Jump to content
The Education Forum
Guest Duncan MacRae

PRAYER PERSON - PRAYER MAN OR PRAYER WOMAN? RESEARCH THREAD

Recommended Posts

Just a couple of thoughts while I'm waiting to hear from my webmaster, with 3 precise mechanical drawings ready to post.

I got the same 20 degree angle between PrayerMan and the west wall that Drew Phipps & Albert Doyle arrived at- I don't know how they got theirs, but mine is close to 20.0 degrees.

This led to only about a 1.02% adjustment (to PM's height because of increased distance) whether Darnell was set at 70, 75 or 80 feet from Frazier. Earlier, setting Darnell at only 46 feet, I had thought the adjustment was about 2%. So their positions, with respect to Darnell's camera, are even more accurately considered as "coplanar".

Basic trigonometry told us, at 20 degrees and at the edge of a 4-foot landing, that PM was 1.5 feet from the west wall. But I haven't seen the following point yet mentioned: the shoulders are about one-foot in width, and a raised elbow adds a further one-foot to body-width.

So when PM raises his elbow in Wiegman, the elbow is extremely close to the west wall. PM needs one-foot available for this elbow-raise and has to be at the edge of the landing, as far from the corner as possible- otherwise his elbow would knock against the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have hopes of getting those drawings posted today. My webmaster said he received them. In the meantime, a fresh argument has occurred to me against the contention that PrayerMan is on the 1st step. So this is in addition to the preposterously-long legs that ensue from a body-proportion comparison with Tie Man.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,8916.4520.html

In the Wiegman gif, PrayerMan stays at the same level, whereas Lovelady raises himself from the 1st step onto the landing. While on the 1st step, the 5'8" Lovelady is several inches below the top of PrayerMan's head. But when he rises onto the landing, Lovelady is a couple of inches above PrayerMan's head.

If PrayerMan were the 5'9" Oswald standing on the 1st step, he would appear approximately equal in height to the 1st-step Lovelady. And close to a step-riser shorter when Lovelady rises onto the landing.

But we don't see that. We see a person shorter than the 5'8" Lovelady, standing on the landing throughout the Wiegman gif.

Edited by Richard Gilbride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have hopes of getting those drawings posted today. My webmaster said he received them. In the meantime, a fresh argument has occurred to me against the contention that PrayerMan is on the 1st step. So this is in addition to the preposterously-long legs that ensue from a body-proportion comparison with Tie Man.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,8916.4520.html

In the Wiegman gif, PrayerMan stays at the same level, whereas Lovelady raises himself from the 1st step onto the landing. While on the 1st step, the 5'8" Lovelady is several inches below the top of PrayerMan's head. But when he rises onto the landing, Lovelady is a couple of inches above PrayerMan's head.

If PrayerMan were the 5'9" Oswald standing on the 1st step, he would appear approximately equal in height to the 1st-step Lovelady. And close to a step-riser shorter when Lovelady rises onto the landing.

But we don't see that. We see a person shorter than the 5'8" Lovelady, standing on the landing throughout the Wiegman gif.

Albert, "Buttons" Doyle is complaining that you haven't credited him with helping you with your work, Richard.

Quote

" Without crediting me, I see Gilbride has finally made the point I was asking him to make days ago when he was buddying with Stancak. That Unger's Wiegman gif clearly refutes the Prayer Person one step down claim."

Tut tut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Lovelady does not raise himself, he lowers himself. Yes really!

Furthermore your interpretation of Lovelady being several inches shorter in that GIF than PM (meaning Oswald) has to be taken with a massive grain of salt.

If anything that gif shows them standing on the same level (first step down, Shelley is on the landing behind Lovelady!) and them two being near equal height.

Cool Oswald was standing one step below as I already pointed out yonks ago. This blows Fratini's fairy tale and Doyles lies completely out of the water.

Edited by Bart Kamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Chris- I had Lovelady's movements backwards.

Bart, you do not address the point I raised. Lovelady, when he is on the 1st step, is a good 4 inches below the top of PrayerMan's head. If the 5'9" Oswald and the 5'8" Lovelady were both standing on the 1st step, their heights would be approximately the same. They're not, and so they're not both on the 1st step. Only Lovelady is.

