Chris Davidson Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 (edited) Bill, Why not submit the aspect info from Gary, so everyone can scrutinize it. I think that's a plain and simple request. If there is a glaring mistake in Duncan's methodology, submit it. The aspect ratio of the different medium's appear to be very close in nature. Duncan is using comparisons within the same photo, which makes a lot of sense. chris Edited January 20, 2008 by Chris Davidson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 He's just dancing badly again.Duncan Duncan, Square Dance? The incline is fully considered. I appreciate BM's photo opportunity: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Duncan,Square Dance? Duncan, Just a quick look at the eternal disparities. The human Titan in the right two insets is actually the real Gordon Arnold! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Yes, and even from the higher elevation Arnold photograph compared to the Arnold Moorman, we see less of the lower portion of the floating torso than we can see in Moorman.Where exactly does Bill stand on his opinion of the exact loaction of Arnold? He has never been specific, and what about his quote "So you tell me how Gordon's upper body is of normal size when seen against the height of the fence" Is this Bill telling us that Arnold is up against the fence? Duncan Well, Duncan, It's the old, old story of something not being kosher in the realm of Pickle. You see, in TMWKK Arnie was placed here (yes, that's the real Gordon Arnold!): But, this meant that Arnie was being placed at a spot where from he had the poorest filming view point that was possible, saving his going to Glasgow to film. Mack was adviser to TMWKK. So, either Arnie placed himself here or he allowed himself to be placed here by someone else? Mack? Here is Arnie's view from this spot: I don't think BM knows where to put Arnie, except airborne floating around in the parking lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 (edited) DuncanDuncan, Square Dance? The incline is fully considered. I appreciate BM's photo opportunity:[/b] Miles ... the picture is cocked at the wrong angle, thus your merely drawing horizontal lines from the top of the wall to someone standing along the walkway are not accurate and merely shows how little you know about this stuff. This is precisely why you and Duncan's post are garbage ... because you make such errors from the very start, thus all else that follows is based on erroneous data. Do you even know if the man seen in the image is 5' tall or 6' tall ... of course you don't know! (Very sloppy) I might as well address you and Duncan's other errors once again. The ground in and around the walkway was no longer the same when TMWKK series was made. In other words ... the elevation in certain places had changed. This could have easily been discovered had either of you super-sleuths had bothered to contact the Museum and inquired about it. The location of the camera in TMWKK isn't exactly at Moorman's location and appears to be at a higher elevation than Moorman's camera because most people know the further east one moves along Elm Street ... the higher they stand because of the downhill grade of the street. Also, neither of you two have addressed where Gordon's belt is in his younger picture Vs. his latter picture when his gut has enlarged, thus causing him to wear his belt much lower. I would think that at least one of you probably has some first hand experience in that department. Edited January 21, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 How about something concrete from you Bill, like watching the video link I attached and making a comment on it like " Why this photogrammetry expert is wrong about Badgeman" and why you are correct with your aimless theory when applying the same principles that this photographer applied to Arnold in the perfect recreation of Moorman. You called on me to get information from a photogrammetry expert, well this is sufficient in my opinion, and I believe Gary is aware of the video as he was involved to some degree I believe. Why don't you consult him on this?Duncan I could have sworn that I did mention at least one of the errors they made ... Mack has told me of several, so I ask that you contact him at GMack@JFK.ORG to learn more. BTW, did not they say they had Badge Man standing in front of the fence and not behind it? If that is so, then would not the subject being too close to the camera also make him appear too large ... thats been my experience. Like I said, I put Tony Cummings just behind the fence at the Badge Man location and Tony wasn't too large. In other words, I could have you stand at a particular spot over the wall that would match Badge Man's size, but when using someone like Miles in the same location ... he would appear too big. Miles would have to back up from the camera until he looks your size. This is common sense and as I have repeatedly said, I got someone to match in size, as well as Mack was able to do it independent of my attempt. I suggest you contact Gary and get what information that he has to offer ... that is if you really want to know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I don't think BM knows where to put Arnie, except airborne floating around in the parking lot. Knowing where to place Arnold is an easy task when using someone of similar size. And if you want to know if Mack assisted in the filming of Gordon Arnold - try emailing him, then you can post facts instead of speculative garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 (edited) I don't think BM knows where to put Arnie, except airborne floating around in the parking lot. Knowing where to place Arnold is an easy task when using someone of similar size. And if you want to know if Mack assisted in the filming of Gordon Arnold - try emailing him, then you can post facts instead of speculative garbage. The only one speculating is you...Watch the video link which I have supplied twice, and you will see Gary giving assistance. If you want to criticise in future, do your homework . If placing Arnold is so easy, as you say, then tell me how in the last 44 years no one in the history of researching the JFK case has managed to acomplish this " If you think your expertise is superior to that of the photogrammetrist who carried out the Moorman recreation with a scientifically calculated end result which would also apply to Arnold, then i'm sure the world would want to know. Front page headlines Bill, now's your big chance Duncan Right, Duncan, The person who has not consulted with Mack is BM, who desperately needs to do so before advancing arcane & esoteric theories so difficult to comprehend, such as BM's latest profundity: "...the further east one moves along Elm Street ... the higher they stand because of the downhill grade of the street." - Miller In other words, BM definitely & actually asserts that: If you go uphill, then you also go UP ! Remember BM's triumph of logic: Bowers could see the south side of the fence from the tower? Edit: color Edited January 22, 2008 by Miles Scull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 This is why I suggested the to scale Arnold placard based on the Moorman appearance, crazy as it may seem to many. Duncan Duncan, To answer your former question as to where BM places Arnie, I found this old shot made by BM during his in depth on the spot investigations. It is clear that BM blindly accepted Mack's error as seen in TMWKK, when Arnie is placed in a spot so that he cannot film the motorcade. So, BM has Royce pose in THE WRONG SPOT ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 I suggest that all participants in this thread meet in Dealey Plaza with cameras, models, and reference materials. Pose the models. Shoot pictures. Settle the dispute. Don't speculate. Do original research. Then you will be qualified to have an opinion...not before. Speculation is not research. Uninformed speculation demonstrates dumbth. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Duncan, To answer your former question as to where BM places Arnie, I found this old shot made by BM during his in depth on the spot investigations. It is clear that BM blindly accepted Mack's error as seen in TMWKK, when Arnie is placed in a spot so that he cannot film the motorcade. So, BM has Royce pose in THE WRONG SPOT ! I'll say one thing ... you are consistent ... consistent at making bone-headed remarks. Yes, this is one of several test shots we made when looking at the Gordon Arnold issue. We found that Arnold had to be west of the sidewalk ... not at the wall as some people had thought. And at the time we took those pictures - I didn't know how tall Arnold was. Royce did not match Gordon's body size. Mack was right .. a person Gordon's size has to move back towards the fence on the same LOS we used. Once again and as usual ... you don't bother to get all the facts before posting more garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 (edited) Here are two other views......FWTAW These are newer views taken some years later, and the bench area is now a cemented patio, which raised it, to some degree, as well as the knoll being repaired and perhaps raised, somewhat ,from the repairs after the wash out, that took place some time later..... B.... Edited January 22, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 (edited) The only one speculating is you...Watch the video link which I have supplied twice, and you will see Gary giving assistance.If you want to criticise in future, do your homework . If placing Arnold is so easy, as you say, then tell me how in the last 44 years no one in the history of researching the JFK case has managed to acomplish this " If you think your expertise is superior to that of the photogrammetrist who carried out the Moorman recreation with a scientifically calculated end result which would also apply to Arnold, then i'm sure the world would want to know. Front page headlines Bill, now's your big chance Duncan Duncan, please point out where Gary Mack is referenced in the link you posted? Then after failing to do that much ... point out at what point do you see Gary Mack because I have seen that link twice and I don't see Gary Mack at all. So please enlighten me with more of your alleged non-speculation by telling me why your statement is anything but more garbage. Now ... nowhere did I see these guys mention Gordon Arnold's size. They started out positioning someone between the fence and the wall and claimed that to be the Badge Man location. Who ever said Badge Man was near the walkway ??? Then they said something about Badge Man being 2'+ tall according to their figures ... how dumb was that? Badge Man is only seen from the chest-up. All I can tell any bone head who hasn't bothered to check it for themselves ... someone the right size can be placed at the fence and be on the LOS that Badge Man is. They placed a person just beyond the wall and then said that to make him as small as Badge Man ... they needed to move him back into the RR yard. Like I said before ... One would have to move Miles back a country mile to make him appear to be the same size as you standing much closer to the camera. Had you consulted Mack - he could have told you some of the mistakes those guys made. Edited January 22, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Bill, Gary Mack with radio in hand, receiving directions from the photographer for positioning the young man. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 (edited) Bill,Gary Mack with radio in hand, receiving directions from the photographer for positioning the young man. chris Thx Chris. Like I said before ... One would have to move Miles back a country mile to make him appear to be the same size as you standing much closer to the camera. Had you consulted Mack - he could have told you some of the mistakes those guys made. Are you really saying that Mack has told you that I, as Arnie in the Moorman image, must be placed on the east bank of the Trinity River? If that is the implication of your assertion, then I must call your bluff. I say you are misrepresenting Mack & misstating facts. I am 6 feet & weigh 158 pounds US. Go figure, thanks! Now, your forced analysis is, not surprisingly, faulty because it fails to consider a preeminently key fact: Duncan's discovery of the ineluctable tininess of the Arnie image in Moorman which eliminates the possibility of that image being human post dates your extensive, but misguided (by Mack) investigations. You could not have known that your investigations were wrong footed until Duncan recently published his startling discovery, which overturns & reverses all of your findings which at the time seemed valid to you because they had the imprimatur of Mack. Understandable then. But NOT now! Now, because it emerges that Arnie must be placed in the parking lot, you keep referring Duncan & myself to Mack. What? You refer us to Mack, who misled you? In the forlorn & absurd hope that he will do the same for us? Thus, rather than accept Duncan's brave new world, you seek to enforce your eldritch mistake by brute force? I ain't buyin' it, but maybe, in fairness to you, Duncan will. I have my doubts. I'll wager you do too. Edit: spelling Edited January 22, 2008 by Miles Scull 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