Chris Davidson

Jack, You are correct. Whatever the distance from front bumper to center/rear of front tire is. Which is not close to 9/10 of a foot. chris

Solve the math/timing problems related to the Z film/WC and then we can move on. WC document 884. chris

The actual camera never moved during the test. Only the lens was moved a total of 20mm from side to side. When taking a picture of the actual camera positions, shouldn't a tripod have been used, so the only movement shown is the len's movement? chris

Craig, What's at the end of Newman's shoulder? Just as there appears to be an antenna, there appears to be an arm. Just not the position it should be in. Bill might confirm that for you. How about supplying that high res drum scan? chris

That's if you believe it's an antenna. As I said before, if you can't connect the antenna back to it's cycle, it doesn't work. Where is the rest of it in Moorman? The antenna appears wider at the base, than at the tip. From Muchmore, it's the same cycle. Does the Arnold/MiniMe scenario ring a bell. chris

That's correct, Robin. Here is a more complete animation of Newman's movement and keep an eye on the antenna positions. Credit to John Dolva http://76.89.77.141:8400/8381B/cyclecops.mov Thanks for reminding me of this one, Bernice. chris

Robin, If you can't connect the antenna back to the cycle it belongs to, then it doesn't work. In this movie: Cops in foreground from both frames basically aligned. Note the antenna's on all 4 cycles. The antenna on the far side of the street is a much closer fit in size, to the Moorman object in question. In fact, the cop farthest away in this new film, is the same size, as the one farthest away in Moorman. (Can show if requested) In other words, the object in Newman's armpit is near his side of the street. chris Chris. I understand what you are saying. The antenna situated behind the black utility box does appear to be quite some distance from the riders back. I also see in your Nix frame that there is an object (line) cutting through Newman. Below Newman and his son, is that the front left wheel of the queen Mary. ? No. It's cycle 1 and it's antenna. Which can be connected. chris

Bill, That contradicts what is seen in Nix. Newman's hand never leaves his son's hand. chris

Robin, If you can't connect the antenna back to the cycle it belongs to, then it doesn't work. In this movie: Cops in foreground from both frames basically aligned. Note the antenna's on all 4 cycles. The antenna on the far side of the street is a much closer fit in size, to the Moorman object in question. In fact, the cop farthest away in this new film, is the same size, as the one farthest away in Moorman. (Can show if requested) In other words, the object in Newman's armpit is near his side of the street. chris

If you look at Nix, and the previous stabilization I created, the antenna's map out this way. Cop (1+4) closest and farthest away to Nix, share rearmost antenna. It's in the same spot. Cop#2 is closest to Jackie and leading the other cops. Cop#3 antenna is just above cop#4 helmet. If that is cop#3's antenna in Moorman, where is the space between his rear end and the antenna? That object going into Newman's armpit runs through the cop's back on cycle #3. There should be a nice gap between the back of the cop and the antenna in Moorman. chris

Full frame from post #22. He is closest to Jackie on her side of limo chris

Jack, The difference between the two cops is indistinguishable to me. Best picture I have is Altgen's. The only variation I pick up is one with sunglasses. The provided animation is Martin over Hargis from Altgen's. The previous posted, cycle cop comparison animation, involves the one closest to Jackie. It's the same cop. Easier for me to keep track of. It was not a windshield comparison between the two, it was for antenna positioning. chris

perhaps the Lone Nutter's need a good Photoshop guy/gal? Besides, I wouldn't trust where ANY of these .jpg/.gif images originated from. They're running you in circles Chris... David, That's quite alright. I enjoy the creative side of this. The little I possess and pass on, for the benefit of others. Moving forward, I don't remember Toni Foster's coat moving as such, in consecutive frames in Z. That's if you believe the shadow moving toward her, along with the cars, is from her coat. Just my imagination I guess. enjoy, chris P.S. Edited description of Foster's coat from rising and falling to "moving as such", sorry about that.

Robin, Thank you for confirming what I stated in post #12. Craig says that antenna is from cycle #2. I assume he refers to cycle #2 as closest to Jackie. If the object going through Newman's armpit is the antenna from #2 cycle, please connect it back to the cycle for me in Moorman? I'd also like to see the windshield near that antenna. If it's not this cycle, I'd love to hear which one it is. chris

It is a curved windshield and its quite visable in Moorman. The vertical in Moorman that has you stumped is the antenna from the second motorcycle....Why is it you think this frame is NOT a good fit with Moorman? I'll assume you meant to say "the vertical in Nix". Well, yes the vertical in Nix is the cycle antenna, which I've known for some time. Actually, it appears to represent 2 cycle antenna's if you look a little closer at Nix's film. chris

No Craig. Let me know. BTW, That straightened vertical object I mentioned going up through Newman's armpit, shows up in Nix. It's not a curved windshield I wonder why this frame doesn't sync with Moorman. chris

Comparison 1 is wrong. The black object showing through the cycle windshield is fine. Frame is from Muchmore. chris NO, Chris...you are NOT wrong. It still coincides EXACTLY with the limo wheelwell...just not all of it! Jack Thanks Jack, In fairness and haste, I didn't want the previous photo to come as a surprise to anyone interested. Looked long and hard for other clear images of this area. Please pick it apart. I still believe there are too many commonly aligned elements among both photos, for this to be a coincidence. chris

Comparison 1 is wrong. The black object showing through the cycle windshield is fine. Frame is from Muchmore. chris

I wonder if a Hughes frame of the limo, in a similar position, might raise a question or two. Hughes filmed from the street at the corner of Houston/Main. It appears that he was closer than Moorman. Objects appearing somewhat larger. That being the case, using the white tire stripe and Clint limo handrail as registration points, should the left end/brakelight in Hughes extend out past what is seen in Moorman? Is the left side of that handrail bent, as it doesn't appear to keep it's shape when compared to Hughes? chris

It is difficult on my part to argue the lighting conditions which lead to the disappearance of Newman's left arm. However, when Newman is created and aligned as a whole, out of the ashes arises much more of Muchmore. The green arrows only point to the obvious common elements between both photos. There are others, see what you can find. A closer look (outline of figures) will reveal Charles Brehm and Babushka lady arising from Moorman. I whole-heartedly agree with Tom about the strategic positioning of the thumbprint. The Moorman alteration relates to the LOS lessons he was giving us with regards to Muchmore and Bond. imo chris P.S. Craig, after aligning Newman, I couldn't figure out why the cycle windscreen edge would appear perfectly vertical(passing right through Newman's armpit). All the cycle windscreens I've seen are built with a curve. Even from Moorman's perspective, wouldn't I expect to see that curve as I see with the other's?

Josiah Thompson quote: "Hence, the films and photos from Dealey Plaza form a bedrock of evidence in the case that future historians can use to evaluate eyewitness testimony and physical evidence. This will happen even if the films and photos from Dealey Plaza are not used in a future legal proceeding." Math will rule the day. It is admissible in a court of law. The Towner camera FPS / Myer's individual film frames sync contradiction awaits. What type of movie camera's filmed at 24FPS back in 1963? Surely not Towner's 8mm. chris

Darnell stabilized. http://76.89.77.141:8400/11831/DARNELLSTABILIZED.mov I see no movement from the object behind the fence. chris

Could this actually be someone behind the fence? Or, like my Moorman creation's, is this picturesque pixels? chris

Chris, actually it was Geoffrey Crawley (a well noted photo scientist who specializes in debunking images) who was able to duplicate the clarity as represented in Jack's work. Crawley used the same type camera with the glass lens. So it isn't a matter of what I or you say, but rather a fact that it was done using the same equipment as Moorman did. Bill Miller Bill, That's fine. I'm referring to the actual photo. He probably missed this behind the wall. Or, we all see things we want to see. chris

Thanks Robin, Have you come across any photos/film where the windscreen actually obscurs the object seen through it? Remember, at least according to Bill, this camera len's resolving power is good enough to pick up badgeman in shadow, how many feet away? chris