Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 This gif is accurate and shows that Arnold can not be real in this position in Moorman.Duncan Before we dance ... can you say why the Arnold figure cannot be real? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 This gif is accurate and shows that Arnold can not be real in this position in Moorman.Duncan Before we dance ... can you say why the Arnold figure cannot be real? Bill Yes..Because he's a floating torso Where would you place his feet?, a rough estimate will do. Just imagine you can see through the wall and place his feet where you believe the ground is. Duncan I have emailed Don R. to see if he still has the test photo I took of Tony Cummings and Mike Brown in a Moorman recreation photo that Groden and I shot. Mack and others have also recreated their images by placing Gordon between the wall and Badge Man at the fence. If the images can be recreated and their sizes match to real known people who stood-in for them, then your assumption that Arnold is too short cannot be accurate. You do know that the wall at ground level on the outside of the wall is not the same as on the walkway side of it - right? You are also aware that Gordon told Golz that he stood on a little mound of dirt when he stood above the knoll - right? If Don has my recreation photo and emails it to me - I will post it once again. That photo has been posted numerous times in the past on both forums. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) I have emailed Don R. to see if he still has the test photo I took of Tony Cummings and Mike Brown in a Moorman recreation photo that Groden and I shot. Mack and others have also recreated their images by placing Gordon between the wall and Badge Man at the fence. If the images can be recreated and their sizes match to real known people who stood-in for them, then your assumption that Arnold is too short cannot be accurate. You do know that the wall at ground level on the outside of the wall is not the same as on the walkway side of it - right? You are also aware that Gordon told Golz that he stood on a little mound of dirt when he stood above the knoll - right? If Don has my recreation photo and emails it to me - I will post it once again. That photo has been posted numerous times in the past on both forums. Bill Yes, I'm aware of those facts. Duncan OK - good! Now if the images of Arnold and Badge Man have been recreated and they match that seen on the Moorman photograph, then how can Arnold not be real IYO??? You have basically made a typical allegation without any specific data as to how you reached it ... while not forgetting the recreations that have been achieved. Please explain, if you can. Bill Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) OK - good! Now if the images of Arnold and Badge Man have been recreated and they match that seen on the Moorman photograph, then how can Arnold not be real IYO??? You have basically made a typical allegation without any specific data as to how you reached it ... while not forgetting the recreations that have been achieved. Please explain, if you can.Bill I'll wait until I see the recreation photographs before I give you a considered response, In the meantime, can you show me where Arnold's feet would be in Moorman, as previously requested? Duncan The ground level would depend how far Gordon was from the wall ... for Moorman is looking upward at a hill slope that rises beyond the wall. Follow the fence line where it meets the ground and track it from the corner of the fence to the south leg of the wall. BTW, do we know how high the dirt mound was? As far as the recreation pics ... is it your position that you have not seen them before or have never responded to a thread containing them or is it that you just don't recall the details of those pics? Below is a pic showing a man bent forward and leaning on the wall ... care to guess where his feet touch the ground? Bill Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 The ground level would depend how far Gordon was from the wall ... for Moorman is looking upward at a hill slope that rises beyond the wall. Follow the fence line where it meets the ground and track it from the corner of the fence to the south leg of the wall. Ok..I've did that, i've even simulated what the fence would look like if the wall wasn't there to make it easier for you..Here's the result. Now can to tell me where Arnold's feet would be, approximatly? BTW, do we know how high the dirt mound was? I don't, if you know tell me. Below is a pic showing a man bent forward and leaning on the wall ... care to guess where his feet touch the ground? No..It has no bearing on the issue of the Moorman Arnold figure. Duncan Having never been to the plaza, I can see why you might think like you do. The dirt rounds upward - you drew in a straight flat line which is incorrect. You also forgot to show the mound of dirt Arnold mentioned to Golz. And I am still interested in you answering my previous questions pertaining to any recreation Moorman images that you may have seen or read about. Any idea as to how they were accomplished? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Bill.You are asking me to answer questions. I will do so once you have answered my questions and requests. Once again, I ask you to show where arnold's feet would approximately be in Moorman. I also now ask you to show me where you would draw the line at the bottom of the fence as it would have been seen if the wall wasn't there.Thanks Duncan I will show you where the ground is once I find one of my recreation photos. I am searching forum archives for a copy at this time. In the end it will be posted - recreations by several researchers have been conducted and found to match the alleged figures in Moorman's photo, thus will end that nonsense and we can get back to why your alleged floating cop is too large when considering the further distance he would be from Moorman's camera when compared to the men on the steps. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 Animated overlay of test Arnold / Badge Man images against real people above the knoll. Back side of he wall. The further back from the corner of the wall towards the fence on a LOS from Moorman's location - the ground rises. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) I appreciate you posting the test Arnold. Unfortunately he does not match up with the correct position or size of the widely accepted Jack White Moorman Arnold position.Duncan In what way doesn't it match up, Duncan? The field of depth between subjects along with their sizes was found to be a match. Don R. reported that Tony was a half a step out of position to be directly over the corner of the wall. Now having said the obvious - were we not discussing the size of these individuals and not their left to right positioning when discussing your alleged shooter??? Bill Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 It doesn't match up because you've faked the original Moorman Arnold to compare with the "Tony" test Arnold to get the result you wanted. I've extracted your in transition Moorman frame from your 2 frame gif. You might be able to fool the masses Bill, but there's no escape from this blatantly faked Moorman. Duncan I didn't fake anything, Duncan. Find one thing in the Moorman image that doesn't match the test photo ... Groden and I nailed that photo right down to the major tree limbs in the background. The animation is made up of combining/mixing a transparency of each onto the other. As far as faking Arnold and Badge Man ... I merely took a Moorman photo and radio'd the subjects on the knoll so to tell them where to be so match the heights of those in Mary's photo. It was only after the picture was taken did I then ask the test subjects where they ended up. The result was consistent within a step of where Arnold said he stood during the shooting. Bill Miller Color image of Badge Man as requested by another forum member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) I didn't fake anything, Duncan. Find one thing in the Moorman image that doesn't match the test photoOk..Arnold..that's one thing...You have not used the Arnold Moorman, so there can be no match ... Groden and I nailed that photo right down to the major tree limbs in the background. The animation is made up of combining/mixing a transparency of each onto the other. As far as faking Arnold and Badge Man ... I merely took a Moorman photo and radio'd the subjects on the knoll so to tell them where to be so match the heights of those in Mary's photo. It was only after the picture was taken did I then ask the test subjects where they ended up. The result was consistent within a step of where Arnold said he stood during the shooting. Just tell me why you used an altered version of arnold to make the comparison. It doesn't make sense, nor can it be classed as a valid study Duncan Duncan, you will seldom see me in a poker game where I don't already know what the next card is going to be. First of all, what do you mean by an "altered version of Arnold"??? Certainly you are aware that White only water colored the image and didn't change anything pertaining to the shapes of the original images. There is a slight contrasting and sharpness between the two separate Moorman image sources because the Moorman photo Jack used for his work was sharper. The claim that I had not used the Arnold Moorman ... I have not a clue as to what you meant by that. The Moorman photo recreation matched every landmark seen in Mary's photo. Now the actual normal photos with Badge Man inserts are on my other computer in the States. This is why I have emailed Don R. to see if he still has some of those images because he worked on a few of mine when he posted that my Badge Man LOS was off a half a step. I will post those images once again as I find them. BTW, any information on those "perspective" problems I asked that you take to an art teacher or photographer ... have they emailed you back yet ... ot have you not bothered to investigate it any further? Bill Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) name='Duncan MacRae' post='107510' date='Jun 26 2007, 11:22 PM']Duncan, you will seldom see me in a poker game where I don't already know what the next card is going to be. First of all, what do you mean by an "altered version of Arnold"???I mean you have altered Arnold in the image in post number 225 which I extracted from your gif and posted to the forum. To deny this would be foolish. Anyone on here can see it's altered, there's no escaping this fact. Duncan, there is no discernible Arnold in the overlay to alter. The dark image you see is Mike Brown in both images for these are different stages of transparency overlays allowing one picture to fade, but be less dominant over the other ... and then visa-versa. Now the actual normal photos with Badge Man inserts are on my other computer in the States. This is why I have emailed Don R. to see if he still has some of those images because he worked on a few of mine when he posted that my Badge Man LOS was off a half a step. I will post those images once again as I find them. Sure...But id rather you address using a fake Arnold to justify your recreation resultsDuncan - THERE IS NO FAKE ARNOLD! Read the previous answer. You are so unaware of how to investigate these images that you make comments as fact that are incorrect. BTW, any information on those "perspective" problems I asked that you take to an art teacher or photographer ... have they emailed you back yet ... ot have you not bothered to investigate it any further?Not taking the bait. Here is a riddle for you, Duncan. Q) When is a legitimate research question considered bait? A) When Duncan knows the answer will kill his alleged over-sized assassin. Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 26, 2007 Share Posted June 26, 2007 (edited) Still not takin the bait Sure you're not touching those questions because " A) " was the real answer. Bill Edited June 26, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 (edited) There are some Badge Man/Arnold test images still on this forum if one will only look for them. Bill http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=3099&st=15 Edited June 27, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Arnold looks real to me. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eugene B. Connolly Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 (edited) Duncan, Please view these reconstruction images: Compare size of heads of car occupants as viewed from the fence. Anyone in the car would see that anyone standing at the fence would have the same size of head as those in the car if the car occupants could view themselves from the same position as that of the person standing at the fence. (Impossible, of course!) Anyone standing on the grass verge could see a correspondingly smaller head at the fence since h/she (on the grass verge) would be further from the seen head (on the fence). If Duncan's shooter's head was well concealed it might have been virtually invisible or virtually indiscernible to anyone standing on the grass verge at an initial, secondary or even tertiary glance. Duncan's shooter would have been only potentially visible or discernible for a matter of seconds (if even that long). The shooter would have broken cover for the minimal amount of time it took him to execute the action. It is amazing that Moorman's photo captured the very second that the shot impacted with JFK's head and in doing so Moorman, perforce, captured the shooter. The images show the exact same event viewed from different locations and perspectives. The graphics structures' measurements are based on 1963-era maps of Dealey Plaza, I hope this helps,Duncan EBC Edited June 27, 2007 by Eugene B. Connolly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now