David G. Healy Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Evidently Mr. Peter's can't quite find his way there - hopefully he'll venture out and see what the Z-film alteration camp has for his perusal, let us know his ** opinion **, unless of course he's degreed in the appropriate specialty, then he can correct or point out errors -- if he'd like Gary Mack's email address to write and ask permission, I'll gladly provide it. Alway helpful, David Healy p.s. here's the URL Mr. Peter's re: the main page of Dr. Costella's website http://www.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~jpc/hoax/ I'll be posting a URL for the NEW main page - one with animated .gif's that even Mr. Peter's can understand... I might learn to like this guy, once I meet him. If he's been around as long as he say's, I don't understand why nobody knows who he is? Once Mr. Peter's reviews the website, get's up to speed sort of speak - we can dialogue about the possible alteration of the camera original Zapruder Film - which is why he's here in the first place. The attacks and criticisms on Jack White and his voluminous work is a charade, Jack's convienent, forthcoming, as well as a great - respectful guy, not to mention a great photog. How he puts up with the abuse he deal's with, I'll never understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Peters Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) I'll be posting a URL for the NEW main page - one with animated .gif's that even Mr. Peter's can understand... I might learn to like this guy, once I meet him. If he's been around as long as he say's, I don't understand why nobody knows who he is? Mr. Healy - there are many people who have studied the JFK assassination and I bet that before you heard of this site - you had never heard the name John Simkin before. Besides, it's not the researchers who are usually remembered for being in the spotlight, but rather the grandstanders. Once Mr. Peter's reviews the website, get's up to speed sort of speak - we can dialogue about the possible alteration of the camera original Zapruder Film - which is why he's here in the first place. Mr. Healy, I have seen every claim of photo and film alteration mentioned in TGZFH and let me remind you that it has not been I that has evaded getting into the specifics of these claims. When you feel that you can address the questions put to you or can at least explain why you believe an alteration claim is valid other than just saying 'anthing is possible', then I'll be happy to go over the evidence with you, as well. I can appreciate your desire to advertise for TGZFH book and Mr. Costella's web page. The first three URL's discuss "The Gang" which is more grandstanding that I have little interest in. Mr. Costella does have a piece written about a 27 hour window of time before Mary Moorman's number 5 Polaroid was ran in the newspapers whereas he claims that left time for her photograph to have been altered. What Mr. Costella didn't know or bother to find out before hand is that Mary Moorman, her camera and her camera original photo were filmed within 30 minutes of the assassination, but the film wasn't shown on NBC until 3:15pm Dallas time on the very day of the assassination. When filmed, the picture had not yet been out of her hands. Like with the Altgens 6 photograph going on the Associated Press news wire by 1:03 p.m. CST and before any time could have been allotted for altering that photograph, it's really waste of time talking about what could have been done to the photgraph at a later time for the window of opportunity was closed when the photo was shown publicly. Unless Moorman altered her photograph herself within the first 30 minutes following the assassination and before it was taped to be shown on TV in a few hours, then what occurred over the next 27 hours after that is meaningless. I cannot stress the importance of this enough and I am sure you are intelligent enough to see the problem here for Mr. Costella. Maybe had Mr. Costella had known all the facts to start with, then maybe he would not have even written the piece on Moorman's photograph to start with, but he did and he wasn't aware of all the details. Now with all that said - there can be no logical purpose for reading what Mr. Costella wrote about the possible altering of Moorman's #5 Polaroid over the next 27 hours following the assassination. On the other hand, if he should ever write about how Mary Moorman altered her photograph within the first 30 minutes following the assassination, then that would grab my interest in seeing how he explains it was done. Edited July 15, 2004 by Larry Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I'll be posting a URL for the NEW main page - one with animated .gif's that even Mr. Peter's can understand... I might learn to like this guy, once I meet him. If he's been around as long as he say's, I don't understand why nobody knows who he is? Mr. Healy - there are many people who have studied the JFK assassination