Chris Davidson

David,

I'm going to add to what you wrote, but in a way that will tie your post in, with what I've been posting.

A little at a time.

Myers deliberate deception with the Towner camera FPS rate =1.8 seconds.

The car in the background of z190 takes 67 frames to get to where we see it as Wiegman15.  1.8sec + 67 frames(67/18.3 = 3.66sec) = 5.46sec =100 total frames

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OcFdsUUFfX1BLMk0/view?usp=sharing

All one has to do is plot Bell's end of film frame on Houston St, with his beginning frame onto Elm St. (SELECTIVE SPLICING) is what I refer to it as.

Then plot that object (if you even know what it is) from Z193, find where those LOS's intersect, and realize this is exactly the area Myers has that object travel it's miraculous 14.2mph.

Even when shown, it takes a little effort (not much) to understand it.

But, I'm not holding my breath.

BTW, guess what film Myer's doesn't include on Houston St in his multi-sync document?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005ORVpTdTN2dVZhV1E/view?usp=sharing

51 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Michael Walton writes:

You'd think that it would be in his own interests to make his case as clearly as possible, rather than simply pump out these cryptic equations which, I'd guess, just make most readers' eyes glaze over. That's if he's confident about what he's saying, of course. If he isn't, then it makes sense to keep everything as vague as possible, to disguise the weaknesses.

There was actually a hint at an explanation in an earlier post:

Again we are presented with a mention of CE 884 without any discussion of why the figures in that document cannot be trusted. It's still very cryptic, but, filling in the gaps, the full reasoning seems to go something like this:

1 - Tina Towner's film is 30 feet long, and contains 167 frames.
2 - The FBI's figures in CE 884 do not correspond to what we see on the film.
3 - This discrepancy means either that the extant film is inauthentic or that the data in CE 884 is wrong.
4 - We know that the FBI fiddled at least some of the figures in CE 884.
5 - Because at least some of the data in CE 884 was made up, there is no reason to assume that CE 884 provides an accurate reflection of what the FBI saw in any of the assassination films.
6 - Because the data in CE 884 is untrustworthy, it has nothing to tell us about the authenticity of any of the assassination films.

Chris seems to have come around at last to the common-sense point of view that you can't use the unreliable data in CE 884 as evidence that any of the assassination films are in some way fake.

 

Now you're trying to summarize. 

Tina Towner's film 30ft long!!!!

Stop while you're ahead way behind.

The denseness is getting very thick.

z133 + 67 = 200 frames + Myers 1.8sec fps switch = 233 frames

Governor CONNALLY. As we looked at them this morning, and as you related the numbers to me, it appeared to me that I was hit in the range between 130 or 131, I don't remember precisely, up to 134, in that bracket.
Mr. SPECTER. May I suggest to you that it was 231?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, 231 and 234, then.
Mr. SPECTER. The series under our numbering system starts with a higher number when the car comes around the turn, so when you come out of the sign, which was----
Governor CONNALLY. It was just after we came out of the sign, for whatever that sequence of numbers was, and if it was 200, I correct my testimony. It was 231 to about 234. It was within that range.

67/18.3 = 3.661

3.661 + Myers 1.8 sec fps switch = 5.461 sec

5.461sec x 18.3 fps = 100frames

9.3 x 1.47 = 13.671ft per sec

1.8sec x 13.671 = 24.6ft

6 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

So now Chris Davidson  is quoting as his proof none other than Gary Mack? Really?  The same Gary Mack who could never be trusted except to mouth the boilerplate WC? The same Gary Mack who participated in a "scientific" TV show, and where the producers actually added a fake photo of the three guys standing on the steps, but they moved the photo almost down to the sidewalk, to convince people watching that the SB nonsense is the correct answer and, thus, the conclusion?

It's pretty amazing that a CTer like Chris Davidson is now quoting Gary Mack, a known l--i--a--r, to try to back up his ridiculous math theories. And let's, for argument sake, accept that Towner's film was shot at 22 FPS.  The reply to that is - so what?  Why is he worried about a film shot at 22 FPS - or even 16 FPS for that matter - showing the limo way up at the intersection of Houston and Elm?  What could that possibly have anything to do with anything sinister?

When you have a CTer quoting a known WC mouthpiece, then you can see the desperation to prop up a crazy theory oozing out.

And BTW - I'd absolutely love to see Chris Davidson respond to Pat Speer's analysis of this whole thing.

Meanwhile, MC compared me arguing here to someone going into the mall and spouting off.  The last time I remember going to a mall and returning merchandise, you can rest assured I did so politely...but not that it's your business to begin with.  A better comparison would be for me to go to a convention with people saying there's conspiracy everywhere - like little green men, and fake wires hanging up fake moon landing images, and people standing around saying that everything under the sun in the Kennedy case has been faked. Then yes - there's going to be a lot of vigorous debate because, to me, these people do nothing but muddle the entire Kennedy case. Their "truth" and the real truth will never be reconciled.

Lack of Research.

9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

If there is any doubt that 30ft and the 167 frame total of Towner's film is not connected to both WC CE884 documents, let me lay that idea to rest right now.

167 frames = 100 + 67 frames

167frames /18.3fps = 9.125 sec

30ft/9.125 sec = 3.287... ft per sec /1.47 (1mph) = 2.236mph

100 frames/18.3fps = 5.464 sec

30ft/5.464 sec = 5.49ft per sec = 3.735mph

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OWDB2VUhBRGllcW8/view?usp=sharing

The orange version of CE884 will yield a limo speed of: 18.3fps/3frames = 6.1 x .9ft = 5.49ft per sec = 3.735mph

The white version of CE884 will yield a limo speed of: 18.3fps/5frames = 3.66 x .9ft = 3.294ft per sec = 2.24mph

So once again, how was it the WC arrived at the limo traveling at 2.24 and 3.74 mph?

Enquiring minds want to know.

 

 

67/2 = 33.5 /18.3 = 1.83sec

30/1.83 = 16.393ft per sec = 11.151mph

152/18.3 =8.3sec

136.1/8.3 = 16.397 = 11.154mph

17 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Chris,

I don't understand what you're saying here, so let me ask you a question if I may:

About how many seconds after Z-313 did Couch and Darnell start filming the scene around the TSBD steps from their position in the Camera Car?

Thanks,

--  Tommy

 

 

My best guess for now is approx 26.5 seconds with what's available.

1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

 

Does this mean that in Couch-Darnell, we see Marion Baker near the curb in front of the TSBD steps about 30 seconds after the last shot was fired?

IMHO, thirty seconds would have been plenty of time for all of the following to have happened:

 

Thomas, this will not affect the overall time of approx 30sec.

It has no affect on what you're trying to prove.

Chris 

19 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

This is how the (WC) uses manipulation.

Let's pretend that we don't have access and have never watched the zfilm. Then, someone supplies us with an official document that states the limo was traveling at 2.24mph at a certain time. 

Could I make the assumption it was averaging 2.24mph for longer than 5frames =.273 seconds, even though that's what the document entails?

How would we know the total frame count during that 2.24mph span? 

 

If there is any doubt that 30ft and the 167 frame total of Towner's film is not connected to both WC CE884 documents, let me lay that idea to rest right now.

167 frames = 100 + 67 frames

167frames /18.3fps = 9.125 sec

30ft/9.125 sec = 3.287... ft per sec /1.47 (1mph) = 2.236mph

100 frames/18.3fps = 5.464 sec

30ft/5.464 sec = 5.49ft per sec = 3.735mph

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OWDB2VUhBRGllcW8/view?usp=sharing

The orange version of CE884 will yield a limo speed of: 18.3fps/3frames = 6.1 x .9ft = 5.49ft per sec = 3.735mph

The white version of CE884 will yield a limo speed of: 18.3fps/5frames = 3.66 x .9ft = 3.294ft per sec = 2.24mph

So once again, how was it the WC arrived at the limo traveling at 2.24 and 3.74 mph?

Enquiring minds want to know.

5 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

 

With no contentions on my part, Chris Davidson offered up the following a while back;

There is 3.5 seconds of missing footage from the Wiegman sequence.

Eventually, someone else will wise up and connect this information with the "Towner" thread.

The distance traveled by the common object from z193-z257 = 73ft.

64 frames/18.3 fps = 3.497 sec

You can then begin to stop spinning your wheels.

The inability of Michael and Jeremy to directly address/disprove the information being provided speaks volumes.

The earth is still flat to these guys because someone keeps telling them it is. 

Here's an easy question to answer: Yes or No

Do you believe Tina Towner's 8mm camera ran at an average 22.8fps as stated by Dale Myers in his multi-sync project?

Remember, that is an average, so doing a little simple math could yield (24+21.6 speeds)=45.6/2 =22.8fps

I guess they fed the camera some "speed" before filming ensued.

So please tell us film experts, when does a 8mm camera become a 16mm/24fps camera.

24fps - 5% (1.2fps) variation = 24 -1.2 = 22.8fps

This is why there are industry standards. 

Excerpt from Gary Mack on Towner's film: "The Towner film's true speed is likely closer to 18fps or slightly faster for most of the reel than to any other speed; it certainly was not operating at 16fps on November 22, 1963. Gary Mack"

I didn't agree with GM on many aspects of this case, but his common sense answer to Towner's frame rate is more than appropriate.

Slightly faster would include 18.3 which is exactly what I'm using to discredit Myers.

So, go back and look at the rest of the A-B-C's and start discovering a world that is round.

On 4/20/2017 at 0:05 AM, Andrej Stancak said:

Chris:

sure, Mr. Myers correlated Wiegman's frame 15 with Z-frame 257, it was myself who assumed (based on Mr. Myers's timeline) that the frame Z-255 would be Wiegman's frame 14 or 15.

Would you like to comment on the excised frames? Would it matter Zapruder's film or Wiegman's film or both? The temporal coordination of Altgens6 and Wiegman's film is essential for reconstruction of Prayer Man and other people in the doorway.

 

Andrej,

If Carl Jones was looking eastward in Altgen's 6, what would be an event/sound that would cause him to look westward?

Answer this question and you might begin to understand the Myer's frame sync deception.

This is how the (WC) uses manipulation.

Let's pretend that we don't have access and have never watched the zfilm. Then, someone supplies us with an official document that states the limo was traveling at 2.24mph at a certain time. 

Could I make the assumption it was averaging 2.24mph for longer than 5frames =.273 seconds, even though that's what the document entails?

How would we know the total frame count during that 2.24mph span? 

7 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Chris all of this is embarrassingly meaningless to me and many, many others who come here.

And yet, you continue with the same responses. Once again, PLEASE move on to something else. 

It’s embarrassing you don’t understand simple equations.

Glad to hear you’re the designated spokesperson for the forum members.

As I've  said numerous  times even if all of these hidden  figures mean something  in the overall  scheme of things  they  prove absolutely  nothing  in the assassination.

In your opinion of course. (I see your belief is that more speculation is the answer to the question.)

In addition  all theories are supposed  to  lead to  a  conclusion. Since I've  been  corresponding  with  you  on  EF you STILL to this  day have not answered  the simple  question  of WHAT do your  hidden  figures  prove in relation  to  the  murder. 

I suggest listening to the song “One Thing Leads To Another” by The Fixx and putting it into WC context.    

And we're  going  to  continue  to  wait  because  I'm  sorry  to  say  but it  all means nothing.

Then I can enjoy the sound of your silence (Simon and Garfunkel recommended) when I post my meaningless (your speculation of course) information.

A win-win for me. 

Of course using .18ft per frame x 5 frames CE884 (z161-z166) = .9ft or the total B.S. distance traveled if you are to believe the WC.

Quite close indeed.

If you want an even closer match, just use a number between CE884 z166 and Towner total frames of 167.

Something like this:

30ft/.18sec = 166.666... frames  

WC884- z161-z166 = .9ft traveled in 5 frames

18.3frames per sec/5frames = 3.66 x .9ft = 3.294ft per sec / 1.47(1mph) = 2.24mph

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005Obk9fNjdySjVGRk0/view?usp=sharing

I don't believe in many coincidences, at least, not in this case.

167 Towner frames /18.3fps = 9.125seconds

30ft/9.125sec = 2.236mph

Isn't it interesting at what total frame# (166) within WC884, the limo's speed is at an all time low (z161-z166)

And, coincidentally, the Towner film is comprised of 167 frames.

Myers gives us the time- 1.8 sec

Cutler gives us the distance- 30ft

The Towner film gives us the total frames (167) or quite close to.

In other words,

The WC didn't supply data for extant frames 133-166 or coincidentally 33 frames.

Always important to know the answer to simple equations.

The extant film (limo on film) starts at z133.

Myers robbed us of 1.8sec = 33 zframes via the change in frame rate for Towner's camera from 18.3 to 22.8.

WC CE884 (JFK in limo) at z166 = Station# 3+30.1 

From z161-z166, the WC has slowed the limo tremendously.

Cutler (when superimposed on West) accurately plots JFK within the limo at extant z133 = Station# 2+99

This points to a 30ft correction.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005Obk9fNjdySjVGRk0/view?usp=sharing

On 4/20/2017 at 11:05 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Now convert 1.8 sec of 18.3fps film into total number of frames.

Does that result sound familiar?

 

33 frames would be the answer.