Ray Mitcham

Maybe one of our Langley contacts could help tell us why they haven't been released.

20 hours ago, John Butler said:

Davidson's man in the bushes in Dorman:

I only see a shadowed area between branches and not a human figure.  A human figure should look like this in the Dorman film and not a black cut out which is actually a shadowed area between branches:

Have a look at the gif, Chris posted here,

on the 31st May and you will see your "shadowed area" moving below  the tree foliage.

ncorrectI link supplied

I

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

:

 

Incorrect link.

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

"I won't be drawn to comment on that statement.  " 

I didn't want you to think I was making a "personal attack" on  you with what I really wanted to reply.😁

By the way please show me where I have made a personal attack rather than point out your silly ideas.

My stance has always been that I consider the Z film to be altered, but not in the silly ways you believe.

32 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Why should I re-read Davidson's post?  I didn't agree with it in the first place.  Since, you guys like to avoid answering questions you find uncomfortable or unanswerable can you answer this for me directly.

 

Because you asked a question which he  had already answered. I know it's difficult for you but please try.

33 minutes ago, John Butler said:

I guess I am just an awful person who doesn't listen and learn.

I won't be drawn to comment on that statement.

22 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Mitcham and Bulman,

You gentlemen have not shown yourselves very well during the course of this thread.  What have you contributed other than despiteful, personal attacks?  At least Davidson has made presentations based on what he considers intelligent and rational arguments.  I find his assumptions and work questionable.

 

All I and others  have done in the course of this thread is point out your numerous erroneous posts.

In the post above, in answer to your question,  I suggest you re-read Chris Davidson's post where you will see he said "The alteration you are looking for is there, you just have to put the right pieces together."

4 hours ago, John Butler said:

Davidson,

You are certainly entitled to your thoughts, statements, and research.

So, you are saying the Zapruder film is a true record and unaltered?  Are you saying things occurred as depicted in the Zapruder contrary to all the evidence presented here and all the evidence presented by others?

Read Chris's post again, Butler, and you will get your answer.

You guys are wasting your time arguing with Butler. He doesn't understand perspective or the way shadows work. Don't argue, just point out his many mistakes.

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Pat:

As far as I know Tom Wilson and his work, your statements appear to me as very harsh. Tom Wilson was not aware that he was being filmed, and he was not selling or advertising his work. Actually, Tom Wilson expressed his disagreement with being filmed.  However, he was very enthusiastic about his work and results which is something what researchers often show. He was just sitting in the kitchen with three people whom he trusted and took some minutes to explain his findings. Tom Wilson was indeed very interested in finding out the truth and it is simply shameful to cast any doubts about Tom's work or character posthumously. This was a friendly chat among three people, not a professional interview of Jerrold Custer or Tom Wilson.

 

Agreed, Andrej. I think Pat's opinion is swayed by the fact that Tom's work  doesn't agree with his.

Once again Butler gets it wrong. Look at the film @ 33secs in the Dorman film, and you will see the two the two women and their shadows and to their left (Right of frame) the  two men and their shadows seen in the Dorman film mosaic shown above.

Dorman frame @ 33secs

Mosaic shown above.

You really do have problems, John.

Re Rosemary and Linda, the Dorman film is too indistinct to show whether Rosemary or Linda made the South West Corner of Elm Street, (wherever that may be.)

John, when in a hole stop digging..

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thanks again for your ad hominem attack associating me with these conspiracy realists, reprobates though they may be.

👍

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

Ray,

Don't pretend you don't know the answer.  You do it all the time.

Please, John, inform me of what I know. Should be interesting.

Interesting video, Ron.

Thanks for posting, the video,Vince. I believe that Tom Wilson was correct about what he said about the photos. I hope somebody somewhere can re invent the system he used, and which unfortunately died with him.

14 hours ago, Robert Harper said:

Happy Birthday JFK ! We now know the truth of what happened to you and why it happened. You weren't a shil for special interests, you were against colonialism in all forms, worldwide. You were smart, witty, rarely wasted a sentence in public. You were widely loved and you inspired untold millions of people to reach for happiness--which, as you said, was defined by the Greeks as performing one's ability - whatever it is - at a level of excellence. You were a genuine war hero who dragged a shipmate - with your teeth  -for a mile in the sea. Your great June 1963 American Univ Commencement Address will stand with Washington's and Eisenhower's Farewell Address. Presidents who are pure - who are not grifters or shils -  remain in our memory because of their character and integrity while performing the work that gave them happiness. We salute you again, Mr President. It has not been the same since.
 

As a Brit, I would like to endorse everything you wrote above, Robert.

7 hours ago, John Butler said:

It's to piss off Ray Mitcham.  I inadvertently misspelled his name on one occasion and he made a big deal out of it.  Ray consistently harasses and abuses me in his posts.  It's just a small way of paying him back.

And you expect people to take you seriously? It really is time to grow up, John. 

I think David has put it very precisely.However, I don't believe, he is COINTELPRO. Even they wouldn't have him. 

5 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Here is an explanation after the style of Dana Andrews. [,,,]  I want to thank Dana for using his wonderful writing style.

You're sounding like Lex Luthor, JB.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dana_Andrews

I think Mr Butler suffers from Dyslexia as well as Pareidolia, Dana😂

Either that or he spent too much time at the movies when he was a kid.

6 hours ago, John Butler said:

Hmm, BS.  Let's see, Ray.  I don't think your "two pole experiment" is up to snuff. I don't think it will fit into the paradigm of natural philosophy.  What that means Ray is that it is not scientific. 

Whether you think my "two pole experiment" is up to snuff, matters not a jot. You argued that sun shadows could not converge away and towards the sun. Does my experiment fit into the' paradigm of natural philosophy" (whatever that BS means,)is of no consequence. Try the experiment and come back to me with photos showing I am wrong.

6 hours ago, John Butler said:

At times I can make a stupid blunder and have done so a couple of times. 

Possibly the underestimate of all time. Your problem is that you have this weird belief that every photo given in evidence has been altered, (remember your photo of the limo tire with the triangular shadow et al?) You seem to be mesmerised by shadows, which you obviously are incapable of interpreting.   

6 hours ago, John Butler said:

OBTW, if you fellas think this is so outre, based on disinformation,  and stupid why do you waste your time trying to refute it?  Do like David Josephs, put me on a blocked view.

I don't think it's a waste of time correcting B.S. I will try to correct any incorrect information posted on here, whether it is pro or anti my views on the conspiracy, by you or any other poster.

You just seem to post the major number of cockups on here.

Nothing personal, mind, you just correcting your rubbish for future readers.

Now just once more try my two post experiment and come back with photos, and prove me wrong. I dare you.

Have a nice day, John.

If you asked a question, Mr Bottler, about your "theory", I would attempt to answer it.

Do the two pole experiment and come back to us with your answer. If you don't, it shows you are full of B.S.

11 hours ago, John Butler said:

 

I'm thinking about starting a new topic "A Review of the Strange Imagery Found in Dealey Plaza".  There will be a ton of this kind of false, edited images.  You can have a field day thinking up goofy stuff.

You already supply more than enough goofy stuff. 

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

Ray Mitchum,

 

Once again, Butler seems incapable of reading let alone understanding a photograph. My name is Ray Mitcham.

Perhaps you are deliberately misspelling my name as an insult, but if so it is just shows how you stupid you are.

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

The Windshield white triangle shown on the windscreen is obviously a  reflection of light. (the black is the reflection of a building on the screen"  Why should I refute this nonsense.  Take another look at the vehicle. 

 

No you have another look at this and previous frames, and you will see the white triangle grow, showing it is a reflection of light as the vehicle moves.

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

I took a look at your Z 157 example.  That is John Connally you have captured in you white rectangle.  The person you are referring to is turned around backwards and I don't recall any instances of President Kennedy doing that.  Do you know that there is probably more than a half dozen content problems with that frame. 

Utter and total rubbish. The only problems are inside your head.

You have proven your argument that "it is Connally," to be wrong, with your next post, where you arrow Connolly further forward in the limo.😂

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

Couldn't you use a bigger view of that particular frame.  Or, are you keeping it small just so it is difficult to assess? 

 

Try seeing if you can see this.

or this.

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

OBTW, one of your confreres, after criticism, went on a rant and said he didn't have an "effin Master".  Do you, Ray?  Do you have an "effin Master" that makes you write these ludicrous comments?  Just curious? 

 

I don't have any "confreres", I have fellow posters who appear to agree that you are barmy. (See Chris Davidson's post immediately above.) Neither do I have an "effin master". Do you have an "effin brain"?

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

Or, have you departed the land of reason and rationality for the land of disinformation and despite?  

 

If I have, I expect,  you will be there to welcome me with open arms.

p.s. If my two pole experiment is "loopiness", please be my guest and prove me wrong. I know you won't, because you know it's correct.

On 5/26/2019 at 12:21 PM, John Butler said:

It appears that Kennedy is laying his head on the side of the vehicle and his arm is flopping around outside the vehicle.

Re Zapruder frame 157, enlarge  the white square, and you will see JFK still upright.

19 hours ago, John Butler said:

It looks like old Ray Mitchell needs to go to the dictionary to learn a new word.

Your arguments are specious.

Specious mean superficially plausible but, totally wrong.

Looks like old John Butler needs to go to see an optometrist, as my name on the forum is Ray Mitcham. As for my arguments being specious, maybe you should try to refute them. (Don't bother. you can't.)

Still not tried the two pole shadow experiment yet, John?