Swan-Song -- Math Rules

[Chris Davidson]

The adjustment at z168-z171 reveals the 1/4 difference between 18fps and stepped down 24fps.

z168-z171 = 3.734mph

z168-z186 = 18frames x 1.016 = 18.3fps @ 21.6ft x 1.016 = 21.96ft per sec / 1.47 (1mph) 14.938mph

3.734mph / 14.938mph = .25

Difference between 18 and 24fps = 6fps

6fps/24fps =.25

P.S. Here's a simple question for you.

How many frames do you expel to end up with a 1/4 ratio?

Added on edit below:

Edited August 4, 2016 by Chris Davidson

[Chris Davidson]

This will be the last equation (which includes the streamlined explanation below). I wish everyone continued success in whatever endeavors they may pursue.

The ratio of 16FPS - 18.3FPS = .874

The ratio of 2.622(48/18.3)- 3 = .874

cheers,

Chris Davidson

[David G. Healy]

great job, guy!

[Sandy Larsen]

The Z film has always been a valuable piece of evidence in the case. Unless I'm overlooking it, can someone take a moment to explain what it the point of this thread? Thank you.

Michael,

A valuable piece for whom?

If you are interested, take the gif and count the total number of frames.

Compare it (frame count) to the same segment in the extant Zfilm?

Minus your preconceived notion that the extant zfilm is authentic, what major difference is there between the two?

chris

I didn't follow this thread because, as far as I could tell, there was no explanation as to what was being done or what the goal was.

Now that it is completed, maybe somebody could summarize what the goal of the thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

I did know early on that it had something to do with removing two out of every three frames to arrive at the extant 18.3 FPS Z-film. And a week or two ago Chris posted a picture of the movie camera Zapruder used, showing that it would have been easy for Zapruder to switch to Slow Motion mode, which I understood to mean 48 FPS mode. So apparently Chris was claiming that Zapruder filmed at 48 FPS.

Then just a moment ago I found the above video snippet Chris had provided to skeptic Michael Walton early on in the thread. (I didn't know back when this was posted that Michael was a skeptic of this topic.) I compared the number of frames in the above snippet to the number of frames in the same interval in the extant Z-film. Sure enough, the above snippet has three times as many frames! So, naturally, my question is, where did this snippet come from??

Edited August 7, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[David Josephs]

So I am wondering about the showing of the film that Friday and then again on Sat & Sun.

It is said they ran it on an Analyst projector at very fast speeds to check quickly for errors in printing. I found Phil's recap letter which states the Analyst projector was 4x speed and either 8mm or 16mm film worked.

Filmed at 48fps, this showing at 64fps (4 x normal) would it be obvious it was filmed in slo-mo or not ???.

The film shown on Sat morning at Kodak is supposed to be the film Sorrels gives Kelley and then onto the FBI and is brought by the FBI to Kodak, and appears to be already altered.

The CIA claims that the FBI told them they got a film before Zap negotiated with LIFE... which had to be Friday night.

They watched this back and forth according to Phil Chamberlain - who also says the Analyst Project was 16mm, not 8mm yet he says he's "pretty sure" they were working with an 8mm film...

4:00 p.m.
Kodak personnel, using a special viewer, watched the film once to determine if the processing was correct. Kodak manager Phil Chamberlain then declined to show it again for fear of accidental damage.

I am still of the opinion that no one sees that "original" again while the film sent to DC by Philips may have been 0184 which in turn becomes the film copies seen over that weekend.

Zap gives Stolley 0183 (unless that was the film taken to DC Friday night) and still has another "Best Copy"

Once again we have 0183, 0185/6/7 0186 is the SS copy and the only film with the 0186 number punched into the film

So #1 - 0183, Zap best copy #2 - 0185

#3 - 0186 SS copy, 0187 #4-FBI copy provided by Sorrels

and #5 film (the 4th copy or 2nd original) is sent to DC Friday night and is never heard from again.

Yet here we see even more conflict with how many rolls were given to Zap, who ran off the end of the roll, and how many copies with which Zap returns from Jamieson.

