Jump to content
The Education Forum
Guest Stephen Turner

Zapruder, Four questions..

Recommended Posts

Guest Stephen Turner

Well, to an admittedly untrained eye, Bill Miller's post is pretty convinsing testimony to spectator movement on the North side of the street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill,

An excellent overlay -- thank you.

Another plausible explanation for the increased south-side movement is that the majority of the people there have already seen the "main event" (the President's car passing by), and are beginning to leave/return to work/move to a better point of view/etc. Those on the north side, on the other hand, are focused on the "main event" so to speak.

I do not believe that the north side spectators are motionless. That is clear from watching the film -- head swivels and hand motion (clapping) is visible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave - Rule #1 of this forum is "All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature". Where's yours? I remember you hastling me before I added my photo. You are one of the very few members of the forum not in compliance.

Len

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave - Rule #1 of this forum is "All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature". Where's yours? I remember you hastling me before I added my photo. You are one of the very few members of the forum not in compliance.

Len

biography? rofl ---

buy the book and read it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave - Rule #1 of this forum is "All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature". Where's yours? I remember you hastling me before I added my photo. You are one of the very few members of the forum not in compliance.

Len

biography? rofl ---

buy the book and read it!

David, why should anyone read a book that has been debunked to get an answer on a forum that is supposed to offer free discussion?

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, why should anyone read a book that has been debunked to get an answer on a forum that is supposed to offer free discussion?

Larry

Right! Where does it say in the forum rules that David Healy is excused of following forum rules? Is there a "loud mouth" exclusion somewhere?

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I have posted a clip here that I got off another forum that exposed this claim of yours as also being in error. Both the man in the hat and the woman next to him move in the Zapruder film. This forum also showed other women's heads turning and it pointed out some witnesses hands moving as they clapped."

Mr. Peters,

The site you mentioned looks like an interesting one. Could you share it's name/address? I'd like to check it out. Thanx.

Hello, the site's URL is: http://216.122.129.112/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=3 Hope you like it.

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill,

An excellent overlay -- thank you.

Thanks. I am waiting for Jack to now say that the second woman to the left of the road sign was merely practicing her clapping for when the motorcade came by 20 minutes later.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill,

An excellent overlay -- thank you.

Thanks. I am waiting for Jack to now say that the second woman to the left of the road sign was merely practicing her clapping for when the motorcade came by 20 minutes later.

Bill

they'll be plenty to laugh about, soon! Stay tuned...

and NO -- you can forget about the north side of Elm Street -- the south side is another story of course....

tis all for now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill[/b]

they'll be plenty to laugh about, soon! Stay tuned...

and NO -- you can forget about the north side of Elm Street -- the south side is another story of course....

tis all for now!

David, are you threatening us by asserting that you may actually post something of substance? Besides, you have said that you have never seen proof of Zapruder film alteration or did you forget that Larry reminded you of that fact not more than 24 hours ago.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, to an admittedly untrained eye, Bill Miller's post is pretty convinsing testimony to spectator movement on the North side of the street.

Below are more people that Jack claimed were not moving/motionless!

post-1084-1137631433_thumb.gif

Red arrow - woman's hand and arm lowers.

Black arrow - woman's hand lowers.

White arrow - woman's head turns left.

Purple arrow - man's head turns right.

Green arrow - woman leans back from just looking at the approaching cycles and turns head.

Anyone seen Fetzer ... I was hoping to have him recalculate Jack's batting average that he was so willing to falsely represent in an earlier post he made to this forum.

Bill Miller

JFK assassination researcher/investigator

Edited by Bill Miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have recently been in contact with Rollie Zavada*. Healy insinuated that he no longer stands by his determination after detailed study that the Z-film in the National Archives was and in camera original and showed no signs of "optical effect or matte work". That is utter nonsense – he still believes that and is convinced that the film could not have been altered as alleged.

Unable to name a single movie from the period of the assassination which used compositing as intricate as was alleged to have been used in the "altered" Z-film Healy instead cites a Special Effects text book by Ray Fielding. Zavada visited Professor Fielding in 2003 to ensure his conclusions about the improbability of alteration were correct. Professor Fielding agreed with Zavada; "that it was not possible to alter the Zapruder film incorporating the scene changes attributed to that process and if attempted, the results would be easily detectable".

So I think that pretty much settles it, we can all go home now. ROTFLMHO

Ding Dong! The Theory is dead. Which old Theory? The Z-film alteration Theory!

Ding Dong! The Z-film alteration Theory is dead.

Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed.

Wake up, the Z-film alteration Theory is dead. It's gone where the nonsense goes,

Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out.

Ding Dong' the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low.

Let them know

The Z-film alteration Theory is dead!

Other songs on today's playlist:

Another One Bites The Dust -Queen

Down In Flames - The Dead Boys

Laugh - The Monkees

*Who worked for Kodak for many years as a product engineer and led the team that invented the Kodachrome II film that Zapruder used. See the following link for his bio.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Zavada/zbio.pdf

Dave - Rule #1 of this forum is "All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature". Where's yours? I remember you hastling me before I added my photo. You are one of the very few members of the forum not in compliance.

Len

biography? rofl ---

buy the book and read it!

Not really that interested Dave but I do find your double standard amusing and typical. Don't your remember how much your harped on about my lack of a photo, even implying I might get booted from the forum?

I'm going away again probably won't post for another week - not that there's much to discus any way until the alterationist can provide evidence that the Z-film could have been altered.

Edited by Len Colby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where does it say in the forum rules that David Healy is excused of following forum rules? Is there a "loud mouth" exclusion somewhere?

I second Bill's question.

T.C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where does it say in the forum rules that David Healy is excused of following forum rules? Is there a "loud mouth" exclusion somewhere?

I second Bill's question.

T.C.

Does Bill miller/larry Peters think this is LANCER? And Tom just sit tight, unless of course your another mouth piece for Miller --

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have recently been in contact with Rollie Zavada*. Healy insinuated that he no longer stands by his determination after detailed study that the Z-film in the National Archives was and in camera original and showed no signs of "optical effect or matte work". That is utter nonsense – he still believes that and is convinced that the film could not have been altered as alleged.

Unable to name a single movie from the period of the assassination which used compositing as intricate as was alleged to have been used in the "altered" Z-film Healy instead cites a Special Effects text book by Ray Fielding. Zavada visited Professor Fielding in 2003 to ensure his conclusions about the improbability of alteration were correct. Professor Fielding agreed with Zavada; "that it was not possible to alter the Zapruder film incorporating the scene changes attributed to that process and if attempted, the results would be easily detectable".

So I think that pretty much settles it, we can all go home now. ROTFLMHO

Ding Dong! The Theory is dead. Which old Theory? The Z-film alteration Theory!

Ding Dong! The Z-film alteration Theory is dead.

Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed.

Wake up, the Z-film alteration Theory is dead. It's gone where the nonsense goes,

Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out.

Ding Dong' the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low.

Let them know

The Z-film alteration Theory is dead!

Other songs on today's playlist:

Another One Bites The Dust -Queen

Down In Flames - The Dead Boys

Laugh - The Monkees

*Who worked for Kodak for many years as a product engineer and led the team that invented the Kodachrome II film that Zapruder used. See the following link for his bio.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Zavada/zbio.pdf

Dave - Rule #1 of this forum is "All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature". Where's yours? I remember you hastling me before I added my photo. You are one of the very few members of the forum not in compliance.

Len

biography? rofl ---

buy the book and read it!

Not really that interested Dave but I do find your double standard amusing and typical. Don't your remember how much your harped on about my lack of a photo, even implying I might get booted from the forum?

I'm going away again probably won't post for another week - not that there's much to discus any way until the alterationist can provide evidence that the Z-film could have been altered.

_________________________

yeah right -- roflmfao I'll be making my formal claim, soon -- we'll see what kind of offense you can mount -- not that I suspect you can mount anything -- oh, your gonna need Roland Zavada -- I'll venture say you lone neuters MAY find a optical film printing expert within 30 day's, right.... ?

ding-dong!

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

×
×
  • Create New...