Can you not be gracious when your thesis is shown to be fundamentally incorrect? Do you expect to see some lineage behind every single "public domain" image included in the book series? I think I see quite a few Lincoln clips in "The Collector"'s article that were also supposedly restored by startrekhistory and are currently displayed there. If I might make the observation, you appear now to be just "digging in" to your past position without any reasonable consideration of the evidence that was just plainly posted for all to see. And, as I've asked you previously, where is your evidence that unquestionably connects even a single "pilfered" B&W book photo to a startrekhistory restoration versus other iterations on the web?