David Josephs

You are hilarious CL..

Do you not notice that the entire recreation picture is taken from a less extreme low-to-high LOS...

as if the camera is pointed more straight on rather than UP at an angle...

are you going to now show us those math skills and tell us how 10 inches in any direction changes the LOS VERTICALLY on a 3 degree slope ?

Here are the two images in a gif... it is OBVIOUS the walls of the TSBD tilt forward from Altgens to the recreation...

IOW the camera is pointing LESS of an angle upward than in Altgens...

How much further up Elm can the camera move so that it can be used almost head on and STILL be able to match the tree in front of the TSBD?

You think 10 inches in any direction will change the vertical LOS that much? at a 3 degree slope... you wanna bet even YOUR MATH will show a greater movement than 10 inches

to accompish the vertical shift in the image

and finally CL... your re-example of the letter movement once again assumes only perpendicular movement....

If we keep all things constant and simply move 20 feet directly closer to the TSBD and up the 3 degree slope, you wanna bet the photos can be made to look the same

even though the location has changed dramatically?

and since you have no idea from where the recreation photo was taken... you cannot work backwards ASSUMING they were taken from the same place.

The ONLY way your LEVER math works is if you can figure out the EXACT perpendicular change AND the exact angular change VERTICALLY as his position is moved UP both Elm and the slope..

Go get 'em CL...

Once again you try to confuse the issue...

The 20 foot movement was not AT the TSBD but at an angle... the 5 foot movement was not perpendicular.. but at yet another ANGLE

You have NO IDEA how the camera was moved or to where... you make assumptions and ASSUME the LEVER math works since you start your example off with a WRONG ASSUMPTION.

and then support you WRONG ASSUMPTION with wrong movements

Try again CL...

The example you posted (red line movement to blue line) is approx 20 feet on the Don R map. (since Moorman is 40 feet from Altgens)

Your own lines show the slight movement in the LOS to the TSBD lettering as you claim.

If a 20 foot movement can result in a minor change to the LOS - AS YOU HAVE SHOWN AND PROVEN -...

why do you keep claiming only a 10" movement for the recreation camera?

CL - while it is indeed a nice try...

you completely forget about LOS in your LEVER math....

The LEVER Math only works with perpendicular movement CL...

Do you have a photo of where they put the recreation camera? Do you know the lens used for the recreation?

a simple yes or no here CL.

If you do not know where the camera is or the lens used you CANNOT use your lever math...

You ASSUME that the recreation camera and Altgens' camera are the same distance from the TSBD...

You also assume that the recreation image is printed at the correct size, no cropping, just like Altgens again... and you do not know these as facts

You can't use the Altgens camera position to determine the potential MOVEMENT of the recreation Camera - unless the movement is exactly perpendicular to the LOS...

YOU need to figure out the different LOS possibilities for those two images to look so similiar... cause we KNOW where Altgens was, and we also know the curve of the street and the distances involved...

You keep trying to tell us that there are no other locations in DP that the recreation photo could have been taken other than a 10 inch circle around Altgen's original position

That's complete BS and you know it CL...

Moving UP towards moorman and over is NOT the same as moving perpendicular to the LOS... your LEVER MATH is worthless in this example.... but again, nice try....

Let's get a little better idea of where Altgens was and how that alignes with Moorman

Your logic is completely based on EXACT PERPENDICULAR MOVEMENT of the camera in relation to the direction the camera is pointed....

You assume the MAXIMUM change in LOS rather than what is possible based on the reality of the Plaza...

Try this CL... if we were TRYING to recreate Altgens AND move him up closer to Moorman AND maintain a "close enough for gov't work" attitidue

where would YOU move the camera and what would YOU do with focal length and LOS?

