Michael Walton

There are many anamolies here. First, is about Stancak's latest 3D picture - the one above showing the figure to the left - and could not be Oswald. Stancak is trying to convince us that taking a 5-9 figure and dropping one leg down onto the lower step will make someone shrink that much. The figure looks way too small to be anatomically or "real world" correct and should be "taller. Watch Oswald grow in the GIF below: Second, it's obvious that all on this kinder and gentler forum who really REALLY want to believe in this theory have lost all sense of plausibility or reality. The reason why I say that is because here we see a plot to murder the president. They've planned it out since March '63, getting their patsy to publicly show how he's a hothead Communist (in NO), they get him into position in the building one month before Kennedy visits, yet they let him step out of the building right when the president is being shot and shortly thereafter. I mean - really, kinder and genter EF members? Does that not sound just a little bit too far fetched? I think it does and many other researchers (but not on this forum but on other forums) think the same thing. Third, Stancak is trying to show some photos of Oswald when he was younger, especially the muscular Oswald, that he stood on his back foot a lot. That's fine but there simply is not enough photo evidence to prove this. But now Stancak is also trying to say that because he does that a lot - stands on his back foot a lot - that it makes him shrink enough to fit the PM height. I mean - WOW - what an incredible leap of faith Stancak is taking here. Fourth, that muscular Oswald - according to many kinder and gentler members here - is NOT the so-called Lee Lee Oswald - it's the Hungarian clone that was found roaming the streets of Europe (Hungary?) right after WWII. He was plucked from the streets along with his Mom by fedora-wearing secret agents, who brought him back to the US and trained him to be the impostor of the Texas born Oswald. And it just so happened that this Europe (Hungary?) born Oswald's Mom looked exactly like the US born Margeruite except she was frumpy and never smiled. So Stancak needs to be careful about using photo comparison techniques or it will upset the alternate world view of kinder and gentler members here. Fifth, I'm finding it very hard to believe that in the Stancak image, taken from news footage that also shows Baker running toward the entrance of the building, that that would be Oswald up there (see #2 above) and also because LHO was supposedly found in the lunchroom where he was confronted by Baker and Truly. He cannot be in two places at the same time. So #2 and #5 are real dot connectors for me.

The problem here, Mark, is that when others post perfectly logical rebuttals to the fantasy theories on this forum, they're either ignored, buried by others with garbage just for the sake of burying them, or both. I've helped you prove nothing, Mark. This forum is slowly going downhill because of the "kinder and gentler" approach it has taken. "Kinder and gentler" as in - agree with our crazy theories or you're banned to two posts a week...or forever. People with solid theories based on reason and the available record are abandoning it in droves. It's becoming a vast echo chamber of the same old people with ridiculous theories and the same old associated hangers on and groupies who stay around burying dissent while offering up "atta boys" to the same old members. You know, sort of like a clique. But if that's your vision of a "forum, then so be it.

A simple question that deserves a simple answer for all of the additional cartoon work and overlays and animated GIFs... Do any of you find it just a little bit strange that after all of this planning of the murder - starting back in March '63 - that the planners would have at least told Oswald to stay in the building during the most crucial time of all? Perhaps with the fake notion of "be ready to take a call" or something like that? This is mere seconds before and after the shooting sequence. So they do all of this planning - set up the fake backyard photos, give damning evidence to the Paines, have Oswald recorded on film back in August as a communist, get him a job in the very building where the fake snipers nest is set up, and on and on - and yet... OOPS! There's their patsy lurking around *outside of the snipers nest* I mean, really? Andrej, you said something above about... Lee Harvey Oswald flees the scene knowing that he soon will be a marked man. He travels to his rooming house, changes the slacks and the shirt, and takes his gun with him when leaving the house in haste. Really, Andrej? The evidence suggests otherwise. He catches a cab, gives it up to a lady, and ends up taking the bus - hardly the actions of a man fleeing. Your story above is actually pretty good and kudos to you for writing it. Still, it just seems too far-fetched that all of this planning would have been ruined by allowing Oswald to lurk out there. And didn't I read somewhere that Oswald was good at taking orders? In other words, if they were promising him something - and had been stringing him along all of this time, all the way back to August in NO - why would he suddenly break ranks now? It doesn't make sense.