Ray, unbeknownst to your daddy, "Buttons" Doyle, I was playing Stancak like a python. You seem more interested in spreading malicious gossip, rather than admitting that Doyle's simple insights completely refute Murphy's misbegotten thesis.

If Sean had done a height analysis before he went off and running with eliminating TSBD employees one by one, this PrayerMan debacle would've been nipped in the bud two years ago. Now it's grown into a politically-charged monster, where it's become dangerous to express a dissenting opinion, at the risk of ROKC's ClockworkOrange-style intimidation. Nincompoop blowhards who should be kept miles away from mainstream assassination research. They bet the farm on this and lost. It's going to take some serious character growth for them to acknowledge this loss and move forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Richard,

I do address exactly what you are putting forward, it's you who is not understanding what is going on here. The fact that you are missing that Lovelady moves downwards (for leaving steps no doubt!) and is NOT standing on the top landing is telling for your ability to interpret a photo/film. Utter failure, and you want people to take you serious? Even when not having the balls or decency to admit your mistake? Right....

They look almost of the same height while standing on the 1st step down next to each other.

You are just making it up that there is 4 inches difference without putting anything on the table to support this.

Anyone else with a tad of common sense can see that

1/ There is no height analysis you and Albert Doyle are just making this up! Doyle has been lying since Sept 2015 about anything Prayer Man related nor has he put anything of substance forward.

2 /They look of very similar height, which makes the case, once again, even more likely for it to be Oswald.

3/ The elimination of the TSBD employees was most definitely the way forward than your guessing game.Thanks to Sean Murphy and Richard Hocking (he deserves more credit than he has been given).

4/Since it is you who has brought ROKC up and be a condescending individual once again, allow me to retort in kind. ROKC did the best thing ever by addressing your rubbish and then some, and you will disagree no doubt. But this thread revolving around the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter where the bucket load of speculations and lies (like Doyle) by you are exposed and dealt with will for anyone who is interested be very telling and show what you are actually made of.

And in all that time you have not learned nor changed much.

One more thing that 2nd floor nonsense you propagate here and at the old ROKC forum will be addressed in May one more time, strap in dude your hoaxing will be addressed in minute detail!

edit: spelling and grammar.

Edited by Bart Kamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Chris- I had Lovelady's movements backwards.

Ray, unbeknownst to your daddy, "Buttons" Doyle, I was playing Stancak like a python. You seem more interested in spreading malicious gossip, rather than admitting that Doyle's simple insights completely refute Murphy's misbegotten thesis.

In no way was I spreading "malicious gossip". I was giving you the opportunity to either confirm what "Buttons" Doyle" said, i.e. that you hadn't credited him with his helping you, or to deny it.

If what he said was true, you owe him an apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Chris- I had Lovelady's movements backwards.

Bart, you do not address the point I raised. Lovelady, when he is on the 1st step, is a good 4 inches below the top of PrayerMan's head. If the 5'9" Oswald and the 5'8" Lovelady were both standing on the 1st step, their heights would be approximately the same. They're not, and so they're not both on the 1st step. Only Lovelady is.

Ray, unbeknownst to your daddy, "Buttons" Doyle, I was playing Stancak like a python. You seem more interested in spreading malicious gossip, rather than admitting that Doyle's simple insights completely refute Murphy's misbegotten thesis.

If Sean had done a height analysis before he went off and running with eliminating TSBD employees one by one, this PrayerMan debacle would've been nipped in the bud two years ago. Now it's grown into a politically-charged monster, where it's become dangerous to express a dissenting opinion, at the risk of ROKC's ClockworkOrange-style intimidation. Nincompoop blowhards who should be kept miles away from mainstream assassination research. They bet the farm on this and lost. It's going to take some serious character growth for them to acknowledge this loss and move forward.

If Oswald, at 5'9" (69"), was standing on the top step, and Lovelady, at 5'8" (68"), was on the next step down, and each step was approximately 7+" higher than the next, wouldn't the 1" difference in height, plus the 7" difference in steps, mean that there should be an easily apparent 8" difference in height between the two men?