If a person was to move closer to the TSBD by 20 feet and then perpendicular for 5 feet... and use a different focal length lens

this person would have a view SIMILIAR to Altgens yet he would not be 220 feet from the TSBD any longer

As this illustrates...moving perpendicular to the arrow pointing AT the TSBD could create the shift you are referring to in your LEVER math

But we are not saying the recreation moved him in that direction... the recreation moved him UP THE STREET, closer to Moorman

Based on the curve of the street we can see that movement in that direction would not affect the "letters on the TSBD" as much as your perpendicular movement would.

So tell us CL... do we see any photos of where they placed the camera for this recreation, which lens was used to take the photo?

And then explain to us your LEVER math as it relates to moving in OTHER directions rather than perpendicular... what are the LOS changes if you are not sure where the recreation camera is?

You first Lamson...

You've done nothing to support your claims...

SHOW YOUR WORK or move on already.....

Jim...

I am hoping this is not simply a matter of semantics...

The Luncheon was scheduled for 12 noon for VIPs

JFK was to arrive at 12:15 (45 mins from arrival at 11:30 at Love to the Trade Mart)

Anyone with knowledge of JFK's route and a desire to shot him from a window in the the TSBD SHOULD expect JFK to pass by around 12:10 - IF ON TIME

The motorcade left Love at 11:50, 20 mins late...

At this point do you believe there were changes in the route to make back that 20 mins or was the rest of the world going to wait until the POTUS got there? I don't think anything was changed

Oswald - if the Lone Nut - needs to know when JFK is passing his building to be ready to shoot him...

If all he knows is what's been published and announced... JFK would be passing his window at 12:10....

When does the LN need to get his rifle ready to fire in that case? and where is he REALLY at 12:10?

On the other hand, witnesses begin seeing men with rifles and men watching the street/overpass between 12:10 and 12:20 ON THE 6th FLOOR and then recede back into the darkness...

Men in the SW and SE windows

Would they have known he stopped to shake hands and was 20 mins late leaving the airport? but knew they needed to be in position ahead of time?

Jim -

Even if JFK landed an hour late and he or Jackie had a 45 minute "emergency"... people in DP and the Trade Mart would have still turned out on time to see him.

The motorcade would still have left and there still would have been teams in DP ready to fire...

IF you are saying that DC could have aborted the assassination due to this TIME ALLOTMENT being used up... THAT I can see and fully understand since people returning to their offices due to their lunch hour being over COULD HAVE interfered with teams in DP.... yet imo, even that had contingency planning...

Gut feeling is that there was no way he was going to leave Dallas alive... Dick Russell writes about alternate plans along Stemmons and at the Trade Mart... and my guess would be there were others at the airport to try and kill him... but that's purely speculation.

To sum up... I agree that the motorcade timing was crucial to the assassination working.... anytime between 12pm and 1pm though would have been PREFERRED due to the emptying of buildings...

Curious... in Chicago and Tampa... what times where the motorcasdes scheduled for?

btw - it has gotten to the point where anything and everything is worth looking into and researching... there was a time Jupiter had only a few moons... now, with clarity, we know there are over 60...

what is mysterious and incomprehensible NOW will change in time... as illumination is brought to the subject...

Keep shining those lights Jim...

DJ

Hey there Tom, Chris...

If dawned on me that since we are comparing Altgens location in relation to Moorman.... a few things come to mind

- according to Don's map, Altgens is 40 feet from Moorman...

- if Altgens' recreation was moved up the street as hypothesized, is there any photo that captures Moorman's POV back toward the TSBD?

Moorman 3 includes the concrete pillar at the far right of the frame...

I took M3 and added Altgens and the recreation photos all centered on the concrete pillar...

Since lenses dont matter according to the resident expert... if Moorman 3 was taken with a 105mm lens instead of the wider angle polaroid lens

how would that compare to the two other photos?

If Altgens moved only 10 inches, the moorman photo should not work at all from her location 40 feet NE of Altgens, when compared to either altgens or the recreation...

If distance is the same, or very close, a change in focal length should not matter

If moorman and altgens are taken from different distances it should NOT work and the recreation could NOT be sized to Moorman 3

No doubt I'm doing something wrong

yet it appears from this overlay that the recreation photo could have EASILY been taken from moorman's location in her #3 image... 40 feet from Altgens.

And that there is simply too much rotation within the photo to have the recreation only off by 10 inches.... unless CL can prove it with his math skills

(PS - if CL is going to mention math repeatedly - don't you think he should show HIS work instead of just claiming he's right and not offer anything to back himself up?)

Is anyone else having trouble with the jfkassassinationforum or jfkforum?

Duncan said he was having speed troubles and was migrating to a new site....

I thought I had the new link... but can't seem to find it.... I had already registered there as well...

at least I thought I did...

DJ

I'm guessing Duncan will post links here and there to lead people to the new location...

The two different versions are now synced up in distance and in frame count by IMPLEMENTING 2 SECONDS OF FILM AT 24FPS. into the 18.3 fps version.

Thanks Chris... I want to clearly understand this....

2 seconds at 24fps into the 18.3 version of the Zfilm I assume.

Can you state your conclusion related to the T film and Z film without pronouns

My understanding is

The WCR slowed the limo to 2.25 mph from 161-166 so the movement would only be .97 feet during that time so the different films would sync... specifically Towner

The Towner Splice also allows the films to sync?

The splice at 156 allows for ??

Where exactly is the 2 seconds of fim at 24fps?

Sure, thanks....is there a lone assassin theorist in the house?

Why again is one of those needed? Isn't THAT POV pretty well defined by now?

What are they going to say? Weitzman was "Mistaken"? Truly and Baker, "mistaken"?

Hill's declaration - "Mistaken" again?

1:34 550/2 (Sgt. G.L. Hill) The shells at the scene indicate that the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol.

Just curious...

The evidence was changed, altered, created, lost, fabricated, lied about - not to mention the wholesale removal of all this evidence without record...

yet we know Dulles didn't want it out... so he changed the evidence...

How can we be sure that any piece of evidence establishing the guilt of Oswald is "AUTHENTIC"?

Excellent, Pat, my first taker! Thank you! Any lone assassin theorists out there ready to weigh in?

Need one more CTer too ....

I'd be interested in your work as well Barry....

I am a reality theorist.... the authentic evidence of this case conclusively shows the conspiracy...

and I'm all about authenticating the evidence...

PM me for my home email address

DJ

and this gif will give you some idea of what the xray is trying to tell us is gone

I need some help from you experts about something I've never figured out about the Z film.

For the headshot, while JFK's head goes back from a shot from the front, how come the head explosion looks awkward. Whenever I see this, I expect something from the back of his head being blown out. Now I've read the witness testimony's and of course some of your work showing that 'blob' in the Z film as his back of the head. But what is actually being blown away in the Z film?

When I see it, I see what it seems like his side of the head/right ear gets blown away and the head flaps over it. Almost makes it look like the shot came from his left to right.

Still can't really figure it out.

Hey there Rodney... this might help...

A shot from the front still opens up the right side of the head... yet the testimony from Parkland does not corroborate the FLAP we see...

I am of the opinion that this flap may not have been as pronounced as we see in the fox photo...

It is obvious from the photos and xrays, they do not work together... his entire forehead and frontal skull cannot just be gone...

Thanks B...

and always big thanks Robin.

You think Fetz will tell us the tree was added after the fact to block the GK and Altgens' position...

perfectly?

I was not aware of that.

I thought the FB I tested the camera and it came out at 18.3 FPS.

Was Zapruder running it at a lower rate?

Thanks you Chris... and here I thought something just popped out at me...

Yet I still think the math allows the Zfilm to excise 2-3 seconds, most probably at the corner and having to do with the splice in Z at that corner.

Well Jim... right out of the gate... if the FBI says so....

How could the FBI test how much winding Mr Z did before he started filming...?

It would seem to me that the FBI would ultimately use a fps rate that made everything work.... if they had a hand in any alteration...

Bottom line is the info provided for accurate measurements in DP from our government is WRONG... which in turn make it virtually impossible to relate frames, to speed, to time.

If the headshot happens 15 feet from Altgens... how in the world does it look like he's that distance at z342?

btw... where is the Queen Mary in Bronson? was it really that far behind the limo?

The more I keep looking the different angles - the more it looks wrong...

DJ

Cue up the Stabilized version of the Zfilm... http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov

It BEGINS at frame 133....

The headshot is STILL at 313... or 180 frames later

180 frames / 18.3fps = 9.84 seconds...

Except when you freeze the frame at z313... it is almost 13 seconds later....

If the stabilized version running at 18.3fps then we are missing almost 3 seconds of film between 133 and 313.

I am not at a location where I can use software to get the exact time elapsed of the film from 133-313...

but the zframes would have to be slowed down by almost 25% to get 13 seconds from 9.84...

The stabilized version is not 25% slower is it?

DJ

Films usually have a starting point (frame 1) and end point (last frame).

Math starts with a question and ends with an answer.

I'll start with Zone1 from the previous post since that includes frame 1-(161 WC starting point).

If the WC started their calculations with frame 161, that tells me there must be a frame 1 starting point.

If they didn't have footage of the limo, at the beginning of the Z film, around the Elm St. turn, they could use the Towner film.

How so?

They could have used a landmark within the plaza to align JFK and start their frame counting from that spot. (Landmark would be the physical corner of the TSBD).

Now, to do that, they would have to be in possession of the Towner film back in 1963/64.

What does the Towner film show when JFK is near the TSBD corner? It shows a splice and removal of frames. The position of JFK after the splice is aligned with the corner of the TSBD.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/TownerSplice-1.gif

So a starting point has been set.

The WC quite easily could have used the Towner frame count at 18.3 FPS to arrive at approx 167 or 168 total frames depending on the missing spliced frame count.

How would the math work on this?

Including the splice frames (approx 8) to where JFK is aligned with the corner of the TSBD is 92 frames. That leaves 76 frames from the corner on down Elm St.

92 frames at 18.3 fps=5.02 sec.

76frames at 18.3 fps=4.15 sec.

Apparently they thought about starting the frame calculations at frame 168 but eventually changed their minds.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Frame168.png

Instead, there is an approx 7 to 8 frame splice and their official calculations start with Frame 161.

Frame 168-161 = 7 frames.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Frame161-1.png

Also take note of the distance adjustment made for frames 161-166 of .9ft traveled in 5 frames.

chris

There are 3600 seconds in an hour and 5280 feet in a mile

At 1mph the limo would travel 1.47 feet in one second (5280/3600)

At 1mph the limo would travel .4 feet in 5/18.3 of a second (5 frames)

At 2mph the limo would travel .8 feet in 5 frames

At 2.25mph the limo travels the .9 feet in 5 frames

The limo was moving 2.25mph from 161-166...

Moving on... from 166-185 = 19 frames or 1.038 seconds

and equates to 19.2 feet the limo moved

At 1mph the limo moves 1.47 feet....

At 13.5mph the limo moves 19.2 feet in 1.038 seconds

In less than a second the limo accellerated from 2.25mph to 13.5mph?

The distances related to Zframes does not work... Zframes are missing...

In the case from 161-166 there are as many as 14-15 frames missing if the limo was up to it's 11mph speed

Thanks David,

My frame100 reference has nothing to do with the pre-limo footage, at least in relation to what I am looking for.

chris

That's fine... yet does this movement look correct to you?

How does the entire shape of the "F" change yet not appear to move at all at the top of the frame?

Shouldn't this be mirror there?

DJ

No worries... you did quite a lot to establish the distance and time problems so I believe you deserve some of the kudos regardless...

Your comment about z100 got me looking... I did not find anything in the testimony but I did go look at the frame....

as well as from 94-101... Tom is very cryptic but usually has a point...

What struck me was the reflection of what looks like the letter "F" and how in all the frames before it moves in both the intersprocket area and above the top sprocket hole in sync....

Except for z100. Is it possible to have a section of the film moving while the reflection of that image doesn't?

When the attempt was made to reconstruct the Altgens photo, the final product moves Altgens to the EAST a considerable distance...

The small letters are the recreation... the two images were stablized around the main pillar above the limo....

To get the small letters to align with the capital letters the camera MUST move to the EAST while rotating around that column...

The REAL problem with Altgens was that it was taken 30-40 feet further WEST... where we ultimately see Altgens standing in Zflim...

Altgens tell us the limo moved from 40 feet away in his photo to 15 feet at z313... both measurements do not work with what is seen on the Zflim.

Add to this the incorrect survey data and the final shot at station 4+95 (15 feet in front of Altgens) and

we all can see the real problems in using any of the photos/films in relation to one another...

They do NOT work together... even though they appear to.

The distance from Z255 to where Altgens is 15 feet from JFK (Z342) is much farther than what the z film allows...

Now, why would "they" want to move Altgens 30-40 feet EAST for his photograph?

DJ

Mr. ALTGENS - You will see by then referring to picture No. 354, that the Presidential car was well down Elm Street in front of a tree that is located in a grassy area which is just off of Elm Street and just off of the street that runs down in front of the Book Depository Building, which would indicate that the point at which he was struck, the location of the car, would be approximately 30 feet in front of the position from which I made this picture. Does that make sense?

Mr. LIEBELER - Yes; what you are saying is that picture 203 was taken at a time when the President's car had actually gone down Elm Street to a point past this tree that stands at the corner here, in the grassy area, outlined by Elm Street and a little street that runs down by the Texas School Book Depository Building?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER - Now, the thing that is troubling me, though, Mr. Altgens, is that you say the car was 30 feet away at the time you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and that is the time at which the first shot was fired?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER - And that it was 15 feet away at the time the third shot was fired.Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER - But during that period of time the car moved much more than 15 feet down Elm Street going down toward the triple underpass?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I'm having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President's car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.

I didn't think they used temp employee for the 6th floor... don't we get a list of the workers from Williams?

He doesn't mention TEMP workers...

Mr. BALL. And how many were working on the sixth floor with you?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I believe there were five.

Mr. BALL. What are their names?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, Bill Shelley, Charles Givens, and there was a fellow by the name of Danny Arce.

Mr. BALL. He is a Mexican boy?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. And a fellow by the name of Billy Lovelady, and myself. And there was a fellow that came up--his name was Harold Norman. He really wasn't working at the time, but there wasn't anything to do, he would come around to help a little bit, and then back down.

Mr. DULLES. Was he in the employ of the company?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; he had been working there at the time about 2 years, I think.

Mr. DULLES. But he wasn't on this particular detail on the sixth floor that you are speaking of?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, he had been helping us on the fifth floor. When the orders would come in, he would go down and help with the orders, and when he didn't have anything else to do he would come back and help us move stock around. I think that was him.

Mr. BALL. What part of the sixth floor were you working that morning?

Mr. WILLIAMS. On the west side.

Mr. BALL. Were you moving stock or laying floor that morning?

Mr. WILLIAMS. We were doing both.

Mr. BALL. You were doing both?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

Yet this black man, at the rear door is there 5 minutes after the shooting and what appears to be 20-25 minutes after as well... I believe that dark Cubans and/or some of the black men MAY have been put into a position to cooperate

Goes behind TSBD: Mr. HAYGOOD. At that time I talked to the colored male (negro) who was standing at the door and asked him how long he had been there, and he said he had been there some 5 minutes or so. And I asked him if anyone had came out that door, and he said that they had not.

Mr. SORRELS - I don't believe it could have been more than 20 or 25 minutes at the very most.

Mr. STERN - Then you arrived at the Book Depository Building, and did you see any police officers outside the building?

Mr. SORRELS - Yes; there were officers. I recall seeing officers. I could not say any specific one.

Now, as I came into the back of the building, there was a colored man standing on the rear platform, a loading platform. And he was just standing there looking off into the distance. I don't think he knew what happened.

And I said to him, ""Did you see anyone run out the back?""

He said, ""No, sir.""

""Did you see anyone leave the back way?""

""No, sir.""

Mr. STERN - Did you get his name?

Mr. SORRELS - No, sir; I did not. I did not stop to do that, because I figured he was an employee of the building.

Don't you find it hard to believe that NOTHING is seen for 20-30 minutes at the back of the TSBD? When we KNOW there was quite a lot of activity back there...

just a thought... who would even guess that black men would be involved that day?

David,

IF Altgens was altered--and I am neither convinced that it was or was not--but, IF it was, then there are several factors to consider, some of which are NOT necessarily obvious.

I agree with you that it would have been a "simpler" solution to add Oswald to a photo of the 6th floor--IF--framing him for the crime was their ONLY (or their most important) goal.

But, what if an equally--if not more--important goal was to cause: confusion, infighting, the chasing of red herrings, mis-direction, doubt, fear, cognitive dissonance, and myriad other psyops "effects" that serve a more long term goal? If true, then we must look at the subject of alteration with a different eye altogether. For instance, the topic of Z-film alteration has led, understandably, to some skeptics asking the legitimate question: "If the conspirators altered the film why did they leave in some of the most damaging evidence, such as, the "back and to the left" motion that clearly indicates a shot from the front?" That question is similar in nature to the one you raised.

Again, sometimes motivations are not as obvious or "simple" as all of that. The events in Dealey Plaza, in my view, were not just the murder of the president, a coup, and a frame-up of a patsy so the perps could get away with it. It was much more than that.

It was psychological warfare on a very deep level perpetrated against the sovereignty of the PEOPLE of the United States. I believe that the perpetrators were fully capable of completely covering up this crime to the point of it being Case Closed--accepted by everyone--within a few months.

IMHO:

THAT the official story is still being doubted by the vast majority of Americans is by DESIGN.

There is no doubt that events where planned to create HONEST, conflicting testimony about identical events...

There is also no doubt that we are not only looking at the tip of the iceberg... but in many cases the wrong iceberg entirely...

So the question remains... how to authenticate the conspiracy using in-authentic evidence... by its nature, showing that the evidence cannot be authenticated

IS in itself proof of the conspiracy...

Take care Greg...

and thanks for remaining one of the truly enjopyable points of light from this forum....

DJ

Excellent KK... thanks!

So Greg...

What are you thoughts then...

If they can alter Altgens to remove Oswald... IF...

why not just simply put Oswald into one of the TSBD 6th images as I playfully did?

and what is the white line crossing in front of his shoulder and chin

and how does it actually appear as if black man is blocked out by Doorman 6-7 feet west of him in weigman... did he move to the west between images?

DJ

ps... you're one of the heavy weights Greg... anyone who's seen a differet Z film qualifies

or has offered up clarity in as many areas as you have...

cheers

Hi Tommy..

It's strange,no?

I post this pages and pages ago to discuss the white lines crossing in front of Doorman...

or how his shoulder and arm are so out of place... how it crosses in front of the black man.... just insults..

I make the suggestion that if the photo changers are THAT GOOD, why not just put Oswald in the 6th floor window in ANY image

If they knew he would not be there and they could control any sightings of Oswald (Arnold, Reid) thru alteration and intimidation.

why not, right?

Silence.

and then look at the images they DO use to argue DETAILS with each other...

Can you imagine ANYONE outside our group reading this thread with the heavyweights of the assassination bickering like children...

Here is the first floor B...

[...]

If they could put Lovelady in the doorway... why not put Oswald in the 6th floor window and call it Case Closed??

[...]

David,

You make an excellent point.

--Thomas