[ThePythonicCow]

This same story, as reported by AP, was already posted here, and here. Here is Reuters version.

[ThePythonicCow]

The following enlargement of the above pair of pictures is attached to the above Reuters report on Yahoo news:

Sharbat Gula, who captivated audiences with her haunting green eyes when she appeared on the cover of National Geographic magazine in 1985, is seen in the magazine's 1985 cover photograph (L), and today (R), 17 years later. The story of her life and how she was located after nearly two decades is featured in the April issue of National Geographic magazine. Photo by National Geographic Society/Reuters

[Rodney King]

Nasty. A girl can change a lot in 15 years. That is why you should always check out their mothers before you marry them.

[Shooter 2.5]

I don't see why her face is any diffent than it was before other than the age. Her expression as a child was a blank one and the recent picture seems like she's frowning. What did anyone think she would look like? Makeup and a hairstyled mane of hair? Too bad the photographer tried to duplicate the photo. He tried to duplicate her expression and failed.

[arm958]

Gula got married shortly after McCurry first saw her and had four daughters.

What? No Sons? I thought they killed women for less.

[Destructor]

What? No Burqua!?! Stone her!!!

[Contra]

I saw a girl with bright green eyes like that once and she had on a pair of colored contact lenses. That's probably all it was, fake lenses.

[Contra]

I saw a girl with bright green eyes like that once and she had on a pair of colored contact lenses. That's probably all it was, fake lenses.

[IronJack]

Time is merciless to beauty.

[Willie Green]

National Geographic used several scientific methods to ensure they had found the right woman, including iris recognition in which the colored portion of the eye is examined.

This sounds rather far-fetched to me.

I know that professional photographers use high-quality equipment and film, but wouldn't a more detail close-up of the iris be necessary? Not just a portrait? I'd think too much detail would be lost to perform iris recognition. (Although she DOES have very striking eyes.)