Jump to content
The Education Forum

PRAYER PERSON - PRAYER MAN OR PRAYER WOMAN? RESEARCH THREAD


Guest Duncan MacRae

Recommended Posts

Guest Brian Doyle

If you obey the rules of forensic law, Wheel Barrow Man is too small to be real because the dimensions of the portal disallow it. We also know there can't be any man with a wheel barrow in the portal. What this does is show a case of real pareidolia, and the reasoning for it, vs a real image, since Prayer Woman's face is of correct proportion and placement for a real face, unlike Wheel Barrow Man. In effect the strongest statement made by the Wheel Barrow Man image is a case of real pareidolia and how it differs from the woman's face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

With a head shaped like that "she"must be a descendant of Frankenstein. And who is the woman in the white circle.?

I see a bunny in that circle and Sir Francis Drake giving a thumbs up just above it.

Picking images out of digital artifacts is much like lying on your back and having fun with clouds, both activities probably return the same amount of "evidence".

Oswald had an apple in his lunch pack. In the Doorway photo, could the bright "cup"/camera" be him eating his apple after his sandwich?

That, though, might be a brilliant observation.

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's expose these two clowns (Brian Doyle and Duncan MacRae) for what they are: being economical with the truth.

3 layered gif??? really??

Duncan-MacRae-of-the-JFK-Assassination-F

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Brian Doyle

The value fields in the attached Darnell image are of good enough resolution that the white skin shown on Oswald's neck and face would show up if they were present. Instead we see the blackish color tones of a mass covering Prayer Woman's head in the shape of long hair. Particularly the blackish color tone in a blotch below the ear. Go below the ear in Oswald's mug shot and you see the white skin of his neck. The color values that are apparent in Darnell show that his film did have enough capacity to capture skin tones. You can see this in the skin tones seen on Prayer Man's face and breast. If you go to the area below the ear in Darnell's image you can see dark color tones that are identical to the dark tones seen on the top of Prayer Man's head where we know there was hair. This is good enough photographic evidence that if Prayer Man were Oswald then that area below the ear would be white. The Darnell image clearly shows a below the ear area that possesses long hair.

      It is important that people keep strictly scientific about this. At the most scientific forensic level a photo analyst would see that Prayer Man has an identifiable black colored area on his head in Darnell. This is very definitely hair because we know that most people have hair on their head and at minimum Oswald would have had hair on his head. So at a strict scientific level there is a dark colored mass on Prayer Man's head that conforms to hair in Darnell. It then makes forensic sense that if the dark tone at the top of Prayer Man's head is hair then the identical blackish colored tone down below the ear is also hair. Again, paying strict attention to science, a photo analyst will take technical measurements of the precise color tone of the blackish area at the top of the head as well as the blackish area below the ear and confirm they match. It is very simple forensic logic from there that once you know the dark area at the top of the head is hair then the area beneath the ear that matches it is also hair.  And since Oswald didn't have long hair that proves it wasn't him. That same expert will confirm that the blackish mass also possesses a uniform shape that resembles woman's long hair.  

        This provides two sources that show the Darnell image does not match features of Lee Harvey Oswald that would have shown up at this resolution. The first source is internal color tone matching in Darnell for the dark area below the ear with the dark area on top of the head where we know there is hair. The second source is comparing Oswald's white skin on his neck with the same area on Prayer Man in Darnell. In the mugshot the white skin goes all the way to the back of the neck. In Darnell there is a dark blotch. That blotch is hair. If Oswald were Prayer Man the white skin of his neck should have been apparent. And his ear too. 

Oswald Mugshot.jpg

MacRae PW.jpg

Edited by Brian Doyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you were scientific then you wouldn't have even started posting all this dross, where you see glasses, buttons and a bag for the past 14-16 months. And now this.

You possess no scientific nor forensic analytical skills yourself, you merely offer an interpretation, a bad one at best. The images you use are not very good to put your assumptions forward.

