David Josephs

61' - 21.34' = 39.66' - 21.34 = 18.32' (any meaning?)

419.71' - 419.07' = .64' x 18.3 = 11.71' up Elm

4+65.3 - 11.71 = 4+53.59 which appears to me as the spot JFK would have been when the front bumper reaches extant 313 on the street.

4+65.3 at 421.75' (JFK) - 3.27 = 418.41' (street)

4+65.3 - 4+53.59 = 11.71 / 18.3 = .64 so street elevation at JFK when front bumper is at 4.65.3 is (418.41 + .64 = 419.05)

I'm just thinking out loud here - anything you can do to help...

-------

As for Shot #1 at 3+81.34.... If we place the rear bumper at 207 instead of JFK, then JFK is at 3+81.34 (not sure if this is what you were looking for - I still do not comprehend the 81.34 unless we're talking rear bumper ?)

21.34 - 15.2 = 6.14' (JFK to rear Bumper)

(z207) shown as 3+71.1 at JFK elevation 427.02 - 3.27 = street level 423.75' (not 423.07')

423.75 - 423.07 = .68 x 18.3 = JFK position at 207 is 12.44' further up Elm using the correct elevation

3+71.1 - 12.44' = 3+58.66

Rear bumper at 3+58.44 plus 21.34 = 3+79.78

Looking at CE884, the station# for shot#1 could easily be 3+81.34, just rounded off as the rest to the nearest tenth's place.

please clarify Chris... I've confused myself here.... lol

I see the 10.2' difference between 3+71.1 & 3+81.34 but I forget where the 10.2' comes from in you work...

What two distances within this graphic give you an equation for the length of the limo?

131.3 - 110 = 21.3

The limo extends from 2+50 along the 131.3 line leaving 110' from the FRONT BUMPER and 131.3 to the REAR BUMPER.

JFK's location in the limo just adds another lever to confuse things

You may think this thread is helping other researchers but it's not. It's moved into absurdist territory.

It's nice to know you have your finger on the pulse of the Zfilm research community Mike.... yet in reality quite a number of people are benefiting from this work, sorry you can't be one of them.

The scenario the FBI & SS offered to explain the assassination conflicted with the evidence by offering a shot well past what we see as Z313 and then removing it when it no longer worked..

I'm truly glad you know this was a conspiracy and that the Oswald Ruby shot did not shoot anyone that day... Yet as much evidence as possible was offered to confirm the exact opposite.

If all this evidence is designed to convict a patsy Mike, and you truly have no idea what happened to the film and the copies and Hawkeyeworks and NPIC and Rowley in DC and 0184 - where do you come off preaching to us what we should or shouldn't be studying?

You simply have done none of the homework needed to grasp the implications of PROVING what transpired to take 6 shots and turn them into three, to take frontal shots and turn the "Best Evidence" of that truth into the opposite.

How every single item of evidence serves one and only one purpose - convict Oswald. Yet the FBI/SS/CIA basically leaves Zappy and his amazing film alone?

You see Mike - "cause Mike says so" is not a proof of anything. When Doug Horne illustrates the 2 NPIC events with evidence - THAT is proof.

When you look at these 2-3 supposedly "consecutive" frames and learn that what Greer does here is physically impossible in the time allowed.

I believe the experiments were done and published in "Bloody Treason" -

Point being, images can play tricks - MATH cannot. It either works and proves the hypothesis or doesn't.

Can you offer a different explanation for why the FBI had WEST remove the third shot, why the distances and speeds do not compute in real life but only corroborate the obviously altered Zfilm which in turn is used to convict Oswald in public opinion.

I guess bottom line Mike is why would you dive into a thread that was taking the proof of conspiracy and alteration steps further than ever before - in fact proving what it is you already believe by offering examples from evidence - yet attack the work as being "absurd". ??

What are YOU trying to accomplish by that exactly? There are 100's of channels on the Ed forum you can switch to at any time and ban this absurdity from your mind, but you don't.

How again does Chris and I working thru the math involved in deceiving the public and explaining the transition from Dallas evidence to DC evidence have anything to do with your inability to grasp the work?

As Chris asked - start your thread to prove the film authentic - you'll have plenty of support, get a few back slaps, and make fun of us conspiracy realists.

THIS thread is about the MATH used to make 6+ shots into 3, into 2 and to explain how all the different levers which affect these calculations were moved.

Why does our work bother you so when you admittedly don't understand it? Cause you're "sure" it wasn't altered... Well Ok... we are and are finding the answers in the math...

Live and Let Live Mike...

