David Josephs Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Paul, I don't think Armstrong worships himself. I believe he is just so totally wrapped up in his theory that maybe he can't see that there may be flaws to it. Kathy... you of all people should understand the difference between a theory and the evidence which repeatedly suggests something is up. We all know that the evidence proves Oswald was in Ping Tung - there are witnesses, guard duty stories and recaps of his USMC time which all includes time in Taiwan yet the DoD wrote the HSCA to let them know that Oswald did NOT go to Ping Tung. Why would the DoD lie about what occurred with Oswald in Taiwan given the Atsugi medical records have Oswald being treated for an STD during this entire time? Why would Gorsky claim he signed the discharge of Oswald in March 1959 and all the Oswald records were ordered to Washing DC? Who is it that Anna Lewis sees in Feb 1962 in New Orleans while Harvey is in Minsk? She repeats Jan-Apr 1962 a number of time yet Oswald was not in New Orleans until Apr 24, 1963 The bottom line Kathy is that while it is possible that these sightings are of some other Oswald impersonator, the USMC records, Taiwan, Felde, Donovan, Gorsky and on and on - JA came to find that there were two different sets of witnesses - those who knew Lee and those who knew Harvey... with precious little cross-over... I know that John appreciates the digging and clarification of the minute details... I also know that in each and every case there are arguments which can support both sides of the debate. I hope they continue to dig deeper yet start to focus their time and effort on the evidence which shows the duplicity... why would the DoD deny where Oswald was while their own confirms he was in Taiwan ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 When did his ears drop? Puberty? In case some readers here don't know it -- this discovery was first announced in 1991 by Photographer Jack White from Texas. It seems that some of y'all don't remember his first discoveries about this. Both of these photographs were made in the USSR, using a tried-and-true KGB trick for concealing identities, namely, the left-half of a face is duplicated and reversed, then pasted over the right-side of the face. Or, as in the second photo, the right-half of the face is duplicated and reversed, then pasted over the left-side of the face. That is why these two photos of Lee Harvey Oswald remind us of Oswald, and yet differ significantly. That is also why the two halves of these faces are so SYMMETRIC, which is not really natural. You can try this yourself with your own photograph sometime. It's fun to see that the left-half and right-half of our faces are actually a little bit different! Regards, --Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 When did his ears drop? Puberty? In case some readers here don't know it -- this discovery was first announced in 1991 by Photographer Jack White from Texas. It seems that some of y'all don't remember his first discoveries about this. Both of these photographs were made in the USSR, using a tried-and-true KGB trick for concealing identities, namely, the left-half of a face is duplicated and reversed, then pasted over the right-side of the face. Or, as in the second photo, the right-half of the face is duplicated and reversed, then pasted over the left-side of the face. That is why these two photos of Lee Harvey Oswald remind us of Oswald, and yet differ significantly. That is also why the two halves of these faces are so SYMMETRIC, which is not really natural. You can try this yourself with your own photograph sometime. It's fun to see that the left-half and right-half of our faces are actually a little bit different! Regards, --Paul Trejo Paul - you are so incredibly wrong about this it's embarassing. You speak with authority as if you've actually done something to support your opinions when we come to find you;ve done nothing FIRST but decalre your conclusions and THEN you go look for support. Still looking for that Hoover evidence or gave up the ghost on that one? The photo on the right was taken for his 1959 passport in Santa Ana - can you not read? The image on the left is CLAIMED to be from Minsk, yet there is not proof of the origin of the photo... If you have sources for your conclusions, post them...otherwise maybe an ouce of prevention would be worth not having to listen to you guess on every post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Paul - you are so incredibly wrong about this it's embarassing. You speak with authority as if you've actually done something to support your opinions when we come to find you;ve done nothing FIRST but decalre your conclusions and THEN you go look for support. Still looking for that Hoover evidence or gave up the ghost on that one? The photo on the right was taken for his 1959 passport in Santa Ana - can you not read? The image on the left is CLAIMED to be from Minsk, yet there is not proof of the origin of the photo... If you have sources for your conclusions, post them...otherwise maybe an ouce of prevention would be worth not having to listen to you guess on every post. Well, David, if I'm wrong about it, then so was Jack White when he first announced it in 1991. Jack White, you may recall, was the original source of the "Harvey & Lee" theory. You now admit he was wrong? Besides, anybody can tell that both of those photos were RETOUCHED. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited July 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Morrow Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? His head is clearly tilted more downward in the right photo, which would make his ears appear higher. If you don't understand how perspective works, I'm afraid there is no helping you. Mr Morrow, you berate Ray here about perspective and you claim authority while measuring a 3d dimension on a 2d image by drawing some line... there is something called photogrammetry which is a complex method for measuring objects on a 2d space which results in 3d analysis. What you did can best be called "eye-balling" it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogrammetry Photogrammetry is the science of making measurements from photographs, especially for recovering the exact positions of surface points. What you've actually done above, frankly, is a joke in relation to the comparison of two different images... personal opinions aside, this work doesn't prove your opinion, it only proves how little you know about measuring distance in photographs... Knowing something about perspective you'd also know your comment about why the ears appear "higher" is complete gibberish. (your pick line even proves the opposite of what your opinion is - it shows these people's faces are NOT the same at all... why exactly do you ignore the results of this work in the first place? You basically prove the images do not match at all, and then state the opposite as an opinion... and then get on Ray related to perspective which you completely fubar. http://commonsensephotography.com/what_is_camera_perspective/index.php Below are examples of a 24mm lens and a 200mm lens taken from the same position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography) gives you a walkthru example of different focal lengths and photographer distances to the same object... You'd also know you'd need to know much more about the taking of these images to be able to compare them at all.... How far from each camera were these images taken? With what lens do you think each was taken - 35mm, 50mm, zoomed or not - the same for each or not? What is the scale of each image to the original negative? If the two images were taken with different settings or distances of any kind it is impossible to use lines, pixels or anything else for that matter to compare or measure what is seen on the images. Maybe read up alittle about measuring distance on a 2d representation of 3d space... It's nice you think it is so easy as to just draw a few lines... sadly, that's not at all how it works. By sizing and lining up the right ear we can at least see how the two images work with each other... no measurements, just starting with a feature that is sized to match each other which SHOULD result in the faces matching each other... What we also find is that no matter what we do we cannot get LEE's dropped shoulders to match Harvey's more straight shoulders But if there is something you can do to make them match... let's see what you got. There is that fact as well that the 1959 Passport image and the image of Harvey from a week or so later do not appear too similar That is a rather lengthy rebuttle, and I don't deny that there are several factors that can influence a photograph. However, I was talking about simple perspective shifts based on head orientation relation to camera lens being able to explain ear movement outside of "puberty" as Mr. Mitchem so eloquently put it. Below is a quick and dirty rendering of the exact same head in a 3d modeling program. The head on the right has a very slight shift downward in relation to the viewing angle. Amazingly, we see an upward shift in the ears relation to the "viewing lens" of this image. I don't really know how simpler to explain it, but that is what I was attempting to point out regarding the issue with ear height variation from photo to photo. Please let me know if you disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Barking mad...! WHO IS (GREG PARKER????) He's an entity Steven. A COINTELPRO op and he's under your bed! He's in your wardrobe and he's in your shed. We all are. Watching you. Making sure you don't tell the world about the secrets that only you and the CIA know. The future of corporate America is totally dependent on making sure Steven Gaal is silenced. This is us trying to do that. But... You've rumbled us! Not for the first time we all have to ask Steven Gaal...What on earth are you talking about? This cult, note that its main proponents are religious fanatics, will go to any lengths to divert and slither away from anyone who challenges their guru. Btw, in the five years these interviews have been on You Tube none have had more than 2,000 hits, (that's about one a day!). Jeez, even my crappy songs are more popular than that! Can we just let this silliness go now and start addressing the real issue? Great job Bernie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 David Josephs said: there is something called photogrammetry which is a complex method for measuring objects on a 2d space which results in 3d analysis. What you did can best be called "eye-balling" it... That is precisely the point. What everyone is doing, including yourself David, is eyeballing. Now since your side is making the claim of two Oswalds will you kindly point us to a study based on photogrammetry conducted by scientists that supports your position. I'll save you time-there isn't one. There is however an HSCA study based on scientific principals that shows that one photo of "Harvey" and one of "Lee" are of the same individual. But you will never hear you or any of the H&L people mention that. I know, the HSCA can't be believed right? That is unless John Armstrong is using them in his book to make a point. Then they can suddenly be seen as righteous truth-tellers. Morrow