What type of blur are we talking about here Brian Doyle? Is Oswald moving his head too fast or is the camera swing by Darnell so quick that the shutter 'couldn't keep up" with the speed of his arm movement? Or is it a combination of both? I tend to lean to the latter, but that is my speculative observation. I have been making images for 35 years so I reckon that opinion ought to count for something, even though I would not dare to call myself an expert.

Have a proper look at Oswald’s haircut (the one he had and was teased by his fellow workers to get a haircut!!!)

Quite a bit of growth down his neck no?

vlcsnap-2015-05-22-19h53m26s96.png

Let's do this proper shall we? Quite far down indeed.

vlcsnap-2015-05-22-19h04m48s112.png

His hair is going down quite a bit as shown in the two shots above.

Now let’s just assume that we are dealing with motion blur for the sake of it, it’s most likely that this is the case but there is always room for error. I don’t know at what angle this happened, first of all the angle of Darnell position needs to be determined, and no one has been dead accurate with that and then also the angle at which the shot was made, you can see that the TSBD is not straight. That would be some serious guesswork in which I would not dare to delve into. So I am going to show some samples of motion blur from left to right with a straight horizon.

First the Prayer Man pic from Darnell, I am using an image which is of a better quality than what you posted and lacks arrows and the imaginary buttons.

It is more than obvious that due to the blurring the right ear of Oswald is extended through his hair by the looks of it. Add on the fact that Oswald's face is completely blank, my guess is that he turned his head as well.

Prayer-Man-is-still-Lee-Oswald-blurred-e

Ok now let’s have a look at the better images available showing Oswald in the corridor of the DPD, as everyone can see his hair goes way down, at least halfway down his neck.

I shall post the original image and a blurred version below it. . Even though this is subjective, due to the amount of motion blur added and the angles of the shots taken in comparison to the Darnell frame It  becomes abundantly clear that blurring not only extends Oswald’s ear but his hair as well.

1.jpg2.jpg3.jpg4.jpg5.jpg6.jpg

Oswald is still the No.1 candidate for Prayer Man!

Now that I have directly refuted you and ‘your observations'; time and time again I have a few  questions for you.

1/You refer to me as Camp at MacRae’s forum in quite a few posts, a horrible homophobic slur. If you wish to hide behind MacRae messing with his forum settings where Kamp is being changed automatically into Camp, then so be it. But besides making Duncan MacRae of the JFKAssassinationforum the culprit you are equally responsible for this homophobic rubbish since you have done NOTHING about it! You owe me an unreserved apology.

Brian-Doyle-and-his-homophobic-slurs-2.j

Brian-Doyle-and-his-homophobic-slurs-3.j

Brian-Doyle-and-his-homophobic-slurs-4.j

Brian-Doyle-and-his-homophobic-slurs.jpg

2/ You refer to Jim DiEugenio as ‘Greasy Jim’ care to explain that slur too? You owe Jim an unreserved apology for your ignorant racist comment as well.

Brian-Doyle-on-Andrej-Stan-Stancak-and-J

3/ You refer to Kathy Becket as a dingbat moderator 2x, care to explain for that as well? An unreserved apology to Kathy would be the least you could do, what has she done to you besides calling you to order for your repulsive attitude?

Brian-Doyle-refers-to-Kathy-Becket-as-a-

You slur the mods of this forum even more in the screen shot below.

Brian-Doyle-refers-to-the-EF-mods-as-inc

4/You have slurred Andrej Stancak in so many posts, that I have lost count but I posted two shots above and you lied left, right and centre at MacRae's about his writings it absolutely beggars belief. These are tactics that only trolls and LNers like McAdams resort to. You owe Andrej an apology as well.

Admins/Mods perhaps I have gone too far, but at the same time I do not think that this type of person deserves to be here.

We ought to learn from our experiences, but it seems that Brian Doyle refuses to do so.