And then there's Greer's lying about what he did or didn't see (this is where they add the "My God I'm Hit" claim to counteract any thoughts of a shot from the front to the throat

Additionally we have LIFE's break in the film yet removal of yet another sequence of frames. From Z157 to 158 JFK spins his head like Greer...

Or the complete disappearance of the Chaney episode... as confirmed by Hargis, Chaney, Sorrels and Curry

Mr. HARGIS - I don't know whether it was the Secret Service car, and I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off, and I stopped and got off my motorcycle and ran to the right-hand side of the street, behind the light pole.

Thanks! That makes it clear... except the location is 3+71.1 for shot #1

Where do you get 3+81.3? (I remember your 10.2' reference but I don't remember the math, sorry - that the sill versus muzzle thing?)

Isn't 3+81.3 where the North-South arrow is pointing (mid hood) from z207 with JFK at 423.75 and rear bumper at 424.03?

Gonna need a bit more than that... lol

I get the measurement but the theodolite is adjustable, right? it's not a fixed 5.41' tall - at least it doesn't look anywhere near 5'5" high in the photo you posted and appears that the legs allow it to move up and down... in fact it looks closer to 3.27' in that photo than 5.41'. So why "5.41' and what difference does the 2.14' make

3+71.1 should be 121.1 feet past 2+50 yes? yet it's either 110 feet, 171 feet or 232 feet given the three notations of

1) 110' = 171' - 61' & is offered as the distance between 171' and 61' yet is next to the "2+50" notation which is 429.7' and is supposed to be the TSBD corner

2) 171' at 423.07, shot #1 (which should actually be 423.75) yet that goes back to a 430.8 elevation at the TSBD in the line drawing yet is well behind 2+50

3) 232' = 171' + 61' if the 2+50 notation under 429.7 refers to a point west of the TSBD corner

I simply want to understand the line drawing that I superimposed on the plat... and where you think 2+50 is represented... 429.7 or 430.8 elevation

David Lifton - did you tell Ron Ecker that you thought Bakwr was sent to kill Oz?

It's very interesting in any case. It would make sense that, if the plan was to set Oswald up, the perpetrators would plan to eliminate Oz as quickly as possible, Baker was in a hurry somewhere...

Interesting thought

Baker tells us that despite hearing his Chief and the County Sheriff telling all officers to check out the RR yard, he says he knows better.... after he starts to say something else, "I had it...." Had what?

We are also to remember that Baker/Truly actually saw someone coming down the stairs higher up and Mooney tells us he runs into sheriffs coming down as he is going up to the 6th - and finally there is Ellsworth and the rest of what would become the ATF who were supposedly in the building before anyone and tells us the rifle was found on the 4th or 5th and moved to the 6th....

SENATOR COOPER - I didn't hear what he said he heard on the radio?

Mr. BAKER - I heard Chief Curry, the chief of the police over there, say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.

Mr. BELIN - By "everyone" do you include you, too?

Mr. BAKER - No, Sir. I had it-- I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here.

Thanks Chris -

If 429.16 is the H.I. why are they subtracting 3.27' (the difference between ground level and the top of JFK's head) to arrive at a point 2.14' above ground level?

and what does that have to do with actual ground level at 423.73?

IOW - what is WEST telling us about 207? And why does Shaneyfelt use the 5.41' when he could set the instrument to 3.27' high and get exact data.. beyond the obvious that is, why 2.14 and subtracting 3.27?.

Is the difference the muzzle versus the sill?

Finally, 168.34' foot base of the triangle at 3+71.1 3+71.1 = 171.1 feet past 2+00, yes? or 121.1 feet past 2+50 you can see my confusion regarding that 61' distance ?

I placed 2+50 in line with 2+50 on the plat but that pushes the TSBD window back 61 feet...

What are they doing here Chris?

There is a calc on the 207 survey page which reads

H.I.

5.41

-3.27

------

2.14

With the two measurements on the triangle as 427.02 (street elevation CE884 @ 207) and 429.16

If 427.02 is the top of JFK's head - what does 429.16 refer to?

Where does 5.41 feet come from?

Until Fetz and JVB can explain this - which I am sure they cannot without spilling beans - the woman has zero credibility

Why Copy B?

Why is one 1963 W-2 for work at UF under ChemResearch correct as both Copy C and the correct layout versus the Reily W-2 which does not match a single W-2 in history.

JVB tried to claim it was a State form yet I found a LA state form from 1963 - so again, not so much.

