So the City of Osaka just terminated its sister city relationship with San Francisco, over the inclusion into city property of a statue for Comfort Women that includes this plaque:

This monument bears witness to the suffering of hundreds of thousands of women and girls euphemistically called ‘Comfort Women,’ who were sexually enslaved by the Japanese Imperial Armed Forces in thirteen Asian-Pacific countries from 1931 to 1945.

A full picture of the plaque

The article notes,

San Francisco Board of Supervisors received dozens of complaints about the statue from local residents and Japanese who warned it misrepresented history and would harm bilateral relations.

....

Yoshimura has called the memorial a form of Japan-bashing. In late September, he and Osaka Gov. Ichiro Matsui expressed their displeasure with San Francisco to U.S. Ambassador William Hagerty, calling the memorial “mistaken history.”

And the r/japan thread on this is full of debate about it too. The main counter-points seem to be that 1) It wasn't

What do you guys think about this issue? Is the plaque accurate, or does it misrepresent history? Is this a form of Japan-bashing?

• Photograph number one: cropped and uncropped (less detailed).

• Photograph number two: cropped and uncropped (less detailed).

• Photograph number three: cropped and uncropped (less detailed).

If they are real, they may very well be the only photographs of real line formation combat, and if so they deserve to be much more well known.

This comment in this thread does what I think it's an excellent analysis of the precise event, time and location of what is happening. If it's real, it shows a part of the famous Battle of Sedan; at this location (google maps) in the village of La Moncelle, near Bazeilles; and in the 1st of September 1870. There seems to be confusion as to what troops (French or German) are pictured in each photograph. The thread does not seem to reach a conclusion on wether it's real or not.

This blog post (the source of the photos I linked above) reaches the conclusion that it's some sort of elaborate recreation, but the main reasoning seems weak to me:

There doesn't seem to be any blurring in the photographs caused by movement of the soldiers which was a common trait in photos of the era and could be a sign that the photographs are posed. Cameras with fast exposure times which would minimize any blurring existed at the time but their use was not very widespread.

We may not reach a definitive conclusion here, but any answer to the following questions would help to eventually reach a verdict. Feel free to only answer the questions of your expertise/interests.

• From the uniforms, formations and purposed events depicted, are those German troops, French ones, or both firing at one another? Does the conclusion make sense, knowing what really happened that day in that location (see the comment already linked above)?

• Do you see signs that it may be a reenactment or military exercise? Are the formations accurate for active combat in that time?

• Is the photographic technology consistent with the supposed date? If it's a real battle, why isn't there more blurring?

• Do you detect signs of doctoring that may have transformed a simple photograph of troop movement into a fake combat situation?

• Can you find out the original photographer/studio? No one seems to have done that yet.

I need to know if they're real!

I read in this article that

some ancient North American native healers injected medicine beneath the skin. Making the most of the materials at hand, they fashioned hypodermic needles out of hollow bird bones and small animal bladders.

But it doesn't get more specific about when, what tribe(s), or how we know the way such implements were used. Can anyone provide further insight or, dare I hope, link to a picture?