I would say no. As the overall size of the lobe looks normal. I tried to match the 1983 to prove or disprove, but could be the images to say either way. They were not matching up. When you take a full image, try to get the full head so that I can use references such as the top of the head where the hair line stops. The lower right at the bottom of the neck. Left side, the Back of the neck curve and the have height on the back of the head with the full ear area. Also make sure it is a horizontal shot. When you take an image at an angle and I try to straighten then, the devices are warped a bit. On the 1983 image you posted the other day, the lips were damaged. (I was trying to use them and discovered the damage there) So it is better to have too much of of an image as I can cut and size better, than trying to make the normal size work, when they are not there. That help me from pulling out whats left of my hair. LOL
I've seen this on several of the newer cents. I believe what's going on here is that the little crack that you see isn't really supposed to be there, or it's part of the design. It looks like that crack is separating the actual ear from the doubled one, when in reality the crack is cutting in between the entire earlobe. The earlobe during the newer years are more thickened. So I reality, it's nothing more than a little crack that is part of the design, tricking the eyes of the viewer to think there are two earlobes, rather than just one.
"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get." - Forrest Gump