I vote for an instant permanent ban!

 

 

Edited by Bart Kamp
Spelling and grammar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Brian Doyle

 

     I apologize to Gordon and Beckett. I shouldn't have said that and I retract it. I will refrain from mentioning the content of the ROKC board since that would only be inflammatory and irrelevant.

       I did ask that this be kept scientific so I will say Mr Kamp has answered none of what I pointed out on a scientific basis.

       It is not true that I possess no analytical skills. What I have presented does make a credible case that Prayer Man is a woman for the reasons listed.

       On that same strict scientific basis, camera blur is not a valid issue according to what is being discussed. I clearly detailed that my observations were based on the available image values that were present at the resolution, or even degree of camera blurring, that was present in Darnell. The issue of camera blurring is specious because it does not answer the valid points I raised about the color values that are available in the Darnell image as shown. Any alleged camera blurring cannot be scientifically used to avoid answering what is shown by the "value fields" indicated in Darnell. Those values are of good enough resolution and clarity to credibly indicate what I am showing.

         If you look at Mr Kamp's offerings he shows images of Oswald that show maybe 2% of the very back of his neck covered by a thin strip of hair. What that means is 98% of his neck isn't covered and is white. On a technical basis that thin 2% strip of hair would not affect the color tones and value fields I have pointed-out in Darnell. Nor would it account for the 50% coverage of the neck you see on Prayer Man. Also: Kamp's offering is not scientifically sound because Prayer Man is standing at about 30 degrees off perpendicular, so the back of his neck where that tiny 2% strip is would not show in Darnell just like it doesn't show in the mugshot.

       I protest Mr Kamp calling the buttons pointed out by MacRae "imaginary". They will be confirmed as soon as any photo analysis expert gets hold of Darnell. I have previously shown that they can't be the claimed "pixel quirks" some are calling them because pixel quirks are random and would not show up in perfect order on the clothing exactly where buttons would be. I proved this by showing that the buttons continued along the opening seam of the garment up to the collar, as buttons that are located on one side of a garment's opening would do. This is forensic confirmation that takes the buttons beyond the range of possibility for pixel quirks, that would appear randomly in a photo and not behave so predictably. When objects behave in a photo exactly as buttons would they are buttons. Any look at those buttons shows they can't be Oswald's because they are too low on the garment and there are too many. 

     I thank Mr Kamp for his better image of Darnell because it shows what I am talking about even more clearly. It has the benefit of showing the hair on Frazier. On a basic forensic science level we know Frazier had dark hair on his head. If we go to Frazier in Kamp's image we can see how Darnell's film represents his hair as far as color tones. There's no doubt we can go to Frazier's image in Kamp's frame and see what Darnell's film defines as hair. OK, now go to Prayer Man and you can see Darnell's film identifies Prayer Man's hair with the exact same blackish color as what we know is hair on Frazier. There's no doubt Prayer Woman's hair is a large mass of wavy hair that goes below the ear. You can see it in that lowest black band.    

     Even better, Mr Kamp's Darnell image shows a visible ear on Frazier. A good comparison of what you would also see on Prayer Man if it was Oswald. Just look at the mugshot. 

       As I mentioned in my previous post, a photo expert will take a measurement of the precise color tone of that last dark band below Prayer Woman's ear and compare it to the color tone of the hair on the top of Prayer Woman's head. This scientific color measurement will confirm that both areas are the same color and therefore are the same substance - hair. Mr Kamp ignored my color measurement point. It is scientific and cannot be ignored. By the way, that same expert will confirm Frazier's dark hair is also the same color.   

       Discussions of blurred images are specious and have nothing to do with what we are talking about since my arguments were based on a sharp, unblurred mugshot and a more than adequate image from Darnell. 