Just sayin'......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bart Kamp: ...The fact that you are missing that Lovelady moves downwards (for leaving steps no doubt) and is NOT standing on the top landing is telling for your ability to interpret photo/film... Even when not having the balls or decency to admit your mistake?

This is getting typical of your style, Bart, that you make a false accusation that I have to labor to defend against. Did you not read, or comprehend, the first line of my post, thanking Chris Davidson for showing me I had Lovelady's movements backwards?

...They look almost of the same height while standing on the 1st step down next to each other. You are just making it up that there is 4 inches difference without putting anything on the table to support this...

Almost of the same height??? You need your eyes checked. Lovelady looks almost half a head shorter. Why don't you put something on the table to support this "almost" contention?

Robert Prudhomme seems to be getting the point I made- the height disparity, that we easily discern in the movements of the Wiegman gif, between Lovelady & PrayerMan, cannot be attributed to the 5'9" Oswald.

I walk in my integrity, Bart. Did John Barleycorn take yours?

************************************************************

The Doyle-MacRae photo-theorem may be summarised as follows:

1) Two forensic facts in the Wiegman gif oblige us to situate PrayerMan at the front edge of the landing.

These are: a) a disproportionately-narrow portion of the west wall is visible left of his raised elbow. B) the glass panel's vertical border-strip is visible at the right of his shoulder.

Trigonometric estimates from the Darnell entranceway image situate him about a foot and a half from the west wall. This is close to the minimum space required, from body proportions, for freely lifting the elbow.

2) We are further obliged, from Wiegman, to dismiss any possibility that PrayerMan is on the first step down. Lovelady, when he is on the first step, is several inches lower than PrayerMan, but he is slightly higher when he moves up to the landing.

Not only does PrayerMan remain stationary, but the known heights of Lovelady & Oswald rule out any possibility that PrayerMan could be on the first step.

3) And so we have a firm basis for comparing the height of PrayerMan with the known height of Frazier, who was standing only about 3 feet away. They were both in the neighborhood of 75 feet from Darnell's camera, nearly equidistant. PrayerMan was close to a full head shorter and cannot be the 5'9" Oswald.

****************************************

I don't think the community quite realizes the enormity of what Albert Doyle has achieved. Let me explain. He has saved us $10,000 or more in fund-raising, for getting a digital scan made of Darnell- rental, transport, operator fees, lawyer fees to gain access, haggling with the 6th Floor Museum- months of headaches coordinating getting the scan done, and many more months of computer analysis of the scan by film experts.

He is a sharp, tough cookie and has put up with months of petty abuse. Duncan MacRae brought us the photo-acuity to spur the dissenting opinion, but Albert's cerebral-acuity and tenacity has captained the photo-theorem that gives the proper interpretation of the PrayerMan image- way too short to be Oswald.

There's no "ungetting" the height argument once you "get it". That process works similar to this- I recently looked at a print of the Andrew Wyeth masterpiece Christina's World, while removing a storm window in a house I"m working on. The painting has special meaning to me because I gave my mother a copy 43 Christmases ago. I must have examined that painting a dozen times since then. This was the first time I ever noticed the ladder against the house on the hill. Now it's imprinted in my mind.

http://www.whrtny.com/2009/02/christinas-world-at-moma.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is typical of you Richard, all mouth and no substance, like Doyle. You use some fancy terms but it amounts to nothing, you sure you are not in politics or marketing?

It is time everyone understands what all this is actually about.

"I had Lovelady's movements backwards?" is admitting your mistake? Some way of showing you have been wrong, you address Chris, but it was me you should have been addressing with that colourful lingo, too big for admitting so?

There is no MacRae-Doyle theory, there is no analysis either, and if there is show it to us here and now.

I mean links!

I mean Doyle posting pictures/graphics/anything!

You cannot as Doyle has never posted anything as such. Doyle is morally corrupt and lies through his teeth, he disavows people at DPF and then uses their 'work' at MacRae's. Drew Phipps' make it up as I go story is one shining example. Pure guesswork, or better yet junk science which amounts to nothing.

Doyle is slagging Jim Dieugenio off at MacRae’s yet tries to converse with him in a normal manner at DPF he has been cold shouldered there ever since his return, and rightly so. The forum admins should have chucked him out a few weeks ago, but they resisted, why?

Two/three years ago Greg Burnham and Charles Drago left purely because of him. For the record I am no fan of them two but I completely understand their reaction to Doyle’s Fetzerian BS.

Bob Prudhomme, David Josephs and David Healy all can attest to Doyle’s rubbish, none are ROKCers, I can state that there’s no love lost between them and ROKC

I left myself in Sept as I could not understand why this tr0ll is allowed free reign over there

Really quit talking dude and point me and everyone else to the posts by Doyle where he (not anyone else) shows the goods brought to the table. Try not to talk yourself out of this one, show us the goods!

MacRae's rubbish was debunkend and spat out months ago

His Prayer Woman theory has been torn a new one and then some, him deleting all his 'work' speaks volumes by itself. Him manipulating a poll and reposting it here is further evidence of his deceit.

The fact that you post that MacRae and Doyle together have solved something speaks volumes.about your observational skills, but I think you have an agenda instead.

MacRae came up with the Prayer Woman rubbish, Doyle supported him, only for MacRae to withdraw, after being debunked and then Doyle starts talking about heights and distances, and calling a wide angle lens standard and so forth page after page, issues he has absolutely no knowledge off.

He cannot even post a picture at any forum and you give this person credit? This makes you as ‘credible’ as him, better yet I accuse you of trolling this thread purely out of spite!

Doyle has been attacked by CTers and LNers for his incessant trolling for months. He was chucked out for a month at DPF only for him to appear at MaCRae’s and obliterated the Prayer Person thread by Ian Kingsbury (which was actually called “You Ain’t Got A Prayer Man” which was changed by MacRae). There are more than 200 pages with his rubbish trolling, if you support that type of ‘research’ then we all know now what you stand for as well.

Ray Mitcham can attest for this, so can Bob Prudhomme. They asked him on several ocassions to show the goods, so have LNers as Fratini and Mytton. And no one ever got a reply, and if there is I’d like to see it.

You should count yourself out for trying to obtain this particular mage, as hard as it may be to nab this scan you shouldn't bother getting involved. We don’t need people like you, as a matter of fact you are a heavy burden on this case. So relieve yourself regarding this particular matter, it’s for the best.

Besides having a massive ROKC grudge I seriously suspect you just rather talk about all this until the cows come home.

Where are your calculations Richard, your webmaster is he on holiday?

How difficult is it to post this stuff? Zip it all up and post a download link for anyone interested to check it out.

Regarding the photographs, you have no skills or qualifications in that direction whatsoever you suck this out of your thumb without posting any additional evidence. Put up or shut up!

Since you have such superior skills, I have no doubt you will be able to point with a set of pix all these height differences out since my eyes need checking out. Go on show us all!!!

So let’s recap this shall we Richard ?

1/Post the analysis/research by Albert Doyle regarding the height(s), sun planes, calculations you name it that proves beyond a reasonable doubt what he has been claiming. Something that has not been acknowledged by anyone else at any forum but you. SHOW US HIS WORK!

2/Show your measurements/distances as promised upload it with wetransfer and paste the link in here, I am dying to see it. So is everyone else. Don’t use fancy words to explain, we all need to see the ground work.

3/Show a set of photographs that support your assertion regarding the height and position of Oswald compared to Lovelady.

That’s three challenges for you there, looks like a long night ahead for you, but I doubt you will be able to since it is all spiteful talk with a massive grudge against us at ROKC, seems that the second floor debacle you have been propagating and which you lied your way through two years ago is still hurting.

Let’s up the stakes shall we?

If you post all three to a certain degree of satisfaction which I shall leave to other members to decide whether that is the case, and if so then I will tender my resignation as a member here, but if you cannot then you should go and not ever come back here.

How’s that? Like those odds? I do!

Edited by Bart Kamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard Gilbride said:

"Robert Prudhomme seems to be getting the point I made- the height disparity, that we easily discern in the movements of the Wiegman gif, between Lovelady & PrayerMan, cannot be attributed to the 5'9" Oswald."

In your enthusiasm to find people to agree with you, I believe you have seriously misinterpreted what I said to you in Post # 174, quoted in entirety below:

"If Oswald, at 5'9" (69"), was standing on the top step, and Lovelady, at 5'8" (68"), was on the next step down, and each step was approximately 7+" higher than the next, wouldn't the 1" difference in height, plus the 7" difference in steps, mean that there should be an easily apparent 8" difference in height between the two men?

Just sayin'......"

The above is in response to your assertion that, with Oswald on the top step, and the one inch shorter Lovelady on the step below him, there was a four inch difference in height between the two men.

If what you are saying is true, and Oswald was one inch taller than Lovelady, this means there could only be a three inch difference in height between the individual steps of the front steps of the TSBD. This is impossible, as Ray Mitcham has already established each step was just over seven inches in height.

Using your logic, should we not see an eight inch difference in height between Oswald and Lovelady? Does this not prove that camera perspectives can greatly distort images, and make possible the illusion that Frazier is over a head taller than Oswald in Darnell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bart Kamp: ...The fact that you are missing that Lovelady moves downwards (for leaving steps no doubt) and is NOT standing on the top landing is telling for your ability to interpret photo/film... Even when not having the balls or decency to admit your mistake?

This is getting typical of your style, Bart, that you make a false accusation that I have to labor to defend against. Did you not read, or comprehend, the first line of my post, thanking Chris Davidson for showing me I had Lovelady's movements backwards?

...They look almost of the same height while standing on the 1st step down next to each other. You are just making it up that there is 4 inches difference without putting anything on the table to support this...

Almost of the same height??? You need your eyes checked. Lovelady looks almost half a head shorter. Why don't you put something on the table to support this "almost" contention?

Robert Prudhomme seems to be getting the point I made- the height disparity, that we easily discern in the movements of the Wiegman gif, between Lovelady & PrayerMan, cannot be attributed to the 5'9" Oswald.

I walk in my integrity, Bart. Did John Barleycorn take yours?

************************************************************

The Doyle-MacRae photo-theorem may be summarised as follows:

1) Two forensic facts in the Wiegman gif oblige us to situate PrayerMan at the front edge of the landing.

These are: a) a disproportionately-narrow portion of the west wall is visible left of his raised elbow. B) the glass panel's vertical border-strip is visible at the right of his shoulder.

Trigonometric estimates from the Darnell entranceway image situate him about a foot and a half from the west wall. This is close to the minimum space required, from body proportions, for freely lifting the elbow.

2) We are further obliged, from Wiegman, to dismiss any possibility that PrayerMan is on the first step down. Lovelady, when he is on the first step, is several inches lower than PrayerMan, but he is slightly higher when he moves up to the landing.

Not only does PrayerMan remain stationary, but the known heights of Lovelady & Oswald rule out any possibility that PrayerMan could be on the first step.

3) And so we have a firm basis for comparing the height of PrayerMan with the known height of Frazier, who was standing only about 3 feet away. They were both in the neighborhood of 75 feet from Darnell's camera, nearly equidistant. PrayerMan was close to a full head shorter and cannot be the 5'9" Oswald.

****************************************

I don't think the community quite realizes the enormity of what Albert Doyle has achieved. Let me explain. He has saved us $10,000 or more in fund-raising, for getting a digital scan made of Darnell- rental, transport, operator fees, lawyer fees to gain access, haggling with the 6th Floor Museum- months of headaches coordinating getting the scan done, and many more months of computer analysis of the scan by film experts.

He is a sharp, tough cookie and has put up with months of petty abuse. Duncan MacRae brought us the photo-acuity to spur the dissenting opinion, but Albert's cerebral-acuity and tenacity has captained the photo-theorem that gives the proper interpretation of the PrayerMan image- way too short to be Oswald.

