Thomas Graves Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Bart Kamp said: And that non darkened version is the correct version? The one without any proper contrast? For who Michael? You? Everything you say in the post above can be given a 180 and used against you. You do understand that don't you. Now there's a surprise! A paint job is always different compared to artefacts from a transfer from video. Please do your homework and adjust your beliefs accordingly. For the record I do not give a hoot about H&L. And Tom stop fantasising dude, this forum is filled to the brim with your 'dreams' , enough already. Bart, With all due respect, are you so paranoid and such a bad reader as to think that I was somehow trying to support the Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites "theory" in my last post? Did that photo appear in the school's yearbook, or not? If so, I've offered a plausible explanation as to how such an amateurish touch up / photo alteration job was done on it (probably by a student) in an attempt to "show" that Oswald had lost one or two teeth, but did such a lousy job that it looks as though he lost 2.5 of them, and that he had some kind of horrible shin cancer on his lower lip, as well (nice "find," by the way). Btw, ... Ever find Gloria Calvery in Zapruder? Do you believe Nosenko was a true defector? (lol) Why did Duran and Azcue describe a (probably imaginary) Oswald impostor in such a way as to so closely resemble KGB colonel Nikolai Leonov? Hmm? Etc, etc, -- Tommy PS As far as I'm concerned, you can take your crummy, Josephs-like attitude and ..... it up your ....... ... . Edited March 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 7 hours ago, Bart Kamp said: A paint job is always different compared to artefacts from a transfer from video. Please do your homework and adjust your beliefs accordingly. Come on Bart nothing has been painted in. Someone took the photo and darkened it and when they did it darkened all of the other subtler shades too causing the blob. Do I really need to explain this after all of the BS posted about PM? You should know better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 HAVE YOU NOTICED BART? THE CHILDREN ARE GETTING UPPITY... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 1 hour ago, David Josephs said: HAVE YOU NOTICED BART? THE CHILDREN ARE GETTING UPPITY.. Why of course we are! We know better and can distinguish fact from fiction! LOL!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) DEL Edited March 1, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 1, 2018 Share Posted March 1, 2018 1 hour ago, David Josephs said: HAVE YOU NOTICED BART? THE CHILDREN ARE GETTING UPPITY... 13 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: Why of course we are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 My Nexus 6P doesn’t have a macro mode, but earlier today I put the phone as close to page 70 of LIFE mag’s 2/21/64 edition as would focus in the natural light, and took the following shot. The halftone dots are clearly visible. I’m wondering if it isn’t the tip of LEE Oswald’s tongue that is visible behind his missing tooth. No doubt H&L critics will whine and cry and disagree. Here’s the full image…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, David Josephs said: ....... HAVE YOU NOTICED BART? THE CHILDREN ARE GETTING UPPITY.. -- posted by David Joseph 4 hours ago ----------------------------------------------------- David, With all due respect, what could be more childish than (paranoiacally?) tilting ones head down at such a sharp angle as to not even be close to looking towards the camera for your JFK Assassination Debate "profile" photo, "yelling" in upper-case letters, flooding posts with different kinds of silly emoticons (plural), and trying to belittle your opponent by writing the first letter of his or her name with a lower-case letter? -- Tommy Edited March 2, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Jim - thanks for using the better photo not the artificially darkened one. The blow up and the regular sized one confirm for me several things. First, the camera definitely had a flash on it. Look at the girl sitting next to LHO and you can see the stark shadows from it. The flash also was not powerful enough to illuminate the entire room which is why further in the BG the lighting of the room gets dimmer. The blow up confirms several things for me as well. The photo is made up of dots - as is to be expected - but there's still plenty of detail; for example, you can see a glimmer/shine in LHO's eyes. This means they're not blobs but actual shine, most probably from the flash. And most telling of all, there is NOT a missing tooth. You can clearly see where the camera flash caught a tooth where the Hardly Gang thinks there's a missing one. Yes it's dark but my guess is maybe he colored his tooth with a pencil blacking it out. It's also why you see him hamming it up as the photo was taken. If he had NOT blackened his tooth, then he would not have had a reason to give a clownish pose and smile like that. But he darkened his tooth then made his goofy pose revealing his colored in tooth for this photo. As Tracy Parnell says here numerous times, the much simpler explanations have the more "ring of truth" in them. And no matter what Larson says to create further subterfuge here, two different dental charts DO NOT show X's on any of the front teeth, and the exhumation photos show teeth in the skull. Meaning one thing - no missing teeth. Meaning something else - only one LHO. Of course the Hardly Gang, being that you're all living in your alternative universe, will not agree with this. Which is fine but just remember - when you throw the REC switch in an automobile, you're not turning on a magic gas-guzzling motor in your car; the "ring of truth" explanation is the correct one - you're just recirculating the same air again to make it colder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 10 hours ago, Michael Walton said: Yes it's dark but my guess is maybe he colored his tooth with a pencil blacking it out. It's also why you see him hamming it up as the photo was taken. If he had NOT blackened his tooth, then he would not have had a reason to give a clownish pose and smile like that. But he darkened his tooth then made his goofy pose revealing his colored in tooth for this photo. As Tracy Parnell says here numerous times, the much simpler explanations have the more "ring of truth" in them Actually, you are the one who has to come up with weird explanations again and again. Either that, or you have to admit that a lot of evidence for two Oswalds slipped through J. Edgar Hoover’s dragnet. In this case, here’s what you have to believe: Ed Voebel and LEE Oswald made a gag photo by darkening Oswald’s tooth so that... uh... hmmm... years later Voebel would get the opportunity to perjure himself at the Warren Commission by saying he thought Oswald lost a tooth in the attack. You also have to take a cue from Greg Parker and claim that U.S. Marine Corps dentists classified liquid dental sealants as false teeth (prosthetics), as you say they did right here: You also have to assume that it’s just a wacky coincidence that two of Oswald’s upper front teeth in a photo taken the exact same year as the prosthetics failed notation looked like this: To read Sandy’s interesting theory about that, CLICK HERE. The rest of your “analysis” and your usual name-calling is irrelevant. If Voebel took the classroom with a flash, rather than available light, why is the front of the room as bright as the objects closest to the camera? The inverse square law states, as one example, that the intensity of illumination changes in inverse proportion to the square of the distance from the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: To read Sandy’s interesting theory about that, CLICK HERE. The rest of your “analysis” and your usual name-calling is irrelevant. If Voebel took the classroom with a flash, rather than available light, why is the front of the room as bright as the objects closest to the camera? The inverse square law states, as one example, that the intensity of illumination changes in inverse proportion to the square of the distance from the source. It was with a flash Jim. If you can't see it, then you (and others) are simply blind and I'm not going to take time to put an arrow in the photo to point it out because you and others STILL won't see the light, so to speak. And this pretty much sums up the entire "he said, she said" narrative of the Hardly story, Jim. You won't even admit now that the photo was taken with a flash (and therefore, maybe...just maybe I'm right about the shine on a darkened tooth). You won't admit it even when it's plain as day. So if you can't even admit this, there's no way we can ever expect you or others to admit that your Hardly story is full of malarkey. Everyone has called each other names on here, Jim. You're no exception so it's pretty much par for the course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 14 hours ago, Thomas Graves said: HAVE YOU NOTICED BART? THE CHILDREN ARE GETTING UPPITY.. -- posted by David Joseph 4 hours ago ----------------------------------------------------- David, With all due respect, what could be more childish than (paranoiacally?) tilting ones head down at such a sharp angle as to not even be close to looking towards the camera for your JFK Assassination Debate "profile" photo, "yelling" in upper-case letters, flooding posts with different kinds of silly emoticons (plural), and trying to belittle your opponent by writing the first letter of his or her name with a lower-case letter? -- Tommy tommy... belittle... me? you seem a bit fixated on my profile, posting, image, and style good buddy... whereas most come here to discuss a topic within the JFK case... you, it seems - with only the respect you deserve - have barely 1 thing to say, just the 1, and you repeat it as if it 1) needed to be so maybe you'd be taken seriously or 2) you were adding anything to the conversation to begin with... Maybe instead of trying and failing to be witty with every post, you could try for interesting, helpful and/or informative instead? Then maybe people wouldn't feel so imposed upon or annoyed each time you and your buddy in perpetual confusion, enter a thread as for the emoticons and you being upset about EVERY - LITTLE - THING I do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 1 hour ago, David Josephs said: ou seem a bit fixated on my profile, posting, image, and style good buddy... wh You really do like your emoticons - LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 36 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: You really do like your emoticons - LOL Michael, With all due respect, why stoop to his level? -- Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Thomas Graves said: Michael, With all due respect, why stoop to his level? I'm actually not. I thought that commercial was always cute and happy and the lady in it is very beautiful too and does a great job in her role. 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