        Also:  Drew Phipps on the Deep Politics board isolated a bright jutting protrusion on Prayer Man's brow in the above Darnell image that corresponds to an eyeglass frame. Those same eyeglasses were revealed in Davidson's enhancement of Wiegman that will also be confirmed by a photo expert. You have two sources showing eyeglasses there. Oswald did not wear eyeglasses.  

      

       Frazier should be shown Davidson's woman's face as soon as possible.

 

       Davidson should be asked if he will please try to run Darnell through his Photoshop process.

 

        

      

Edited by Brian Doyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still here?

Fine by me.

1/You have no scientific skills. Period! 2%? Where did you come up with that info? Lalaland? 

Nor do you possess any skills what type of blur we are talking about, let alone interpret them. Your deep state of denial regarding this is all the more telling.

2/You still owe me an apology for the homophobic rubbish at MacRae's.

3/You owe Jim D an apology

4/You owe Ray an apology

5/You owe Andrej a massive apology for the lies you have spread at MacRae's 

 

And those stupid buttons were refuted yonks ago. They are not neatly lined up at all. It's an artefact from the video transfer. Again you show your ignorance regarding technical matters like these. 

Come back when you have real evidence. A real photographic expert would tell you to GTFO trying to put forward a 9th or even a possible 10th generation of an image.

I am still of the opinion you need to be dropped out of this place for life.

Prayer-Woman-Dead-and-Buried.jpg

 

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Brian Doyle
On 11/5/2016 at 0:47 PM, Bart Kamp said:

 

Prayer-Man-is-still-Lee-Oswald-blurred-e

 

 

      

        What Mr Kamp is not addressing is, at a scientific level that is beyond the naked eye level we are dealing at here, Prayer Man's bottom dark band of hair can be analyzed on a spectral basis to match it to the hair on the top of his head. I can see it with my naked eye, but spectral analysis will prove that the color tones match on a scientific basis. You also have a 3rd source for spectral color tone matching. Frazier's hair can also be matched at a spectral level to show it is similar to Prayer Man's hair. This shows, at a scientific level, that the dark areas seen on both Prayer Man and Frazier's heads are hair. This will conclusively prove that the dark band seen beneath Prayer Man's ear is also hair. This automatically refutes Prayer Man being Oswald since Oswald's short hair can be seen in his mugshot and it doesn't go below his ear, no matter how many false comparisons are shown. 

        Mr Kamp has answered my discussion of the hair evidence by means of an irrelevant camera blurring discussion. What he is doing is pointing to the lighter band on Prayer Man's head with his two red arrows and saying it is the long blur of Prayer Man's ear. There are reasons why that isn't so. Right above Kamp's alleged blurred ear is another light colored band. The light colored band above what Kamp is calling the blurred ear can't be a second ear, so what is it? It is either wavy hair reflecting sunlight at intervals or it is a linear photo artifact that is seen elsewhere in the photo. If it is a linear artifact it doesn't disprove the hair that we know is there because the person in question had hair. So either way it is either a linear artifact going through woman's long wavy hair or intervals of sunlight reflecting off the waves of woman's long hair. Also: I'm pretty sure there is no ear on Prayer Man because it is covered by long hair.     

      Mr Kamp has placed his arrows at the lower of the two light colored bands. He should have placed those arrows one band lower on the lowest of the 3 dark colored bands. That lowest band is more meaningful evidence wise. His failure to outline the most meaningful evidence only exhibits how he is not answering what is being argued. Not only is Mr Kamp's description of his highlighted band incorrect but it also fails to address the more pertinent evidence. Once Spectral analysis is done on the hair on the top of Prayer Man's head, along with that lowest band, it will show they both match. And if the area we know is hair on the top of Prayer Man's head matches the dark blotch under 'his' ear then we know it's hair. Mr Kamp has failed to discuss this and his ear blurring entry is not relevant.