Doesn't the journey's end of one of the films at SS Chief Rowley's office just beg the question -

What ever happened to THAT film?? given that LIFE gets Zap's best copy on Nov 25th

For this charade to work, the "master film" as SS agent Philips calls it, needs to be altered, copied and returned to Zapruder by the FBI Sat morning - there are simply no adequate descriptions of what was seen in the film beyond what Dino and Homer tell us.

Again, great job Chris showing how all this interconnects using math. The 001-132 frames may have been filmed at "regular" speed and then a switch to slo-mo which would have been obvious if shown at 18fps. The frames between 132 and 133 effectively removes the slo-mo switch and the wide Elm turn. As for running 19 feet of film off to finish the roll - we have the Blair/Zap conflict regarding who even did it.

Thanks again - DJ

[Sandy Larsen]

The Z film has always been a valuable piece of evidence in the case. Unless I'm overlooking it, can someone take a moment to explain what it the point of this thread? Thank you.

Michael,

A valuable piece for whom?

If you are interested, take the gif and count the total number of frames.

Compare it (frame count) to the same segment in the extant Zfilm?

Minus your preconceived notion that the extant zfilm is authentic, what major difference is there between the two?

chris

I didn't follow this thread because, as far as I could tell, there was no explanation as to what was being done or what the goal was.

Now that it is completed, maybe somebody could summarize what the goal of the thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

I did know early on that it had something to do with removing two out of every three frames to arrive at the extant 18.3 FPS Z-film. And a week or two ago Chris posted a picture of the movie camera Zapruder used, showing that it would have been easy for Zapruder to switch to Slow Motion mode, which I understood to mean 48 FPS mode. So apparently Chris was claiming that Zapruder filmed at 48 FPS.

Then just a moment ago I found the above video snippet Chris had provided to skeptic Michael Walton early on in the thread. (I didn't know back when this was posted that Michael was a skeptic of this topic.) I compared the number of frames in the above snippet to the number of frames in the same interval in the extant Z-film. Sure enough, the above snippet has three times as many frames! So, naturally, my question is, where did this snippet come from??

BUMP

Would somebody please summarize what the goal of this thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

Also, where did the above 48 FPS clip come from?

[Chris Scally]

It is said they ran it on an Analyst projector at very fast speeds to check quickly for errors in printing. I found Phil's recap letter which states the Analyst projector was 4x speed and either 8mm or 16mm film worked.

Hi David:

Quick question, if I may - "Phil's recap letter" ? Can you tell me anything further, please? Is it in Zavada's Report, or somewhere else where I can find it?

Thanks in anticipation,

Chris.

Posted in error - please ignore / delete

Edited August 10, 2016 by Chris Scally

[David Josephs]

{sigh}

Mr. Larsen - I'm curious why you are in such a need to understand what this is about yet have argued against not only the content but the sheer process of posting the material in the first place?

Please follow...

Unlike you, we understand that what is now in 9 pieces in the Archives does not represent what happened in DP on 11/22

Also unlike you, we see the evidence offered to explain what transpired on Elm as a thinly veiled attempt to push a square peg into a round hole.

No matter where you are in the world, Time X Speed = Distance, and therefore: Time / Distance = Speed, Time / Distance = Speed, & Distance / Speed = Time (basic algebra)

This thread proves the FBI and SS used math to recreate the events in the form of evidence, then made sure the public did not see the film as a film for 13 years.

This thread was also able to determine that certain unaltered frame sequences were shot at 48 frames per second or Slow Motion. In turn, to change 48fps to 18.3fps we need to remove almost 2/3rds of the frames. A full 2/3 and we'd have a 16fps final film.

Using 168-171 changed to 161-166 we get an idea of what is happening. The film shows the limo moving at a constant rate of speed prior to the Stemmons sign.

Except in the original survey, 168-171 covered 9/10ths of a foot for a limo speed of 2.24mph..

171-185 comes to 17mph.. in less than a second the car accelerated from 2.2mph to 17mph? you see that on the Zfilm do you Sandy? Truly claims the limo almost hits the curb on Elm

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

So it was changed. and that turn is removed from the record. At 161 he would have been accelerating from that near stop, yet by 161 he would be traveling much faster that 2.24mph...

Look at the difference between 161 and 166... that .9 feet covered in 5 frames was proven by Chris to equate to 5, 48fps frames in a row yet is claimed to be at 18.3 fps.