Is there any possibility - at all - that Tague was simply mistaken about the wound on his face? Maybe a bee stung him or he flinched and scratched himself from all of the commotion? This is actually a serious question and not a xxxx stirring question. I ask because it just seems hard to believe that a guy so far down the line of fire would have had a piece of concrete fly up and hit him. I don't care what other researchers say - I firmly and always believe that the shots do NOT start until right after Kennedy appears from behind the sign. There is no evidence at all when you watch the Zapruder film (and yes "the film is fake" researchers, it IS a real film) that any shots were fired until he appears from the sign. There was some kind of shooting starting down at that point where we see him reappear from the sign - what it is I have no idea. But it makes absolutely no sense at all to me that any shots were fired before because first, if the plotters put in all of this time and effort to set up the fake snipers nest and get their patsy into the building so he could be blamed, they would not have left anything to chance. Therefore, they would NOT have started firing until right after he appears from the sign. The plotters were not stupid. There was NO SHOT at all from the fake snipers nest before the first shot is fired (when he appears from behind the sign). They had to know this so therefore, they would not have complicated the shooting sequence by firing into branches. So regarding Tague, I've always felt a little bit "nah-nah" about this concrete flying up and hitting him in the cheek. If you look at a view from the window, it seems almost impossible for it to have happened.

If I'm not mistaken, Mark Knight recently encouraged Andrej Stancek's anatomically incorrect Prayer Man 3D cartoon. The one where Stancek, who's trying to fit an over-size crooked leg into a so-called round hole of proof to "prove" that Oswald could be Prayer Man. I believe Knight said something along the lines of, "Good job, Andrej." So what are we to make of this? KNIGHT'S POST HERE: Now members, we have to be careful about using faulty IF/THEN logic. KNIGHT'S ENCOURAGEMENT: Good job, Andrej. IF the over-sized crooked leg on your cartoon works, THEN Prayer Man is LHO.

So what kind of post is this really, Mark? I just read Gordon's thread about Connally's wounds and several people pointed out to him that his 3D model wasn't even anatomically correct. None of us, including you, are seasoned detectives nor police investigators, Mark, but we all try in our own way to get to some kind of truth in the Kennedy case. Then you have the charlatans and fakers passing off ridiculous "theories" like the Oswald clone - and even his Mom's clone - found in Europe 14 years after 11/22/63; the stealing of the body to alter the wounds (why they needed to be altered the charlatans won't even say why); and the Z film as well as the Nix, Muchmore, and Towner films are all faked (why they needed to be faked the charlatans won't even say why). You may want to check out a show on YouTube called Forensic Files. These are actual murder cases solved by actual seasoned detectives and police investigators. And believe me when I say these detectives come up with all manner of methods to solve the case, including your so-called faulty logic of "if/then." So this is something for you to think about as well. Or put another way, isn't this thread just preaching to the choir?

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,562.100.html Another blistering critique of Andrej's cartoon. People DO NOT stand that way Andrej. You're trying to fit a straight oversized leg in a round hole here. It's as simple as that. And besides this whole "PM is Oswald" goes against every single piece of plausibility and realism. Why would the murderers allow their patsy to even be out there during this crucial period, after planning this murder for the last 6-7 months? All of the groundwork that was laid down, only to see it go up in smoke when the victim of the murder enters the kill zone and the patsy wandering around outside instead of hiding himself up in the lunchroom. OSWALD: So what am I supposed to do? PLANNERS: Well, don't you know? Go right on out the front door and catch a glimpse of the President. And take a few photos while they go by. OSWALD: OK. HAHAHAHA!!!

I don't know if any of this means anything but over on the Duncan M. forum someone found a black guy (BG) photo - he's standing on steps so I took this and inserted it into the PM cartoon. I made sure his head was the same size as the other cartoon characters. You can see that based on the grid lines I added proportions are the same which means BG is the correct size. I also took the suit and tie guy and made an extra one of him and put him in there so all three are the same human proportions: Then I put BG's leg down on that 2nd step s if it's down there with the PM character. Then, for fun, I put suit and tie guy down there too just to see what would happen. BG barely fits and his hind leg on the top doesn't quite fit up there - it looks like it's touching the edge of the top step vs. being up there enough so it wouldn't touch the edge. Amazingly, BG and suit and tie guy appear to be physically smaller than the PM character judging by their respective head tops once you move them down one step. One final thing I did was line up the crotches of BG and suit and tie guy with the PM character's crotch. You can see what happens when they're lined up below. So what does it all mean? It does appear that that leaping leg of PM's is too long. I realize that putting 2D images inside of a 3D cartoon is not 100% scientific but the above images do show some interesting results. More importantly, though, for me, is that I STILL can't wrap my head around the idea that the planners would let their patsy be roaming around outside risking being photographed when he's supposed to be up in the 6th floor sniper's nest.

Paul - did you even bother comprehending how Josephs interprets evidence and how Jason does? Josephs is one of those "everything is fake" kind of believers. Fake as in the Z film/Towner film/Muchmore film are fake; that LHO had a clone discovered in Hungary...and the clone's Mom was also a clone of Marge Oswald; that the FBI dioramas were faked; that the body was squirreled away at Love Field and altered for some unknown reason. If you don't think that matters - trust me it DOES matter. And aren't you being just a tad disingenuous here because you know Josephs is a CIA did it believer where as Ward is a Trejo the right wingers did it believer? If you hate the government as much as Josephs does, then you can go to the bank that everything is going to be colored biased in his mind. Trust me when I say no grizzled police investigator would take him seriously knowing how biased he is.

Tom, I've been doing mutlimedia for 32 years now. Even I like to learn new things. Andrej used a FREE piece of software called Sketch Up. You can download it for free. I know you're 68.5 years old but maybe it will exercise the other part of your brain and add years to your life. Here's a short 3D piece I made with it. I made this when I was 52.75 years old: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxSGNvalR0eS1TX00 You can download it here. https://www.sketchup.com/products/sketchup-free Give it a whirl and have fun - who knows, maybe you'll amaze yourself and become the new Dealey Plaza animator with legs that are of human proportions.

Brian Doyle offers a blistering critique of Andrej's inaccurate 3D cartoon. Not only does Doyle point out the extra long inhuman leg but he also covers how the "new and improved kinder and gentler" version of this forum totally quashes all dissent for the crazy theories you will find on this forum. In other words, all Andrej has to do when someone backs him into a legitimate corner is go crying "enough is enough" and the admins will step in and slap a two posts a day or whatever the xxxx their new policy is. Then DiEugenio will step in and applaud the kinder and gentler "new" forum again. So read Doyle and weep/laugh; bottom line is Andrej, in his zeal to "prove" that the figure in the photos is LHO, will do and say anything to defend his "scientific" work. https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,562.0.html As for me, I don't know where I read it, but I'm now convinced the figure is not LHO. Why? Simple - if the plotters went through all of this planning of setting up a fake snipers nest so the blame can be placed on Oswald, do you really think they would have allowed Oswald to be roaming around in public during the actual murder when he was supposed to be up on the 6th floor killing Kennedy? Of course not. It totally goes against all reason and plausibility. To Tom Graves - I really miss the "dripping with sarcasm" Tom Graves. The kinder and gentler Graves of late is just not you.