Baker’s father responded by trying to get her arrested as a runaway. However, with UF’s Dean of Women Marian Brady’s help, Baker obtained a writ of emancipation (at that time parents had legal custody of their dependents until age 21). Brady created several cover jobs for Baker to account for funding provided, in fact, by Senator Smathers “even as police outside her office door were demanding entrance,” says Baker.

http://www.ctka.net/2015/JudythBaker-DJ.pdf covers many of the details with the help of Jim D.... She couldn't even get her friend Anna Lewis to lie about the correct month and year she was supposedly with Oswald....

and Judy was sitting in the room with her as she spoke on film... amazing.

Does the limo hood/fender area appear larger/taller also once it goes to b/w?

that was a result of my overlay, not the frames

Actually, the black bars appear to be frame boundaries from a B&W version or a decolorized version.

I found the B&W in the Groden Bell frames - at least that's how I have the files labeled.

These are 4 successive frames - Chris D sent me a gif with no color loss at this point so IDK - is it known that Groden or someone did something to the Bell frames as an exercise?

Here are the frames - the first

David,

Since it's supposed to be the same shot between the TV program and WC, I'd take the difference of the 4" and 5.75" distances and plug them back in.

5.75/4 = 1.4375/1

The end result of 4" was an angle of 19.1deg.

WC stated angle of 21deg 34min @ z208/210 depending on which CE884 is used, doesn't matter, just need the angle.

Difference between what the program (Beyond Magic Bullet) and WC determination = 21deg34min - 19.1deg(19deg 6min)= 2deg 28min

2deg 28min = 2.4666..deg x 1.4375 (5.75"/4" difference) = 3.545 deg

3.545deg - 2.466deg = 1.079deg (1deg 4.74min) difference

19deg 6min(19.1deg) + 1deg 4.74min = 20deg10.74min = CE884 z225

No jacket shirt bunch- back shot 5.75" down from collar top at extant z225.

Thanks again Chris...

You've found a series of levers:

Window sill,

Rifle muzzle,

4" down,

5+" down,

rear bumper,

JFK,

JC,

front bumper,

JFK top of head elevation,

18.3fps related to rise/run of Elm

and the 10" recreation vehicle difference related to the angle's origination point.

The front bumper of the limo is 20.34/18.3= 1.166 feet lower than the rear at any given time along Elm when the rear bumper hits the 61' mark in Shaneyfelt's drawing

Thanks for taking the time and having the patience to work thru this Chris... becomes invaluable as I write about WCD298 and the disappearing 3rd shot that never existed in the first place.

The problem I have with Z225 is 1) it is obvious a shot had been fired with another soon after z225 hitting JC - extant film 2) the NPIC notes and LIFE do not recognize a shot in the Z225 range

This is the NPIC "figgur it out" sheet for the Homer McMahon briefing boards. Z242? LIFE's z264?? Like they were looking at a different film than the rest of us....

DJ

The program shows a shirt bunch (collar on down) difference of 4 inches.

So I'm wondering then Chris... How does the coat have a hole 5 3/8" down from the collar and the shirt 5 3/4" from the collar

yet the coat did not bunch up 4 inches... BTW - these measurements are from the TOP of the collar, not the bottom as shown in the image.

Furthermore, to believe an expensive shirt would ride up 4" simple means those claiming this do not know anything about fine shirts or tailoring.

And finally... if the shirt and jacket actually folded over on themselves - wouldn't we see multiple holes where the fabric overlaps?

"...assuming the Pres was struck at frame 210...." is almost as good as

"....and then exiting from the hole that you have described in the midline of the neck.

Now, assuming those facts to be true, would the hole which you observed in the neck of the President be consistent with an exit wound under those circumstances?

The old is-an-exit-hole-an-exit hole trick... Specter was a crafty one...

If he was struck at 210 one has to wonder what he's reacting to between 190 and 200.

I was watching Bell over again - I had created a gif to follow Rosemary - and I noticed something I hadn't before.

Truly claims the limo swung wide onto Elm and almost hits the curb.

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
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.

The limo and the people under the tree, the street etc all go from full color to B&W

Is this on all the versions of the film? Sure looks like the people and tree are not in the same film during the B&W frames... IDK

Thanks

DJ

Thank you Robin. Now if you can only convince the gang over on the Math Rules thread you'd make this forum a more enlightening one. I've given up trying to talk reason over there.

Now that's funny Mike.

You're talking "reason"? Is "reason" what we're now calling unsupported opinions ?

It's obvious you don't understand the subject matter yet you make repeated snide remarks about its foundation and meaning - and then call it "reason" when you're asked to do the simplest of things and can't...?

Mike - the films and photos can be faked and/or altered... the math can't. The math proves why what we see and what occurred are not possible.

We're all sorry you cannot make the connection between 18.3 frames per second and Elm's incline of a 1 foot drop over 18.3 horizontal feet -

or that fact that those at NPIC sat night could not understand the 18.3fps when the camera had two settings: 16fps and 48fps with a spring load so over time the speed actual slows

or that there were even two film originals worked upon by two different teams on two different nights

or that the CIA informs us the FBI had the film original Friday night

or that so much is missing from the extent zfilm which shouldn't be missing

or that 0183 does not appear on the extent film

or that Zapruder says he did not stop filming at the corner

With as obvious as that splice is you'd think Zappy would simply say he stopped filming and waited until the limo turned the corner - but that's not what he says. nor does the splice recreate the same light bleed we see on frame #1 (see below)

You see Mike - we come prepared to defend our statements with evidence and analysis - we've discussed these things for many years and gain insight by enlisting experts in their field to provide their input. David Healy is one such expert... You on the other hand stand little chance of being taken seriously when you repeatedly show the limitations in your understanding and the lack of desire to do anything about it

Do you have any supportable responses to this evidence of what certainly appears to be a straight out splice in the film to remove an embarrassing situation for the Secret Service as well as bring to the forefront the 120-degree turn a presidential limo should NEVER have to navigate

Mr. TRULY. That is right.

And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.

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.

Mr. LIEBELER - As you stood there on this abutment with your camera, the motorcade came down Houston Street and turned left on Elm Street, did it not?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER - And it proceeded then down Elm Street toward the triple underpass; is that correct?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting--when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street.

David Josephs I think your eyes are just playing tricks on you. Or you're seeing what you want to see rather than what's actually there.

There is a difference between the two.

Sir, you haven't offered one solid observation or the building blocks to a single conclusion/opinion offered which you can defend.... While we appreciate what you "think" we are more concerned with what you can defend with authenticated evidence. How fast does a man need to run to accomplish what Hill did? simple question given the speeds offered. Care to try?

Use the information provided by the WCR and see what is being done here rather than continually interject an uninformed and basically unsupported opinion about a topic you've obviously not taken much time to understand.

West creates a 3-shot survey diagram in Dec 1963 only to have the FBI have him recreate the identical survey yet removing this "last shot" down at 4+96 (a shot I understand as being created out of thin air to explain the 3-shot = 3-hit scenario) in May/June of '64.

Now why on earth would the FBI order WEST to redo the survey Mike in order to remove a shot which they claim existed since their summary report on Dec 9th.? The FBI tried so hard to show 3 shots & 3 hits. The Secret Service tried as well... Which created the evidence we now have which in turn shows what a farce this was.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=8&tab=page

A. Assassin in Building

As the motorcade was traveling through downtown Dallas on Elm Street about

fifty yards west of the intersection with Houston Street, three shots rang

out. Two bullets struck President Kennedy, and one wounded Governor

Connally. The President, who slumped forward in the car, was rushed to

Parkland Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 1:00 p.m.

The first shot is identified as 171 feet from the corner. Not a bad estimate.

But then they revert back to lying:

Tests of Rifle

By actual tests It has been demonstrated by the FBI that a skilled person

can fire three accurately aimed shots with this weapon in five seconds.

(DJ: this is complete BS as proven by the evidence of the "actual" test))

Leo Gauthier takes a model which is said to allow for a precise understanding of the assassination without having to go to Dallas, and subverts it into a bad CE with a legend that is never seen yet entered into evidence as authentic.

How LIFE and the NPIC places shots at a variety of Zframe locations starting with 190 yet nothing between 216 and 242.. and nothing past 313..... And yet we both can see what occurs at 224 on the existing film.

It's always amusing when someone who refuses to put forth even the smallest effort to understand what is being said, can expect anyone to give weight or credibility to their opinion. Wishing you're right and hoping no one notices or call you to task is a helluva way to post on an "Education" forum.

You are aware that original Nix film was never returned?

You are aware that Muchmore told the FBI that she did not, did NOT get any film of the shooting (the WC never did call her to testify, wonder why?) - if you were to look at the first half of Muchmore you'd see a real amateur film, she's somehow able to not only get the film but an amazingly clear closeup of the shots hitting JFK

Try taking a few steps back and looking at the entire picture as opposed to your "this puzzle piece doesn't fit with that puzzle piece" mentality.

Or you're seeing what you want to see rather than what's actually there.

This is called "projection" Mike. You want so bad to be right about something, anything, you're willing to keep showing us in post after post how wrong an unsupported opinion can truly be. Or maybe you're just hoping to stumble upon something that you can use to prove we're wrong?

161-166 is a great example. Covering 9/10ths of a foot in 5 frames at 18.3fps derives a speed of around 3 mph... that's walking speed - and it's obvious the limo is not moving at walking speed in the film...

So the legend and information was changed and hidden. The math and film contradicts itself and proves what Redlich was trying to say.

Maybe you've never seen this... do these speeds look correct to you - the math doesn't lie... only the FBI and SS do in this case.

Taken individually the evidence attempts to support itself - a self-corroborating circle of evidence. But once you hold this evidence up to the real world with real physics and real motion, it falls apart - and that appears to be the one thing just out of your grasp. It was very apparent to the lawyers of the WCR.

April 27, 1964 Redlich to Rankin:

"Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy,

but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions

that Oswald was the sole assassin."

"I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession, submitted to us

in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service, are totally incorrect and,

if left uncorrected, will present a completely misleading picture."

Both of these "reports" (WCDs 1&3 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10404#relPageId=35&tab=page )

promote the 3 shot scenario with a shot beyond 313 which disappears

And Once again we learn that a motorcycle (Chaney) pulled up to the Lead car immediately after the final shots - yet there is not a single image showing this occurring -

Can you take a minute and see if you can work this thru? We have more than enough evidence to prove this one way or the other.

Can you find any image where Chaney is doing what virtually everyone says he did?

Mr. HARGIS - I don't know whether it was the Secret Service car, and I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off, and I stopped and got off my motorcycle and ran to the right-hand side of the street, behind the light pole.

Mr. CURRY - I said what was that, was that a firecracker, or someone said this, I don't recall whether it was me or someone else, and from the report I couldn't tell whether it was coming from the railroad yard or whether it was coming from behind but I said over the radio, I said, "Get someone up in the railroad yard and check."

And then about this time, I believe it was motorcycle Officer Chaney rode up beside of me and looking back in the rear view mirror I could see some commotion in the President's car and after this there had been two more reports, but these other two reports I could tell were coming behind instead of from the railroad yards.

Curry says this at 12:31 on the dicta-belt transcripts - almost immediately as he says... with Chaney coming up to him very quickly.

Mike - why is this missing from all the visual evidence? any ideas based on the evidence?

Here's a good one to try out...

If the limo and Queen Mary are moving at 11.2 mph... how fast does Hill need to run to cover how much ground between where he starts and when he first touches the limo...

In the NIX sequence we see one LARGE step with the left leg, no interim step, and he's at the limo...

hmmmm. Doesn't that suggest the limo was moving much slower at the time? Now where was that Nix original... Gayle?

Do we get any measurements after Z313 other than the final shot being done when the limo's rear bumper is above station 4+96?

According to this report - M/M Zapruder, the FBI was at their place friday night and were given - at the very least - a copy.

Now, don't you suppose the FBI would get the Original from Zap?

plus, as Philip's note says, Zap did not have his "best copy" but only the original, 2 to Sorrels and the third print forwarded. The 8mm film which Dino possibly sees Sat night AFTER it's been worked on

Homer McMahan works on a 16mm film btw....

With regards to MW's desire to convince anyone this film is "original" one wonders if and when he will ever get to actual evidence of this rather than anecdotal discussion of his opinions...

It's sad when people like Mike can't take the word of those who have dedicated their lives to specific topics and professions over his own "feelings" on the subject.

Without an ounce of supporting evidence for his theory, Mike keeps farting into the wind hoping no one will notice the lack of substance and that foul odor.

So maybe take a minute and address how the FBI has a film prior to Zap's "negotiations" with LIFE - as if the FBI would simply allow this private citizen do whatever he liked with this key evidence.

Did Nix, Moorman, Muchmore, or any of the others get such kid glove treatment? of course not.

Every other item of evidence in this case is pure crap, but the film which supports the crap info must be authentic? Where does someone learn logic like that?

The result of this alteration was to artificially move the first two frames westward and downward, and the third slightly eastward and upward.

And you believe that the above could actually be done using 1960s technology, when I just described Fosse working with Hollywood film prints and the most they could do was cut and splice them...eight years *after* Zapruder's film was shot with a consumer camera?

And you actually think that by moving a mere three frames in a film that it would drastically change the running sequence of it? We're getting into "Jackie shot JFK with the help of the limo driver" territory here, Chris.

I mean, wow. We're getting into absolute and utter ridiculousness here.

Fosse? As in Bob Fosse? Now that's utter ridiculousness! LMAO! Actually, it could have been done utilizing 1940's film technology. Which was at least 13 years BEFORE the Z-film was shot! Take it to the bank!

Ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know....

Thanks DH - and now with Chris' math we prove the 48fps and the bogus claim that 19 feet was "run off" before emptying the camera of film at Kodak... "0184" - this simple number explains a lot more than was originally offered IMHO.

"...Third print forwarded" - Max Philips to Chief Rowley...

Anyone ever trace what happens to the Rowley copy - 0184?

DJ

I'm with you brother....

I'm posting this here for new people that visit this site. If you have made it this far into this thread called "Swan Song" (meaning the original author of this post thinks that he's found all of the answers to the case) and "Math Rules" (meaning he thinks math is the best and ultimate way to solve the case) and you're as confused as I am, you're not alone.

To give you some background, there is a clique of JFK assassination researchers who think that the film shot by Abraham Zapruder has been somehow, some way altered. For some reason these people (including the original author of this thread) think the film needed to be altered in some way to show or prove that President Kennedy was assassinated by a single assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald. In other words, the film needed to be altered to remove the elements showing a conspiracy.

I'm here to tell you that despite this thread receiving over 10,000 views, all of the math formulas, pictures, and so on prove nothing. Here are the reasons why this is true:

1. There was *no need* for the government to alter this film;

2. The government had no time to alter the film;

3. Because the film does show evidence of a frontal shot hitting President Kennedy in the head and, thus, a conspiracy, the film was kept from public view by the government for 12 long years;

4. The government made a reenactment film sometime in 1964. This film was an "eyes only" film, meaning it was only for high government officials. In this film, the government included a black and white copy of the Zapruder film. If you watch this film and compare it with the Z film widely available on the internet, you will note that both films look exactly alike;

5. Once the government had complete control of the film, they could easily control the message seen in the film. Two instances of this were when CBS reporter Dan Rather described what he saw in the film (but not actually showing it to the public) and completely eliminating the President's violent "back and to the left" movement; and when Life magazine fudged the description of some of the frames printed in their special edition on the assassination.

The points I've outlined above are far more solid evidence of a conspiracy than the math formulas, photos, and drawings posted on this thread. Yet, you will notice that the original author of this thread keeps it alive by continuing to post "updates" to the thread like:

"From extant to exant: 23.4 ft per sec rounded off to the nth degree"

and then a few days later:

"Height of slope in wall x 192 ft. and then rounded to 12.4 mph of the limo"

...and so on. How many versions of a math formula can someone come up with to try to prove the same result over and over again? It's not solving anything and it's being done to keep the thread high up in the HOT rankings of this forum's home page. It all means nothing and I encourage new readers to read elsewhere to learn about the assassination.

MW -

Simply because you cannot follow the thread's points - there is no reason to attack what you don't understand.

Your "reasons" also betray a very shallow understanding of the events from the time Zapruder leaves the pedestal to SA Phillips sending Chief Rowley a Zfilm Friday night, to the events of Sat and Sunday night with two different teams of men at the NPIC working on two different fils yet both teams believing they had the one and only Original.

It amazes me that anyone can come onto a forum and disparage other people's work simply because it's over your head. So let's look at your 5 reasons:

1. There was *no need* for the government to alter this film; How would you have any idea about that Michael? Did you actually see the film prior to 1975? prior to it leaving Dallas? You've done the same work Horne or Costella have done?

2. The government had no time to alter the film; That's a joke right? why is it that people with only opinions rarely if ever have a clue about the evidence about which they are expressing said opinion? A Zfilm was in Washington DC by 2am Sat morning. Sr. Staff at the FBI claims to have seen a film in DC fri nite / sat morning while this film in the Chief of the SS's hands appears to have disappeared as there is no information about the fate of that film..

3. Because the film does show evidence of a frontal shot hitting President Kennedy in the head and, thus, a conspiracy, the film was kept from public view by the government for 12 long years; Again Mike - how would you know what was on any of these films unless you were at KODAK, with Rowley, at NPIC, at Hawkeyeworks or in Dallas with Zapruder, the FBI, the SS and Stolley watching it?

4. The government made a reenactment film sometime in 1964. This film was an "eyes only" film, meaning it was only for high government officials. In this film, the government included a black and white copy of the Zapruder film. If you watch this film and compare it with the Z film widely available on the internet, you will note that both films look exactly alike; that's close to the most absurd statement I've read. The briefing boards from Sunday night also exactly match the extant Zfilm - except those aren't the boards created Saturday night by Dino Brugioni and team who describes items in the film he saw that are not in the extant film.

5. Once the government had complete control of the film, they could easily control the message seen in the film. Two instances of this were when CBS reporter Dan Rather described what he saw in the film (but not actually showing it to the public) and completely eliminating the President's violent "back and to the left" movement; and when Life magazine fudged the description of some of the frames printed in their special edition on the assassination. And yet again, your opinions backed by anecdotes.