Look how little the white line moves between 161 and 166. the line starts at the left edge of the wheel's hubcap and barely moves forward. Which is why the revised legend CE884 starts at 168-171 with the same exact location/station and covering the same distance as the original 161-166.

If you cannot reconcile this first point, there is no use going on. Like all the other directly incriminating evidence, the film's authenticity cannot be established. There is good evidence which shows that the FBI had the film prior to Zapruder's negotiations with LIFE - IOW, Friday night. SS also had a copy in DC friday night... the film, in original form, would show more convincingly the shots coming from the front. As much of that evidence was removed as possible and photos instead of the film are used from there on out.

JFK was killed as a result of a well planned execution plan with numerous shooters, and even more there to cover it up. That cover up continues today

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." William Colby

From: Barbara Honegger

Date: Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Conference on THE WARREN REPORT AND THE
JFK ASSASSINATION : FIVE DECADES OF
SIGNIFICANT DISCLOSURES
To: Greg Smith
I told Mae about it when we worked together ...
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Greg Smith wrote:

Thanks Barbara! That's priceless. The web attributes it to Mae B only, and therefore, it's discounted in chat and group conversations on social media. You might want to give it better street cred? Your call!

On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Barbara Honegger wrote:

> Seriously -- I personally was the Source
> for that William Casey quote. He said it
> at an early Feb. 1981 meeting in the
> Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of
> the White House which I attended, and
> I immediately told my close friend and
> political godmother Senior White House
> Correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
> then went public with it without naming
> the source ...
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> Love to, but can't break away. I'll definitely get the DVD for future very intense scrutiny! On that note, in the words of the infamous William J. Casey, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

[Sandy Larsen]

{sigh}

Mr. Larsen - I'm curious why you are in such a need to understand what this is about yet have argued against not only the content but the sheer process of posting the material in the first place?

David,

I have never argued against anything regarding this thread. As a matter of fact, I sided with Tom Neal when he complained to Admin about a member who was doing what you're now accusing me of doing. On this thread, Post 3, I said:

".... I know of which forum topic Tom speaks. And from what I've seen, there is a member there who is disagreeing not with the evidence being presented or analysis thereof, but with the whole line of reasoning. That is to say, the member seems to disagree that the topic should exist at all. From what I've seen, this particular member is engaging in harassment and is serving only to disrupt the thread. ...."

As for why I'm inquiring about this thread now, I explain it in my Post 439 above where I wrote:

"I didn't follow this thread because, as far as I could tell, there was no explanation as to what was being done or what the goal was.

"Now that it is completed, maybe somebody could summarize what the goal of the thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

"I did know early on that it had something to do with removing two out of every three frames to arrive at the extant 18.3 FPS Z-film. And a week or two ago Chris posted a picture of the movie camera Zapruder used, showing that it would have been easy for Zapruder to switch to Slow Motion mode, which I understood to mean 48 FPS mode. So apparently Chris was claiming that Zapruder filmed at 48 FPS.

"Then just a moment ago I found the above video snippet Chris had provided to skeptic Michael Walton early on in the thread. (I didn't know back when this was posted that Michael was a skeptic of this topic.) I compared the number of frames in the above snippet to the number of frames in the same interval in the extant Z-film. Sure enough, the above snippet has three times as many frames! So, naturally, my question is, where did this snippet come from??"

Here is the video snippet I ask about:

This thread was widely read and so I was pretty sure somebody would give me a quick summary. Surprisingly nobody did. Till now.

I'll read your post. Hopefully it doesn't assume I was following the thread.

[Sandy Larsen]

Sandy Larsen said:

I didn't follow this thread because, as far as I could tell, there was no explanation as to what was being done or what the goal was.

Now that it is completed, maybe somebody could summarize what the goal of the thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

Please follow...

Unlike you, we understand that what is now in 9 pieces in the Archives does not represent what happened in DP on 11/22

Also unlike you, we see the evidence offered to explain what transpired on Elm as a thinly veiled attempt to push a square peg into a round hole.

No, not unlike me. I'm an alterationist. I believe the rear head wound has been hidden. I also believe that, if there are numerous witnesses who stated that the limo came to a stop or near stop, then that is what happened, and it has been obscured as well. I don't believe in mass hallucinations.

No matter where you are in the world, Time X Speed = Distance, and therefore: Time / Distance = Speed, Time / Distance = Speed, & Distance / Speed = Time (basic algebra)

This thread proves the FBI and SS used math to recreate the events in the form of evidence, then made sure the public did not see the film as a film for 13 years.

This thread was also able to determine that certain unaltered frame sequences were shot at 48 frames per second or Slow Motion. In turn, to change 48fps to 18.3fps we need to remove almost 2/3rds of the frames. A full 2/3 and we'd have a 16fps final film.

Let me make sure I understand this. Are you saying that the extant z-film has sections that were recorded at 48 fps, and that we need to remove almost 2/3 of the frames in these sections to see the true speed of the recorded action?

If that's true, and we remove the extra frames, then the limo (and everything else) will speed up in those particular sections of the film.

If I'm understanding you correctly, please tell me which sections should have frames removed. Did you, or Chris, or anybody else make an animated GIF with frames removed so that we can see the true speeds?

Using 168-171 changed to 161-166 we get an idea of what is happening. The film shows the limo moving at a constant rate of speed prior to the Stemmons sign.

David, I'm having a tough time following you. Because you aren't being specific enough. For example, you say, "Using 168-171 changed to 161-166." I don't know if the extant film as we see it has the 168-171 or 161-166. The latter range (161-166) has more frames than the former. I assume that somebody removes frames and doesn't add new ones, which if true would mean that the original frame numbers were 161-166, and that somebody removes some frames, which results in the 168-171 range of frames. Okay. But if so, who are you saying removes the frames from the 161-166 set? The conspirators have done it? Or we need to do it ourselves, in order to see the limo etc. moving at the correct, faster speed?

You need to say things precisely when speaking to those who aren't familiar with the subject matter.

Except in the original survey, 168-171 covered 9/10ths of a foot for a limo speed of 2.24mph..

171-185 comes to 17mph.. in less than a second the car accelerated from 2.2mph to 17mph? ....

Since I'm not following you, I can't make any judgement regarding this. It certainly would be interesting to see an instantaneous jump in speed from 2.24 to 17 mph. Is that what we see now in the extant film? I don't recall seeing any jumps like that.

....you see that on the Zfilm do you Sandy? Truly claims the limo almost hits the curb on Elm.

Do I see the jump in speed in the z-fiim? I don't think so. Is it there to see?

What's your point in saying here that the limo almost hits the curb on Elm? Didn't that occur during the part of the film that no longer exists? Well before the frames you are talking about here? (If you are changing subjects, you need to say so.)

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

So it was changed. and that turn is removed from the record. At 161 he would have been accelerating from that near stop, yet by 161 he would be traveling much faster that 2.24mph...

Good, now you're writing in a coherent way that can be followed. So you're saying that the limo is traveling at only 2.24 mph at Z161 but should be traveling faster by then.

Look at the difference between 161 and 166... that .9 feet [11 inches] covered in 5 frames was proven by Chris to equate to 5, 48fps frames in a row yet is claimed to be at 18.3 fps.

FWIW, I measure the distance covered in the five frames to be 1.4 times the outside diameter of the limo's tire. I assumed the tires to be 15 inches inside diameter and used a profile photo of the limo to determine that the outside diameter of the tire to be 26 inches. 1.4 x 26 = 36.4 inches distance traveled. (I used the white dashed line on the road as a reference in determining the distance traveled. It shows the direction traveled.)

So my measurement shows the distance traveled by the limo to be 36.4" compared to Chris's 11". Which works out to be 7.4 mph compared to Chris's 2.24 mph at 18 fps film speed

Chris should double-check his work on this one. I checked my work twice... though I used the same method both times. (I have more confidence in my work if I use a different method in taking second measurements.) My 26 inches for the limo tire might be a bit big.

Look how little the white line moves between 161 and 166. the line starts at the left edge of the wheel's hubcap and barely moves forward.

Is your "little white line" the same as mine? See the Z frames below. The road's white dashed line (which is what I'm talking about) is never near a hubcap.

BTW, notice how far the car moves in those five frames. Definitely much more than Chris's 0.9 ft (11 inches).

Which is why the revised legend CE884 starts at 168-171 with the same exact location/station and covering the same distance as the original 161-166.

Okay, now your talking about something that I, as a non-follower of the thread, am not familiar with.

If you cannot reconcile this first point, there is no use going on. Like all the other directly incriminating evidence, the film's authenticity cannot be established. There is good evidence which shows that the FBI had the film prior to Zapruder's negotiations with LIFE - IOW, Friday night. SS also had a copy in DC friday night... the film, in original form, would show more convincingly the shots coming from the front. As much of that evidence was removed as possible and photos instead of the film are used from there on out.

JFK was killed as a result of a well planned execution plan with numerous shooters, and even more there to cover it up. That cover up continues today

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." William Colby

From: Barbara Honegger

Date: Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Conference on THE WARREN REPORT AND THE
JFK ASSASSINATION : FIVE DECADES OF
SIGNIFICANT DISCLOSURES
To: Greg Smith
I told Mae about it when we worked together ...
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Greg Smith wrote:

Thanks Barbara! That's priceless. The web attributes it to Mae B only, and therefore, it's discounted in chat and group conversations on social media. You might want to give it better street cred? Your call!

On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Barbara Honegger wrote:

> Seriously -- I personally was the Source
> for that William Casey quote. He said it
> at an early Feb. 1981 meeting in the
> Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of
> the White House which I attended, and
> I immediately told my close friend and
> political godmother Senior White House
> Correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
> then went public with it without naming
> the source ...
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> Love to, but can't break away. I'll definitely get the DVD for future very intense scrutiny! On that note, in the words of the infamous William J. Casey, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

Z161

Z166

Edited August 23, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[David Josephs]

My bad Sandy... I must have you mixed up with someone else...

Terribly sorry. As I look back over the thread, it was someone else I had in my mind...

Again, sorry for the old and senile curmudgeon in me coming out... Let me address your comments as best I can although a careful reading of the thread with pencil and paper in hand is the best advice.

Sandy Larsen said:

I didn't follow this thread because, as far as I could tell, there was no explanation as to what was being done or what the goal was.

Now that it is completed, maybe somebody could summarize what the goal of the thread was, what if anything was learned or proved, and any other useful information.

Please follow...

Unlike you, we understand that what is now in 9 pieces in the Archives does not represent what happened in DP on 11/22

Also unlike you, we see the evidence offered to explain what transpired on Elm as a thinly veiled attempt to push a square peg into a round hole.

No, not unlike me. I'm an alterationist. I believe the rear head wound has been hidden. I also believe that, if there are numerous witnesses who stated that the limo came to a stop or near stop, then that is what happened, and it has been obscured as well. I don't believe in mass hallucinations.

No matter where you are in the world, Time X Speed = Distance, and therefore: Time / Distance = Speed, Time / Distance = Speed, & Distance / Speed = Time (basic algebra)

This thread proves the FBI and SS used math to recreate the events in the form of evidence, then made sure the public did not see the film as a film for 13 years.

This thread was also able to determine that certain unaltered frame sequences were shot at 48 frames per second or Slow Motion. In turn, to change 48fps to 18.3fps we need to remove almost 2/3rds of the frames. A full 2/3 and we'd have a 16fps final film.

Let me make sure I understand this. Are you saying that the extant z-film has sections that were recorded at 48 fps, and that we need to remove almost 2/3 of the frames in these sections to see the true speed of the recorded action?

If that's true, and we remove the extra frames, then the limo (and everything else) will speed up in those particular sections of the film.

If I'm understanding you correctly, please tell me which sections should have frames removed. Did you, or Chris, or anybody else make an animated GIF with frames removed so that we can see the true speeds?

The extra frames had already been removed Sandy. The in camera original is shot either completely or in sections at 48fps which creates 3 times as many frames as a 16fps film. Except the alteration did not remove exactly 2/3 of the frames but a little short of that resulting in a higher frame count per second than that camera operates normally... 18.3 (it also relates to the 18.3:1 ration of the incline of Elm - in the course of a second the limo travels 18.3 feet in 18.3 frames is we accept the speeds offered)

As you say, if the limo did stop, which I too believe happened, let's say it was a 1 second stop then go... if 48 frames are taken of that 1 second virtually all of these frames must go away, but it is still only 1 second of time. By choosing the right frames to leave in we get the 302-303 Greer head-turn while both foreground and background are in focus... the limo must have been moving extremely slowly at this point. The same thing happens at 316-317 and again in the 340-350 range.

