• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

David Josephs

Members
  • Content count

    2,805
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About David Josephs

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    History

Recent Profile Visitors

17,351 profile views
  1. I was pretty sure that like Alvarado, PAZ and group were also discredited... seems PAZ had it out for Sylvia... but by all means, keep digging. An allegation by Elenita Garro de Paz that Sylvia Duran brought Oswald to a party at her home in September 1963. The source of this information came from a memo written by CIA asset June Cobb Sharp. This story was eventually revealed as yet another fabricated attempt to link Oswald to Sylvia Duran and the Cubans. June Cobb Sharp -
  2. David - wasn't Jenner and Rankin in on the explanation regarding Ely's work? I would expect that Jenner, knowing about the inconsistencies and problems with Oswald's bio, would not treat PIC as a hostile witness. Pic wasn't stupid... he was very careful with his answers... but yeah, Jenner, like Liebeler had the WCR agenda... DJ
  3. Sandy, I'd assume each state has it's own way of doing it. Beauregard's records refer to a PS 44 in NY called "Byron Jr High" CE1413 refers to ALL records on Lee Harvey in the New Orleans files and not once, other than the above mention, do these records refer to NYC school records which "should" have been sent... As I understand, schools kept two sets of records, one perm and one that goes with the child.... Ask Greg what the source is of the info gathered by the "districts"... They didn't just pull the stuff out of their ears..... they got reports on each child from the school admins themselves... who got them from the records of the teachers... grade cards, attendance cards, etc... Maybe it's done differently in different parts of the world. I grew up in NY and moved to CA in Jr High... Greg's one lynchpin in his arguments is how impossible it is for US citizens or its military to keep records with any level of accuracy... The US is founded on the minutia of detail and record keeping... yet school administrators don't know how many days in a school year? Please.
  4. Ok, let's forget NPIC for now. Should be obvious since z312 as the last shot was immediately contradicted by the surveys. The Nov 26 Time/Life survey has shot one 163' from the TSBD corner... except the surveys put it at 423.07 which is 172 feet from the same spot. WCD298 from Dec's survey data squarely puts a shot within 4 feet of 5+00 as does the Feb FBI survey as does CE875 - as we both know. The real question is whether this 3rd shot was CREATED and REMOVED, or ACTUAL and REMOVED and can that be proven. With the need for a third shot and have 2 shots defined with z312 the 2nd shot, they needed a place for a third shot which would not interfere, with what Shaneyfelt did not the path of the limo and shot locations. Couldn't be before 207 with the tree and Position A as rationale. COULD be between 207 and 312 since it was 42 frames for a reload and 207 + 42 = 249 + 42 = 291... Which is why NPIC has 242 and 256 as frames with potential shots COULD be after 312 since the FBI's position was 3 shots = 3 hits with the last hit being the head shot... 40 feet further down Elm. As usual the exhibits negate the narrative.
  5. the total length including the black film is 8'10". Assassination sequence is only 75" of that. Unless this is now incorrect? The NPIC notes confirm the choice of frames: it, like the Panels, also shows you the "seconds" mark as they pass... 1 second is before z206. Does the " = 14 - (1)" suggest one second is 14 frames after z188 or z202? Second #2 comes at z220, 18 frames past 202. 18 + 14 = 32 / 2 = 16fps (Second #2 is not noted on PANEL 1) Second #3 comes at z234, 14 frames past 220 yet PANEL 2 has second #3 at z243, 9 frames later or 23 frames after z220 in 1 second. Second #4 comes at z250, 16 frames past 234 yet PANEL 2 has second #4 at the end of the panel or z257. This is 23 frames after 234, and 14 frames after 243. 23 + 14 = 37 / 2 = 18.5fps Second #5 SHOULD come at z266/67/68. #5 is on panel #3 between z274 & z289. Even is it were z274, that's 24 frames... PANEL 3: z266 - 7 frames - z274 - 14 frames - z289 Second #6 has to be 16-18 frames prior to z314 = z296-z298. Both are beyond Panel 3 which has it at z291.5 Second #7 is on z314 314 - 291.5 = 22.5 frames from Second 6 to 7. From the equation below the NPIC table: z256-z224 = 32 frames = 2 seconds of film in the 5.5 film sequence = 16fps. All these NPIC Table calcs are for 16 frames per second, not 18.3. the Time stamps on the boards have no direct relationship to a 5.5 second span of film. The full span from the NPIC page is 312 - 224 = 88 frames / 5.5 secs = 16fps. yet this table matches the panels exactly. Panel 2 has a "4 SECONDS" notation at the end... If it meant the entire panel: 258 - 188 = 70 / 4 seconds = 17.5fps According to the NPIC table, 4 seconds comes at z246, the PANELS have it at z257, 11 frames later. I am once again spread out a bit... but I think you can pick the ball up from here. Figured at 16fps yet not sure if they tried using a stopwatch, or just counted frames... PANEL 4.... 8 second mark at the start of z331 - 49 missing - z386 = 51 frames / 3 seconds = 17fps It appears that nothing about these two items of related z-film info works in the real world. Can you check the work Chris and expand... I do believe we are inching closer to a more detailed description of the 48 to 18.3 fps cut-down. Cheers DJ
  6. Well embraced Sandy.... One thing I'd like to throw in... I have a difficult time with your assumption that a child has 2 different PERM RECORDS simply because he changed schools. That's the point of a permanent record... one place for everything that occurs to a child while in NYC middle schools. I would suggest the concept of FBI alteration and creation of documents for it is the FBI report which claims Oswald attended 200 of 210 available days.
  7. Steve - any idea on how that person is completely blacked out when the sun would be shining from the direction of the camera. This is from the next day... where do you suppose that person was walking so he'd be in total shade yet appear as large as he does? Michael That black couple mentioned by Marilyn Sitzman had always intrigued me.... yet as she described them, they were sitting on the bench. From any one of a number of images we should see their heads above the retaining wall. Even sitting there we should see a head in Willis. Sitzman: And they were eating their lunch, 'cause they had little lunch sacks, and they were drinking coke. The main reason I remember 'em is, after the last shot I recall hearing and the car went down under the triple underpass there, I heard a crash of glass, and I looked over there, and the kids had thrown down their coke bottles, just threw them down and just started running towards the back I believe this image shows the soda on the ground - as for the glass, IDK. Sitzman: Because the pop bottle crashing was much louder than the shots were.
  8. Let's stay with 1 second of time = 18-19 frames = 18.3fps = z188 thru z206 on PANEL 1 16 total frames "missing" ; 3 total frames shown ; 1 second occurs .3 of the way into frame 206. When we make the assumption that those 18 frames come from 48 we automatically make the math work, Let's say those 18-19 frames were actually filmed at 1000fps ... as long as the boards are labeled as they are, how would we know the filmed frame rate? We wouldn't. So isn't it pure mathematical coincidence that 48 x 1/2 x 1/4 = 18 due to 18 and 48 being divisible by 6 and 3, magical math numbers. There is no way to know if 981 frames were removed from a 1000fps film so we're back to the B&H settings... 16 and 48fps It would require the creation/addition of frames if the film was taken at 16fps or a completely different frame numbering system - the first shot's frame number depends entirely on the final frames per second speed... 213 @ 18fps and 224 @ 16fps. That's 11 frames @ 2 fps diff = 5.5 seconds of elapsed time. So we are GIVEN the 48fps as the only possibility above 18.3fps for that film to originally be shot. Filming the recreation at 24fps indeed is a strong indication that the first pass removal of frames would be 50% of the frames. Now comes the part whether there was another 1/2 of the 50% = 6 frames, or 1/3 of the 50% = 8 frames. To get to the 16fps they would have removed 1/3 of the and would have matched the actual available camera speeds... but they did not take this easy route, the 2nd 1/2 removal from 50% of the remaining frames plus/minus a few frames gets them to their 18.3 (to match Elm's incline and make the remaining calcs easier) 486 frames net divided by 75% = 648 frames before removing 25% and then double it for the first 50% = 1296 total starting frames / 48fps = 27 seconds = 486 / 18. At 18.3fps the run time is 26.56 seconds. That is .44 seconds faster which equates to 21-22 frames at 48fps or 8 frames at 18.3fps Again, more than likely 48fps was double stepped down to 18.3 by taking 50% of the frames away then 50% OF THE TOTAL again from the 48fps original. If there were frames between 132 and 133 they were completely removed and have no bearing on the 486 extant frames. At .149" from frame start to frame start, 486 frames = 72.414" = 6.03' of film yet there is 6' 3" of film at the archive. 2.97" of film = 20 frames or about 1 second One meter = 3.28084' = 264 frames = 39.37" = .149" per frame including the space between frames (according to Wiki) 75"/39.37" is the ratio of total length to a known quantity = 1.905 x 264 frames = 504 total frames - 486 = 18 frames or about one second Chris - I seem to have got lost in the math... trying to do too many things at once. Am I making sense with the 18 to 18.3 fps comparison? Does the length of the film and # of frames resulting in an extra 18-20 frames add up to you? 75" of film equates to too many frames... what can be derived from this? your help as always is greatly appreciated DJ
  9. Yet we are removing just short of 2/3 of the frames, not 1/3. ?? And your math is simply stating the same thing in different ways. There are 3 frames shown on the board for 188-206 and 16 missing frames with 1 second coming at 18.3 frames or the middle of 206. Multiplying both sides of the equation by 3 to get to 48fps resulting in the 5/8ths and 3/8ths %'s. And why do you keep using 1/3? Finally, these frames are simply not shown... whether there are 48 frames to a second or not, the board show 18.3 fframes for each second... the rest of the boards have missing frames as well... ??
  10. "X" = Bronx under the heading "Borough" I grew up in the borough of Queens. There's also Brooklyn, Manhattan and Staten Island In the row below 117 the record of the xfer is shown. On 1/16/53 this boy is moved to PS44 in the Bronx as shown on the map I posted. I don't think the record for PS44 relates to the same child as from PS117. (edit: I see you meant the middle incomplete record. Yet since these are "Pupil Perm Record in JR High School" he is transferring within the same Boro... this record would not start over or end... and if it did, we'd not see any info prior to PS44 on the form... There is simply no reason for this middle copy to exist.
  11. Sandy, Your curiosity and persistence is greatly appreciated. I do believe it most likely the FBI had the ability to recreate documents and had access to the earliest machines. That really isn't the point. A "PERMANENT CUMULATIVE RECORD" is a singular item added to over time and would follow the child as they moved to different schools. The item in the center should not exist at all, unless that boy simply stopped going to NYC schools. *If it was only one mention that would be one thing, yet between Robert and Carro LEE was in PS44 and doing well. The record for PS44 is all LEE's I believe. That way Marge is able to tell us how he changed and was not class president and attending as expected... Little Harvey was not part of this miraculous change. One thing that never gets tired for me is the inability to add by those trying to prove these records legit. Look closely - from March 23 thru the end of the semester June 29, this boy was supposed to have attended 109 3/2 days of school. This is important because it is very hard to imagine an actual school administrator filling out this form and showing 109 3/2 + 15 3/2 = 127 days of school Here are all the school days from March 23 on. You want to help show them how 127 days of school fits between March 23 and Sept 14. and no, Oswald did not go to summer school. Summer 1953 is North Dakota time... And as shown, he returns and enters 9th grade in Sept 1953... That's Lee, not Harvey.
  12. Sandy, With Tracy et al, every single instance of duality must be addressed and explained away. In so many cases, their only reply is "they got it wrong".. (just like John Ely got it wrong) The 3 different PS44's for example. Here is the relevant page along with reports from John Carro, Oswald's school probation officer. From Robert: "During the summer Mother looked around for another apartment, so Lee could make a fresh start in a new school in the fall" This would be the famous "North Dakota summer"... yet the NYC school records do not support Robert's comment. Lee had already transferred from PS117 to PS44 on Jan 16, 1953. He doesn't show up until March 23rd. You can see from the TRUANT REPORT (bottom right of collage) that Oswald and mom had already moved to E179th street by March 1953. They did not move again before the 53/54 school year so there was no fresh start... Unless he was referring to LEE who attended a different PS44 and did very well according to the records... the 2 mixed into one is truly not that hard to see. "Mother and Lee" did not look for an apartment during the summer 1953 "Mother and Lee" had moved to E179th street by April 1953 Robert gives us the Manhattan address of PS44 while Pic adds yet another wrinkle It got toward schooltime and they had their foothold in the house and he was going to enroll in the neighborhood school, and they planned to stay with us, and I didn't much like this. We couldn't afford to have them, and took him up to enroll in this school. Mr. JENNER - You did? Mr. PIC - No, sir; my mother did. I think this is a public school in New York City located on about 89th, 90th Street between Third Avenue and Second Avenue. Lee didn't like this school. I didn't much blame him. This might have been the East Side Middle School at 91st between 1st and 2nd, Mrs. Marge Oswald: I enrolled him in the Lutheran school which took him approximately an hour or longer by subway to get there. It was quite a distance. That is when we first arrived in New York. I believe that Lee was in that school a very short time, 2 or 3 weeks The Trinity school he, and then she, speaks of is at 2130 Watson in the Bronx and is indeed quite a trip for a 7th grader, alone, in NY. Ave On Sept 14, 1953 they were living in the Bronx at 829 E 179th after having been to 1455 Sheridan after leaving the Pics. Just below the bottom of this map is where PS44 in Brooklyn is. You are correct Sandy in questioning EVERYTHING about NYC, and 1952-1954. Robert appears to have transitioned to Harvey with the zoo photo and his apartment location yet with all the time in the world to be correct, Robert tells us LEE is going to school at PS44 in Manhattan which was at 100 West 77th. I believe him. LEE did go to PS44 in NYC while little Harvey was in the Bronx at the other PS44. Two records were combined into one... except as usual for the FBI, mistakes were made.(see bottom image) These three "permanent records" are supposed to be ONE RECORD with all that occurs to a child recorded within. Not only are there 3. But there is no progression, they are of the same data but rewritten each time. They are net even the same form... 1st and 2nd are the same, yet once the 1st adds info beyond the first year, the 2nd record should no longer exist... unless something out of the ordinary happened between PS117 and PS44 besides the YOUTH HOUSE (Apr/May 1953). Only the 3rd image is the CE which is written on a form that isn't the same as the first 2. How many different PERMANENT RECORDS is a child supposed to have?
  13. yes... his work adds so much joy to the journey. Best wishes for a speedy recovery...
  14. if a 48fps film was used to create the 0183 original by cutting out key sequences... there are films to be accounted for. How? The film to Dina at NPIC from SA Smith from Hawkeyework Saturday night was already altered to some extent, (possibly the first 24fps cutdown version ?? ) So those first boards were not preserved. only the Homer boards of the extent Zfilm... done deal by Sunday. How... with some corroborating evidence if possible - the existing evidence I've seen only hints at it. Great work and thanks for keeping me reaching with this
  15. It would have to be... I don't know if Zapruder was involved prior to that day... has anyone looked deeply into the 3-4 months of Abe's life prior to 11/22? My point being he'd have to purposefully change to 48fps and turn it off again if we are talking only of 171-334... makes more sense that it was all filmed at that speed.. It would be hard to tell on the 16mm preview projector Chamberlain used at 4x speed.. ... wait, just dawns on me that at 4-6x or 64-96fps the film would actually look only slightly fast compared to what would normally be seen. yet the problem remains the FBI is looking at a 16mm film at Kodak on the 23rd... which appears to be already cut down. I know you prefer to stay away from what the math suggests... the "how"... yet if it was done this way, there is a "how", whether we can conceive of it is another question entirely. Chamberlain swears repeatedly he only gave Zapruder 2 rolls of IIA film... another discussion for another time DJ