I use the same images because to make the comparisons, the faces have to be full-front-on, both of them. And yes, I am consistent for that reason, just as you are, you cannot make a comment without the same belittling tone which achieves nothing.
In the pictures I selected, both girls appear to have long chins. As near as I can judge, they are the same length. Compare their chins.
Of course they both have long chins. That's one of the attributes that persuaded who-ever it was that lifted them from the free-vintage-porn com website to falsely attribute them to Stanley Ann Dunham, with nothing more to go on than a superficial resemblance. If the originals on the site (now removed) didn't have a long chin, the entire fiasco would never have been started.
Just in case you missed it the first six times I've said it, I am suggesting that the three original pictures (one of which is above.) might be Stanley Ann, but the other pictures discovered by Gilbert are not.
They are however, the same girl, photographed in the same place on the same day and in several images in both black and white and tinted, wearing either the same shoes, underwear or earrings and/or necklace...you obviously haven't studied the images in detail.
Why don't you compare the visible length of chins from the original (John Ray) three pictures with the Gilbert pictures? Or Why don't you resize and compare the jaw length of the John Ray picture above, with the Stanley Ann picture above?
Why don't you? There's something most peculiar about your refusal to accept that there are both black and white AND TINTED images of the same model.