      The image of Frazier above is very important because it shows what a person who we know had a short haircut similar to Oswald would look like in Darnell. Not only can we see the clear outline of Frazier's hair but we can also see the light colored area where his ear is located. Frazier also represents another source internal to Darnell's image for spectral hair properties. Additionally, Frazier is important because we can see his ear and also see there is no blurring. Kamp suggests camera motion blur, but, scientifically, a camera cannot blur in one part of the image and not in another. Any camera motion blur would be distributed throughout the whole image. Go to Frazier's ear and we see no such lengthy blurring. What this tells you is the long lighter colored band on Prayer Man that Kamp highlights with red arrows is not camera blur. It shows that it is either an artifact or sunlight reflection, however it does not refute the obvious large uniform mass of woman's hair we are seeing.        

      Having dismissed Mr Kamp's claim we can now return to the pertinent evidence of the lowest hair band that he did not address. If you view Mr Kamp's response he ignored my point that Prayer Man is facing about 30 degrees or so towards the camera. Oswald's mugshot also has a similar angle. The small strip of hair Mr Kamp showed in his images is not visible in Darnell because of this angle. Mr Kamp is offering both invalid and irrelevant evidence and is not answering the science I am showing. He has not answered the fact that, at the angle seen in Darnell, and the mugshot, Oswald's neck would appear as white from front to back. This is a color field of enough size and resolution that it would be impossible for the image to show the dark band we see going more than 50% across Prayer Man's neck in Darnell. It is a color field that appears on Frazier, in full view, as a direct comparison, and shows his neck to be completely white from front to back.    

     Finally, the Darnell image above shows Frazier to be about 6-7 inches taller than Prayer Man. Frazier was just over 6 foot. Oswald was 5 foot 9. On Deep Politics Drew Phipps did the trigonometry to show that at the distance of Darnell's camera the most Prayer Man could differ from Frazier in height, due to perspective shift, is about 1/3rd of an inch. The obvious 6-7 inch height difference between Prayer Man and Frazier in Darnell excludes Oswald from being Prayer Man, and the 1/3rd inch perspective shift maximum disallows any perspective excuses for this obvious height difference. Richard Gilbride added some good illustrated drafts of these height measurements. He was ignored and I haven't seen him since.         

             

Edited by Brian Doyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can try and avoid matters but you are not getting away with this drivel.

What you fail to address here, and I post this for the third time are the apologies you owe to me for those disgusting homophobic slurs and the unbecoming demeanour to  Ray Mitcham, Jim D and Andrej S.

It shows what you are made of.

Again I state and for everyone to see is your refusal to address ALL THE EVIDENCE that has been presented by me and others. Instead of just harping on about a small part of an image of which its entire size comprises to no more than 654 x 480 pixels. How is that for science!

Add on Oswald's neck hair below his ear it makes him the perfect candidate for Prayer Man. That is in conjunction with all the other evidence (docs/statements) 

You possess no skills when it comes to analysing an image, you have not brought anything to the table for the past 15 months in any shape or form besides your own observations using other people's work, which not one researcher agrees with! You have been warned about this before and been moderated at two forums for this behaviour. In this instance you are using the images I presented.

The camera blurring discussion you refer to holds more than anything you have posted, as a matter of fact it confirms that blurring stretches matter beyond its original size. Does not take a very intelligent person to understand this, yet you seem to have missed the boat and stay behind and resort to heavy trolling and deflecting but it doesn't work, not just here, but also at DPF, MacRae's and Amazon. Again that ought to tell everyone something. I wonder whether MacRae set you up for this to show up here with your repugnant antics, there is no place here for this rubbish. 

Frazier's ear is sharp? Come again? You actually know the meaning of what you are actually posting? Of course you do not.

Game over Doyle.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Brian Doyle

 

     Again Mr Kamp, you are not answering credible evidence I have posted. I assume your assertion that the evidence I'm pointing out is too small is referring to the lowest of the black bands in Prayer Man's hair. I have to assume because your answers are so vague that they don't specifically describe what you are referring to. It's not too small because anyone can see it and you used the lighter band of the exact same size above it to make your invalid "blurred ear" argument. So you had no problem with its size in regard to evidence when you used it. Any objective person can look at Darnell and see both the dark band and Frazier's ear are not too small to make the arguments I do with them. You proved so yourself when you made your invalid blurred ear argument using the same item and even pointed it out with arrows.

     This is twice now that you have avoided addressing the spectral analysis argument for the hair on Prayer Man's head. I have argued correctly, using valid, visible examples in the Darnell image, that the dark areas can be confirmed at a color spectrum level to be the same. Since we know the dark area at the top of Prayer Man's head is hair then the dark area beneath the ear that matches it at a spectral level would also have to be hair. Even the naked eye can see this. Mr Kamp, you try to represent yourself as offering the best photo science. These spectral analyses are that science and require an adequate answer when shown. So far you have not given any. In Darnell you will have 3 objects that match on a spectral color tone basis. One will be the top of Prayer Man's head where we know there is hair. The second will be the lowest dark band on Prayer Man's head. And the third will be Frazier's hair. The arguments why these three samples will prove Prayer Man has long hair were already made in my last post.

      Your camera blur argument has been refuted. If you look at Frazier's ear it has no such elongated blurring. Since film images have to blur uniformly throughout, the long light colored band you pointed to on Prayer Man's head cannot be a camera-blurred ear. It is likely a linear artifact or intervals of sunlight reflecting in wavy hair. Even better the ear you refer to on Prayer Man is almost certainly covered under long hair. Something one look at Oswald's mugshot would show to be impossible. This photographic evidence makes clear that Prayer Man has long hair and that if it was Oswald it would be impossible for him to appear as he does in Darnell. My case is based on sound arguments of evidence and possesses a quality of analysis that deserves equal response.

       The way photo science works is once you show that Frazier's ear is unblurred it unavoidably requires that Prayer Man's ear would also have to be unblurred. Since blurring is the aberration, and Frazier's ear is unblurred, that means his normal ear is the going standard and proves ALL ears would have to be unblurred. Mr Kamp's blurring claim is refuted by this alone. So one look at Oswald's mugshot makes it clear that his prominent ear would have to show up in Darnell like Frazier's did.      

     Mr Kamp ignored the fact that Prayer Man's standing at a 30 degree angle in Darnell means his hair strip on the back of the neck argument is moot since you can't see it at that angle. Nor does he answer why we can't see Oswald's ear. The 30 degree angle point was ignored by Mr Kamp and his same refuted claim was re-entered. If Prayer Man were Oswald you would see what you see in the mugshot - which is white neck skin from front to back with a prominent ear.  

   

       The real questions that need to be answered here are: Why does Frazier show short hair, an obvious ear, and the white skin of his neck from front to back in Darnell?

         If Oswald had a similar haircut why doesn't he appear similarly?

         Since we can see the difference between Prayer Man and Frazier clearly in Darnell, why does Prayer Man have a noticeably different appearance showing dark hair where Frazier has light skin?  

 

        Also:  Kamp made no attempt to answer the height argument that was backed by trigonometry on Deep Politics and by drafted illustrations by Gilbride here. Frazier is clearly 6 to 7 inches taller than Prayer Man in this photo, which would be impossible for the 5 foot 9 Oswald. 

          

        The definition of evidence is that which the opposition cannot answer or refute. I assure you as soon as any photo analysis expert gets hold of Darnell he will confirm everything I've written here. In fact Davidson should be encouraged to process Darnell in his Photoshop tool to see if he can improve the image like he did with Wiegman.       

         

         Mr Kamp doesn't seem to realize that the way evidence works is any "small part" that shows irrefutable evidence disproves any larger body of evidence that doesn't better it. It's the "little bit pregnant" rule he doesn't seem to fathom.     

Edited by Brian Doyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...