David, I'm far from a Gary Mack wannabe. I know there was a conspiracy just like you and others here do. I just do not think that many of the theories du jour apply in this case. Such theories as: Hardly Lee Thrumming Copter and Scalpels at the Ready Scenes were Snipped/Painted In/Painted Out in the Z/Nix/Muchmore/Towner/Elsie Films Photos Faked Shooter in the Pavilion Sewer Shooter Carousel Club Basement was Assassination HQ (with Ruby Serving Dulles High Balls) Z Film Alteration Using Outrageous Mathematical Formulas Perry Never Cut into the Throat Incision ...and many more. What you an others don't seem to understand is that the Bad Guys could not just wave a magic wand and make these two films magically sync up like you see in this video. It would have been an impossible feat to pull this off and there is zero evidence anywhere and in the films that this was ever done. It would have taken a tremendous amount of coordination to pull this off and further on Von Pein's video collection, look up the '64 black and white "top secret" assassination film the FBI made. In it, you'll find a BW copy of the Z film in it. It looks exactly the same as the film you see today on YTV - except it's BW. So what's the point of this? The point is this. That's the one and only Z film you and others are ever going to see because that's all we have. No secret "there's another film to see" malarkey that I read about on here ad nauseum. Which brings me to another point - what in the world do you and others think this "other" film could possibly show? The Z film shows conspiracy; it proves that the shot sequence could not have happened like the SBT says. So there we have it - two films from different angles lined up and they match perfectly. No magic or wand waving needed. But if you want to continue to believe in paranoid fantasy theories go right ahead.

Yes I remember that discussion a while back. I remember taking a snap of Dealey from Maps and showing that the elapsed time from the last shot could allow all in white and the check skirt to walk or trot hysterically from their positions up to the steps in time to be captured in the film.

If he's in the shadows already but his shiny object is reflective would it matter how far he's in the shadows? There could still be a sliver of light coming in thus creating the shine on his wrist object.

Do not forget this one, which proves something very important - NO film alteration. At all.

What I mean is, AS wants us to think that this guy just stood there with one leg down comfortably on the step. This is how he compensates for the figure to be "small." But it's possible to put both legs onto the top like most normal people stand and move him back away from the camera. This will also make him look smaller. AS said it's impossible but in his top view there seems to be room. And the "lean" I mention is not a huge one - just a casual lean on the wall. See the animated GIF below: Also, if you look at this clip of the unedited footage PM was hardly noticeable in it and someone had to edit it to bring him out. What's that tell you? It tells me he that he seems to be more back in the shadows. Notice too that the footage below is PM *before* his supposed very comfortable putting his leg down onto the step. If you look at it, he's in pretty much the same position as when the woman in all white is going up the steps which is 30-60 seconds later. And we're expected to believe that PM stood there with his leg down on the step comfortably?

I think this is the first time I've EVER read that something is not possible in the JFK case. To wit... Hardly Lee Thrumming copter Perry lied about trach incision Frames painted on in the Z film But it's impossible to move a guy a foot or two back so he can lean?

Andrej you seem to be arguing against opposing ideas. His shoulders are squared in some of those pictures but his shoulder droops in PM. You still don't address how or why someone would be standing that long in such an awkward stance. But of course stranger things have happened.

Tom - respectfully, that's why I think he's leaning against the wall. PS - are you OK with Tom? Or do you prefer Tommy or TG?

Andrej does a nice job with his 3D work. But I'm finding it very hard to believe PM standing there for the longest time with that leg down. On his website there's a top view and it appears there's room to put PM back toward the corner. He may also be casually leaning his shoulder on the wall. Regardless that makes sense to me more than a person with a leg down on the step.

He doesn't have a photo of himself so that may be why. Here's Zapruder around 2.30 or so describing what he saw. I'm saying 2.30 because that's the time the hearse left PMH. Hardly an elephant, Mr. Abe

Below is an animated GIF of the two photos. PS - this file is quite large in file size so give it a moment to load. I combined them and took the middle shell of one (middle meaning the one that's touching the crack where the floorboards are joined) and made it almost the same size as the middle in the other and also lined them up. When you look at that shell - keep looking at it - it's obvious that the photographer either stepped closer to get a little bit of close up of the same scene or zoomed in. I'm guessing he stepped in as I can't imagine them using vari-zoom lenses back in '63 like they have today. Other things move like the size and angle of the boxes. That's to be expected due to perspective change. It becomes quite obvious that the shells and the scene in both photos have not been moved - the one thing that DOES move is the photographer. Therefore, the shells were not moved in any way. As another researcher likes to say elsewhere, I'm agnostic about what this proves except it shows that nothing was disturbed nor moved when the two photos were taken.

