Is This Black Dog Man

[Bill Miller]

Alan, you are getting all heated up over a confusion in semantics.

With the aid of Nigel Turner, we found the exact spot Arnold would

be standing if it is he in the Moorman photo.

As I recall from the photo Nigel took, it was 18 inches west of the

sidewalk and 24 inches north of the top step.

Argue all you want over wording, but a reconstruction shows a

person in that spot will be near identical to the image in Moorman.

And before he ever saw the Moorman image, Arnold had said,

"THE BULLET WHIZZED BY MY LEFT EAR". This exact location is

the only place on the knoll that could happen, as seen in Moorman.

I have posted the image many times. If requested, I can get Bernice

to post it again.

Jack

PS...always a mystery to me is why he chose that position rather

than the Blackdogman position.

Alan doesn't get it because he doesn't want to. I asked Alan what the top step had to do with Gordon Arnold - I am still asking, but unless I have missed it ... no direct response has been forthcoming so far. In a message that Gary Mack sent Alan, it reads ...."You must read slowly for comprehension. Bill accurately related what I told him: Arnold said he was BETWEEN the wall and the fence, not BEHIND the wall. Standing west of the steps IS still between the wall and the fence." Alan seems to be playing a wording game whereas he wants to suggest that we are saying the steps themselves are behind the wall when we know it is the walkway that is behind the wall. What Alan is refusing to do is to understand that anyone looking down on the knoll could draw a line through the wall - through the steps and walkway - through the grass between the walkway and fence - and through the fence .... and each line will be west of the other. Once Alan accepts this, then maybe he will better understand what it is that we have been trying to tell him.

As far as the BDM position - I respectively disagree with you that the BDM was up at the wall. Even the fence looks up near the wall, so the spacing of objects in those photos, especially as little more than silhouettes in deep shadow, is impossible to get exact merely by looking at either the Willis or Betzner photographs.

The one photo that offers a better angle so the spacing can be better determined was Moorman's photograph. The reason for this is that the BDM and Gordon Arnold are one in the same person. Lets evaluate the evidence once more concerning Arnold. Gordon Arnold said that he had walked out to the spot he demonstrated in "TMWKK" and Gordon stood there and did a few test pans. Then Gordon saw the President come onto the street and started filming JFK until Kennedy got to the location of the kill shot whereas Gordon upon hearing a shot come past his ear - Arnold then hit the ground. (So far are you with me here?) Ok - Gordon never said that anyone walked out and stood in front of him blocking his view as JFK was coming down Elm Street. The Willis and Betzner photos show but one individual, thus if no one stood in front of Arnold as he filmed the President coming towards him, then the BDM must be Arnold. (Now I think we agree on this point because you have said the BDM was altered so to hide it from being known as a man in uniform ... such as Gordon Arnold was wearing) I believe it is the shade passing over Arnold and his possible moving (especially in the Willis photo) that causes him to blur and appear so dark.

Alright - whether one wishes to think the BDM was painted over to hide Arnold's uniform is debatable and is unimportant - it is Moorman's photograph taken from more of a side view to the wall that told you, Mack, Groden, myself, and anyone else going to the plaza to align the stand-ins to match Moorman's photograph that Arnold was NOT up near the wall, but rather just west of the walkway in the grass.

Now allow me to drawn attention to the sunspot seen on Arnold's right shoulder and chest. That sunspot is caused by sunlight shining through a bare spot in the tree foliage between he and the sun. To take a step in either direction would cause one to move out of that sunspot. (Follow me so far?) In the Betzner photo, which is better than the Willis photo for seeing the BDM IMO, there is a sunspot on the BDM's right shoulder and chest just like it is seen in Moorman's photograph. So we have Arnold who doesn't say that anyone stood in front of him blocking his view of the approaching President and we have a figure in the Betzner and Moorman photographs that has the same sunspot coming through the foliage and shining down on his right shoulder and chest. It is these pieces of evidence that tells me that the BDM is not up at the wall as some have believed merely by looking at a 2D photograph taken from a frontal view.

Bill

Edited August 1, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

duplicate post deleted

Edited August 1, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Herb White]

Alan, you are getting all heated up over a confusion in semantics.

With the aid of Nigel Turner, we found the exact spot Arnold would

be standing if it is he in the Moorman photo.

As I recall from the photo Nigel took, it was 18 inches west of the

sidewalk and 24 inches north of the top step.

Argue all you want over wording, but a reconstruction shows a

person in that spot will be near identical to the image in Moorman.

And before he ever saw the Moorman image, Arnold had said,

"THE BULLET WHIZZED BY MY LEFT EAR". This exact location is

the only place on the knoll that could happen, as seen in Moorman.

I have posted the image many times. If requested, I can get Bernice

to post it again.

Jack

PS...always a mystery to me is why he chose that position rather

than the Blackdogman position.

Alan doesn't get it because he doesn't want to. I asked Alan what the top step had to do with Gordon Arnold - I am still asking, but unless I have missed it ... no direct response has been forthcoming so far. In a message that Gary Mack sent Alan, it reads ...."You must read slowly for comprehension. Bill accurately related what I told him: Arnold said he was BETWEEN the wall and the fence, not BEHIND the wall. Standing west of the steps IS still between the wall and the fence." Alan seems to be playing a wording game whereas he wants to suggest that we are saying the steps themselves are behind the wall when we know it is the walkway that is behind the wall. What Alan is refusing to do is to understand that anyone looking down on the knoll could draw a line through the wall - through the steps and walkway - through the grass between the walkway and fence - and through the fence .... and each line will be west of the other. Once Alan accepts this, then maybe he will better understand what it is that we have been trying to tell him.

As far as the BDM position - I respectively disagree with you that the BDM was up at the wall. Even the fence looks up near the wall, so the spacing of objects in those photos, especially as little more than silhouettes in deep shadow, is impossible to get exact merely by looking at either the Willis or Betzner photographs.

The one photo that offers a better angle so the spacing can be better determined was Moorman's photograph. The reason for this is that the BDM and Gordon Arnold are one in the same person. Lets evaluate the evidence once more concerning Arnold. Gordon Arnold said that he had walked out to the spot he demonstrated in "TMWKK" and Gordon stood there and did a few test pans. Then Gordon saw the President come onto the street and started filming JFK until Kennedy got to the location of the kill shot whereas Gordon upon hearing a shot come past his ear - Arnold then hit the ground. (So far are you with me here?) Ok - Gordon never said that anyone walked out and stood in front of him blocking his view as JFK was coming down Elm Street. The Willis and Betzner photos show but one individual, thus if no one stood in front of Arnold as he filmed the President coming towards him, then the BDM must be Arnold. (Now I think we agree on this point because you have said the BDM was altered so to hide it from being known as a man in uniform ... such as Gordon Arnold was wearing) I believe it is the shade passing over Arnold and his possible moving (especially in the Willis photo) that causes him to blur and appear so dark.

Alright - whether one wishes to think the BDM was painted over to hide Arnold's uniform is debatable and is unimportant - it is Moorman's photograph taken from more of a side view to the wall that told you, Mack, Groden, myself, and anyone else going to the plaza to align the stand-ins to match Moorman's photograph that Arnold was NOT up near the wall, but rather just west of the walkway in the grass.

Now allow me to drawn attention to the sunspot seen on Arnold's right shoulder and chest. That sunspot is caused by sunlight shining through a bare spot in the tree foliage between he and the sun. To take a step in either direction would cause one to move out of that sunspot. (Follow me so far?) In the Betzner photo, which is better than the Willis photo for seeing the BDM IMO, there is a sunspot on the BDM's right shoulder and chest just like it is seen in Moorman's photograph. So we have Arnold who doesn't say that anyone stood in front of him blocking his view of the approaching President and we have a figure in the Betzner and Moorman photographs that has the same sunspot coming through the foliage and shining down on his right shoulder and chest. It is these pieces of evidence that tells me that the BDM is not up at the wall as some have believed merely by looking at a 2D photograph taken from a frontal view.

Bill

Bill,

I 've said it previously in an email to you, but thanks again for clearing up, what for me, was one of the knottiest problems with the photo evidence...BDM. It is obvious, as you say, if one believes Gordon Arnold's story, as I do, then BDM and Arnold have to be the same image. Your analysis of the sunspot, shadow and blurred movement have proven beyond doubt that BDM is Gordon, thereby adding even more credence to his story.

I also asked either you or Jack to post Jack's clearest colorized version of Badgeman as I have a question to put to you regarding something I believe is in the photo that hasn't been discussed.

Thanks, Herb

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

I 've said it previously in an email to you, but thanks again for clearing up, what for me, was one of the knottiest problems with the photo evidence...BDM. It is obvious, as you say, if one believes Gordon Arnold's story, as I do, then BDM and Arnold have to be the same image. Your analysis of the sunspot, shadow and blurred movement have proven beyond doubt that BDM is Gordon, thereby adding even more credence to his story.

I also asked either you or Jack to post Jack's clearest colorized version of Badgeman as I have a question to put to you regarding something I believe is in the photo that hasn't been discussed.

Thanks, Herb

Herb, I was sorry that I couldn't post the image you wanted for I have not been in my office since early Spring. I did a search on Lancer and pulled some of the old images from there. Here you go and thanks - glad the analysis made sense to you for it does to me, too. It is so simple that I was surprised that so many researchers had missed the connection for so many years.

Bill

Edited September 27, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

duplicate post deleted

Edited August 1, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Herb White]

Bill,

I 've said it previously in an email to you, but thanks again for clearing up, what for me, was one of the knottiest problems with the photo evidence...BDM. It is obvious, as you say, if one believes Gordon Arnold's story, as I do, then BDM and Arnold have to be the same image. Your analysis of the sunspot, shadow and blurred movement have proven beyond doubt that BDM is Gordon, thereby adding even more credence to his story.

I also asked either you or Jack to post Jack's clearest colorized version of Badgeman as I have a question to put to you regarding something I believe is in the photo that hasn't been discussed.

Thanks, Herb

Herb, I was sorry that I couldn't post the image you wanted for I have not been in my office since early Spring. I did a search on Lancer and pulled some of the old images from there. Here you go and thanks - glad the analysis made sense to you for it does to me, too. It is so simple that I was suprised that so many researchers had missed the connection for so many years.

Bill

Bill,

Are there any other researchers who have commented positively on your analysis of of GA as BDM?

In my opinion, the Arnold story and photo evidence along with the Dillard photo showing the t shirt wearing, short haired person Groden found in the depository window moments after the shooting are convincing evidence of conspiracy almost on their own.

In the Badgeman photos, and the ones above aren't quite as clear, or possibly as large as some I've seen, I have thought for sometime that there appears to be another face peering around and over the right shoulder of the railroad worker. The face is slightly roundish and the right eye, cheek and nose are fairly discernable. In some photos he appears quite clearly and even may be wearing a hat. imo. I understand this could be an artifact of light or shadows, but the size of the head/face are consistent with Badgeman and the railroad worker. I respect your work and would enjoy any comment regarding

this subject.

Herb

[Jack White]

Herb...a couple of days ago (Robin or Chris) posted the clearest and largest

study of my colored badgeman group I have seen...even better than any

that I have. I don't have time now to look it up, but maybe someone could

repost it here.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Bill,

Are there any other researchers who have commented positively on your analysis of of GA as BDM?

In my opinion, the Arnold story and photo evidence along with the Dillard photo showing the t shirt wearing, short haired person Groden found in the depository window moments after the shooting are convincing evidence of conspiracy almost on their own.

In the Badgeman photos, and the ones above aren't quite as clear, or possibly as large as some I've seen, I have thought for sometime that there appears to be another face peering around and over the right shoulder of the railroad worker. The face is slightly roundish and the right eye, cheek and nose are fairly discernable. In some photos he appears quite clearly and even may be wearing a hat. imo. I understand this could be an artifact of light or shadows, but the size of the head/face are consistent with Badgeman and the railroad worker. I respect your work and would enjoy any comment regarding

this subject.

Herb

Herb, I can only think of a few people who have not understood the connection between Arnold and the Black Dog Man (BMD). Researchers from Robert Groden, Joan Mellen, William Law, Larry Hancock, Debra Conway, and etc., have seen these images and have said that after they saw my presentation that they had finally seen the connection and that I had convinced them that the two individuals were one in the same. Had it not been for the work Jack and Gary had done with the Badge Man, then I may never have made the connection. It was when I created an overlay transparency of Arnold and the BDM that convinced me they were one in the same person.

I have not seen another face in the Badge Man images other than what Jack and Gary have shown.

