Cliff Varnell Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Wrong again. The fold is as tall as the jacket collar. You need need glasses VARNELL. Craig, you carney so many brands of snake oil you get your story-lines all mixed up. According to YOU the jacket was bunched up close to his ear on the right side of the jacket, and bunched up close to the top of the shirt collar on the left side of the jacket. Remember? The straight lines in the following graphic are mine, pointing to the visible shirt collar and the visible minor fold in the jacket. The lumpy thing on JFK's right shoulder is all Lamson: This "bunch" of Craig's is positively psychedelic, here's the left side of the jacket: Don't eat the brown acid, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) The first significant drop of JFK's jacket occurred at the corner of Main and Houston. On Main St. the jacket had bunched up into JFK's hairline. At the corner of Main and Houston JFK brushed his hair at the back of his head, which clearly caused the jacket to drop below the hairline and indent. The jacket was never elevated more than a fraction of an inch during the entire ride in Dealey Plaza. Edited July 6, 2011 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Varnell, lost in his 'the jacket fell" fantasy, The drop of the jacket is clearly captured in the Nix film, and clearly indicated in the other Dealey Plaza films and photos. Silly cliff strikes again. Good job location the results of MOTION BLUR... You are living a fantasy cliff.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 David, please note that JFK's shirt collar is visible at the left-back of his neck, correct? But in Altgens on Houston St. the jacket collar occluded the shirt collar at that location, as you've noted. Ask yourself: how could the jacket collar drop to a normal position just above the base of JFK's neck if there were multiple inches of shirt and jacket fabric bunched up entirely above the SBT inshoot at the base of JFK's neck? Silly boy, you don't have a clue if hte jacket collar occluded the shirt collar in Altgens or if the fold of fabric on the back of JKF's jacket occluded the shirt collar. You claim is simply a fantasy. Such a scenario is contrary to the nature of reality. You don't understand reality... The only thing contrary to the laws of "reality" is Varnell and his "Magic Jacket theory". Gravity is not a theory. Nor is it magical. The fraction of an inch drop of JFK's jacket in Dealey Plaza was utterly consistent with the nature of reality. You can't get your shirt to bunch up by waving your arm because such a posture causes the shirt fabric to indent at the shoulder-line. That reality is replicated trillions of times a day on this planet. Really? Yet you admit that's exactly what happened to the jacket as seen in Jefferies Reality is simply not your strong suit is it cliff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Wrong again. The fold is as tall as the jacket collar. You need need glasses VARNELL. Craig, you carney so many brands of snake oil you get your story-lines all mixed up. According to YOU the jacket was bunched up close to his ear on the right side of the jacket, and bunched up close to the top of the shirt collar on the left side of the jacket. Remember? The straight lines in the following graphic are mine, pointing to the visible shirt collar and the visible minor fold in the jacket. The lumpy thing on JFK's right shoulder is all Lamson: This "bunch" of Craig's is positively psychedelic, here's the left side of the jacket: Don't eat the brown acid, man. Don't ever leave your fantasy world cliff,it might just hurt you. In another thread to tell us the Z film as it covers croft and Betzner is "the bedrock of the case" Cool. The zfilm in that area shows the jacket on JFK's right shoulder to be near the same height as his right ear. Thanks for endorsing my work. The fold in Betzer is quite the killer of your silly theory. it proves in an unimpeachable manner that htere was a fold that consumed 3+ inches of fabric onhte back of JFK's jacket, which totally destroys you. NO amount of shucking and jiveing will ever bring your silly claim back to life. THE REALITY of the properties of light and shadow (which are totally beyond your limited ability to understand) destroys you. You best learn to live with it, as it is now your legacy. And that is gonna leave a mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) The first significant drop of JFK's jacket occurred at the corner of Main and Houston. On Main St. the jacket had bunched up into JFK's hairline. But cliff you tell us this is impossible, and yet here you are telling us it IS possible. In Jefferies The jacket clear has a fold that is higher than the jacket collar, which you claim is impossible because you say there can only be a small "indentation" on the shoulder and because the jacket collar must occlude the shirt collar. Neither of those are true in Jefferies and yet you claim the jacket is folded, which it clearly is. Lets all watch cliff you an unsuccessful attempt at the backstroke.... At the corner of Main and Houston JFK brushed his hair at the back of his head, which clearly caused the jacket to drop below the hairline and indent. Uh, NOPE, Weaver shows the same fold as Towner, Croft and Betzner. Once again the unbending laws a light and shadow destroy you. You should really give this up cliff, you really suck at it. The jacket was never elevated more than a fraction of an inch during the entire ride in Dealey Plaza. Opps, wrong again! 3+ inch fold of fabric in Towner, Croft and Betzner, all unimpeachable. cliff continues his fantasy. Edited July 7, 2011 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Varnell, lost in his 'the jacket fell" fantasy, The drop of the jacket is clearly captured in the Nix film, and clearly indicated in the other Dealey Plaza films and photos. Craig Lamson attributes the visible shirt collar to motion blur. In the post to follow I'll post a photo taken immediately before the drop of the jacket collar and a photo taken immediately after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 (edited) This is the Altgens 5 photo taken a few seconds before the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly not visible This is the Betzner 1 photo taken a few seconds after the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly visible at the side and left back of his neck. JFK's jacket dropped in Dealey Plaza. Edited July 7, 2011 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 This is the Altgens 5 photo taken a few seconds before the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly not visible This is the Betzner 1 photo taken a few seconds after the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly visible at the side and left back of his neck. JFK's jacket dropped in Dealey Plaza. ROFLMAO! You still can't even understand grade school level perspective cliff. You fail photo analysis 101. The jacket collar NEVER dropped, It was ALWAYs down, from Jefferies to Towner and finally to Croft. Your claim is an utter fantasy cliff. cliffs fairy tale of the "jacket dropping" is simply silly. And you need to toss those silly ran bans in the trash. They don't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Hinrichs Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 The clothes doesn't matter but the geometry which proves is doesn't happpend that way. Myers know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 This is the Altgens 5 photo taken a few seconds before the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly not visible This is the Betzner 1 photo taken a few seconds after the drop of the jacket collar. JFK's shirt collar is clearly visible at the side and left back of his neck. JFK's jacket dropped in Dealey Plaza. ROFLMAO! You still can't even understand grade school level perspective cliff. You fail photo analysis 101. The jacket collar NEVER dropped, It was ALWAYs down, from Jefferies to Towner and finally to Croft. Your claim is an utter fantasy cliff. cliffs fairy tale of the "jacket dropping" is simply silly. And you need to toss those silly ran bans in the trash. They don't work. Pure vapor. Does Craig deny that JFK's shirt collar was occluded in Altgens? No, he does not deny that. He can't. Does Craig deny that JFK's shirt collar is clearly visible in Betzner 1? No, he does not deny that. He can't. Can Craig account for why the shirt collar is occluded in Altgens but visible in Betzner, taken only a few seconds later? No, he can't. Too bad hand waving and vapor blowing aren't Olympic sports. Indiana produces champions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 The clothes doesn't matter but the geometry which proves is doesn't happpend that way. Myers know it. Hard physical evidence doesn't matter? In what other murder case would such an assertion be made? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 The jacket collar NEVER dropped, It was ALWAYs down, from Jefferies to Towner and finally to Croft. The Weaver photo, taken on the corner of Houston and Main St. 30 seconds after the Jefferies film. The top of JFK's shirt collar may possibly be visible, but otherwise the shirt collar is occluded by the jacket collar even though there are two visible indentations on the right side of the jacket. Craig Lamson claims that this photo shows the right side of JFK's jacket riding up close to his ear. I'll let the reader divine the credibility of Lamson's claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 Pure vapor. Does Craig deny that JFK's shirt collar was occluded in Altgens? No, he does not deny that. He can't. Occluded by WHAT? A fold? maybe. The jacket collar? Who knows. YOU don't. Does Craig deny that JFK's shirt collar is clearly visible in Betzner 1? No, he does not deny that. He can't. And why should it NOT be visable given the PERSPECTIVE and DIRECTION OF VIEW. Oh wait cliff does not understand something as simple as perspective. Can Craig account for why the shirt collar is occluded in Altgens but visible in Betzner, taken only a few seconds later? No, he can't. Sure I can. I can account for it perfectly. Its called PERSPECTIVE and DIRECTION OF VIEW cliff. And you simply don't have the first clue how it works. You lose again. Too bad hand waving and vapor blowing aren't Olympic sports. Indiana produces champions. How would you even know if any of this is hand waving or not. You don't understand the subject in the least. Thus your claim of hand waving a vapor blowing are the true acts of hand waving and vapor blowing. And yet another example of cliff not understanding the first thing about any of this, he is simply clueless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 The Weaver photo, taken on the corner of Houston and Main St. 30 seconds after the Jefferies film. The top of JFK's shirt collar may possibly be visible, but otherwise the shirt collar is occluded by the jacket collar even though there are two visible indentations on the right side of the jacket. Here are two more examples of JFK's jacket indenting when JFK raised his right arm. 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