Thanks for the reply and well said. Now if only I can convince the Math Guys that their calculations make no sense and watch the two-film sync video of Nix/Z.

First, let me just say - wow! I mean, WOW! So here we are. Everyone has a big concern about how to cut back on, as Mark Knight said, the "carping." That's actually the term he used for my rebuttals to another member's insistent posting of mathematical formulas to somehow prove that one piece of unaltered evidence in the case - and which actually proves that the official shooting sequence could not have happened the way the WC said it happened - has been altered or faked. And with a heaping dose of irony, who would actually be right in this particular case - the big bad US government? Or the forum member? Nowhere did I question this member's intelligence - ONLY his theory. And Knight calls my rebuttal "carping." And by the way, Mark, you don't have to cite errors in his theory. All you have to do is watch the video I posted over and over to prove that no math in the world is going to prove his theory. In this particular incidence a picture really is worth a thousand words. Here is that quote: So does Michael Walton, whose incessant carping at Chris Davidson without actually citing any errors in his calculations is getting quite tiresome, at least to me. Is Chris Davidson on the right track? Perhaps, and perhaps not. But as he's working out his evidence, should we continue to allow Mr. Walton to, essentially, question Davidson's intelligence? Meanwhile on another thread, the Josephs thread where all of the conspiracists are welcoming him back with open arms, Knight posts this about the sllort (a word spelled backwards): Mr. Josephs, I thank you for your contributions to the forum. I don't get involved in the H&L discussions simply because I don't have time to get up to speed on the subject. But I appreciate your work on other areas of the JFK assassination. As a moderator, I would simply advise you, as I would any other member, to not respond in kind to provocative posts. IOW, "don't feed the T-R-O-L-L-S." And yet, as Lance Payette was eloquently explaining the why's and where of's about the ongoing problems of this forum, Josephs himself gets on, and says: ...5% exposure and a closed mind and one based on 90% and some level of acknowledgment that the cold war produced many things thought to be improbable... Then tops it off with: "No matter how paranoid one is, what the government is really doing, is much worse ".... I'll say this as politely as I possibly can. The man definitely has anger and paranoia issues. But don't take my word for it - he himself just admitted as much: I applaud those with cooler heads... I'm Passionate, Mediterranean, hot blooded.....And make no excuses... Lance then replies clearly to Josephs with: "You now characterize my views as based "on a 5% exposure and a closed mind." Do you not see that you are doing PRECISELY what you accuse others of doing? Do you not see that you are making my VERY point, that there is no solution to this situation? You do not see this because Harvey and Lee is your religion, and I do not share your view the Pope is infallible. True Believers can never understand why others do not share their views. The only possibility can be that the others are uninformed and close-minded." And we're expected to believe that anything is really going to change here for the better? Who are the sllort, Mark? Who are the carpists? Are they those that vigorously fight back on theories that are, at best, head-slapping stories and, at worst, do nothing but muddle the JFK assassination picture? Someone like Tracy Parnell (apologies to using his name here) one of the nicest people on this board but who doesn't buy into the Hardly Lee story and vigorously pushes back on it? As far as I know, he's a WC apologist but even he has tactfully called some people out for their nastiness on here. Is it Jeremy who runs the assassination site in the UK? Bernie? David Von Pein? Lance even? If you'd look around on this board, Mark, you'd find there are plenty of folks on this board who you probably hold in higher esteem than us sllort and carpists who would be considered huge sllort in their own right. There is one who seems to do nothing but follow me around on this board, criticizing me for changing my avatar for goodness sake. In fact, it got so weird that another member made a comment to this sllort about how he seems to be doing nothing but follow me around. And if you can't find any, Mark, PM me and I'll be glad to share with you some of their greatest hits.

Where the limo was? Towner splice? Really Chris and Dave? Here's all the proof you need that no alteration took place. It's right in front of you here and all you have to do is get "the big bad government" out of your heads and you'd then see it: