Sorry man but you're reaching too far on this one. The zoomed out picture shows the bar running under him .... around post 40.
Could be. Odd that the bar of the stretcher doesn't follow a straight line, though.
I agree, reaching too far on this one.
If he is sitting up it explains why the fabric is not taught behind his head. Try doing a semi situp on a lawn chair with similar fabric for a case in point.
The stretcher appears longer than it first appeared. So the theory of a too small stretcher or levitating man is out. The dust color and lack of visible injuries are hardly confident indicators of doctoring.
And, it appears the stretcher may be resting on a wooden fence of some sort, hence the lack of exertion on the part of those carrying the stretcher.
I think that you all are unwitting dupes to an experiment. I would include myself in the dupes category as I've spent way to much time trying to find something wrong with the picture. What's more we may be the subjects of that very experiment. The object lesson to be taken from the experiment: "where you engage lots of peeps in a hunt for something wrong with say, "a picture" you can expect them to find something and to engage in wild and rampant speculation."
As evidence of the experiment I would point to the following facts:
1. The picture and teasing comment were thrown out there for the purpose of inviting speculation. “I suspect that not all is as it appears to be in the photo, and somehow doubt that Times readers will ever learn why that might be the case.”
2. No further explanation for the teasing comment has been forthcoming;
3. Specific facts have been withheld in an apparent dulling out of information. (i.e. after allowing people to float levitation theories a later picture showing an extended gurney is released)
4. fill in
5. fill in
Now, having said that this is merely an object lesson, I qualify and say that "maybe" this is an object lesson, because, maybe I’ve missed something (i.e. maybe there are no palm trees located in that area)….. But at this point I have no reason, other than “I suspect that not all is as it appears to be in the photo, and somehow doubt that Times readers will ever learn why that might be the case.” to suspect anything.