It is claimed that 19 feet of film was run off at Kodak.. there is only 25-27 feet of usable film in the 30 foot roll and he filmed the Hesters by the pergola on side B before the motorcade.

Using 168-171 changed to 161-166 we get an idea of what is happening. The film shows the limo moving at a constant rate of speed prior to the Stemmons sign.

David, I'm having a tough time following you. Because you aren't being specific enough. For example, you say, "Using 168-171 changed to 161-166." I don't know if the extant film as we see it has the 168-171 or 161-166. The latter range (161-166) has more frames than the former. I assume that somebody removes frames and doesn't add new ones, which if true would mean that the original frame numbers were 161-166, and that somebody removes some frames, which results in the 168-171 range of frames. Okay. But if so, who are you saying removes the frames from the 161-166 set? The conspirators have done it? Or we need to do it ourselves, in order to see the limo etc. moving at the correct, faster speed?

You need to say things precisely when speaking to those who aren't familiar with the subject matter.

Ok... let's try it this way. (Sandy, I have to assume you've read thru the thread and are aware of CE884, the changed legend that Leo Gauthier sealed in a canister and presented to the WCR as evidence. CE884 is the WHITE version of the legend, the original legend is that orange color and replaces some of the key data: Surveyor WEST places a 9/10th of a foot difference between frames 161 and 166. I forget which post but Chris shows how those 5 frames equate to 5 continuous 48fps frames. I actually had it backward in my explanation. This is the equation and the link:

15.116' is the distance from the front of the limo to JFK in the limo and there are 12 frames between 154-166 as the gif shows
This means the limo moves 1.25966' per frame. Now, at 18.3 fps the limo travels 1.25966 x 18.3 = 23.05 feet per second between 154-166
If that 23.05' was filmed at 48fps 23.05' / 48 frames = .48 foot per frame x 5 frames from 161-166 = 2.4 feet. 2.4 feet is the distance between JFK and JC as shown in post #5
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22692&page=1#entry326132

Except in the original survey, 168-171 covered 9/10ths of a foot for a limo speed of 2.24mph..

171-185 comes to 17mph.. in less than a second the car accelerated from 2.2mph to 17mph? ....

Since I'm not following you, I can't make any judgement regarding this. It certainly would be interesting to see an instantaneous jump in speed from 2.24 to 17 mph. Is that what we see now in the extant film? I don't recall seeing any jumps like that.

Exactly Sandy... the limo seems to glide down Elm with no changes in speed at all... yet the data related to these images shows a slowing, speeding up, slowing again, etc...

....you see that on the Zfilm do you Sandy? Truly claims the limo almost hits the curb on Elm.

Do I see the jump in speed in the z-fiim? I don't think so. Is it there to see?

What's your point in saying here that the limo almost hits the curb on Elm? Didn't that occur during the part of the film that no longer exists? Well before the frames you are talking about here? (If you are changing subjects, you need to say so.)

When the film jumps from 132 to 133, motorcycle to motorcade the normal "stop/start" frame lightening is not seen - images of this were posted in this thread. If we assume Truly is lying, why? This dovetails into the Towner film's alteration and syncing... but that's another story.

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

So it was changed. and that turn is removed from the record. At 161 he would have been accelerating from that near stop, yet by 161 he would be traveling much faster that 2.24mph...

Good, now you're writing in a coherent way that can be followed. So you're saying that the limo is traveling at only 2.24 mph at Z161 but should be traveling faster by then.

I'm saying the DATA shows it to be moving at 2.24mph and accelerating to 17mph within a second. Do you see that in the film? as no one I've ever spoken with does.

Look at the difference between 161 and 166... that .9 feet [11 inches] covered in 5 frames was proven by Chris to equate to 5, 48fps frames in a row yet is claimed to be at 18.3 fps.

FWIW, I measure the distance covered in the five frames to be 1.4 times the outside diameter of the limo's tire. I assumed the tires to be 15 inches inside diameter and used a profile photo of the limo to determine that the outside diameter of the tire to be 26 inches. 1.4 x 26 = 36.4 inches distance traveled. (I used the white dashed line on the road as a reference in determining the distance traveled. It shows the direction traveled.)

So my measurement shows the distance traveled by the limo to be 36.4" compared to Chris's 11". Which works out to be 7.4 mph compared to Chris's 2.24 mph at 18 fps film speed

The speed we refer to here is CE884's 168-171 speed of 3.73mph. Double this and we get your speed of 7.4mph. If you wanted to double the speed of the limo on film wouldn't you only need remove half the frames from any frame rate speed and project at the normal 16-18fps speed? of course you would Sandy. In some areas all the frames are removed, some 2/3, some 1/2... Maybe you can explain how a 16fps camera takes film at 18.3... then projected at 16fps it would look a little slow.

Chris should double-check his work on this one. I checked my work twice... though I used the same method both times. (I have more confidence in my work if I use a different method in taking second measurements.) My 26 inches for the limo tire might be a bit big.

That was my mistake not Chris' . His gif at this post explains it. The 9/10th of a foot is the Robert West Survey measurement, not Chris', The limo moves 2.4ft from 161-166 based on the distance between JC and JFK.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22692&page=1#entry326129

Look how little the white line moves between 161 and 166. the line starts at the left edge of the wheel's hubcap and barely moves forward.

Is your "little white line" the same as mine? See the Z frames below. The road's white dashed line (which is what I'm talking about) is never near a hubcap.

BTW, notice how far the car moves in those five frames. Definitely much more than Chris's 0.9 ft (11 inches).

Which is why the revised legend CE884 starts at 168-171 with the same exact location/station and covering the same distance as the original 161-166.

Okay, now your talking about something that I, as a non-follower of the thread, am not familiar with. All you need do is read thru the thread then Sandy... and I repeat... this was my mistake with the frames and the overlay... Chris' measurements are correct. Terribly sorry for the confusion.

This again is only the tip of the iceberg related to the math problems in trying to illustrate in math what we see on the film... in the real world with an unaltered film running at a constant rate of speed the math should work perfectly. That the math does not work is clue #1 that something is wrong.

DJ

If you cannot reconcile this first point, there is no use going on. Like all the other directly incriminating evidence, the film's authenticity cannot be established. There is good evidence which shows that the FBI had the film prior to Zapruder's negotiations with LIFE - IOW, Friday night. SS also had a copy in DC friday night... the film, in original form, would show more convincingly the shots coming from the front. As much of that evidence was removed as possible and photos instead of the film are used from there on out.

JFK was killed as a result of a well planned execution plan with numerous shooters, and even more there to cover it up. That cover up continues today

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." William Colby

From: Barbara Honegger

Date: Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Conference on THE WARREN REPORT AND THE
JFK ASSASSINATION : FIVE DECADES OF
SIGNIFICANT DISCLOSURES
To: Greg Smith
I told Mae about it when we worked together ...
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Greg Smith wrote:

Thanks Barbara! That's priceless. The web attributes it to Mae B only, and therefore, it's discounted in chat and group conversations on social media. You might want to give it better street cred? Your call!

On Sep 21, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Barbara Honegger wrote:

> Seriously -- I personally was the Source
> for that William Casey quote. He said it
> at an early Feb. 1981 meeting in the
> Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of
> the White House which I attended, and
> I immediately told my close friend and
> political godmother Senior White House
> Correspondent Sarah McClendon, who
> then went public with it without naming
> the source ...
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
> Love to, but can't break away. I'll definitely get the DVD for future very intense scrutiny! On that note, in the words of the infamous William J. Casey, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

Z161

Z166

[Michael Walton]

Every thread deserves a final rebuttal. Here's mine. Thank you.

The answer to the above, and in conclusion, is that the Zapruder film was NOT filmed at 48 FPS; and it was NOT doctored or altered in any way. Instead, the Bad Guys knew this film was a fully packed keg of dynamite evidence showing conspiracy. So instead of showing this film to the world days after it was filmed, they did the opposite - they suppressed it from public view, and members of the media twisted and turned what was actually shown in the film to minimize or effectively sweep under the rug the evidence that more than one shooter was involved and that Oswald could not have pulled off the firing as the they claim he did.

As seen in the video below, when the Nix film and Zapruder film are matched frame for frame, played side by side, and stabilized, they match up perfectly. Ask yourself - how can that be? How can the Bad Guys take the so-called "48 FPS" Z film, doctor it and remove 67% of the frames, and then by some miracle, both films miraculously match up when played side by side?

The answer is simple - they didn't because there was no such thing as a "67% of the frames removed from the 48 FPS" version of the film like this thread claims.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxenlSZHZsX3pHa2s

Edited August 27, 2016 by Michael Walton

[Sandy Larsen]

David,

Thanks for explaining to me what this thread was about.

I can see now that if you go by the surveyors' data given in CE884 (below) that the limo speed at Z161-166 was only 2.24 mph assuming the film was made at 18 fps as claimed. Yet we see with our own eyes that the limo is going considerably faster than that. And we can measure it. Chris measured it to be about 6 mph and I measured it to be about 7 mph, so we are roughly in agreement.

If the film was actually recorded at 48 fps (the camera's Slow Motion mode), then that would certainly explain the discrepancy. Because that would mean that the surveyors' data actually shows a speed of (48/18) x 2.24 = 5.97 mph, which matches our measurements.

This is a very interesting anomaly that I want to spend more time studying. It's hard to believe that the surveyors could have been so far off in their measurements.

On the other hand, one has to wonder how the transition was made between Z161-166, where no frames are removed in the extant film, to elsewhere where frames were presumably removed. First, how was a smooth transition made? And second, why does the surveyors' data not conflict with what we see in the film. It seems like it should conflict all over the place. Yet, if I recall correctly, Chris points out just a small number of conflicts. Correct me if I am wrong.

[David Josephs]

Quote

This is a very interesting anomaly that I want to spend more time studying. It's hard to believe that the surveyors could have been so far off in their measurements.

On the other hand, one has to wonder how the transition was made between Z161-166, where no frames are removed in the extant film, to elsewhere where frames were presumably removed. First, how was a smooth transition made? And second, why does the surveyors' data not conflict with what we see in the film. It seems like it should conflict all over the place. Yet, if I recall correctly, Chris points out just a small number of conflicts. Correct me if I am wrong.

The surveyors were not off, the FBI, Shaneyfelt, changed the data.

I suggest you start with the idea that the frames and the numbers were an FBI creation.  18.3fps another FBI creation.  All measurements to the 6th floor window only... FBI

So let's just say we have a film that seems to stop and start without the tell-tale signs at z133.. z133 then is the 1st frame of the motorcade, the first frame with JFK...

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Since it was not practical to stop the projector when using the original of the Zapruder film, because of the possibility of damage to the film, Mr. Orth volunteered to prepare 35-mm. color slides directly from the original movie of all of the pertinent frames of the assassination which were determined to be frames 171 through 434. 

Mr. SPECTER. Starting with what frame number? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Starting with frame 171, going through frame 334. 
Mr. SPECTER. And why did you start with frame 171? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the frame that the slides start from. This was an arbitrary frame number that was decided on as being far enough back to include the area that we wanted to study

By using averages the FBI was able to "smooth out" the movements (to match the smooth movement seen in the film) which the MATH shows goes from 2.24mph to 18mph.  Let me be clear as well... the 48fps original was altered and re-shot on the Zapruder camera after removing an AVERAGE of 48/18.3 = 2.24 frames for every 3 original frames.   

What this suggests to me is z133 was z161 with frames between 132-160 removed changing the original z161 now z133...  162 x 3 = 486 = total # of frames.  The film was broken into thirds... 1-161, 162 - 324, 325-486 with all the necessary info between 162-324...  When we take the 10 frames from 171-334 (which moves things up Elm 10.2') we get 161-324... and the charade begins...  by using averages the FBI was able to remove movement, time and distance from the Zfilm with very few saeeing how it was done...

 

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313. This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds. 

Mr. SPECTER. Will you take the first point Mr. Dulles has referred to and mark it as point X. I think we already have some letter designations in the early part of the alphabet. 
Mr. McCLOY. Where is that point? What significance is that point? The first point? 
Mr. SPECTER. This frame 161. 
Mr. McCLOY. Yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. Is the first frame we have on the Zapruder film. 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

[deleted]

 

Edited November 6, 2016 by Sandy Larsen