Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
John Butler

Robert Hughes And The Cut Apart Policeman

Recommended Posts

Thanks Chris,

There seems to be only one policeman on the corner.  I would really like to have all the frames of that bit of Hughes.

No big yellow stripes.  No sgt.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

John Martin And The Transparent Policeman

or See Through Police Helmet

marten%20the%20see%20through%20helmet_zp

Motion blurring?  Film failure?  Technical Difficulty?  Static?  Something hidden?

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Muchmore gifs that keep on giving

Phillip Willis taking slide 3:

Muchmore%207_frame_0035%20a_zpsexcr8h3i.

The next is self-explanatory:

Willis%20fantastic%20run_zpsly6v1cik.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From the Muchmore gifs that keep on giving

Both of these men are from the Marie Muchmore film.  There is a big difference in their film appearance.  This should have been posted in another topic but, we are dealing with oddities in this post.

willis%20an%20non%20see%20through%20man_

Someone claimed Willis'  see through nature shown above is just motion blurring.  The man on the right can be considered motion blurring to some extant.  Willis is a different problem because you can add to the see through nature the straight, flat head which indicates a cutout.   He is an inserted object here.

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A Modern Conspiracy?

 

I have already addressed this issue once.  However, it needs to be touched upon again.

 

Robin Unger   

  • Super Member
  •  
  •  
  • Members
  •  
  • 3,557 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted Saturday at 02:07 PM (edited) · Report post

John Butler

Why are you using FAKE composites and trying to pass them of as a single frame 

This is obviously a composite of two separate frames, you can see the line across the image where the two frames have been joined.

The Cut Apart Policeman comes from Robert Groden’s Assassination Films DVD, 1995.  I picked up this copy when I visited Dealey Plaza in July, 2015.  Groden signed the copy and then became surly and uncommunicative after some of my remarks concerning the authenticity of Zapruder.

I could not find the frame I used in other film versions.  I looked for it in the YouTube film Robert Hughes and I couldn’t find it there or Ungers version.  I hope that’s just a case of not being able to find it. Here is another copy of the frame from Groden taken with different DVD software.  I trust Groden's film even though the tech is old and the film viewing is not the best.  But, I do believe it is accurate and above board.

cut%20apart%20policeman%202_zpsewtodq8p.

The NFV in the corner of every frame is for New Frontier Video.  I guess that’s Groden’s trademark?  I hope this eases Unger’s blood pressure so his head doesn’t explode from false outrage.  lolff

 

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Butler,

You have reached a level of ignorance and stubbornness I truly never thought possible.

Your lack in understanding the physical realities of filming moving objects while the camera moves as well has spread out across this forum like a plague.

We have thread after thread where you attempt to prove or question what you see before you bother doing a simple "reality" check yet you continue on as if you're the only person to have ever seen an anomaly which was never there and contradicts the bounds of reality...

In some areas of the films and photos that indeed does happen...  yet the kinds of "error" you believe you spot are only in your mind's eye.  The rest of us see perfectly well, well enough in fact that your presentations actually make me physically ill they are so poor.

I honestly can't tell if you're playing with yourself here too much and we're all not in on your little joke... or you truly are this deaf, dumb and blind.  Only a complete idiot keeps up with the sell job you are trying to pass of as your "work" and believes a contribution is being made.

"FAKE" composites?  your really have just fallen off the banana-boat, haven't you...  

I know the moderators are powerless.  You simply can't fix stupid and your Mr. Br have taken that to a whole new level.

====

Here's a thought.  When those with years and years of experience question your pitiful opinions with logic, sense and image maybe you'd consider LEARNING a little something rather than keep pi$$ing into the wind and covering yourself with your own excrement...

Then again, maybe you're just too ignorant to know how stupid your presentations are.   You actually try to convince me that the woman with grey hair becomes Hill and the woman in blue without white pants becomes Moorman.

And then you get insulted when your betters show you differently...   You're either a great COINTELPRO agent for continuously interrupting these threads with complete nonsense... or you're too lost to know any better...  I'm thinking the latter, even agents know better than that...

Please give it a rest JB.  Regroup maybe and learn about film, light, speed, aperture, and cameras...  LEARN first, open mouth and insert your foot later...  Please.

Hill and Moorman compared to the SW corner of Elm-Houston.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi David,

I'm really glad I haven't heard from you in awhile, months.  Have you been saving up your venom and spite?  I can see the Mary Moorman notion is still bothering you.  You must have seen my ideas as really bothersome.

Cointelpro agent?  I can see whose losing control here. Do you really think there are such people on this site?

What's to learn about a faked frame such as the one in my last post.  You guys whip out camera angles and focus like a six-shooter when someone doesn't agree with you.  Or, you see something that is threatening to your position. 

Go talk to Robin Unger about "FAKE" composites?  your really have just fallen off the banana-boat, haven't you...  ".   Maybe you can start helping him warp and distort things that I post.  Oh, you have already done that.

The moderators are not powerless.  They can shut me down at anytime they choose for any reason and I won't complain.  You and Unger prove the "fake composite" charges to them.  Your an old hand here.  Report it.  And, while your at it report yourself for breaking the forum rules.  I've decided not to do that anymore.  People need to read posts such as yours so that they can clearly see what type of person you are

Your gush of vituperative invective is something I dealt with many times with middle school children.  They grow out of it.  Seems you haven't.

 

 

 

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Mr. Butler,

You have reached a level of ignorance and stubbornness I truly never thought possible.

Your lack in understanding the physical realities of filming moving objects while the camera moves as well has spread out across this forum like a plague.

We have thread after thread where you attempt to prove or question what you see before you bother doing a simple "reality" check yet you continue on as if you're the only person to have ever seen an anomaly which was never there and contradicts the bounds of reality...

In some areas of the films and photos that indeed does happen...  yet the kinds of "error" you believe you spot are only in your mind's eye.  The rest of us see perfectly well, well enough in fact that your presentations actually make me physically ill they are so poor.

I honestly can't tell if you're playing with yourself here too much and we're all not in on your little joke... or you truly are this deaf, dumb and blind.  Only a complete idiot keeps up with the sell job you are trying to pass of as your "work" and believes a contribution is being made.

"FAKE" composites?  your really have just fallen off the banana-boat, haven't you...  

I know the moderators are powerless.  You simply can't fix stupid and your Mr. Br have taken that to a whole new level.

====

Here's a thought.  When those with years and years of experience question your pitiful opinions with logic, sense and image maybe you'd consider LEARNING a little something rather than keep pi$$ing into the wind and covering yourself with your own excrement...

Then again, maybe you're just too ignorant to know how stupid your presentations are.   You actually try to convince me that the woman with grey hair becomes Hill and the woman in blue without white pants becomes Moorman.

And then you get insulted when your betters show you differently...   You're either a great COINTELPRO agent for continuously interrupting these threads with complete nonsense... or you're too lost to know any better...  I'm thinking the latter, even agents know better than that...

Please give it a rest JB.  Regroup maybe and learn about film, light, speed, aperture, and cameras...  LEARN first, open mouth and insert your foot later...  Please.

Hill and Moorman compared to the SW corner of Elm-Houston.jpg

Are you guys seeing what I am seeing just behind and between MM and JH? I see a guy with a green gun, he's dressed in all green, camouflaged, real hard to see. I think we should call him All Green Man (AGM). He looks as guilty as sin to me. I wonder if the commission tracked him down?

Cheers,

Michael

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So John Butler instead of owning up to his dishonesty regarding the Hughes composite frame, ducks and weaves and instead shifts the blame to Groden.

 

hughes corner badly edited 1_zpsnbtfyxcj.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Butler said:

Hi David,

I'm really glad I haven't heard from you in awhile, months.  Have you been saving up your venom and spite?  I can see the Mary Moorman notion is still bothering you.  You must have seen my ideas as really bothersome.

Cointelpro agent?  I can see whose losing control here. Do you really think there are such people on this site?

What's to learn about a faked frame such as the one in my last post.  You guys whip out camera angles and focus like a six-shooter when someone doesn't agree with you.  Or, you see something that is threatening to your position. 

Go talk to Robin Unger about "FAKE" composites?  your really have just fallen off the banana-boat, haven't you...  ".   Maybe you can start helping him warp and distort things that I post.  Oh, you have already done that.

The moderators are not powerless.  They can shut me down at anytime they choose for any reason and I won't complain.  You and Unger prove the "fake composite" charges to them.  Your an old hand here.  Report it.  And, while your at it report yourself for breaking the forum rules.  I've decided not to do that anymore.  People need to read posts such as yours so that they can clearly see what type of person you are

Your gush of vituperative invective is something I dealt with many times with middle school children.  They grow out of it.  Seems you haven't.

 

 

 

:rolleyes:  :lol:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Butler said:

Robin, 

You should recognize the software containing the Groden frame and know it is an authentic frame.

But, go ahead on with your corrupt practices.  The viewers of this conversation will be the judge of your honesty.

Josephs said you can't fix stupid.  We'll, boys you can't cure crookedness either.

Go back and re-read my posts.

The Groden frame is NOT authentic.

it is an anomaly made from a combination of two separate Hughes frames.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×