Jump to content
The Education Forum

Chris Bristow

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chris Bristow

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

863 profile views
  1. I am trying to find out if Oswald had a slight degree of Knock knees. My nephew has knock knee and he can come pretty close to duplicating Oswald's leaning position in CE133 from the waist down. The hard part to reproduce is the alignment of Oswald's right knee within about an inch of his center line at the waist(Where the belt buckle would be). I could not come close to it, in fact I took a photo where I was just about to fall over, yet still had to rotate the photo 7 degrees to attain the knee to buckle alignment. That is six degrees past where I would fall over. Although knock knees can bring you close to the alignment, Oswald's lower right leg looks like it is leaning slightly outward instead of in towards the opposing knee. Matching the lower legs outward angle may negate the benefit of a knock kneed stance. Only having to duplicate the knee/waist alignment makes testing the stance simple. If you keep the lower leg leaning outward or even just straight up there are no more joint articulations that you can do to align the knee under the midline at the waist. All you can do at that point is start leaning your legs and hips as a whole. If you try and match the image as it appeared in LIFE mag you will need to align right at the belt buckle. If you try to match the image in the Dartmouth study you only need to get within an inch of the belt buckle. The Dartmouth photo is rotated ones degree farther right so is a bit easier to do, but if you look at the full photo 3 degrees of rotation is obviously past level. I put up a video on Youtube to challenge anyone to duplicate Oswald's posture from the waist down. You can do anything you like above the waist and you can even cheat the stance to see what it takes to do it. But I found that even with a rifle as a counter balance it is impossible for me to do and having to rotate my photo 7 degrees was so far beyond the tipping point that I am stumped. That said, I am not married to this idea and am open to input.
  2. Chris Bristow


    Pamela, Ya unfortunately there are lots of crazy conspiracy theories out there. People will start to believe a theory if they see many small unrelated facts that raise questions. Like years ago Jack White raised so many questions that it seemed there had to be something to the conspiracy. But they were just questions and many of them have been shown to have no merit. I try to keep this in mind when considering the JFK assassination. Still consider the conspiracy as the most likely truth though. Thanks for the info you provided.
  3. Chris Bristow


    I don't think it is a real mark, it looks too much like a bullet strike, it has to be a deliberate hoax.
  4. Chris Bristow


    So the Marsh copy has the mark on the bumper too. But it is not in the National Archives copy.
  5. Chris Bristow

    Focus your research on Zapruder, he is the key

    I think Zapruder knew he had something worth a lot of money. He may have also considered that the value of it would be greater if he sold it before other films surfaced. He took off so quickly he was ten steps ahead of Miss Stitzman. I have wondered about his motivation to leave so quickly when the normal reaction would to be stunned after the event.
  6. Chris Bristow


    Thanks I'm sure it's got some interesting bits.
  7. Chris Bristow


    Thanks Pamela, I assumed this was likely a false issue because it is so obvious yet I could not find it addressed on JFK forums. I thought it may be a defect on the photo but the resemblance to a bullet strike made my finally ask about it. I post videos on Youtube and a few debunk conspiracy theories that I found lacking. So I am open to input on either side of the issue.
  8. Chris Bristow


    Thanks, I wondered why I could not find anything on it. I will leave it up for anyone else that was not ware of this hoax.
  9. On the upper part of the front bumper, just above the "GG" on the license plate, is what looks like a bullet strike. When a bullet hits paint or chrome on a car it often shows a dark hole or dent in the center surrounded by paint primer for about 1/2 inch, then the paint or chrome around the primer. The mark on the bumper fits that description.
  10. Chris Bristow


    I think the issue of hitting JFK from the knoll without hitting Jackie is completely resolved by looking at the Muchmore film at the moment of the headshot. From her perspective you can clearly see that JFK's head was about 6 inches away from Jackie's. In addition the Muchmore line of sight lines up with the Knoll shooters line from the opposite side(Within a couple degrees). If the knoll shooter was in the position marked by the muddy shoe prints then they saw the same gap between the heads that Muchmore did, just from the other side. I recently saw "Inside The Target Car" documentary with Gary mack recreating the headshot. They ignored the line of sight and second axis that Muchmore could provide and based The Kennedy's head positions solely on the Z film. They came to the false conclusion that Jackie would have been in the way.
  11. Chris Bristow

    Unaltered Zapruder film

    What bugs me is how the motor cops all surged forward towards the limo when it only slowed by 3 or 4 mph. They were tasked with keeping pace with the limo and had previous experience. How does an experienced rider get caught so off guard?. In fact all four of them move forward in the nix film. The follow up 'Beast' kept correct distance and the motor cops were right next to it. I can't see how they all missed the limo slowing down. I believe it could be because they were actually reacting to the limo slamming on the brakes. That part was removed and so now their move forward makes no sense. Finally i will repeat again that John Costella's pincushion theory about the Stemmons sign is the strongest proof that the film has fakery in it. The only counter theory floated in the 10 years since it was proposed is that a leaning pole will appear to swing as you pan and change your perspective. The problem with the theory is a pole that leans away swings in the wrong direction to account for Costella's observations. Only a pole leaning towards Zapruder would have produced the swing needed to explain what Costella observed. Secondly I put up a pole with the correct lean and from the correct angle and at 50 feet from the pole. I had to walk 11 feet to make the pole swing 2 degrees!. Zapruder only panned his camera 6 inches or so!!! Look at frames that have not been corrected for pincushion distortion, like the version available at Lightbox, and you find the poles in frames 193 and 228 (Same frames as Costella's pincushion corrected comparison) are parallel! The distortion should bend each pole inward almost one full degree. You should see about a 2 degree difference in the same pole from 193 to 228. No one has been able to explain this easily measurable anomaly. It is not some wild theory that requires faith in the person proposing it. It is not some cryptic accusation based on a questionable understanding of perspective or optics. This is a simple, measurable and straightforward observation with no good explanation. Pincushion distortion is something many have a vague understanding of and maybe that is why this theory falls by the wayside. It really only has a couple of rules to it and knowing them should allow anyone to figure out why a rectangle frame changes to a pincushion shape. First rule is that the distortion displaces images or pixels directly outward from the optical center.(This means if you draw a line from the center of the frame, through the pixel in question and beyond, you find the direction of displacement.) Second rule is the farther from the center the pixel lies, the more displacement it undergoes). The bottom of the Stemmons pole is farther from the center and so is displaced outwards more than the top. That is what causes the leaning effect. The entire pole is displaced outwards but the bottom is displaced more. The pincushion problem does not deal with obscure hard to comprehend concepts. I think anyone who takes a little time to see how pincushion works will find Dr Costella's theory highly credible.
  12. I have a new issue I am trying to sort out now. From Z's pov the sun lined up with the light post on the North side of Elm by the walkway, about frame 408. But looking at the reflection of the Sun starting around 384 the Sun appears to line up behind the limo. The reflection on the window frame behind Nellie C. makes it appear that the limo is passing almost directly under the sun around that time. That is 18 degrees off where the Sun was. The 4 degree slope of Elm can't account for all the change in the reflections position(The limo was traveling across the slope not straight down it so the front to back tilt was only 3 degrees The Sun's angle of 38 degrees also lessens the effect of the tilt because it is 52 degrees off the direction of the slope.) Clint Hill hanging onto the back of the limo also reduced the tilt by about one degree. So the slope of Elm can't explain it and I am putting it out there for new ideas. I assume there is something that will explain this rationally. I am a CT'er but most of the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny. One other weird aspect is when a car passes between the sun and the observer the reflection should stay lined up below the Sun unless the reflective surface is actively changing it's angle. The reflection on Nellies window travels several degrees West when compared with the background. Clint Hill could have caused some of this as he tried to crawl aboard, but he would have to change the angle more than one degree to create the reflections movement West, but both the Nix and Z film show one degree change at the most. Around frame 408 when the reflections should happen the only surfaces reflecting are ones that are angled back to the left like the back of the rear seat or the back of Kellerman's seat. One last bit of weirdness. The lamppost in frame 405 should line up with the sun's position but the little shadow behind the very top is pointing to about 5:30. It should be right at 6:00 pointing straight to Zapruder. The fact that the lamppost is slightly off center in the frame would not cause the shadow to move to the 5:30 position. That makes for a 15 degree difference in the Sun's position and closely aligns with the limo anomaly. My main question is about the limo and what caused the reflections to appear around frame 385.
  13. Chris Bristow

    Alexandra Zapruder Book: Part 2

    I have found that most all of the fake film arguments are crap. Issues like Jack White's 5 foot Zapruder or the guy who opens his legs in a single frame (385) can be explained. One issue that is still open is John Costella's lack of pincushion distortion in the stemmons sign. The only explanation put forth was that Zapruder panning caused the leaning of the pole to make it appear to swing left as he panned. But a pole leaning away from the observer swings WITH their panning motion not against it as in Zapruder frames 193 to 228. This makes the leaning pole rebuttal impossible. Pincushion distortion should cause the pole in the right corner to lean inward(leftward) about 1 degree and in the left corner (228) it should lean inward(to the right) 1 degree. But in uncorrected frames the pole in 228 and 193 are parallel. No one has a good explanation for this yet. A new issue I cannot resolve. Update: I am moving this subject and posting the issue as a new topic
  14. If the lowest peak of the is 380 then it cannot be the motorcycle. I think redline is around 7000 rpm. I would guess 22,800 would sound like a constant tone not a motorcycle. I have been looking at 1/16th slices of the recording for a pattern that should repeat about 3 times in 1/16thsec and see nothing. The start of this video has a 1200 idling around 500 rpm and also has other good example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IlU268hgLI It sounds to me like the stuck mic was happening during the whistling with the 3,000 rpm motor running. I have not sorted out all the material you gave yet. I will take a closer look One thing about the whistling cop is he was a mile or more from Dealey when it happened. if he had the stuck mic all bets are off and the dicta belt is worthless. When people use those radios the never just key the mic and start whistling. Air time is precious because only one person can talk at a time. So if you have nothing important to convey it would be outrageous to just start whistling. You would be in trouble for it the first time you died it.
  15. Chris Bristow


    Ya it could be the Croft Lady. My eyes went fuzzy trying to identify who was in the background. Another part I can't make sense of is what looks like the hair on the left side of JFK's head seem to continue behind his head. It has a ribbed look to it . That dark area also bleeds over slightly onto the rear view mirror. But the Croft Lady is still the most obvious possibility.