For those actually giving an effort to understand the math and how the Zfilm was taken at 48fps for long stretches - or how the anomalies in the film cannot be explained except for such cutting of frames, it all makes perfect sense.

Claiming the Zfilm is unaltered is as misinformed as claiming Oswald was in the 6th floor window. But then again you aint gonna learn what you don't wanna know... and it appears that zfilm alteration is a topic you simply do not wanna know about in any detail - if you did you'd understand what this thread is about.

If the Zfilm was unaltered - why is it necessary to do numerous recreations culminating with the FBI telling Robert West to "REMOVE THE 3RD SHOT FROM THE SURVEY"

If the Zfilm was a record of what occurred - why do you suppose it was reduced to photos and not shown as a film for 12 years?

Duplicity runs rampant throughout the JFK Evidence as I and many others have proven over and over.

In Warren Commission Doc 298 as well as CE875 we have the FBI and Secret Service presenting evidence of a shot well past z313's location - since there had to be 3 shots and there were no shots prior to JFK disappearing behind the Elm street Tree and no time for shots between #1 and #2 So the SS and FBI created a shot location for a shot that never existed, rather than describe and illustrate all the actual shots for which there is evidence.

Which of the final 2 shot scenario leaves the mark on the manhole cover?

You would agree that JFK was hit between 190 and 207 yet JC's reaction does not begin until z224... remember the FBI initially concluded JC was hit by his own bullet which did not change until Tague in April 64 and the famous Eisenberg and Redlich memos.

If the film was authentic, from what info would Redlich write the paragraphs below in relation to the Zfilm and Leo's model which was delivered in January 1964 when the reports of the FBI (WCD1 & WCD298) & SS (CE875) "are totally incorrect"

Mr. SPECTER. And where have these models been maintained since the time they were prepared by the FBI?

Mr. GAUTHIER The models were delivered to the Commission's building and installed in the exhibits room on the first floor, on January 20, 1964.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, I now move for the admission into evidence of the photographs 878, 879, 880, and 881.

Michael - the image at the bottom of this post is the original Model as presented with 3 strings to each of the cars representing an impact yet CE879 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=925&tab=page is a different angle and no suggestion that the cars relate to any shots even though the model cars are in exactly the same position as the WCD298 model.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy. For those reading Michael's post and agreeing the Zfilm as it is today is the same as what was filmed - you may wish to investigate why every other item in evidence is not authentic to the crime but only indicative of an innocent man's guilt - and then ask yourself why not the Zapruder film - the one permanent record the SS/FBI agree upon in it's current form.

Try this Michael... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21767#entry298458 shows a FBI memo stating that PRIOR to LIFE buying the films, prior even to Zap negotiating for this sale - the FBI has a copy of the film from Zapruder himself...

"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied" or the converse "Never believe anything if it has been officially endorsed"

The Zfilm has been the government's ace-in-the-hole while the Nix original disappears and Muchmore claims she did not film the motorcade on Elm. Bronson somehow gets a few frames exactly at the headshot with nothing else filmed on Elm.

April 27, 1964

MEMORANDUM

TO: J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Norman Redlich

<snip>

We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine

whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to

frame 190. We could locate the position on the ground which

corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish

by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the

President prior to this point.

Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the

hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

I had always assumed that our final report would be

accompanied by a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the

approximate location of the three shots. We certainly cannot prepare

such a diagram without establishing that we are describing an

occurrence which is physically possible. Our failure to do this will,

in my opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty

that others will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same

questions which have been raised by our examination of the films. If

we do not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer

them with facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with

fanciful theories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions

by the investigatory methods available to us.

I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession,

submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service,

are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected,

will present a completely misleading picture.

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the

FBI and Secret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a

staff project.

Thanks again Chris... I don't have all those individual survey plat pieces, but II sure wish I did.

You didn't address the one question I really needed though... the 2+50 on the Shaneyfelt drawing with the arrow and 61' seems to suggest that elevation 429.7 = 2+50 and it's 61 feet back to the TSBD corner station... that would make the z207 shot at station 3+60 which is more like z190.

Add back that 61 feet and shot #1 is at 4+21 which is about Z262 putting the rear bumper at z242 which is where the NPIC notes places a shot as opposed to LIFE's Z264 which may be the same frame just the front bumper instead of the rear. yes?

I think I understand you are simply showing how the adjustments (sill v muzzle; rear-bumper v JFK v front bumper; street level v JFK's head) are used to place the limo where it needs to be to support the CE884 data.

Large portions of the zfilm are taken at 48fps and cut down 18.3fps with certain 48fps frames left consecutive and intact causing the limo to move much smaller distances frame to frame as well as to hide and sync what was needed.

My speculation - This was always going to be a 3 shot, lone gunman scenario as the "conspiracy related to blaming Castro for killing JFK" was simply a smokescreen to keep people quiet. With 3 shells and numerous hits and misses the authorities needed to solidify the "3 shots no more no less" scenario which began almost immediately afterward. 3 shots & the TSBD.

The "third impact" could not possibly have been where the surveys and WCD298 puts it... so it was ultimately removed thanks to Tague. Many shots becomes 2 impacts and one wild miss in the evidence... except we have WCD298 finished in January which illustrates the FBI results in WCD1 and their official conclusion of 3 shots=3hits.

https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/010/10402/images/img_10402_8_300.png

Yet we know the 4+96 rear bumper shot existed for some time right up to CE875 even though they neglect to take a photo of the stand-in limo at that point

The model in WCD298 says it measures to JFK's head though, not to the front bumper.

I agree that 167' + JFK to Front Bumper: 15' + angle difference = 184'. right??

For shot #2 at 262' & 419.07 (which should be 419.72 or 12 feet further up Elm) Shaneyfelt has 242' yet the distance from #2 to his 418.35' elevation is 25 feet with a drop from 419.07 to 418.35. Except 25 feet down Elm would be 417.70... Add back the .656 between 419.07 and 419.72 and we have 418.35... so that 12 feet was also carried down the street?

I think our problem is the point they are measuring to and the hiding of the distances by moving that point from rear to JFK to front bumper. The front of the limo is a bit over a foot lower than the back and 15/18.3 of a foot from JFK.

Still working it thru in my head... the info in WCD298 is pretty straight forward and was written by the FBI's Leo Gauthier.

There is no escaping their being a shot placed lower down Elm but I believe this is only because they did not have any more room up Elm to place a third shot and once Tague appears in March/April we have the May/June WEST redo removing that post 313 impact location which never existed in the first place. FBI luck or fate?

The 48fps proof is outstanding Chris as this enabled the FBI et al to remove what they needed, leave what was needed and come to some erroneous 18.3 fps rate so that the few 48fps frames left consecutively would not appear so slow.

Thinking out loud... but I do have another question:

Added on edit: Station# 2+50 is a location on Elm St, which is in alignment with the sniper's position, within the 6th floor window.

Then Shanelyfelt putting 2+50 61' down Elm at the start of the decline in his line drawing is obvious

or is the notation saying that 2+50 is 61 feet EAST from the 429.7' elevation at 430.2' elevation.???

Yet does not hold true for #2 - #3

285'-232'=53' / 18.3' = 2.896' vert drop

418.07'-2.896' = 415.74'

Elevations listed is 416.83; 1.09' higher or 19.947 feet further up Elm than the distances suggest...

David,

Did you mean to enter 419.07 (The misrepresented elevation of 419.72) in the equation as opposed to 418.07?

chris

Yes of course I did....

419.07 - 2.896 = 416.174 - 416.83 = .656 x 18.3 = 12.005 feet

Add the .656 back to 419.07 = 419.72 which is the same elevation adjustment needed for the #1 to #2 elevation.

yet you mentioned Shaneyfelt maintaining the 61' distance throughout

419.07' = 232' - 61' = 171' from a point called 2+50 (which is 61' from 1+89) yet 2+50 appears to be the corner of the TSBD.

Is it simply the scale of the drawing or ???

Any idea how the WCD298 measurements were created?

thanks Chris - now the culmination of WCD298 work and these measurements

We have CE884 revised, Shaneyfelt's line drawing and the FBI's WCD298 measurements https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699#relPageId=61&tab=page

For WCD298 it states these distances as "hitting the target"

I did the calcs for where the 257' spot at 418,35' was using the difference in distance and the vertical drop and find a drop and distance problem. And also confirm that 419.07 should really be 419.72 (the .646' difference) yet doing the #1 to #3 calcs we get the correct elevation ???

285'-171'=114' / 18.3 = 6.23' vertical drop

423.07' - 6.23' = 416.84'

#3 is shown at 416.83' - math is correct...

Yet does not hold true for #2 - #3

285'-232'=53' / 18.3' = 2.896' vert drop

418.07'-2.896' = 415.74'

Elevations listed is 416.83; 1.09' higher or 19.947 feet further up Elm than the distances suggest...

Are we to throw out Shaneyfelt's drawing and calcs? and what about WCD298's calcs...

Shot #1 at 167 feet and the angles puts it closer to 186 than 207 - i.e. 190?

Thanks again for the help and patience... Your visualization of these figures and the resluting equations and analysis are extraordinary Chris ... keep up the great thinking

DJ