Chris Davidson Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left. If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. Does time and distance increase, if the arc increases and vice-versa? Think at least 1.8seconds and 30ft to begin with. Previously provided for those that are interested. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OajhibnRwazljem8/view?usp=sharing Cryptic, I would say not. Common sense in the context of changing frame rates and cutting out film footage around the corner to accommodate the official story. I would say yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 Mr. Walton, what is YOUR explanation for the alteration of the surveyor's data block to the numbers seen in CE884? What reason would anyone have to change survey data without first consulting with the surveyor? I believe that Mr. Davidson and Mr. Josephs are onto something. Film alteration? Only if excising frames constitutes "alteration." It's not as off the wall as the frame alteration theories that are out there. It's not as off the wall as the lifelong Harvey-and-Lee "parallel lives" theory. So why does it upset you so much? Do you have an "innocent" theory for the data changes seen in CE884? If so, I'm sure everyone would love to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 On 4/26/2017 at 9:43 PM, Chris Davidson said: 9.3 x 1.47 = 13.671ft per sec 1.8sec x 13.671 = 24.6ft The above equation (camera fps conversion of 22.8 to 18.3) using 9.3mph (Myers average speed for the motorcade on Houston St) is converted to distance. This is an adjustment distance that would have to be dealt with somewhere else in the assassination scenario. In other words, if you advance an object forward by 24.6ft arbitrarily, at some point, you would have to retard it also. This distance shows up on the shared original SS Dec5,1963 and Feb 1964 FBI plat.The FBI was trying to retard the extant 313 shot by 24.5ft. The problem they had was the yellow curb markers on film. (Thank you Tom Purvis.) https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OYjJCNmxnbDY4TGM/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 It should then come as no surprise that JFK aligned with Altgens (using Cutler's positioning) via Zapruders LOS at z348 = the 24.6ft that was retarded. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OdXN5bGdwLVoyMXc/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 How do we vice-versa between 24.6ft and 30ft in terms of an adjustment? Look no further than CE884. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 CE884 z161-z166 lists a limo speed of 2.24mph. If one compares that to the extant film, it's quite obvious the limo is not traveling 2.24mph from z161-z166. What shouldn't be forgotten is the truer distance traveled in that span. I suggest using this post (over a year old) as a reference, in regards to the limo speed from z156-z166. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/22692-swan-song-math-rules/&do=findComment&comment=328146 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Using the previous link, can someone do the simple math and tell us how far the limo would have traveled in 5 frames from z161-z166? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: How do we vice-versa between 24.6ft and 30ft in terms of an adjustment? Look no further than CE884. The extant zfilm shows the limo traveling 1.08ft per frame between z156-z166. 5frames x 1.08ft per frame = 5.4ft The distance between 24.6 and 30ft = 5.4ft. Adjustment accounted for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 How would one go about creating an adjustment in this assassination scenario? First read the notes obtained by Tom Purvis via Robert West. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OemZRYmVxQ2FhMGM/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 Translation from the previous notes = The WC creates a separate paths for JFK within the limo. Since they had to take into account Zapruders filming position in terms of LOS, it would look like this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005ON280RWJ1X0NEdDQ/view?usp=sharing If you look at the red arrows, they will show you the 2 different locations (on the same Zapruder LOS), an object (JFK within the limo) would align with. This is what happens when you move the limo in a "slight" southerly direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 On 4/30/2017 at 10:47 AM, Mark Knight said: Mr. Walton, what is YOUR explanation for the alteration of the surveyor's data block to the numbers seen in CE884? What reason would anyone have to change survey data without first consulting with the surveyor? I believe that Mr. Davidson and Mr. Josephs are onto something. Film alteration? Only if excising frames constitutes "alteration." It's not as off the wall as the frame alteration theories that are out there. It's not as off the wall as the lifelong Harvey-and-Lee "parallel lives" theory. So why does it upset you so much? Do you have an "innocent" theory for the data changes seen in CE884? If so, I'm sure everyone would love to read it. Mark, If you have read through the rest of this topic, Robert West's testimony in the Clay Shaw Trial of 1969 will answer the question you posed and back up what I have presented. Objecting to the surveyor's answer when it directly implicates the FBI (told West to plot the points) is pretty much the icing on the cake. They did not want it known that a new path had been created for the limo even in the 1969 trial. Robert West used '+" marks on the original plat/s, as can be seen on the previous path document supplied. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OdXpHbUhhc1dPZzg/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Clint climbing on the back of the limo does not occur until after the extant 313 shot. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005Oazl2MUZZWkpZcDg/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Mr. SPECTER. At that time you looked back and saw Special Agent Hill across the trunk of the car, had your automobile accelerated by that time? Mr. KELLERMAN. Tremendously so; yes. Mr. SPECTER. Now, to the best of your ability to recollect, exactly when did your automobile first accelerate? Mr. KELLERMAN. Our car accelerated immediately on the time-at the time--this flurry of shots came into it. Mr. SPECTER. Would you say the acceleration-- Mr. KELLERMAN. Between the second and third shot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Thanks David, Let me add this back again, as it becomes ever more clear about the "second/last shot" circa Altgens and the speed of the limo at the "first shot". This will also integrate very nicely with frame removal using Kinney's limo speed at the "first shot". https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OS0RxREpjXzRCSmc/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 On 4/30/2017 at 9:37 PM, Chris Davidson said: It should then come as no surprise that JFK aligned with Altgens (using Cutler's positioning) via Zapruders LOS at z348 = the 24.6ft that was retarded. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OdXN5bGdwLVoyMXc/view?usp=sharing Kinney didn't lie. If you do the math for the limo speed between z313 and z348 = 24.6ft the vehicle averaged 8.75mph. It's just that Greer "hit the gas" after the "second shot". The one right in front of Altgens. Or in Kinney's words, "the fatal head shot". 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