Bill Miller Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 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 The first thing wrong with your lines is that they do not work off a vanishing point. Draw lines across alike points of the limo in Moorman's photo and watch how the angle changes the further from the camera each set of alike reference points are. You simply make silly mistakes that incorporated into your post so that a certain xxxxx can applaud them so to make all CTs look like dimwits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 (edited) xxxxx on, Miles ... some of the best shots will close their right eye and aim with the left. I do not aim this way, but I had a crack shot uncle who did. Furthermore, you have no idea where the end of the barrel is behind that flash. From that distance ... an inch could make a lot of difference as to what Badge Man is aiming at, which BTW has been pointed out to you in the past. So once again you are post garbage that has not been researched, so my question is why do you continue to pollute this forum with such nonsense??? Edited January 24, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 (edited) Put your cards on the table Bill and stop messing around. You know I have detected a serious problem. Duncan xxxxx on, Miles ... some of the best shots will close their right eye and aim with the left. I do not aim this way, but I had a crack shot uncle who did. Duncan, Here's an experiment you & even BM can easily & quickly do at home: In a dark room turn on a flashlight. Hold the flashlight in your hand at arm's length. Move your arm, keeping your eye on your hand, from left to right & back again from right to left. Notice anything? Yes! Right. When you moved your hand, which you watched closely, the flashlight also moved, with your hand. Also, did you catch it? The flashlight's beam of light moved also as your hand moved. They all moved in unison, perfectly. This is how you know that when Badgeman moves his rifle, so the muzzle flash will move in the same way. This is how you know exactly where the muzzle is behind the muzzle flash. If the flash is circlular, as in Moorman, lined up directly in line with BM's right eye, then you know BM is shooting Moorman not JFK. Shooting JFK means the flash must move away from its position in Moorman. Duncan, I think BM (Miller) may reverse his position now that he's seen the (flash)light! Edit: spelling Edited January 24, 2008 by Miles Scull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 Do you have an opinion on this? No rush for a reply, study it and consider it in depth.Duncan[/b] Sure thing, Duncan, I'll put it under consideration & get back to you later. Wonder why BM is avoiding this? It's like he's hiding in the dark room, afraid of the (flash)light! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Duncan,Here's an experiment you & even BM can easily & quickly do at home: In a dark room turn on a flashlight. Hold the flashlight in your hand at arm's length. Move your arm, keeping your eye on your hand, from left to right & back again from right to left. Notice anything? Yes! Right. When you moved your hand, which you watched closely, the flashlight also moved, with your hand. Also, did you catch it? The flashlight's beam of light moved also as your hand moved. They all moved in unison, perfectly. This is how you know that when Badgeman moves his rifle, so the muzzle flash will move in the same way. This is how you know exactly where the muzzle is behind the muzzle flash. If the flash is circlular, as in Moorman, lined up directly in line with BM's right eye, then you know BM is shooting Moorman not JFK. Shooting JFK means the flash must move away from its position in Moorman. Duncan, I think BM (Miller) may reverse his position now that he's seen the (flash)light! [/color][/b] Edit: spelling Please tell me that you are merely making fun of Duncan, right? How about telling this forum at what speed does light travel ??? When Ruby shot Oswald the flash came out of the end of his barrel ... was it perfectly uniform or was it not uniform? You may be an expert at holding a flashlight ... and you may be a pro at holding things in your hand because I have suspected that you are always holding something when posting these responses you make, but you are saying things that are not supported by the real world. You also said the flash is circular in Moorman and that isn't a true statement anymore than your telling this forum that Duncan had been consulting Groden and Mack ... it was all made up to mislead the people who use this forum. In reality, the flash seen in Moorman's photo did not splay outward in a uniform manner. The President was just west of the line between Badge Man and Moorman ... Badge Man and Moorman are nowhere close to being on the same elevation ... Badge Man is aiming at a steeper angle than Moorman's camera lens is pointed. You have not considered any of these factors, thus everything you have posted is conjecture and more meaningless hogwash without any data to support it. Edited January 25, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Hallelujah Miles, Hallelujah The reason I brought Badgeman in to the Arnold equation today is that I noticed an anomoly at the wall between the points which I have numbered 1, 2 and 7 when I was looking at Badgeman. Your anomaly is that you cannot accept that on a B&W image - the Dallas sky seen above the fence, and in an around the overhanging tree foliage, has the same color tone as the wall. In some areas it is the same color tone as Jackie's pink suit. Did you not notice how some spots are higher over the line and/or wider than others ... sigh~ I guess that Jack should colored every piece of sky blue so not to confuse the real eagle eyes. Edited January 25, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Duncan, Using a copy with more defined wall lines. Point 1 appears to be the sky in the background. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123...n/GIGANTIC1.jpg chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 How can the face of the wall be obscurred by the fence behind it? What fills the gap in the red border? Something appears to be wrong. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Chris...the quality of that Moorman is very poor. "Arnold" cannot be seen at all, and badgeman and hardhatman are very blurry. But there oddly appears what could be a man standing near the wall. Doubtful, but odd. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Try concentrating on the Arnold area Columbo and you might get somewhere. Skylight, just above the blue line, is piercing through the Arnie image along the top of the wall. Arnie is a leaf cluster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Try concentrating on the Arnold area Columbo and you might get somewhere. The red arrows point to areas that are different in image, comparing the print to the colorised rendering. The print shape conflicts with the human arm interpretation in the colorised. Edit: spelling Edited January 25, 2008 by Miles Scull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Try concentrating on the Arnold area Columbo and you might get somewhere. Duncan, It may be that the anomaly of the fence fronting the upper left hand edge of the short leg of the wall in Moorman may be caused by the indention at the upper wall: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Chris...the quality of that Moorman is very poor. "Arnold" cannot be seen atall, and badgeman and hardhatman are very blurry. But there oddly appears what could be a man standing near the wall. Doubtful, but odd. Jack Jack, with all due respect - you have told these people time and time again that they are using inferior Moorman prints (not necessarily no fault to them) and they seem to lose sight of this fact. Then some of these prints taken out of books have been lightened and as you know ... adding light by way of contrast can expand borders that were already very light (such as the edge of the wall) ever so slightly. Duncan and a select few others either have no experience in this stuff that they don't even consider any other causes. All too often we hear 'I think something is wrong', but based on what ... a lack of knowledge about the subject they are discussing. They don't consider where their sources have come from or the processes that have undergone before they enlarged them. Look at the assassination films ... the limo - the curb line - and other things that were smooth in real life are not smooth on that film. I have even seen some people try and use high resolution pictures to show how the image should look ... not realizing that they are comparing apples to oranges. The Discovery Channel did another photo through a model camera like Moorman's, so let them compare the edging of the wall and other artifacts found in that images. Of course there will be some differences because the film is different ... how it was handled after the photo was taken ... and etc. can make subtle differences, but its not hard to see how these things occur if one just simply cross references the two. As far as you caliming that another person could be seen against the fence ... don't start in with that silliness. You used the best print available in your study and you saw no one standing at the fence. Muchmore's film shows some of that area as well and no one is there. So don't get caught up in the game of 'lets use garbage prints so we can invent objects that were never there in the good prints'. When you start doing this, then you pollute the good work that has been done with garbage, which seems to happen all too much on this forum the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 To answer your question Chris. " How can the face of the wall be obscurred by the fence behind it?"..The answer is easy...It Can't Duncan Maybe if you ever go to the plaza .. many of your questions can be easily answered. For instance, is it your position that the wall is a straight edge from top to bottom or does it have a notch in it like the pedestal ... feel free to contact Gary Mack with an email and ask him before running up needless forum space. It's ridiculous to always see the claim made first and then the questions come later ... it should be the other way around so that much of the nonsense doesn't get into the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Try concentrating on the Arnold area Columbo and you might get somewhere. How about contributing something like where the line is at the top of the side wall as you see it. It must be below Arnold's lowest point of course and match up with point 2. As you can see, the red line from point 2 passing the lowest point of Arnold's body runs straight in to the dallas skyline. I can't give you a bigger hint than that. As Chris rightly spotted, and brilliant in my opinion, the fence can not block out part of the wall. The logical corner is the blue line above where the arrow points to, but the question remains, why is a small portion of the fence is blocking part of the wall? Duncan So not to break any forum rules, I will address this to any bonehead that isn't a forum member. Gary Mack and I both agree that your line accounting for the top of the wall is not accurate. Furthermore, I noticed that you are using the Jack White color version showing Arnold. That image had been lightened considerably to bring out the figures who were in the shade, thus in doing so - the already white area of the wall bled out in places. If you want to get closer to the exact edge of the top of the wall, I suggest using a print that has not been lightened to the point of the Badge Man image. Jack has posted prints showing Arnold and Badge Man before so much contrast and lighting has been introduced to the image ... this would reduce the expanding of the border edges. 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