is simply trying to explain that the tilt of the head, body posture, etc. can be different and explain some of the things pointed out by your true believers. The fact is, without scientific analysis any one of the presentations here is no better than the other including yours. Now I'll be waiting for your scientific presentation but I won't hold my breath. I'm sorry you can't see that they are not the same person... if you want to post the HSCA process please do... In the entirety of the Photographic section of the HSCA reference to Photogrammetry appears here in one paragaph: (376) Finally, in addition to these methods of visual inspection, the materials were studied photogrammetrically. "Photogrammetry is the science of ascertaining the positions and dimensions of objects from measurements of photographs of these objects." (162) In the Oswald backyard pictures, photogrammetry was given particular emphasis in studying critical shadow areas. When you have a chance, post the process and results of this photogrammterical analysis the HSCA panel did... as you read thru Vol 6 section B you find over and over the HSCA expert panel using lines and measurements directly from the photos... sorry, but this is not photogrammetry... Tracy - Can you refute the Department of Defense evidence which suggests the existence two different men? Stay with the DoD letter that Oswald did not go to Taiwan... Please explain who then was in Taiwan described as "Lee Harvey Oswald" while the same man is in Japan getting medical treatment... Can we all stop dicking around with any other topic you can find that means virtually nothing to the conclusion... and focus on the official evidence of duplicity? Why is there a full list of Marines who claimed they were with Harvey which the WC ignored, while those who knew Lee were included? https://books.google.com/books?id=SC-wBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=fbi+interview+of+Major+Gorsky+about+Oswald&source=bl&ots=eeXPZyMJSz&sig=W7_vGrtETy7NXgtzNv5siOZlXxM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBGoVChMIjKyk0azgxgIVhIuSCh0QVgAK#v=onepage&q=fbi%20interview%20of%20Major%20Gorsky%20about%20Oswald&f=false John Ely was supposedly given all the Oswald military records - 100 photostated pages - by Allison Folsom who got originals from William Odom Tracy - it was in these photostats that the Evidence of Oswald in Taiwan and Atsugi simultaneously is found... Armstrong did not create these docs, did not invent Gorsky, Oswald's STD or treatment, the ship which sailed to Ping Tung and back with Oswald on it's manifest, the men listed below stationed with Harvey as well as Felde's conflicts with the record and the FBI's attempt to bury them by using a different Felde.... ...the records of the USMC as offered in the Folsom and Donabedian exhibits presents this all on its own. El Toro and Santa Ana are two separate facilities. So take a little time and address these conflcits as offered by the Dept of Defense thru it's Deptuty Asst Director of Public Affairs... The Landesberg situation simply provides more corroboration for the existence of two seperate Oswalds... but the core of the case comes from the WCR evidence itself... The Evidence IS the Conspiracy... John and many others understand this... maybe you too, after some more digging into the actual meat of the evidence, will see this to be true as well. DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) BUMP Edited July 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Mr. Morrow, You prove what I said to begin with here... these computer models are identical - the same distance, same focal length, same everything EXCEPT for the head tilt... does your program allow you to move the distance from the subject while keeping everything else the same? Move back 3 feet and to the right 6 inches... then compare them.... As basic photography and perspective teaches, regardless of the lens, a photo taken from the exact same spot and distance CAN be compared and of course if there is movement in the subject it will change the perspective... but this model representation is not of the two different images you posted and then drew lines upon... There was another pseudo photo expert who used to do the same things with perspective and images to illustrate his points yet in every case we found that he used these subtle differences to his advantage. All you've shown with that terrible composite and measurement is that two images from different sources cannot be measured in 2 dimensional space to determine 3 dimensional distances... Your conclusions and text notwithstanding - we can try and resize one to match the other - but cannot do it accurately due to basic photographic problems That you used these two images and disregarded everything about photography to reach your conclusion is almost as bad as whoever did this comparion to claim they are two different men... That they are is not proven by this image or gif... that they are two different men comes from the evidence provided the WC by the Dept of Defense... Why would they claim he was in one place when their same evidence proves he wasn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? Ray, In the photo on the left his head is tilted back a little, making his ears to be lower than they actually were. Please note also that too much light in the left photo makes Oswald's face look "flatter" and therefore wider than it really was. --Tommy Edited July 16, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Could you give us a list of the "Harvey & Lee Hit Squad"? why I am trying to figure out if Jim is claiming we are an organized group or what. Tracy, You realize of course that only a paranoid person would even think that we're organized, don't you? LOL --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Paul - you are so incredibly wrong about this it's embarassing. You speak with authority as if you've actually done something to support your opinions when we come to find you;ve done nothing FIRST but decalre your conclusions and THEN you go look for support. Still looking for that Hoover evidence or gave up the ghost on that one? The photo on the right was taken for his 1959 passport in Santa Ana - can you not read? The image on the left is CLAIMED to be from Minsk, yet there is not proof of the origin of the photo... If you have sources for your conclusions, post them...otherwise maybe an ouce of prevention would be worth not having to listen to you guess on every post. Well, David, if I'm wrong about it, then so was Jack White when he first announced it in 1991. Jack White, you may recall, was the original source of the "Harvey & Lee" theory. You now admit he was wrong? Besides, anybody can tell that both of those photos were RETOUCHED. Regards, --Paul Trejo Not exactly sure how you get up each morning and try to be this incorrect about things... but there you go anyway. Jack White was under the impression that many of the faces in his poster where the composite of two people... he was aware of Palmer as was Armstrong. White supported John's work which sprung from both White's work and Palmer's statement. H&L was the result of looking at the evidence. H&L p.9 I telephoned Jack, in Fort Worth, and suggested that we gather all of our photos of Lee Harvey Oswald and put them together, chronologically, in a poster. Jack thought it was a good idea and the result was a poster that contains 77 photographs of both Oswald's, Harvey and Lee. JFK101-13 As I continued to gather documents from the Dallas Public Library, the JFK collections at UTA and TCU, the Warren Volumes, the 33 rolls of microfilm, the New Orleans Historic Collection, the National Archives in Washington, DC, and other locations, I arranged them in chronological order in 4-5 inch wide, 3-ring notebook binders (after 10 y ears of gathering documents, I have over 100 binders). I placed the "official" (Warren Commission, FBI, Dallas Police, Secret Service, etc.) documents relating to Oswald's whereabouts in one set of binders and documents relating to a 2nd "Oswald" in a different binder. By comparing documents year by year I was able to follow, and reconstruct, the lives of both "Oswald's." This is NOT what Jack said about these images at all... from his "faces of Oswald" poster he states that the "Misnk" photo is a composite, while the 1959 passport photo is not questioned or presented as a composite. Get your facts straight FIRST Paul... or will that request always fall on deaf ears? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 You speak with authority as if you've actually done something to support your opinions The irony just keeps on keepin' on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 David, I am not going to post everything the HSCA said, readers may go to the following and see: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0140a.htm I never said the HSCA study used photogrammetry, only scientific principals. I said provide your own study. No, I can not explain all of the evidence but I do not need a parallel universe to do so. The facts about if Oswald was in Taiwan or not will never be known IMO. Many facts may never be known. But there are many inconsistencies and discrepancies and these will allow Armstrong to survive for some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwUsZ8RjIqg John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 1 RE VOEBEL ============================================== some one commented licozythree 2 years ago Myra got one thing right - any photo she may have been shown was not of the boy she claims to remember. The boy she has been convinced by Armstrong was Harvey, was in fact a little kid named Bobby Newman who hung out with Oswald's friend Ed Veobel. see article on this at reopenkennedycase website ========================= ha ha !! licozythree = CIA's LICOZY3 (the CIA man on the motorcycle in Mexico city) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WHO IS licozythree (GREG PARKER ????) ,gaal ========= Could you give us a list of the "Harvey & Lee Hit Squad"? why licozythree Barking mad...! WHO IS (GREG PARKER????) He's an entity Steven. A COINTELPRO op and he's under your bed! He's in your wardrobe and he's in your shed. We all are. Watching you. Making sure you don't tell the world about the secrets that only you and the CIA know. The future of corporate America is totally dependent on making sure Steven Gaal is silenced. This is us trying to do that. But... You've rumbled us! Not for the first time we all have to ask Steven Gaal...What on earth are you talking about? This cult, note that its main proponents are religious fanatics, will go to any lengths to divert and slither away from anyone who challenges their guru. Btw, in the five years these interviews have been on You Tube none have had more than 2,000 hits, (that's about one a day!). Jeez, even my crappy songs are more popular than that! Can we just let this silliness go now and start addressing the real issue? Steve does apparently have some health issues which exempt him from having to keep within "the rules". Steve has by now, whined to the moderators btw, complaining about you stating the obvious -- that he is barking mad. Unlike the real world, being factual is no defense around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts