Jump to content
The Education Forum

David G. Healy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,622

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by David G. Healy

    Prayer Man is a Man

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

     

    I would have to know Duncan McRae to make judgment on him. Chris Davidson is being fooled by what appears to be a lovely woman's face. I happen to agree with him that -- after his filtering of the image -- it appears there is a lovely woman’s face in it. But I know intellectually that we are both seeing a "shape in the clouds." You can't gain true image details through the use of generic Photoshop filters. As I said, you need to use custom filters.
    At least that is the case for anti-blurring. If, on the other hand, you have a grainy image, a general low-pass filter can be used to eliminate some of that noise.
    Now, there are some who see a woman even without the use of filters. I have no idea how they see a woman because PM looks obviously like a man to me. I suppose it could be that they want to see a woman because they are trying to figure out where a missing woman is, like Sarah Stanton. (I figure she must be standing behind someone. In fact, Andrej Stancak has located what appears to be part of a head just behind Frazier's head.)
     

     

     

    In digital signal processing, an image is treated as a two-dimensional signal after it has been digitized (converted to a string of numbers or digits). A digitized sound or radio wave are treated as one-dimensional signals.

     

    thank you.

    Prayer Man is a Man

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

    I wasn’t fooled at all. That is your mis-characterization of what I said after I ran the “shadow contrast and tonal curve” filters and stated “It looks like a woman to me.”

    I did not, nor have I ever declared it was a woman. Big difference.

    There were two frames in which the filter was applied one was more blurry than the other.
    The more blurred frame(after applying the filter) was the one in which I made the comment about looking like a woman.
    The other frame (also with the filter applied) was the one that Duncan enlarged, which is the one you are referring to and I have never said that frame looked like a woman regardless of whether they depicted the same person.

    This is the same crap I went through with others and previously had to correct them.

    You agreed with me that it looked like a woman’s face because the Darnell frames had not yet been discovered by Robin Unger and there was nothing else to compare the Wiegman frames to as they were the best quality frames available at the time.

    If anybody wants confirmation to what I have stated above ask John Iacoletti (I believe he is still a forum member here) as we went through the same BS on Duncan’s forum. John did a little research and validated what I just described.

    So, in the future, please don’t drop my name unless you have the correct information.

     

    image deleted -dh

     

    pretty much what I thought, thanks Chris.

    Prayer Man is a Man

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

    The solution is to use deconvolution to eliminate misfocus and motion blur. 

    Blurring can be modeled mathematically, and so if you perform the inverse mathematical process on the blurry image, this will undo the blurring (with some limitations). This process is called deconvolution. Here is an example before/after image:

    Deconvolution_of_an_astronomical_image.p

     

    The deconvolution filter has to be designed for each specific situation. People who think they are improving an image with a Photoshop deblurring function are kidding themselves. Sure, the image may look sharper, but it's only because it has had sharper transitions added to it. Which means that the image quality has actually been made worse.

    People like Duncan McRae and others who see a woman in a Prayer Man frame after performing some Photoshop filtering, are really just seeing shapes in the cloud.

    (I specialized in digital signal processing for my masters degree. This is the type of work I did for the NSA in their reconnaissance systems. Though my focus was on one-dimensional signals)

     

    a question and comment: do you think they see what they want to see? What is a one-dimensional signal?

    Kamala Harris and the RFK assassination

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    On 8/14/2020 at 3:32 PM, Chris Barnard said:

    [...] She was a deplorable choice of candidate with a questionable track record. Blame the DNC, the party catastrophically failed. 
     

    tnx for using the callout word "deplorable." Deplorable's specifically! Brings back solid memories concerning a very large slice of the 2016 GOP voting bloc...

     

    Did EVEN the Warren Commission Believe Howard Brennan?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

    So, according to you, the conspirators massively altered Altgens 6 during the precious few minutes before it went out over the AP wire but managed to leave in evidence of a sniper in a window of the Dal-Tex building?

    Mr. Cohen -- you've authenticated that this particular (version) Altgen's photo is indeed the *very* one that was sent out over the AP wire 11/22/63?

    Forget the photo alteration aspect for the moment, what is the provenance of this particular image in this thread and proof/documentation of same? I doubt you can tell me, or anyone else those answers with assurance. You are of course entitled to your opinion regarding any case related film or photo, but not your own photo authenticity without provenance.

    More on the Paines

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    15 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

    [...]

    After his Minox became inoperable around 1959, an inexpensive camera would normally be discarded, but Michael kept the inoperable Minox, plus the light meter which was in working order though not used because the camera was inoperable. That Michael would keep an inoperable Minox seems explicable in terms of its expensive cost, in which one keeps it in hope that at some point in the future maybe it could be fixed. So that does not strike me as implausible. So my theory: it was a gift to a rich kid from a relative, he used it until it broke, and that was the end of the Minox story for him. But this is all speculation and what is the point of speculation.

     

    and here are a few facts dealing with the actual camera itself (and various versions of same). This camera was NOT created for the casual photo buff. It appears the inventor had very specific purpose-use in mind.

    https://www.cryptomuseum.com/covert/camera/minox/index.htm

    Find the "chain" attachment and it "use" interesting.

    You can find these cameras on ebay today. Prices vary from $50 bucks up to $700.Have no idea where you might find film cartridges for it, or where to get the film developed...

    Swan-Song -- Math Rules

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    On 7/13/2020 at 4:03 PM, David Josephs said:

    When Max Phillips sent a film to Rowley in DC on 11/22, he wrote a note...

    This "Note" at the end suggests those frames may indeed have been on THAT copy...
    except after that evening we do not know what happens to that film...

    do we now know?
    DJ

    ps...  "the 3rd print is forwarded...."  2 to Sorrels... so one of the Sorrels films was NOT the one he sends to DC
    Zapruder had "master" and best copy... thats 1 original and 4, not 3 copies.  0184?

    [...]

    0184 goes a long way answering questions re early dupes rumored to be created by an optical film house in NYC. Nice work.

    The CIA analysis of the Z film

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by David G. Healy

    On 4/14/2020 at 7:54 AM, Larry Hancock said:

    ...

    Just speculating but there are some pretty standard infantry guide lines for ambush type attacks...including where  you stage blocking points and diversions.

    for instance, Larry:

    https://sites.psu.edu/cxd5132/wp-content/uploads/sites/25797/2015/04/Instruction-Set.pdf

    it was pretty much the same 50 years ago... the deviation here is: not everyone (presidential limo & SS vehicle occupants) in that zone was a target. Why? Nor was there an attempt made to kill all in the zone.

    Jim Lehrer, another xxxx about the assassination

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    On 1/24/2020 at 5:48 AM, Ron Ecker said:

    I saw one of the officially recognized "presidential historians" on TV yesterday (talking about the impeachment trial, what else). I wondered if there is a single one of these "presidential historians" who questions the official story of the assassination. I certainly don't know of one. And I imagine if any of them do question it, they would never do so publicly, lest they be defrocked, of course, as presidential historians.

     

     

     

     

    There's absolutely no future for them if they utter a contrary sound, Ron. With or without evidence.

    The Irishman: A Crushing Disappointment

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by David G. Healy

    41 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

    Well, in another interview, which finds Scorsese ruminating on death, he sees the movie, according to the article, as about "the waning days of Sheeran's life, when he is left alone to contemplate the morality of his deeds." Scorsese says, "It's all about the final days. It's the last act."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/movies/martin-scorsese-irishman.html

    IOW it takes three hours to get to what the movie is about. Poor Sheeran’s last days.

    Mr. Caddy's post hit the nail on the head. My estimation: Hollywood is NOT responsible determining the truth of any historical matter.

    Why insist a bunch of old time actors, and a script writer who made their what, what appears to be their last killing, determine history? When we still have a ton of historians still asleep at the wheel? 

    I say hurrah for keeping attention focused on the topic. NOT chastise a bunch of guys including the Director that heard and responded too the Executive Producer paymaster call...

    DR Costella's leaning lamppost

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    Ya gonna have to make a better argument than this. 

    Who is Barnes, why *his* footage, and where can his footage be found, the camera and lens Barnes imagery used, the media recorded on?

    In you example are you using footage where pin cushion distortion has been removed? Thanks ahead of time for your input.

     

    Here's a link too Dr. John Costella's presentation at the University of Minnesota in 2003 regarding his Z-film analysis with his 'proofs', the entire presentation: 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1B3_sICTAc

     

    Damage to the Limo

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    33 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

    That's extremely weak, David. It's embarrassingly weak for you. Especially after reviewing the comments made later by both James Sibert and Dr. Humes.

    You are desperately searching for justification so that you can continue to believe in the "surgery" that never happened.

    Don't you think it's about time for you to STOP relying on bad information?

    <propoganda snipped>

    spoken by someone whose entire life is immersed in the 1964 Warren Commission Report. Doesn't get more rich than that!

    tsk-tsk!

×
×
  • Create New...