Bill Miller

Duncan, Groden's "interpreatation" has nothing to do with BDM's true shape. Just as Jack stayed as true to form by using a dark room developed print to work on Badge Man. That is what we are talking about here. Groden's copy print was made in a dark room from film - yours is computer generated which by the settings you used ... you had erased over half of the original BDM's shape. In destroying one shape - you invented another that never existed. I believe it's Arnold and that he is the only one between the wall and the fence in the Willis and Betzner photos. The deep shadows and the distance to the camera makes BDM look like he does. Below is a similar problem with shade and only seen from a short distance away. Bill

Well, Jack - look at the dark room BDM in Josiah and Robert's books and all the existing prints of the BDM from Willis and Betzner copies you have ever seen and tell me which one shows something that looks like an 'AOL guy symbol' who's coming in from a week long bender? Someone altered his shape from its original form. Duncan called it an enhancement. Bill

Duncan, was that supposed o be a trick question? Are you saying that you didn't degrade the image and called it an enhancement? The Black Dog Man that I see in Groden and Thompson's book look nothing like the thing you ended up with. If you think about it - your enhancement looks like a chess pond that got sat too close to the fire! And no, I don't believe that you are lying about thinking you have invented some new found way to enhance photos. I just think it is ridiculous! After all, this is why I mentioned that no one is seen like that in the Willis photo. Would that be the same topic discussed in post one about the use of poor images, or post five with the tree branch seen in the Nix film, post eight, ten, eleven,seventeen, nineteen, post twenty one, post twenty three, post twenty four, post twenty five, post twenty nine, or post number thirty - several that you participated in by the way. Yes, we have been on topic IMO. For instance, you said in an earlier response that 'the timing of when the photos were taken wasn't important', but I disagree on the grounds that if your photo was taken around the same time that another photo was taken from a different angle or maybe with better clarity - it would certainly offer a more definitive view at what we are looking at. Bill

It appears that you (Duncan) had merely picked out two dots after degrading the BDM figure to a good portion of it disappearing and then doing just what Jack had said. I can find other places where this can be done, but why would anyone want to? The Willis photo taken just 16/18s of a second later doesn't show anything there, but of course I have not seen where you have all but destroyed that image as well so to achieve the same effect. Will this be coming soon??? Bill

That is a fair request, Duke .... and I can tell you that it is in the 26 Volumes for I have read it several times in the past. I have spent the better part of the morning doing searchers and I have found references to it, but no the report itself. Seymour Weitzman gave a report telling of this meeting with the man who saw something tossed near the steam pipe. Here is a link for those who wish to look for it ... I will continue to search for it as time allows. http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/...Vol24_0111a.htm Bill Miller

Maybe one may be found to be a zoomed version of the other. Bill

What does anyone wish to bet that any film seen on the Discovery Channel will have a known source for its author. That the information one seeks will be known by Gary Mack who usually is the one these documentaries go to for information, if not the films themselves. The head seen over the pedestal IS NOT someone crouching, but rather one of the Hester's entering the shelter where both Hester's, Zapruder, and Sitzman all met following the shooting. See "Pictures of the Pain" for more details. Bill

Post #102 of this thread - Duke Lane: This is also one that shows the lack of vegetation (trees) between the highway (behind McIntyre as he shot this photo, and ahead of the motorcycles in the foreground) and the railroad yards beside the TSBD. This at least proves that Ed Hoffman would've been able to see what he claimed to see if he was where he claims he was. I can go look for my post if need be, but I am certain that I referenced WEITZMAN'S REPORT. It was in the REPORT where it was said that Weitzman was told by a witness that they seen SOMETHING tossed through the trees over near the steam pipe. It could have been a gun - a broom - a mop - or what ever, but the point I made is that something was seen being tossed by someone other than Ed Hoffman. Bill Miller

I have always had a problem with the idea that if one degrades an image far enough that somehow they will bring out other things that were not present before. This method is illogical and unethical IMO. I see little difference in this type of imagery and someone taking a recognizable image in a wet water color painting and smearing it until they have created yet another image. I asked if Duncan had any idea as to when these photographs had been taken following the assassination for he may find other photos of this area taken at around the same time that are much sharper and could verify or deny the accuracy of Duncan's interpretation. Bill

Let me see just what I did notice - shall we .... I will start by quoting you about your so-called enhancement .... "This is a fine piece of photo analysis with limited distortion and pixelisation. " " " " " " " " " " " " " " .This is probably the clearest image of Black Dog Man that anyone has ever seen..ANYWHERE!!!" I thought that Groden and Thompson had the clearest images of the BDM in their books, but let us look at your alleged enhancement again ... Now you may recall that I asked you if you were going to enhance the image like you did the BDM in what you called 'the clearest image of the BDM ever' so to be sure they were a match. In fact, you enhanced/or degraded (depending on how one wants to look at it) the Betzner photo to the point that you invented what you called another shooter crouched at the wall. I would like to point out for the record that the Willis photo taken less than one second later does not show this alleged figure, but possibly with enough eventual degradation of the Willis photo - you might also be able to achieve a similar result. So what I am saying is that you obviously didn't agree that the Groden or Thompson prints showed the true shape of the BDM and that it took you altering the image to get a true look at the BDM. I will leave the forum to decide just how accurate your claims are when comparing your alleged clearest BDM image to that in Robert's and Josiah's books. By the way, do you know the timing of these photos that you say show the same person? Bill

Thanks for the tip, Duncan. I still find that with over half of what could or could not be a shape of someone being hidden by the pyracantha bush that you would have such an amazing ability to do these things. Below is your alleged "enhancement" of the BDM ... ... would you care to compare its enhanced shape to the partial dark area seen beyond the pyracantha bush so to be real sure about your confirmation? Bill

Duncan, While you seem to have a knack for confirming things in your own mind from poor quality images and without any detailed study - tell me how is it that with Towner #3 being taken before the photo you are discussing was exposed that you can somehow can tell from dark silhouettes who the figures are and when they were seen in both earlier and latter assassination images? Bill

Any figure seen from that distance that were standing in shadow will be seen in silhouette. As shown in Towner #3 posted on response #11 - there are two dark figures seen against the background - are we to now say there were two Black Dog Men? Arnold said they were police men ... not Black Dog Men. Bill Miller

I agree with Jack. To give rough visuals of the plaza, then there may be some usefulness is such graphics, but for fine detail and alignments, Myers work is not accurate IMO. One of the first captions that was posted of Dales in this thread shows the Hudson tree to be about 1/3 of the way down the fence line when in fact that tree was almost straight out from the corner of the fence near the walkway in the real world. The overhanging tree foliage, which would have obstructed Bowers view is not present in Dale's graphic, as well. A few years ago I took some Zframe graphic images of Dale's and overlaid them onto the actual correlating Zapruder frames. I discovered that Dale's graphics were not accurate. For instance, If I lined Connally up to scale, then JFK could not be scaled accordingly. The same with the limo. Dale was trying to show how a line of sight through both men could have accounted for the SBT to work, but if the occupants were stretched out of their real world scaling to one another, then is graphics were meaningless as far as I was concerned. Bill Miller

If someone got the Holand and Lane walk from the steam pipe to the point straight out from the fence where the smoke was seen to take 40 seconds on their timer, then I will suggest that they remove the video player from their computer and try reinstalling it again because my player shows Holland and Lane starting their walk after having just crossed under the steam pipe at 2:07 on my RealPlayer clock counter. They then reach the front of the car at the fence at 2:34. A simple arithmetic calculation tells me that 27 seconds have elapsed. I do not recall Hoffman saying the assassin had to take extra time to walk out and around any cars. If anyone knows where Hoffman was supposed to have said this, then please post it or I will assume that it doesn't exist. I believe that Hoffman had said that the man turned away from the fence and walked directly towards the steam pipe and no pictures have been offered showing that this was not possible. As far as the "fairly quick" steady strides attributed to Holland and Lane - they appear to be no faster than the walk was behind JFK's casket on its way to the rotunda. Once again it appears that a 'figure of speech' is only as accurate as its interpretation from individual to individual. Anyway, the accuracy of these post can be examined and checked quite easily. Let me remind this forum that Holland did not take the route that Hoffman stated that the assassin took. Instead, Holland said he went across the parking lot to a point behind the colonnade before turning back to work his way back to the spot where he saw the smoke come through the trees. So it may be possible that the route Holland took did take some stepping over bumpers and so on, but it has nothing to do with walking a straight path from the Hat Man location to the a point just short of the steam pipe. To leave these points out of ones critique does not paint a fair and accurate picture IMO, which may be the goal trying to be achieved by Hoffman's critics. I have posted Holland's statement concerning his route into the parking lot and the length of time it took him to eventually get to the location at the fence where the smoke was seen. Maybe if it is posted enough times ... it will stop certain individuals from misstating the facts and force them to strive for better accuracy. Mr. STERN - When you ran behind the picket fence after the shots were fired, did you come near the area where the station wagon was parked? Mr. HOLLAND - Went up to behind the arcade as far as you could go. Mr. STERN - So, you would have passed where this station wagon was? Mr. HOLLAND - Yes. Mr. STERN - And that was later you came behind the station wagon? Mr. HOLLAND - Oh, maybe 3 or 4 minutes after I got up there, and 3 or 4 minutes after I got up to the end of the fence. Bill Miller "Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to be wrong about the facts. Without the facts, your opinion is of no value.” Rene Dahinden, August 1999.

The 6th Floor Museum has the ORIGINAL Mark Bell film. I will repeat what Gary Mack said after seeing these images which are far superior in clarity than Groden's copy .... Mack writes: "One is wearing a white shirt and the other, standing immediately to his left, is wearing a yellow shirt. Both men appear to be facing to the west at that moment." I would advise people to get a map of Dealey Plaza and find out which way is west. Once this is done, then one can see that the RR box and steam pipe were to the N/NE of these men. IMO, certain individuals who are constantly and purposely misstating the facts do not help students in their study of the JFK assassination. The Groden copy is so poor that one cannot even see a yellow shirt - let alone any details as to which way these men were looking. Bill Miller "Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to be wrong about the facts. Without the facts, your opinion is of no value.” Rene Dahinden, August 1999.

Jack, The first two columns are in shade - the third is in sunlight in every assassination image showing the colonnade. You are simply misreading the angles at which these views were photographed at and this is why you are the only one in 44 years who has made such a claim. If you think otherwise and really feel that you have something solid here, then contact any tabloid and see how far they will run with the story! Bill

Lee, this time you are wrong. The man on the steps who was to Hudson's left is between the camera in Willis and Hudson, which causes him to hide almost all of Hudson. In a really good Willis print the edges of Hudson can be seen. In fact, Hudson's rear end area was lower than the man next to him, so look at the bulges behind the dark man's knees and you will see part of Hudson. I would also use Groden's enlarged version in his book "The Killing of a President". And no, Kathy - Hudson had on a light colored shirt and a dark jacket. The man who ran up the steps did so upon JFK being killed. The photo Duncan posted came well after the assassination. Bill

Robin...I have asked Bernice to post my latest study which I think will change your mind about the authenticity of Altgens 8. After about an hour of looking at light and shadow, I compared the same area in Wiegman and Altgens...and ONE AREA POPPED OUT IN SUNLIGHT THAT IS SHADOWED IN WIEGMAN. I think this is indisputable. Bernice.... Jack Jack, The matching parts of the colonnade are marked in red. Two views from different angles - you picked the wrong one is why they do not match. Bill

Mark Oaskes had the best copy print I have seen to date and it showed Zapruder just hitting the ground where he immediately started walking away. Bill

The Paschall film shows Zapruder getting off the pedestal and starting that walk. Bill

Yes, I believe I am seeing satire in many of the post I have read. Bill

Thanks. I assume you mean Foster was standing on one of the white objects, whatever they are, spaced along the ground between the balustrade and the tracks. That seems dubious to me, because he looks so high in the upward angle of the Altgens (?) photo. Those objects don't look very high, and aren't that close to the balustrade. Standing on one of them, he would have to be 20 feet tall or so to show up as he does in the Altgens photo. Do you know when that aerial photo in post #101 was taken? It also relates to the question of the tracks ever being raised to any significant degree above ground level. Ron, I don't know when that photo was taken because I didn't post it, but a similar view can be seen in Squire Haskins photo which shows up on about page 350 in Trask's book "Pictures of the Pain. Haskins also took several other photos and if I remember correctly - some of them were zoom shots showing the boxes better. Haskins took his photos on the afternoon of the assassination. As far as how high the boxes look ... I believe I can see the white box through the gaps between the concrete sections of the underpass railing. From what I can tell ... they look to be as high as where the guys feet would start. Take a closer look and see if you do not agree. Bill

Let me see if I get you right ... The forum is against students seeing curse words in post, so you think making a list of curse words that should not be said should be posted for all to see ... if this is correct, then sleep on that thought for a night and see if it still sounds like a good idea tomorrow. (sigh~) Bill

Does anyone have any idea what Foster was standing on? This continues to mystify me. There is a person in front of him at the wall, so Foster cannot be standing on any type of railing attached to the wall. He would appear to be hovering in midair. Ron, Go to post #101 of this thread and look at the third photo down from the top .... I believe that it will answer your question. Bill