There's no "ungetting" the height argument once you "get it". That process works similar to this- I recently looked at a print of the Andrew Wyeth masterpiece Christina's World, while removing a storm window in a house I"m working on. The painting has special meaning to me because I gave my mother a copy 43 Christmases ago. I must have examined that painting a dozen times since then. This was the first time I ever noticed the ladder against the house on the hill. Now it's imprinted in my mind.

http://www.whrtny.com/2009/02/christinas-world-at-moma.html

Richard, RoKC are trying every avenue to get that film.

What exactly have you done to help? Have you contacted the 6th Floor Museum or NBC Archives? An email? Anything? You've been on here for months now debating the issue so obviously you think it's important. So, what have you actually done?

You're an author with a reputation. Why don't you add your voice to the chorus trying to batter down the doors of NBC Archives and the 6th Floor Museum?

Edited by Vanessa Loney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Chris- I had Lovelady's movements backwards.

Bart, you do not address the point I raised. Lovelady, when he is on the 1st step, is a good 4 inches below the top of PrayerMan's head. If the 5'9" Oswald and the 5'8" Lovelady were both standing on the 1st step, their heights would be approximately the same. They're not, and so they're not both on the 1st step. Only Lovelady is.

Ray, unbeknownst to your daddy, "Buttons" Doyle, I was playing Stancak like a python. You seem more interested in spreading malicious gossip, rather than admitting that Doyle's simple insights completely refute Murphy's misbegotten thesis.

If Sean had done a height analysis before he went off and running with eliminating TSBD employees one by one, this PrayerMan debacle would've been nipped in the bud two years ago. Now it's grown into a politically-charged monster, where it's become dangerous to express a dissenting opinion, at the risk of ROKC's ClockworkOrange-style intimidation. Nincompoop blowhards who should be kept miles away from mainstream assassination research. They bet the farm on this and lost. It's going to take some serious character growth for them to acknowledge this loss and move forward.

"I was playing Stancak like a python"

Sorry to read this, Mr. Gilbride. You clearly do not realise that your attitudes towards other forum members are very problematic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll never understand why folks take a simple photo interpretation and make it much more complicated and convoluted than it needs to be. All you have to do is watch the GIF and things become very clear.


First, simply look at the black guy and then the lady with her hand up shielding her eyes from the sun. Watch them both in the GIF - back and forth and back again. Between the two GIF frames, they barely or hardly move at all. Also, look at the "BOOK" word carved in at the top of the entrance. Because "BOOK" are neatly aligned between the two images, we now know they're lined up well. These three benchmarks - black guy, shielding eyes lady, and BOOK on the building, are excellent sources because they do not move between the two images. Thus, any movement elsewhere between the two images, can be analyzed better.


Next, look at the PM/Oswald figure. Between the two GIF images, his body does not move except his arm, which is raised. Could he be taking a drink from his Coke bottle? Who know, seems likely, but we'll never know for sure so there's no use in speculating it to death. But it's obvious he's moving his arm upward.


So now you have four good benchmarks in your photo interpretation. There's no need for trigonometry, math rules, and so on.


The final interpretation is Lovelady. As seen in one of the GIF images, it's clear he's leaning outward from his stance and looking down Elm similar to his leaning outward stance as seen in the Altgens photo. The next photo of him in the GIF his head drops downward, which tells me he probably took a step downward from his leaning outward stance. His head also appears to have turned as if he's turned his gaze from Elm (like in Altgens) and is looking at the other cars coming toward him on Houston.


At this point, you have a pretty good interpretation. The work the PM people put into this, especially the document trying to account for everyone who was in the TSBD, is outstanding. The work they did to show the fudging of Baker's testimony is also outstanding. And the clincher, for me, is Oswald's own words:


“Out with Bill Shelley in front.” **


** Fritz notes were not mentioned by the Warren Commission and were hidden from the public until 1997


It's convinced me that the guy raising his arm was Oswald, the man we all know was set up to take the fall for the murder. Does it really matter if the PM figure is standing 3 feet, or 4, or 1 1/2, away from the wall? Why should it matter? Watch the GIF and have faith that the images are telling you what's happening in them.



Edited by Michael Walton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...