The Gordon Arnold Competition

[Bill Miller]

dgh: Gary Mack, if BMiller can work there, I want a job too! I bet my resume blows Miller's right out of the water... give me a call or drop me a note, you know where to find me -- thanks for the consideration

Yes .. I agree that if the 6th floor Museum is looking for a double talking employee who doesn't seem to know squat about the JFK assassination, then you'd certainly be the man for the job.

[Bill Miller]

About the views being used and their accuracy .... more infromation that I requested from Gary Mack about TMWKK views -

"There is so much wrong information about TMWKK’s Gordon Arnold segment. I was not present when Nigel Turner filmed Arnold on the knoll, but I do know that Turner placed Arnold in the general area; he was not trying to replicate the Moorman photo, he was just telling the story in TV terms. Arnold claimed he was on the knoll between the fence and the walkway, so that’s where Turned placed him.

As for the view of Elm Street from the erroneous Arnold location, that scene was done another day when Turner filmed Jack White and I in the plaza. Turner’s camera location was different and it was located in front of the fence but much too low to duplicate what 5’10.5” Arnold would have seen.

Turner’s actions, which were never meant to be interpreted as exact re-creations, have only added to public confusion."

Edited January 24, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

About the views being used

Duncan,

Here's a look at Badgeman NOT aiming or sighting 2/9ths second after shooting.

Badgeman's eye level is far above any rifle sight or scope far too soon after he allegedly shot (2/9ths sec.).

The blue & green horizontal lines are where Badgeman's eye level should be, not at the red line.

Like Oswald, Badgeman never took a shot.

Because he never existed?

Arnie? Well...........

[Miles Scull]

Addendum

The snipers (inset) shoot at a slightly off angle because it's hard to find pics of the true angle. Direct aim at camera pics are found.

The angle difference does not alter the point that Badgeman is not aiming or sighting in Moorman 2/9ths sec. post firing.

[Miles Scull]

Sorry Miles, never having fired a rifle, or studied rifle firing, I'm not really qualified to comment on how the scope line of sight in relation to a shooter's eyes/ head would appear after the shot in such a short space of time. Duncan

Duncan,

Sorry, I forgot.

Here's the low down on muzzle flash which I use to make a point.

The spectral characteristics of small arms fire are well known. The interior ballistics of large and small arms have long been studied, both for improved performance and for signature reduction. Muzzle flash consists of three distinct events. The "primary flash" occurs as hot, highly compressed gases (unburned propellants) escape with the projectile. These gases expand rapidly (not mixing with the atmosphere), then rebound, creating a high-pressure, high-temperature region that produces the "intermediate flash." As oxygen mixes with the unburned propellants, ignition occurs, producing the "secondary flash."

Most of the radiated energy associated with muzzle flash occurs during the secondary flash, and most of the total radiated energy is in the IR region. There is substantially more energy in the 3 to 5 µm interval than in the 8 to 12 micron interval. The flash has strong spectral lines, particularly from H2O and CO2, at around 2.8 µm, and from CO2 at about 4.5 µm. The duration of the muzzle blast varies with weapon type from 1 or 2 ms to tens of milliseconds. The distinguishing characteristic of muzzle flash in the 3 to 5 µm range is a brief, intense flash with a strong spectral line around 4.5 µm.

See:

BM sees the white area in front of Badgeman to be a muzzle flash.

"Moorman's photo doesn't show any smoke that I am aware of ..." - Miller

If that is the case, then Badgeman has less than 1/10th of a second to move away from a position of aiming to the position he is seen in, in Moorman.

Ain't goin' to happen.

For starters, Badgeman's head would be propelled backward, in line with the recoil force backward, not upward, especially in the extremely short time interval, as is seen in Moorman.

Thus, Badgeman's alleged "muzzle flash" is something else, or Badgeman fired without aiming.

Since Badgeman missed, perhaps he did not aim.

BM said that if you go uphill, then you also go up.

Applying this logic Badgeman is partially validated.

Duncan, do you follow BM's logic? If so, how do you explain it to yourself?

I agree Duncan Man is the shooter.

[Bill Miller]

Duncan,

Here's a look at Badgeman NOT aiming or sighting 2/9ths second after shooting.

Badgeman's eye level is far above any rifle sight or scope far too soon after he allegedly shot (2/9ths sec.).

The blue & green horizontal lines are where Badgeman's eye level should be, not at the red line.

Miles, I notice that you address your unvalidated off-the-wall remarks to Duncan ... is it because you think he is simple minded enough to buy such garbage? If you do a search on the forum here or at Lancer - you should find an overlay I did with Rosco White aiming down a rifle barrel and they seemed to match pretty well. I have also read what firearm experts like Al Carrier had to say. You realize don't you that looking down the barrel of a rifle is different than looking down the handle of a table fork - right?

[Miles Scull]

Duncan,

Here's a look at Badgeman NOT aiming or sighting 2/9ths second after shooting.

Badgeman's eye level is far above any rifle sight or scope far too soon after he allegedly shot (2/9ths sec.).

The blue & green horizontal lines are where Badgeman's eye level should be, not at the red line.

Miles, I notice that you address your unvalidated off-the-wall remarks to Duncan ... is it because you think he is simple minded enough to buy such garbage?

Duncan knows the score.

For example, he knows Arnie in Moorman is an illusion.

See: post # 885 on this thread.

[Bill Miller]

Sorry Miles, never having fired a rifle, or studied rifle firing, I'm not really qualified to comment on how the scope line of sight in relation to a shooter's eyes/ head would appear after the shot in such a short space of time. I suppose it would depend on variables like how much recoil an idividual / weapon would produce etc etc, but I really don't know. I believe Bill has some experience at firing rifles. Maybe he could advise you on this What I can tell you is that what you would expect to see with the illustration you have shown with Badgeman and does not equate, DOES equate perfectly when looking at the 33ft shooter when the barrel line of site is drawn to the eye area.

Duncan

Miles doesn't need to seek my advice ... he could read the information on this subject that has been posted in the past. I am more curious as to when you (Duncan) are going to quit feeding Miles' trolling appetite, which should be quite obvious to you by now because when you posted that silly floating cop torso ... he said nothing about how your imaginary barrel lined up with the outline you created. Don't you find it odd that Miles gets very selective as to what he sees depending on what ever he is trying to push. On another note .. it is good that he sees that Badge Man figure so well that he can make such determinations. So regardless if Badge Man was shooting a gun or not ... who was he and why if for no other reason has he never come forward and just say that he was behind the fence and that nothing happened back there????????????? You see, thats the problem with trolling ... a person who tries to paint over one picture ends up creating another.

[Bill Miller]

Duncan, do you follow BM's logic? If so, how do you explain it to yourself?

I agree Duncan Man is the shooter.

[/color][/b]

One doesn't have to follow anyones logic ... one can go to the clip of Ruby shooting Oswald and watch a real muzzle flash in action.

[Bill Miller]

Duncan, do you follow BM's logic? If so, how do you explain it to yourself?

I agree Duncan Man is the shooter.

[/color][/b]

One doesn't have to follow anyones logic ... one can go to the clip of Ruby shooting Oswald and watch a real muzzle flash in action.

I would also like to know where you get your information that would allow you to tell people how anyones head would be propelled when firing a weapon ... there are so may clips and still images on the Internet that show that what you said is merely made up garbage that I would have thought that even you would be smart enough not to be so silly as to get caught posting such dribble.

Also, one other obvious mistake you have made to anyone who understands perspective ... Badge Man isn't aiming at Moorman, but most likely at the President. This means (like with the salt and pepper shakers) that from Moorman's perspective ... anyone looking down the barrel and aiming downward will appear to have their aiming eye above the barrel. If one could drop down and look at Badge Man from where JFK was positioned, then they would probably find that the flash is blocking out their view to Badge Man's eye. This stuff has been mentioned time and time again and yet you always seem to leave these simple principles out of your analogies. Remember, only you and the quality of your post will reflect on how your peers view you as a serious researcher.

Edited January 24, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Duncan, do you follow BM's logic? If so, how do you explain it to yourself?

I agree Duncan Man is the shooter.

One doesn't have to follow anyones logic ... one can go to the clip of Ruby shooting Oswald and watch a real muzzle flash in action.

The reason Badgeman has never stepped forward to reveal what he saw is that he fell down from a 20 foot perch 40 feet back in the parking lot & severely cracked his noggin.

He doesn't remember what happened.

The only thing he said was that if you fall down from a perch on your head, you also go down.

Edit: spelling

Edited January 24, 2008 by Miles Scull

[Bill Miller]

A question for you Bill. The question is in the photograph. Can you see where i'm heading?

Duncan

Yes, Duncan ... that could be a fair assessment. What we do not know is where on Arnold's body did he wear his belt when in Uniform. Like has been pointed out before ... a fat pot-bellied Arnold would wear his belt much lower than lets say ... a younger thinner Arnold. The difference could mean as much as 6" or more in variance. There are many images on the Net showing the various heights of mens belt-lines while in uniform. Some wore them over the navel. Barney Fife (Don Knots) from the Andy Griffith Show is another example.

What is important is for one ... how does Gordon's upper body proportion measure up to the 5' tall fence behind him? I have asked that you compare Gordon's visible upper body height to the fence where it meets the wall, which is the closest visible known height of an object to Gordon. It appears very normal to me. This means that the fence "directly" behind Gordon is even shorter in appearance because it is running away at an angle from the camera, thus Gordon's upper body proportions to it are even larger in reality.

The only thing left to do then is to find where the bottom of the fence is ... apply the mound that is visible in the profile photo taken from the south pasture ... and you have a visual idea as to whether Gordon is of normal height in Moorman's camera.

Edited January 24, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

That wasn't where I was heading, thanks anyway.

Next question. In comparison to what I have termed washout Re: The 33ft Shooter.

I am sure that isn't where you want to head ... you have made that clear already, but its relevant. Moving on - In any Moorman photo ... the fence line can be determined by where it meets the wall. It also appears that you are using one of the better Moorman print crops, which means the wall isn't expanded all that much. Is it perfectly smooth in appearance ... no smoother than other objects seen in the photo. Lets not lose sight of the fact that Moorman is looking uphill, thus the wall will appear higher than a fence that is about 20' further back from the camera. 6' 3" Tony Cummings achieved Badge Man's height by merely standing on a cross support board that wasn't but inches from the ground. I have seen early photos of the RR yard view of the fence and there appears to have been parking barriers laying on the ground that someone could have stood on. In fact, depending on Badge Man's height ... there are a number of things that could have been used to raise his LOS over the fence.

Let's also keep in play the fact that Badge Man (if shooting) has his upper body turned at an angle and unless talking about obese people ... the human body is not as thick as it is wide. This is one of the criticisms those who embrace Dale Myers conclusions are faced with because Dale made an error by having his subject turned square at the camera, thus to get his body width down to that of Badge Man's ... he had to move his subject further back from the camera and on the same LOS, which also meant to elevate his subject even higher into the air. This is where the ladder nonsense came in. But when using a real person at the fence and turning them in the correct posture ... a reasonable and acceptable match can be achieved when doing a re-creation. This is one of the reasons that I think Dale Myers wasn't setting out to test the Badge Man image, but rather to debunk it for he is too smart to have not known these things, but he allowed those mistakes to remain in place so to get the result he was after.

Edited January 24, 2008 by Bill Miller

[Miles Scull]

Looking at this, can you see the problem with your analysis? If my lines are correct, there is a problem. If you don't agree with my lines, tell me why?

Duncan

[Bill Miller]

The reason Badgeman has never stepped forward to reveal what he saw is that he fell down from a 20 foot perch 40 feet back in the parking lot & severely cracked his noggin.

He doesn't remember what happened.

The only thing he said was that if you fall down from a perch on your head, you also go down.[/color][/b]

Edit: spelling

You must not be who you say you are because no one would continue making themselves look so stupid by posting such nonsense.