its only
1.3 m in Dia in 2019, and over the last 140 years it must have grown
some 40% since 1878, and therefore their Kennedy tree was a mere 80 cm
or less in Dia in 1878.
Conclusion: The tree at far left can not be the tree near where Sgnt
Kennedy's body was found.
This above image (left)
demonstrates how small their tree would look when reduced to a mere 80 cm
in Dia as it may have been in 1878, and then over 140 years grow to 1.2
m plus diameter by
2019. But this tree shown (centre image) is still around the same size
as in the 1978 Burman photo at right ?
It is therefore reasonable to expect a much larger tree today.
However the (above) size comparisons are only my immediate observations,
and while the KTG team estimate their tree to have been only 75.5 cm
across in 1878, while their report on page 5, " Finding the Kennedy
tree"
they show a 'Sample1 - cross cut tree ( below) having average growth rings
4.3 mm apart , but lets assume after a long life the tree grew slower as
it got bigger to have growth rings 2.3 mm which I have recorded myself
with the Kelly target tree recovered from Kellys Creek in 2004. - then
lets average this to 3.3 mm per year,
and as the tree grows 3.3 mm around the circumference we multiply x 2 = 6.6mm
Diameter per
year, and over 140 years = 924 mm or 92.4 cm.
Below: image from KTG report of a Sample1 tree log with 4.3 mm growth
rings.
Then from the previous calculations, -
What does 92.4 cm mean
for the KTG tree
?
Answer: it was only an 8 inch or 20cm tree in 1878.
Explanation-
My estimation of their current chosen K tree with the men cut outs, as
above central image, would be 110cm across at the white line, then minus
92.4cm = their tree to be around 18 cm across in 1878.
This equates to their tree in 1878 having a diameter of less than a
dinner plate.
Conclusion: The whole case for the K.T.Group claiming their
discovered K tree being the very same tree where Kennedy's body was found is
VERY unlikely
given the growth and diameter discrepancies here demonstrated.
The next part of their report will be their
site for the Police camp.
To give you an idea of what the Two Huts site looked like in 2010, comparison
this with Burman site 138ys later.
Compare the numbers in each photo and you decide if its a good match ?
Now look at the KTG view they believe is the same
place- as seen via Google Earth tour.
Left images from Page 12 'Finding the 'Police Camp'. Right image
my G Earth tour of SBC road.
On the right are the trees they can see in the Burman photo. I ask
them 'where has that slope gone? OMG !
They also discovered a twisted tree PC4- that nobody can actually see in
the Burman photo, but they found it only 72 metres down the road from
PC1 - on the right. Well what can I say ! That is amazing.
I would like to ask, can pick out that PC4 tree in the image below,
although I had no trouble finding it on SBC road drive by tour exactly
where they plotted it on their GE map.
Seriously below, The Kennedy tree group stand near their PC4 tree
along Stringy Bark Creek road, as on their Face Book page posted 1 Jan
2020. They say "The background group are lined
up to demonstrate how the post and rail fences extended west up the
slope from the old bridle track. On the other side (east side) of the
bridle track was the shingle hut that is marked on the 1884 survey"
Well what can I say, except I have a letter from people that lived up
top end of SBC 'Charlie Engelke' who wrote that in the vicinity of where
they stand was the humpy hut of a hermit Bob Majers* , he just down from
the old house thought to have been built by Beaselys closer to the
picnic ground. * Letter from C.Engelke dated 20Jan 2003.
So, here is their layout that I was able to plot on Google Earth -
Please click on images for full size views.
Here below is my model log layout of the Burman photos first laid out in
2002. Subsequent refinements have been made to the layout with trees
added for clarity on this page to demonstrate the Burman photo area is
no bigger in size than a tennis court, yet the KTG team need an area the
size of a football oval to encompass their tree sojourn.
This image below is on Page4 'Finding the 'Police Camp' so you don't think I'm just making this above view up.
The
following section is about their Post and Rail fence.
Page3 of 'Finding the Police Camp' Amazingly apart from seeing a
Post & Rail fence, they also
claim the slope in the background behind the standing figure is
"Pixelated shrubbery that creates the illusion of a hill."
If there was a Post & Rail fence, then what is it doing up in the top of
shrubbery? Quite obviously this is all looking like a public
practical joke. They must be joking to have a bit of fun? Well no, they
are deadly serious. So serious in fact that while they say they want to
allow debate on their Face Book page, they manipulate what can be seen
by some but not others. Proof of this is when I posted some 3 of my
(upper) tree
dimension pictures with direct
questions to Jim Fogarty, my postings are not to be seen by anyone except for me, I can see my postings but no one else
can.
Now that is what I call transparency.
Anyhow, lets examine their Post and Rail fence. Here below is an image
that might surprise them.
Quite obviously we are looking past some trees onto a steep slope.
Sweeping through the right of the oval is a bent sapling with leafy
foliage extending out the oval. This image is a blow up scan from Kieth
McMenomy's 2001 Ned Kelly edition. The next image has the oval over the
area where KTG team say is a Post &Rail fence. See if you can figure it
out. -- --- ---- ---- - I can.
This oval area shown
is only 25mm across (1 inch) in the Burman photo 'No1, an enlargement
from Keith McMenomy's Ned Kelly book: The Authentic Illustrated History-
2001 edition Page 90. There are roughly 170 raster dots across the oval, but your
average computer screen for the same area has only 72 pixels wide per
inch. If you divide 170 by 72 you get 0.972. This is an un equal number,
so when an image is expanded an interference pattern occurs like looking
through two fly wire screens you see a interference lines cris crossing
the screen. When people view photos on their devices the computer
creates the best adjusted image, and sometimes creates things that are
not actually in the original photo. The image above is but a very rough
reproduction of the original- very pixelated printed version. WE CAN BE
SURE the image above is as close to the 'primary source' information in
the photo unless someone can find the original large glass plate
negatives
Burman processed.
<
this image was only 10 cm wide
> < this
image actual size is about 50 cm wide
>
Here above (right), we see a high resolution image where this section
of Burman photo would be 50 cm wide, whereas, on the left the same image
was crunched down to only 10 cm wide losing millions of pixels, - and then expanded.
And guess what ? There now appears to be a bunch of logs lying
on the slope that are not in the original.
What is going on?
I must add that back in 2002 while at SBC with Gary Dean,
I also asked the question about the Burman photos appearance of a fence
in the back ground. We were at the Jones site on the east bank and we
crossed the swamp to examine the slope when we realised fallen saplings
lying across west to east even in 2002. Gary went one way and I the
other exploring through the thick scrub when I came across one of the
fireplaces of a hut. We knew it was important, and the following week
I found the second fireplace.
In the following YouTube video - I will try and explain how digital pixelisation interferes with printed photo 'raster dots'-
Before I had composed this critique, this blog
Ned Kelly Unmasked
by David McFarlane had already raised poignant questions about
the KTG report, and while I don't agree with most of David's anti Ned
sentiments , old Kelly
history translated into terms of today, his thread topics are most
interesting and a must read and need reply for like 50% of the
population I remain a Kelly sympathiser.
I know David's stance is more to do with having proper public debate about
the Kelly story, rather than to putting Ned down, however he provides
insight form the other side of the 'fence' and here we go again that
fence word.
Its hard to fathom why rusted on Kelly fanatics, or Kelly
family descendants are not willing to engage to open debate -to open up the true
history of the Kelly outbreak. We have to respect David, for he is the
only one fighting for some balance following decades of soppy Ned hero
worship. After Ian Jones passed away, I have been waiting for the next
Guru to surface to carry ground swell support for Ned, but until that
happens I think David is turning the tide.
David is also a fighter for justice and has always supported
rational debate about sites at Stringy Bark Creek. I know this because
we met up at SBC I
showed him around years ago, so he is more familiar with the place than
most here reading this.
Several days ago I posted one of my images on his blog page with more to
come, and David's
writings on the subject i,e,- the KTG's Trees and Post & Rail fences are a
treat to read if you want to get a balanced view from a true professional. But I
suppose by the material the KTG have put out we can probably see an
unwillingness to see the truth rather than an intellectual divide synonymous with sticking to one's belief with
eyes shut. We still have to respect the effort the KTG team have put
into their report, but it remains very difficult to respond if they hide
participants postings if it happens to contradict their dodgy beliefs. How four
seemingly honest team members can be all led astray - and by the sounds
they all believe it, this is the reason I prepared this webpage because
there seem no other way to communicate and allow the casual visitor from knowing the
historical truth.
A most disturbing thing about the internet is its influx of fake
news, fake archaeology, and fake history.
I hope this page has made a few readers more aware so they can make up their
own minds without being hoodwinked by un substantiated claims.
If you have a comment you want to make, go to David's webpage here
KTG report One week later
or send me an email with your thoughts for Feedback to Iron Icon
Thanks for your time,
Bill