Bill

Edited August 2, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Herb White]

Bill,

Are there any other researchers who have commented positively on your analysis of of GA as BDM?

In my opinion, the Arnold story and photo evidence along with the Dillard photo showing the t shirt wearing, short haired person Groden found in the depository window moments after the shooting are convincing evidence of conspiracy almost on their own.

In the Badgeman photos, and the ones above aren't quite as clear, or possibly as large as some I've seen, I have thought for sometime that there appears to be another face peering around and over the right shoulder of the railroad worker. The face is slightly roundish and the right eye, cheek and nose are fairly discernable. In some photos he appears quite clearly and even may be wearing a hat. imo. I understand this could be an artifact of light or shadows, but the size of the head/face are consistent with Badgeman and the railroad worker. I respect your work and would enjoy any comment regarding

this subject.

Herb

Herb, I can only think of a few people who have not understood the connection between Arnold and the Black Dog Man (BMD). Researchers from Robert Groden, Joan Mellen, William Law, Larry Hancock, Debra Conway, and etc., have seen these images and have said that after they saw my presentation that they had finally seen the connection and that I had convinced them that the two individuals were one in the same. Had it not been for the work Jack and gary had done with the Badge Man, then I may never have made the connection. It was when I created an overlay transparency of Arnold and the BDM that convinced me they were one in the same person.

I have not seen another face in the Badge Man images other than what jack and Gary have shown.

Bill

Bill,

It is encouraging to know that so many respected people concur with your finding. I hope Jack can post the Badgeman image he referred to in his post above. I don't know how to outline what I see, but maybe someone can. Do you see the face/image I am referring to? I am not asking you to agree that it is someone. I just would like to know if anyone else sees what I do.

Herb

[Bill Miller]

Can you explain why Arnold is relatively smaller than Badgeman and Railroadman when he is closer to Moormans lens? The scaling is accurate in my composite. His head and body should be larger than that of Badgeman and Railroadman, but they are not, they are smaller

[Bill Miller]

Can you explain why Arnold is relatively smaller than Badgeman and Railroadman when he is closer to Moormans lens? The scaling is accurate in my composite. His head and body should be larger than that of Badgeman and Railroadman, but they are not, they are smaller

There may be a couple of things that would explain what you think you see. One obvious find is that the camera is looking at Arnold face-on and is seeing the Badge Man with his head slightly turned to his right. The human head is narrower from ear to ear - than from back to front. If we could turn Badge Man's head so to be looking right at the camera as Arnold is positioned, then Badge Man's head may even be narrower than Arnold's.

The next thing is that Arnold was not a large man in his younger days. We have no idea how large Badge Man was? I once posted a line of people seen at some outing and one man's head was in real life much larger than the other men's heads in the picture. Without knowing the facts ... there really can be no precise comparison.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

With respect, I don't think I see it. I do see it

I have no idea what you were trying to say in the above statement.

No No No...The body is smaller too..everything is smaller, and all wrong perspectively. Railroadman's body, and head which looks perspectively correct is also turned as he appears to look in the direction of the TSBD. Martial arts practice is to turn sideways to reduce the target area for their opponents, using this theory, Badgeman should look smaller, as in effect we are seeing less of the "target" but we see quite the opposite, he appears much bigger than Arnold

I believe we were talking about Arnold's head when I made that statement. The human head is not round, but rather oblong in shape. As far as the rest of Badge Man's body ... its not defined even in Jack's work, so where does his outline start and where does it stop? I'll do a forum search later to see if I can find that group photo I spoke of ... people standing in a row and one man is much larger than the others, but not in height.

That's another point I forgot to bring up..You say he was not a large man in his younger days, but he sure looks very large to me in Moorman, just as large as if he'd stepped off the TMWKK interview settings.

Duncan - you started out this discussion telling us how small Arnold looked compared to Badge Man ... now you are making Arnold out to be large. Should we stop posting on this until you get it straight on whether Arnold looked small in Moorman or whether he looks large? I will do a search and see if I can find the row of people standing next to one another where one guy is 30+ percent wider all around than the other people next to him.

We have no idea how large Badge Man was?

Come on Bill, that's not an explanatory answer, although what you say is true

I once posted a line of people seen at some outing and one man's head was in real life much larger than the other men's heads in the picture. Without knowing the facts ... there really can be no precise comparison.

I would need to see that photograph before I could comment

I am sure you have seen it for I have posted it on several occasions here and at Lancer.

Bill

[Alan Healy]

Alan, you are getting all heated up over a confusion in semantics.

With the aid of Nigel Turner, we found the exact spot Arnold would

be standing if it is he in the Moorman photo.

As I recall from the photo Nigel took, it was 18 inches west of the

sidewalk and 24 inches north of the top step.

Argue all you want over wording, but a reconstruction shows a

person in that spot will be near identical to the image in Moorman.

And before he ever saw the Moorman image, Arnold had said,

"THE BULLET WHIZZED BY MY LEFT EAR". This exact location is

the only place on the knoll that could happen, as seen in Moorman.

I have posted the image many times. If requested, I can get Bernice

to post it again.

Jack

Your wrong Jack.

Did you read this?

http://hometown.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/add...noldCLAIMS.html

This is the only time that Arnold was asked to pin-point his position for the record & he said "the steps were to the east of me".

So either he was wrong or the "Arnold" figure in the blow-ups is an illusion.

They cannot both be right but they can however, both be wrong, since there is no evidence of Arnold's presence in DP that day at all.

You do realise that I think you have misinterpreted the shapes & shadows that make up the "Arnold figure" don't you?

If not I'll make it clear for you here,

I don't trust it.

It looks unreal to me(unnatural).

I see something else(something that just happens to correspond with what we see in Betzner3).

Did you even pay any attention to my observation that your man's hand is nowhere near his face?

The sketched in arm is still there on P11 of this thread.

Gary allegedly seems to have noticed this years ago & went out of his way to ask Arnold about it.

It's funny how you were not told.

Anyway Jack,

nice to see you defending Bill but, it's a shame you chose this point in time when he just made a blunder by saying the "steps are between the wall & the fence".

It's a ridiculous statement & I'm not hearing any retraction from him despite me clearly illustrating it.

Arnold said he was east of the steps & after I pointed that out that was the best Bill could do.

As you no doubt accurately pointed out, your man is north of the steps, not east.

I think there are other places one could have stood, to get a bullet passing over ones left ear but that depends on our beliefs on the shooting scenario.

Spending time thinking about this would also depend on whether we believe Arnolds story or not & I, as I've made clear, do not.

Badgeman may look ten times more realistic than "Arnold" but that isn't saying much, you must except that there are still major doubts in the community that BM is "really real".

Talking about him like he has been proven(like Bill does with Arnold) doesn't work.

I hope you do get another chance to look again at high quality blow-ups without this Arnold figure blinkering you.

If you are interested I'll show you what I see but I'm not going to beg.

Just to save you the effort, here's the picture your talking about.

Maybe one day you'll take as much interest in Blackdogman & pin-point where he was stood.

Bill reckons it's in exactly the same place as "Arnold" but has some how always avoided posting evidence to back up his claims.

I won't show the photo he came back with the last time he tried to pin-point BDM's position in the plaza but I can sum it up for you in one word.

Farsicle.

Alan

PS...always a mystery to me is why he chose that position rather

than the Blackdogman position.

Are you saying you can prove the two are different Jack?

Please show us.

[Bill Miller]

It gets rather frustrating when someone seemingly is trying to confuse rather than to learn. The grass in which Arnold stood that runs from the shelter down to the street IS west of the steps. The walkway and steps are west of the wall. I read how Gary Mack explained this to you, so why do you continue to pretend not to get such an obvious point?

Below are the two sun patches seen in both the Moorman and Betzner photos. Note the dark spot seen within both patches - does it tell us anything? Sure it does. It tells us that we are looking at the same individual whereas as the limo came towards the knoll - this person turned his body slightly to his right as if to be tracking the President with a movie camera, which is exactly what Arnold said he had done.

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

PS...always a mystery to me is why he chose that position rather

than the Blackdogman position.

Gordon Arnold said that as he was looking for a spot to film from the RR yard side of the fence that the same man came up to him again and said that he wanted him out of there altogether. Gordon said that was when he went around to the other side of the fence. So to answer your question - Arnold was told not to be back in the RR yard at all, thus he couldn't take Badge Man's position ... or so he believed.

Bill