Chris Davidson

10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

If this is not the same person in both frames, somebody did a masterful job.

Who said anything about the above being the same person in Altgens?

If this is not the same person in both frames, somebody did a masterful job.

16 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Drommer Confirmation:

Elevation 490.9 - 161.1 = 329.8 + 88.8 = 418.6 - 418.48 = .12 x 18.3 = 2.196 + 4.2 = 6.396 - .9 = 5.496 / 18.3 = .3ft x 14frames = 4.2ft

More Drommer confirmation:

The rifle barrel elevation for survey 313 was 492ft.

492- 161.1 = 330.9 + 88.8 = elevation 419.7

The elevation listed from the attached plat (shot #2)  is 419.07.

The 0 and 7 were transposed in 419.07, the elevation should have read 419.70

A quick check will show 419.70 - 418.35 = 1.35 x 18.3 = 24.7ft = approx (257 -232) red box

Translated, the WC was trying to move one of the two shots circa extant z313 farther east up Elm St.

Pat,

The plat you refer to is a layered combination of Drommer and the WC final plat in May of 1964.

The dots were entered in, by Robert West, but at the direction of the FBI.

The frame numbers, more than likely, by the FBI/SS.

Robert West's (Clay Shaw) testimony below.

On 2/1/2018 at 7:49 AM, Chris Davidson said:

The extant Zfilm(z301-z313) shows the limo travel (18.3/12 = 1.525 x 7.2ft = 10.98ft per sec / 18.3frames) = .6ft per frame = 7.47mph

At .6ft per frame, 7 additional(non synced) frames = 4.2ft

From Z313, the limo will travel 7 standard Zframes + 7 non-synced frames for a distance of 4.2ft.

I'm quite sure this is what gave Tom Wilson his "4 feet farther down the road" conundrum.

Listen again:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1T_L-ofjszZmZnMK9raiElwQfYA9YjZqx/view?usp=sharing

 

 

 

 

Drommer Confirmation:

Elevation 490.9 - 161.1 = 329.8 + 88.8 = 418.6 - 418.48 = .12 x 18.3 = 2.196 + 4.2 = 6.396 - .9 = 5.496 / 18.3 = .3ft x 14frames = 4.2ft

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

I was wondering when Chris Davidson was going to show up.  It looks like I am being entertained with more pictures of tires as phony as the earlier ones.  You folks must really feel threatened by this thread.  I don't know whether to call you guys secret LN's or CT's in denial.  Doesn't matter what I am posting threatens your fantasy land of 55 years.

At least Jeremy Bojczuk is dealing with the topic at hand.  But, he is a biased commentator and somewhat of a fanatic who loves to twist statements.

"Look, there aren't any reasonable objections to the lone nut theory! All of those conspiracy theorists are crazy, paranoid fantasists!"

Is this for real or laughable? 

As far as this goes:

The smaller frame is familiar and from Muchmore just before you see Edgar Smith.  The motorbike cop blocks his view.  I would not have submitted this.

What the larger frame is I don't know.  It doesn't have either Officer Joe Marshall Smith or Edgar Smith on the southeast corner of Elm and Houston or under the windows of the Court Record Building.  This makes this frame very suspicious.

The frame does have an officer stationed in the middle of Elm St. at the intersection.  It looks to be from an elevated position.  Bell and Zapruder shot from elevated positions.  The angles don't seem right for either of them.  Can't be Zapruder because the scene is much clearer.  Can't be Altgens because he would be blocked by folk on the southwest corner of Elm and Houston.  So, who?  Not a clue.

Is this some secret film no one knows anything about?    

 

Sourced:

https://www.canstockphoto.com/1950-black-coupe-4919799.html

Different angles, same idea.

5 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Thanks Tony. Must have taken some time to prepare the montage. It certainly shows the line of sight if you line up the landmarks. I don't think I have to add anything to your composite which shows the limited field of view of Altgens camera. It certainly shows where the Stemmons sign was in relation to the photo.

Still don't think that it will make any difference to Mr Butler as he is wedded to his belief that the photograph was faked.

Many thanks to Rick McTague for his re-enactment Altgen's photo.

Pretend you're a photographer and you are standing at the end of the red line (lower left of photo) taking a picture of the trucks front end.

Now pretend you're Zapruder taking a photo of the same truck and the forefront light post is the Stemmons sign.

Now pretend you gave me a horizontal distance between where an object should be and where it actually is.

Now look at the horizontal distance line that connects the lightpost to my brothers head(almost).

JFK's position within the limo didn't physically pass the Stemmons sign physical position by Z255.

Can't help you anymore if you don't understand this.

15 hours ago, John Butler said:

 

   25 or 40 feet in Altgens 6 you should see the Stemmons sign to the right rear of the limousine on the north side of Elm. 

  From here in this scene it is 25 feet to Z frame 255.  The Stemmons sign should be visible to the rear of the presidential limousine.  And, it is not.

How can someone taking a photo from in front (Altgens) expect the limo (which hasn't passed the Stemmons sign) at extant Z255 to be ahead of the sign by 40ft, within the photo?

Extant Z is at an angle in relationship to the limo.

You're giving us a horizontal distance/location based on that angle.

Try following the blue line from the Z pedestal to a point that is more parallel with the Stemmons sign.

Extant Z frame numbers 249/255 are in the blue box.

Using the blue parallel line that crosses Elm St, is the Stemmons sign still 40ft behind the limo at extant z255?

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

 The Stemmons sign should be 40 feet behind the presidential limousine in Altgens 6 and be visible.  No amount of camera gobbleygook can convince me otherwise.  How does one arrive at 40 feet?  That's based on he general estimate that 1 frame equals 1 foot in movement of the vehicle.

Actually, JFK (within the limo) hasn't reached the Stemmons sign by extant z255.

On 2/21/2019 at 11:38 AM, David Josephs said:

So this is not accurate showing it to be 5 feet deep?  A little over 3.5 feet is a VERY small landing

FWIW

David,

The cycle cop is one step down from the landing.

I believe the shadow which crosses him coincides with the shadow we see on Lovelady's right side (Wiegman frame above).

The men are probably in the approx same location (depending on time elapsed between pictures), just different camera angles.

Added on edit: Breaking down the cycle cop distances within the entry-way, there is no way the previous sentence is true.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Es_9hqgD9aa_q5PFrENu_-R4CPndpVCO/view?usp=sharing

Thank you.

I found it.

11 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Chris:

The depth of the doorway was estimated to be 3'6'' but in reality, it was 3'9''. 

 

Andrej,

What was your source for this information?

17 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

However, I think this discussion is futile. It leads nowhere as whatever I write in response to you, it will be questioned by quite silly, sorry,  comments. Do you really want to discuss Prayer Man's height or only provoke? Please show your calculations, estimates, measurements, whatever.

 

Andrej,

For accuracy's sake.

55 minutes ago, François Carlier said:

Apparently, on this forum (whose moderators are conspiracy believers) conspiracy theorists can insult those who disagree with them at will, They can mock whomever they want. They risk nothing. But if I post just a bit of humor, Mister Mark Knight feels the need to block the thread and then threatens me to expell me from the forum (so easy to brag through a computer screen !…).
OK.
I'm leaving.
For good.
I bet some people will be happy.
Good luck to everybody ! 
I wish you well !

Imo, Mark shows great restraint in taking restrictive actions among the forum members.

Perhaps posting something more constructive and less mocking would have been appropriate.

11 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

I have no experience in this field, but after reading the above, is there any way that you can enter all frames, that show PM, into some graphics software, that could generate an optimum single image? 

If it ever falls into ones lap.

I haven't been successful obtaining it.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zo0ui7TIPMw

Jim,

The frames immediately preceed the wallet video.

I assume Ryland was the photographer on the scene when the video was taken.

It's his voice on the wallet video clip.

It appears as if the "official story" had already been passed along to the reporter.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q3zgLFHSGytSONPW7kW07qn_FmByJDwq/view?usp=sharing

On 1/29/2019 at 11:24 AM, Chris Davidson said:

You haven't supplied a common occurance among two films for any type of syncing.

Here's Bell for you.

Now compare that with the Couch clip I just supplied, towards the end, and you'll see all the same players that are in Bell.

You even get to see the cycle cop at the lamp-post take off toward his motorcycle, just as we see him in Bell.

Who's that near the Newman's, looks like Altgen's to me.

Who's that with the hat on, looks like Wiegman to me.

So Wiegman and Altgens arrive at the Newmans at approx the same point in time.

Anyone care to look at Couch and help John understand this concept??????

 

 

 

Another close syncing moment:

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

The Bronson frame shows the Newmans standing west to the Stemmons sign.  And, the Zapruder film does not show the Newmans.  And, there is no reason why they shouldn’t be shown.

 

One reason might be the Z film was enlarged and then cropped.

Then again, another might be the Newmans weren't tall enough, just like my brother.

btw, he was 5'9" tall.

52 minutes ago, John Butler said:

The argument is based on the internal timing of the Bell film.  Which does not match others because of the Bell Gap.  How long was that gap? 

 

You haven't supplied a common occurance among two films for any type of syncing.

Here's Bell for you.

Now compare that with the Couch clip I just supplied, towards the end, and you'll see all the same players that are in Bell.

You even get to see the cycle cop at the lamp-post take off toward his motorcycle, just as we see him in Bell.

Who's that near the Newman's, looks like Altgen's to me.

Who's that with the hat on, looks like Wiegman to me.

So Wiegman and Altgens arrive at the Newmans at approx the same point in time.

Anyone care to look at Couch and help John understand this concept??????

13 hours ago, John Butler said:

 

At 59 seconds Altgens enters the scene and is seen standing by the Newmans.  He crosses the street a few seconds after taking Altgens 6.  The street were clear because the Mayor’s Car and the National Press Pool Car were being held in the intersection.  How long were they held?

 

Altgen's 6 taken at approx z255 = 486-255 = 231/18.3 = 12.62sec while the Wiegman/Bell sync at least 22sec after the headshot, followed by Couch does not = Altgens crossing the street a few seconds after Altgens 6?

Altgens is seen(in Couch) crossing the street as Wiegman makes his run down the knoll.

Look closely down the street toward the lightpost. Guess who that is crossing?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OS3QxMXNBemRkSGs/view?usp=sharing