-
Posts
1,402 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Dean Hagerman
-
-
Dean,
That looks civilised enough. When I live in Woodland, not too far from you, all of us saw places like that, paradise!
Woodland is nice, I believe that Northern Califonia is the most beautiful place on earth, I am very biased of course
-
Here is the link Craig "I need a study for every theory that Dean comes up with" Lamson
-
I posted my Pyracantha Bush study Craig, remember?
Here are a couple of the pics I took of the bush in my front yard, maybe they will jog your memory
How about the LINK to the actual post???
Lets see the work....
I will look for it
-
I posted my Pyracantha Bush study Craig, remember?
Here are a couple of the pics I took of the bush in my front yard, maybe they will jog your memory
-
The perfect legacy for deano (lordy lordy I BELIEVE) hagerman
-
You think I'm the only one reading this thread?
Your the only one asking me to post scans, why would I do that when you have what I would post in your home?
-
This has pretty much run its course.
The image is a fake...taken of a real subject but the photo could not exist in a single exposure.
Explained here.
Why would anyone buy an explanation from Craig "I just make stuff up" Lamson"?
-
I laugh like crazy on this forum
I even laugh at Craig posts, he always makes up names that make me laugh, like today he used Cliff "I have no clue how the sun works" Varnell that made me chuckle
Michael Hogan has amazing sarcasm that has me rolling
Greg Burnham has posted stuff thats had me in stiches
The old fights between Bill Miller and David Healy are a howl
I also look for humor in everything because im super laid back and love to joke around
The day you posted the photos of you bench-pressing "homeless bums" in Seattle was also very amusing...
-
I laugh like crazy on this forum
I even laugh at Craig posts, he always makes up names that make me laugh, like today he used Cliff "I have no clue how the sun works" Varnell that made me chuckle
Michael Hogan has amazing sarcasm that has me rolling
Greg Burnham has posted stuff thats had me in stiches
The old fights between Bill Miller and David Healy are a howl
I also look for humor in everything because im super laid back and love to joke around
-
Very admirable Greg, and I agree that he is sincere. Is insincerity beyond him? I don't know the Professor well enough to say, but I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt. i don't see actions which indicate a deep, deliberate decption.
I do see an inability to accept that others may be right when he believes otherwise. To not be able to at least examine rebuttals, to not at least consider that a position might be incorrect, is indicative of a blinkered view which seriously compromises the quality of someones work.
The other problem is his tendency to lash out at those who disagree with him.
I must admit I was shocked when he lashed out at me
However he was fighting many people at the same time, so I can understand the fact that Jim came out swinging when lots of members disagreed with him over Judyth
Water under the bridge for me
-
Jim
I was replying to Martins post "In fact very few Hollywood special-effects movies made before computers took over still look convincing"
That was why I said 2001 in response to Martin
2001 for reasons you stated as well as others is not a good example as far as Z-film alteration is concerned
Kubrick is my favorite director by far and 2001 is one of my top 5 films ever, the special effects are stunningly beautiful for a film made before computers and CGI
My grandpa saw 2001 in theater in Los Angeles, he told me that he felt like he was dreaming about seeing the film because the special effects had him mezzmerized
He had never seen a film like that before
Hey Dean? You all hot air or are you ever gonna post those artifacts seen in both Zapruder and Mary Poppins?
I already told you, grab your copy of TGZFH (you told me you got a copy from Tink) and read
Why would I waste my time scanning the pages and posting them when you can satisfy yourself at home?
-
The ''forgery'' of Mary Poppins are obvious when frames are studied. It is not a good example. Superficially perhaps, but if that is the best example ...
Couldn't agree more, John. In fact very few Hollywood special-effects movies made before computers took over still look convincing. The Zapruder film on the other hand...
"2001 A Space Odyssey"
Remember Kubrick started filming 2001 in 1965
Dean, is this really a good comparison?
The man responsible for the special effects in that film was a guy named Doug Trumbull. If you know anything about him, Trumbull was probably the number one guy at that time in his field. He took a method of special effects that was not really preeminent at the time--front projection--and made it state of the art. The method used in most films at the time was something called rear projection--which is quite detectable. Front projection was much harder to detect. But more difficult to do.
Further, they had a lot of problems perfecting the techniques on that film. Which is one reason it took so long, and for that time, cost a lot. Remember, there are no big stars in that film--the budget was used mostly in production.
Jim
I was replying to Martins post "In fact very few Hollywood special-effects movies made before computers took over still look convincing"
That was why I said 2001 in response to Martin
2001 for reasons you stated as well as others is not a good example as far as Z-film alteration is concerned
Kubrick is my favorite director by far and 2001 is one of my top 5 films ever, the special effects are stunningly beautiful for a film made before computers and CGI
My grandpa saw 2001 in theater in Los Angeles, he told me that he felt like he was dreaming about seeing the film because the special effects had him mezzmerized
He had never seen a film like that before
-
I should add that its ok to be wrong. I'm fooled at times myself.
Craig admits that its ok to be wrong? And sometimes he is fooled?
The temperature in Hell just hit 32 degrees
-
So exactly what are these same anomalies?
Again I said "the same kinds of anomalies" not the same anomalies
You always misquote me Craig, such a shame
-
Its real
I own that same exact Moter Home
-
that show the same mistakes seen in the frame above.
I said "we see some of the same kinds of anomalies"
I never said anything close to we see the same mistakes as the frame above
-
The ''forgery'' of Mary Poppins are obvious when frames are studied. It is not a good example. Superficially perhaps, but if that is the best example ...
Couldn't agree more, John. In fact very few Hollywood special-effects movies made before computers took over still look convincing. The Zapruder film on the other hand...
"2001 A Space Odyssey"
Remember Kubrick started filming 2001 in 1965
-
Here is the "amazing" Bill Miller study that Craig is pimping
The funny thing is that Craig refuses to admit that we see some of the same kinds of anomalies in the Z-film
Where is old Bill Miller anyways? I miss him about as much as I miss Craig when he ducks out for a week or so
Show us....
Get out your copy of TGZFH and look at Jacks section
-
Even though Jim and I got into it over Judyth it never changed my opinion of his sincerity
I still like and respect Jim, even if I disagree with him on some subjects
I still agree with him on the subject that matters most to me
-
Go watch "Mary Poppins" from 1964
Some time ago, Bill MIller posted a number of frames from Mary Poppins, complete with visable matte lines, sections of image areas cut off my poor artwork, etc. The long and short is Mary Poppins does not enhance your position...it destroys it.
Here is the "amazing" Bill Miller study that Craig is pimping
The funny thing is that Craig refuses to admit that we see some of the same kinds of anomalies in the Z-film
Where is old Bill Miller anyways? I miss him about as much as I miss Craig when he ducks out for a week or so
-
Have you lost your mind? Are you so incapable of independent thought that you have failed to grasp the significance of this thread? Did you mis-read the OBVIOUS? Are you so congnitively impaired that the point was completely and utterly lost on you? Do you realize that 1963 technology has already been far and away proved adequate to the task? Even the "non-classified" technology (DISNEY) was capable of what you dismiss. Are you really NEWBIE or just masquerading as one?
Have you been studying this case beyond this weekend? Or did you just start? Or are you like GRODEN et al, who have invested so much of their lives into the "ZAPRUDER FILM is a holy cow" belief?
You are so out of your depth, beyond your scope, perhaps out of your mind...
You waste time with idiotic challenges of which only fools would entertain your mindless suppositions.
Greg,
I think you're being a little unfair. There was absolutely nothing "idiotic" about Robert's "challenge." At all.
If 1963 technology has already been proven adequate to the task of creating the highly sophisticated fruad you claim the Zapruder film is, then you should have no problems posting the proof here, right?
Martin
Go watch "Mary Poppins" from 1964
-
I'm French
Game over
Im like Lindbergh and your like Nungesser and Coli
-
Citing people such as Dean Hagerman (who is a nobody, and would believe anything idiotic)
I have forgot more about the assassination then you will ever know
Why dont you send me a copy of your book, I think I have some room in my basement for it
-
I believe in Z-film alteration 100%
The weak link...deano BELIEVES!
I also believe in finding the truth about who killed JFK
Something you care nothing about
Really? Or is it all about trying to support your worldview?
The funny part is that if I told you my world view you would be shocked to learn how conservative it is
Fake or real?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
That thread did get cut off a little short, I thought I posted a more in depth study of the pictures I took
I guess I didnt, unless I posted more on Duncans forum