and I bet that before you heard of this site - you had never heard the name John Simkin before. Besides, it's not the researchers who are usually remembered for being in the spotl ight, but rather the show boaters. Once Mr. Peter's reviews the website, get's up to speed sort of speak - we can dialogue about the possible alteration of the camera original Zapruder Film - which is why he's here in the first place. Mr. Healy, I have seen every claim of photo and film alteration mentioned in TGZFH and let me remind you that it has not been I that has evaded getting into the specifics of these claims. When you feel that you can address the questions put to you or can at least explain why you believe an alteration claim is valid other than just saying 'anthing is possible', then I'll be happy to go over the evidence with you, as well. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I find it interesting that Mr. Peters responds at 4:22 a.m. in the time zone from which he posts. Does the man NEVER SLEEP? I check the times he posts and they are AROUND THE CLOCK, and to judge from his voluminous writings, he appears to spend ALL OF HIS TIME composing messages for this forum. Is he really posting from the GMT time zone...or somewhere else? Why is he reluctant to reveal anything about himself. Does he have an occupation or ever go to work? Is he employed to make postings here.? Or is he a composite team of people that he constantly quotes? Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Peters Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) I find it interesting that Mr. Peters responds at 4:22 a.m. in the time zone from which he posts. Does the man NEVER SLEEP? I check the times he posts and they are AROUND THE CLOCK, and to judge from his voluminous writings, he appears to spend ALL OF HIS TIME composing messages for this forum. Is he really posting from the GMT time zone...or somewhere else? Why is he reluctant to reveal anything about himself. Does he have an occupation or ever go to work? Is he employed to make postings here.? Or is he a composite team of people that he constantly quotes? Jack White Mr. White, I find it more interesting that you show more concern about the time of day that I post rather than addressing the evidence of the alteration claims that you've made. So to put your mind at ease - I spend a lot of time researching and writing. I also am conditioned not to need a lot of sleep. I am retired and I live quite comfortably. I research on my own and I don't belong to an elaborate dream team created to make around the clock postings here if that is what you are most concerned about. I have not asked anything about your private life, nor does it interest me. What interest me is to be able to better understand what happened in Dallas on 11/22/63. If the films and photographs have been altered, then I want to know about it because it would be BIG NEWS! I have yet to see a photo or film alteration claim of yours that will stand under its own weight. Maybe I have missed something along the way and this is why I want to address the evidence in detail with you. So far it has been like pulling teeth, but I am optimistic that we can stay focused on the more important issues surrounding these claims of yours and possibly you or I can learn something from the other along the way. Edited July 15, 2004 by Larry Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 (edited) I find it interesting that Mr. Peters responds at 4:22 a.m. in the time zone from which he posts. Does the man NEVER SLEEP? I check the times he posts and they are AROUND THE CLOCK, and to judge from his voluminous writings, he appears to spend ALL OF HIS TIME composing messages for this forum. Is he really posting from the GMT time zone...or somewhere else? Why is he reluctant to reveal anything about himself. Does he have an occupation or ever go to work? Is he employed to make postings here.? Or is he a composite team of people that he constantly quotes? Jack White Mr. White, I find it more interesting that you show more concern about the time of day that I post rather than addressing the evidence of the alteration claims that you've made. So to put your mind at ease - I spend a lot of time researching and writing. I also am conditioned not to need a lot of sleep. I am retired and I live quite comfortably. I research on my own and I don't belong to an elaborate dream team created to make around the clock postings here if that is what you are most concerned about. Reply..B*.. Now no wonder people can't stay focused and up all night to read, and you have the gall Mr.Peter's to accuse them of not being able to stay focused.....Well, I guess not, some others do work for a living, and have other responsibilities.....nice to live comfortably and do completely what you want, gee you mean you do not receive any compensation for all your work.?? ...so this is an around the clock effort...hmmmmmm.. ******************************************************************* I have not asked anything about your private life, nor does it interest me. What interest me is to be able to better understand what happened in Dallas on 11/22/63. If the films and photographs have been altered, then I want to know about it because it would be BIG NEWS! I have yet to see a photo or film alteration claim of yours that will stand under its own weight. Maybe I have missed something along the way and this is why I want to address the evidence in detail with you. So far it has been like pulling teeth, but I am optimistic that we can stay focused on the more important issues surrounding these claims of yours and possibly you or I can learn something from the other along the way. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ******************************************************************* Reply B*...There is nothing in Mr. White's life that is hidden relating to his studies and beyond....too bad you cannot say the same..... Edited July 16, 2004 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 16, 2004 Author Share Posted July 16, 2004 Evidently Mr. Peter's is attempting to last as long as he can without debating authorative voices regarding the finer points of possible alteration regarding the Z-film -- We all know the time frames for this and that, most times are in dispute, too! Thus we see these non-sensical points Mr. Peter's continuously falls back on -- he's nothing to say -- as he takes refuge in taking shots at Jack White -- and most of those are blanks ... When you can't refute the challengers, post nothing contrary to the challengers responses, the best your left with is Mr. Peter's... "I can appreciate your desire to advertise for TGZFH book and Mr. Costella's web page..." ROFLMAO - Bill Miller or James Gordon? Your guess is as good as mine... ------------------- I'll be posting a URL for the NEW main page - one with animated .gif's that even Mr. Peter's can understand... I might learn to like this guy, once I meet him. If he's been around as long as he say's, I don't understand why nobody knows who he is? Mr. Healy - there are many people who have studied the JFK assassination and I bet that before you heard of this site - you had never heard the name John Simkin before. Besides, it's not the researchers who are usually remembered for being in the spotlight, but rather the grandstanders. dgh01: I do believe John Simkin posts on the JFK Research site, as well as lancer, which I'm sure YOU of all people know of! David Healy ------------- Once Mr. Peter's reviews the website, get's up to speed sort of speak - we can dialogue about the possible alteration of the camera original Zapruder Film - which is why he's here in the first place. Mr. Healy, I have seen every claim of photo and film alteration mentioned in TGZFH and let me remind you that it has not been I that has evaded getting into the specifics of these claims. When you feel that you can address the questions put to you or can at least explain why you believe an alteration claim is valid other than just saying 'anthing is possible', then I'll be happy to go over the evidence with you, as well. . The first three URL's discuss "The Gang" which is more grandstanding that I have little interest in. Mr. Costella does have a piece written about a 27 hour window of time before Mary Moorman's number 5 Polaroid was ran in the newspapers whereas he claims that left time for her photograph to have been altered. What Mr. Costella didn't know or bother to find out before hand is that Mary Moorman, her camera and her camera original photo were filmed within 30 minutes of the assassination, but the film wasn't shown on NBC until 3:15pm Dallas time on the very day of the assassination. When filmed, the picture had not yet been out of her hands. Like with the Altgens 6 photograph going on the Associated Press news wire by 1:03 p.m. CST and before any time could have been allotted for altering that photograph, it's really waste of time talking about what could have been done to the photgraph at a later time for the window of opportunity was closed when the photo was shown publicly. Unless Moorman altered her photograph herself within the first 30 minutes following the assassination and before it was taped to be shown on TV in a few hours, then what occurred over the next 27 hours after that is meaningless. I cannot stress the importance of this enough and I am sure you are intelligent enough to see the problem here for Mr. Costella. Maybe had Mr. Costella had known all the facts to start with, then maybe he would not have even written the piece on Moorman's photograph to start with, but he did and he wasn't aware of all the details. Now with all that said - there can be no logical purpose for reading what Mr. Costella wrote about the possible altering of Moorman's #5 Polaroid over the next 27 hours following the assassination. On the other hand, if he should ever write about how Mary Moorman altered her photograph within the first 30 minutes following the assassination, then that would grab my interest in seeing how he explains it was done. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Peters Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 (edited) David G. Healy,Jul 16 2004, 01:25 AM]Evidently Mr. Peter's is attempting to last as long as he can without debating authorative voices regarding the finer points of possible alteration regarding the Z-film -- We all know the time frames for this and that, most times are in dispute, too! Thus we see these non-sensical points Mr. Peter's continuously falls back on -- he's nothing to say -- as he takes refuge in taking shots at Jack White -- and most of those are blanks ... When you can't refute the challengers, post nothing contrary to the challengers responses, the best your left with is Mr. Peter's... "I can appreciate your desire to advertise for TGZFH book and Mr. Costella's web page..." ROFLMAO - Bill Miller or James Gordon? Your guess is as good as mine... Mr. Healy, If you spent more time reading the information being discussed between Jack White and I instead of trying to draw attention away from the dicussions, you would see that I am addressing an authoritive voice. If you have a particular photo or film alteration claim that you want discussed, then put one up and tell us why you believe it is legit and we can all take a close look at it together. Why you keep posting such things like saying that I cannot refute challenegs when that is exactly what I have been doing when I can get someone to actually make one, seems to be a total fabrication on your part. What I find even more amazing, other than the sites administrator tolerating your intentional childish interruptions, is that you make these claims when the postings I have made are still available for reading and speak for themselves by the level of detail I provide with each one. Edited July 16, 2004 by Larry Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 16, 2004 Author Share Posted July 16, 2004 [...] When you can't refute the challengers, post nothing contrary to the challengers responses, the best your left with is Mr. Peter's... "I can appreciate your desire to advertise for TGZFH book and Mr. Costella's web page..." ROFLMAO - Bill Miller or James Gordon? Your guess is as good as mine... Mr. Healy, If you spent more time reading the information being discussed between Jack White and I instead of trying to draw attention away from the dicussions, you would see that I am addressing an authoritive voice. If you have a particular photo or film alteration claim that you want discussed, then put one up and tell us why you believe it is legit and we can all take a close look at it together. Why you keep posting such things like saying that I cannot refute challenegs when that is exactly what I have been doing when I can get someone to actually make one, seems to be a total fabrication on your part. What I find even more amazing, other than the sites administrator tolerating your intentional childish interruptions, is that you make these claims when the postings I have made are still available for reading and speak for themselves by the level of detail I provide with each one. dgh01: Mr. Peter's, Jack White is more than capable in handling himself, he's plenty of experience...-- My challenge to you regarding your comments and discussions regarding JWhites photo studies and research -- is thi; post your own research, nobody in this research community like a whinner - a parrot of other people's work - show a little chuztpah, take a chance - let us see something original. Jack manages to do just that - he wins some and loses some - just the nature of the beast... He's assisted many in doing just that [creating **original**] - only respectful thing to do -- With this Mr. Peter's - Gordon or whomever you are, I bow out of your charade, your not worth the time... Have a nice life - David Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Peters Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 (edited) dgh01:Mr. Peter's, Jack White is more than capable in handling himself, he's plenty of experience...-- My challenge to you regarding your comments and discussions regarding JWhites photo studies and research -- is thi; post your own research, I have written every detailed observation on my own, so I don't know why you think it is not my research. If someone says for instance that Elm Street is straight and I say it is not - do I need to go to Dealy Plaza to take my own photo of Elm Street to make my point or am I not allowed to use someone elses? Your comments make absolutely no sense to me. With this Mr. Peter's - Gordon or whomever you are, I bow out of your charade, your not worth the time... Have a nice life - David Healy That's probably a good idea if you have no JFK related information to offer, but if you should ever think of something factual that pertains to the evidence being discussed - I would welcome it. Edited July 16, 2004 by Larry Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now