Jump to content
The Education Forum

Paul Bacon

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    319

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Paul Bacon

    A DEFECT IN THE MOORMAN PHOTO?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    39 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

    This is most likely new to most of you; to some, like me and Chris, it gnaws quietly within the electricity of the brain reminding us that people "ain't gonna learn what they don't wanna know" and pulling on Superman's cape is foolish.

    I've been made aware of a few people who said they saw it and described it online.  One is Greg Burnham referred to in the Prouty thread, the other Rich Dellarosa.

    Paul ,they did not "only" see this film.   The people I refer to have seen both films.  This can be taken as definitive proof if you like... as I find these 2 people beyond reproach  for their integrity and dedication to the truth.

    Back in '09 (and throughout my time online) I have a habit of copying significant posts and threads and saving them on my computer and printing them out for fear of them disappearing someday.  Of losing them to history for what they suggested.  From my files I have these two presentations of what was written and if I remember correctly, the published pages from Rich are in Fetzer's Assassination Science... first off is Greg

    I've been aware of Greg Burnham and Rich Dellarosa's stories for quite a few years.  I unconditionally believed them from the start!  Your post provided many more details than I was aware of, so I'm very grateful for your taking the time to post.  It is astonishing to think about.  But, again, I knew about it (and believed it).  

    My question, though, is where did the two (different) versions (of the extant Z film) Chris used in his gif come from?  I didn't realize there was more than one version of the extant film available.  All I knew was that there were just crappy versions as well as better versions of the same film.

     

    A DEFECT IN THE MOORMAN PHOTO?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Paul Bacon

    2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

    {good sarcasm or honest question?}. I get the sarcasm... for those who want answers:

    Dino B and Homer M

    Bill Smith vs 2 men in black

    Hawkeyeworks

    0184

    The missing Rowley film which arrived on Rowley's desk late night Fri / early morning Sat as sent by Max Phillips and whose chain of custody ends there.

    The half dozen people who actually saw a different film years after the fact, who describe seeing the turn onto Elm and the limo stop.

    the "original" with 6 splices creating 7 pieces totaling over 50 feet of film from a 30 foot side and only 6 feet and change of actual footage

    the demonstrable capability in film alteration available at the time

    the impossible head movements

    the black square over the right rear of his head where you can see his head/hair and other features behind it... stereoscopic viewers of this frame claim the black square appears to hover over the film... if I remember correctly...

    yes, it is apparent to me there are different finished versions of the film.

     

    image.thumb.jpeg.0c3d253d1752c8411a18eff935507a7d.jpeg

     

    David, I do understand what you just laid out.  I believe that Dino saw the original film, but Chris doesn't have a copy, I think I can safely say.  As you said, a half a dozen only have seen that version over the years.

     

    13 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

    The latest frames I posted side x side are the same as in the gif.

    The side x side frames are not composited, layered or any other combination thereof.

    They are two individual frames from two versions of the zfilm.

    What am I missing?  Is Chris saying that there are multiple Z films floating around whose frame compositions are different depending on which version you're seeing?  Where did the black and white version come from?  And where did the color version come from?  Does frame 306 show the white patch in the black and white version, but not the color version.  I have Costella's frames--no white patch in 306.

    God help me!  :>)

    A DEFECT IN THE MOORMAN PHOTO?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    15 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

    Paul, 

    The retired engineer named Tim referred to by Chris Davidson is Tim Nicholson, and the 21pp essay in question is entitled Evidence of Zapruder Film Alteration. You can sign up for free at this link & download his 2018 paper: https://www.academia.edu/38392224/Evidence_of_Zapruder_Film_Alteration_May_2018_pdf

    Thanks for the link Paul.  I know a big part of my difficulty is that I don't have the background knowledge base.

    A DEFECT IN THE MOORMAN PHOTO?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

    Early on I asked Chris the same thing, and with his use of illustration and gif I think he's more than obliged.

    Unfortunately, for me, Chris's gif's often leave me even more confused.  I remember the "bobble head" gifs, but was never sure I was getting the full implications or even any conclusion reached.  I think I get it--indication of two different films, or cameras, or "step" processing mistakes?

    The gif Chris posted just earlier--I can make a guess as to his point, but why not just spell it out?  I'm guessing he was pointing to the fact that, in spite of the two widely separated frames, body positions in the frames had not changed.  If this is true, that would be indicative of a matte process used in Z alteration, would it not?

    Your post David was helpful.  It confirms that I have been getting the general gist of what Chris has done.

    A DEFECT IN THE MOORMAN PHOTO?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    Since Stone's "JFK" came into the movie theatres, the piece of evidence in which I have been most interested in, all in all, is the Zapruder film.  I have been, and continue to be, most impressed and fascinated by Doug Horne's work on the subject.  I am a true believer.

    I have read and tried to understand every word of Chris Davidson's work in the "Unvailing" thread, and have even used, in my head, some of David J's responses to help me understand what Chris D's work is demonstrating.

    I wholeheartedly share Chris Bristow's frustration with trying to understand what Chris D. is getting at, at each turn in the developement of Chris D's analasis.  If I knew the point Chris D. was making at each "turn" of his observation I would have been far more informed than I am.  But, as Chris B. said, I was left guessing.  And I'm going to guess that most of the people in this forum feel the same way.

    Chris Davidson has been doing some fantastic work--my instinct tells me that.  But I sincerely wish I could follow along with all his observations.  If I knew the point behind each of his observations, I believe I could.

    I'm begging you Chris, please be less obtuse... :>)

    Cognitive Infiltration

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

    I’ve always felt that Bush was a useful idiot and not involved in any 9/11 plot. I mean, would conspirators in such a plot divulge it to someone as dim as Bush?

    He was handled by Cheney, who presidential candidate Bush had put in charge of finding him a good running mate. Cheney wound up choosing himself. Then Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were brought in at the Pentagon. The whole thing was basically a neocon coup.

    Remember in one of the presidential debates when Bush was giving a monologue? He suddenly said, “Let me finish!” No one on the stage was trying to stop or interrupt him. He had to be talking to whoever was telling him what to say through a transmitter in his ear. (There was a photo taken at the debate where the outline of a wire could be seen under the back of Bush’s coat.) And this idiot could be trusted with knowledge of a conspiracy like 9/11?

    “Give him a goat story to read.”

     

    I, too, agree with your assesment.  It's quite clear Cheney and Rumsfeld were in charge.  He had no idea what they were doing during his administration--although I imagine, now, he has his suspisions.  

    Remember too, that Cheney and Rumsfeld were part of the Ford administration.  I can only imagine the inside information they were privy to and the ideas that generated.

    Cognitive Infiltration

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Paul Bacon
    add word

    Any pressurized tank will blow when it gets hot enough.  These days, freon is used as a refrigerant because it's much safer.  Before that it was propane.  Propane is flammable, and would create a powerful explosion.

    Ever see a video of a house full of leaked propane exploding?  The massive explosion blows the house to bits.  But house fires that consume refrigerators and AC compressors full of freon are controllable.  Firefighters are not worried about them.

    Beams connected to columns are not welded.  They are bolted--a mechanical connection is much stronger than a weld.  Thermetic material wrapped around those joints would completely sever the connection.

    But beyond all this, there are dozens of reasons to believe the buildings where brought down, not by planes hitting the upper stories, but by controlled demolition.

×
×
  • Create New...