Chris Davidson

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

 - labeling protest as terrorist is something we should all be up in arms about.

Paul,

Personally, I would never label a "peaceful" protest as a terrorist act.

But, what occurred on Jan 6th was not a peaceful protest.

Terrorism Definitions 

International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

And, if anyone believes it was peaceful, just watch/listen to 19 seconds of video.

https://vimeo.com/806904828

If a person smashed the windows in my house trying to break in, I wouldn't necessarily think they were a terrorist, unless the intent was proven to be of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

But, I do have the right to defend my property/safety.

The hypocrisy flowing from the Fox mouthpieces is deafening.

A refresher and it's on to some ballistic triangles:

On 3/7/2023 at 8:28 AM, Chris Davidson said:

 

Does this motion look like familiar?

Change the ANGLE and you have a solution to the bobbleheads.

But, once you change it, it'll reveal the necessary camera height difference upon the pedestal to accommodate the alterations.

And/Or,

This might make it a little easier on the eyes, while conveying the same message:

Don't forget the angle change on the top sprocket hole, now that the bottom one is aligned.

On 2/24/2023 at 12:19 PM, Chris Davidson said:

 

I re-recommend listening to the short clip of Dino from the above link.

These are extant zframes 215/217, I left out z216 for accentuation purposes. Z216 has the same approx angle change as extant 217.

When viewing this, use bobblehead mentality.

iow, Individual pieces of a moving film.

Does this motion look like familiar?

Change the ANGLE and you have a solution to the bobbleheads.

But, once you change it, it'll reveal the necessary camera height difference upon the pedestal to accommodate the alterations.

On 3/5/2023 at 1:12 PM, Michael Davidson said:

So , if hes shot at different points to where the WC states does that  automatically point elsewhere for the shots ? Dal Tex ? Front shot (s) ? 

Plus if the film has been altered does that only refer to the Stemmons sign ? Frame removal ? Masking of blow out at the back of the head ? 

Michael,

I'm not too concerned with shooter locations at this time. I will say, I believe Dr.Shaw has one of the positions correct in regards to Connally. Previously addressed.

More handywork was applied to the film/s than just the StemmonsSign adjustment. imo

More importantly, it's rather obvious that the shot/reaction circa extant z207 had to be excised because of the reactions seen on the extant film at approx z225.

Not enough time for one shooter.

On 2/10/2023 at 11:49 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Speaking of that lower sprockethole.

This next gif should help you conceptualize the sleight of hand.

What part of the StemmonsSign is in unison with the Bobbleheads?

Give your eyes a few seconds for adjusting to see its true movement.

 

 

Let's throw in the bobbleheads using a non-splice/splice frame. two non-splice frames.

A different zfilm iteration of course.

If you didn't realize, these gifs are comprised of extant z205,206,207.

On 3/1/2023 at 1:55 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Actually, the lower sprocket hole is a great answer, which no doubt, was altered.

But, I should have been more specific.

A remnant on the Stemmons Sign is what I'm looking for.

The appropriate song with the appropriate answer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szlqFlG4DL8

Thanks.

Breaking it down somewhat further keeping the CE884 correlation in mind, the 2.24mph distance difference over those 18.3 frames(1sec) would only yield you 3.292ft which would leave another 1.8ft (5.1ft - 3.292) to resolve.

Since 2.24mph = .18ft per frame and there was 1.8ft to resolve, a total of 10 frames would fit the bill.

Hence the difference in entries between CE884 z161/171 of 10 frames, which would actually be in the same physical spot were it not for the angular/chess/BS directional change by the WC.

Or, just take the 5.1ft/5frames (z161-166) = 1.02ft per frame and multiply by 10 frames = 10.2ft.

z166 - 5.1ft/5frames = z161

z166+5.1ft/5frames =  z171

Overall total of 28.3frames x .18ft per frame(2.24mph) = 5.1ft

The same distance(10.2ft) the WC moved Robert West's shot determination circa station# 371.1(extant z207-splice) to the official WC location at station# 381.3

On 3/2/2023 at 12:00 AM, Chris Davidson said:

Looking previously at CE884, it's rather obvious the limo was not traveling at the designated speed entries for z161/166 and z168/171 which is 2.24 and 3.74mph respectively.

But, knowing they were trying to retard the limo progress by 5.1ft at the z166/171 entry point, then a simple calculation of 5.11ft over 5 frames would yield a speed of 12.72mph.

Recollecting, I think I plotted this span at 13.44mph , so close enough to give you a more accurate speed in this location.

 

 

 

 

Take the simple breakdown from above(the path switch) and allow it to help correlate the designations below:
Using 5.1ft/5frames = 12.697mph
Frames Z168-186 = 21.6ft = 14.938mph @ 18.3 frames (1second)
14.938mph - 12.697mph = 2.24mph
Z161-166 = 2.24mph
That’s a match.

Distance retarded 5.11ft

Distance advanced 10.2ft (Station# 371.1-381.3)

Total Span = 15.31ft

10" elevation change on a 3.13° slope = 10"/12" x 18.3 = 15.25ft distance traveled.

Now you can incorporate that retarded 5.11ft into this previously supplied graphic:

And, by piecing together two different WC distance adjustments, you'll have your answer to the 10" height conundrum.

It's similar to using the distance difference between the limo front end vs JFK in the limo as your measurement markers.

Looking previously at CE884, it's rather obvious the limo was not traveling at the designated speed entries for z161/166 and z168/171 which is 2.24 and 3.74mph respectively.

But, knowing they were trying to retard the limo progress by 5.1ft at the z166/171 entry point, then a simple calculation of 5.11ft over 5 frames would yield a speed of 12.72mph.

Recollecting, I think I plotted this span at 13.44mph , so close enough to give you a more accurate speed in this location.

The QueenMary reenactment speed difference(z166-z207) was approx 3.48mph = 5.11ft.

Since the WC knew that plotting the limo on its correct path would reveal more of the true events, they had to alter the limo path (using dots) instead of using Robert West's + marks.

When plotted, it looks like this using an LOS from the Z pedestal.

The blue lines are indicative of the distance difference between West's marks and the WC limo path in the extant Zfilm.

That distance(5.1ft) equaling the speed difference of 3.48mph over 41 extant zframes.

14 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

It's interesting, how many people have written off the reenactments as "less than perfect" attempts to obtain the truth.

The fact is, the reenactments were far more accurate in hiding the alterations.

Just as with the camera height on the pedestal not being quite the same height as what the extant Z camera was, this was also applied in terms of vehicle speed.

The gif above has the limo starting in the same location in both, when using the traffic signal light post in the background.

Running it from the beginning thru to the extant Z207 splice frame = 41 frames, which is reflected as a distance traveled of 41ft via CE884. 41ft/41frames - One ft. per one frame  hmm!!!

The immediate tipoff besides two different CE884 documents, is the listing of frame 166/171 in the same location.

The QueenMary in the reenactment session only takes 32 frames vs the 41 to arrive at the extant z207 location. (They knew the true speed of the limo)

41/32 = QueenMary traveling 1.28x faster in that span.

1ft per one frame = 18.3ft persec/1.47 = 12.44mph

12.44mph x 1.28 = 15.92mph

15.92mph - 12.44 = 3.48mph x 1.47 = 5.11ft in one second = 18.3frames

If this simple math gets too complicated just ask for refinements.

54 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

 

The remnant of the original lower sprocket hole?

 

Actually, the lower sprocket hole is a great answer, which no doubt, was altered.

But, I should have been more specific.

A remnant on the Stemmons Sign is what I'm looking for.

10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

btw,

The alterationists left us a remnant in the splice frame that will close the door on what you have previously been shown.

If anyone cares to point it out, I'll supply the necessary adjustment in a gif.

Until then, let me introduce a chess analogy for the same lateral/angular process used.

It's time to move away from the graphics for just a bit with some simple math to tie even more of this together.

On 2/25/2023 at 11:36 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Both frames shot with the Z camera.

5-7 inches of vertical to accommodate 3.13° angular, among other anomalies previously discussed.

Added on edit:

The Zframe in the top gif which is what I originally posted, is at the wrong aspect ratio.

I corrected it, which required a 7% height reduction.

The bottom gif is the corrected version.

My apology for that.

 

 

 

Harvey and Lee PG753:

"On November 25 (Monday) FBI Agent Emory Horton arrived at Dial Ryder's

house in Irving at 10:30 am. Ryder told the Warren Commission that he did not tell

Horton about the repair ticket until after Horton arrived at his house. Ryder said, "Oh, I

told him I had a ticket with the name Oswald, no date, no address, just for drilling and

tapping and boresighting-no address, or name; he didn't say he'd like to see the ticket....."

Ryder explained, "We went up to the Irving Sports Shop and I opened it up and got the

ticket and showed him."62
Ryder told SA Horton there was no record of a sale of scope mounts to the

customer. Therefore, this customer must have furnished both the scope and the mounts while Ryder performed the labor to drill, tap, and bore sight the gun. But Ryder told Horton he had no recollection of installing a side mounted scope (a very unusual way to mount a scope) on the type of gun used to assassinate President Kennedy. Ryder told the Warren Commission, "On this Italian rifle-I never worked on them. I seen them but as far as doing any physical work, I haven't done none even to this date, I haven't worked on any of them.....l am positive on that, very positive."

SA Horton showed Ryder a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, who said that he associated Oswald's picture with that of an individual who brought in an Argentine­ made rifle about two weeks earlier. Ryder attached a scope on the rifle but said the Argentine rifle had a different bolt assembly than the gun used to assassinate President Kennedy. 63 The FBI failed to ask Ryder for the mans name and address, failed to review repair tickets, and made no attempt to locate the man or the Argentine rifle."

The enlargement is frame 206 at left.

I'll call it bobble-suit:

Both frames shot with the Z camera.

5-7 inches of vertical to accommodate 3.13° angular, among other anomalies previously discussed.

Added on edit:

The Zframe in the top gif which is what I originally posted, is at the wrong aspect ratio.

I corrected it, which required a 7% height reduction.

The bottom gif is the corrected version.

My apology for that.

Thanks for working that out for me.

So, is it safe to say, that the camera height for the Barnes photo was at the same/approx height as the reenactment frames I have been providing? 

Now that you have the lateral concept in mind, keep repeating to yourself as you watch this gif, "the limo's orientation to the StemmonsSign" before the splice and after the splice.

15 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

That said, and thinking about 3.13° limo lateral adjustments in relationship to the sign, please reread the very few testimony snippets I supplied:

The WC shared the lateral adjustment(3.13° plotted with their dots, not Robert West )they needed to coincide with the photographic/film adjustment. Thus the reason for the objection in the Clay Shaw trial.

 

 

 

 

Subtleness.

The curbface or shadow thereof:

Give your eyes time to adjust and/or enlarge it on your monitor.

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Well it should be the same 3.13.... 

Can you explain why this 215/217 looks different that yours? Pincushion effect?  The overlay is lined up to the limo

The limo's orientation to the sign, with 3.13° in play.

I'll be providing you with some examples in a bit. Along with a couple of triangles.

A big problem has always been, not being able to compare to similar footage.  And even then, the changes are very subtle.

That said, and thinking about 3.13° limo lateral adjustments in relationship to the sign, please reread the very few testimony snippets I supplied: