Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 (edited) The fact is Bill, that I was sharp enough to spot him, whereas you said it wasn't him. What does that tell anyone about who has the best visual recognition of what is actually contained in a photograph? I think that you probably had seen more of the clip whereas I was going by a single capture ... just as Beckett had done. But Duncan, even a blind hog finds an ear of corn once in awhile. And to be honest ... you had the law of averages on your side because no one can be wrong all the time and God knows that you were overdue. And let me say this ... even a view of a round pillar will appear to have straight edges. I suppose that depends how much whoever is looking at it had been drinkin Really, are the edges of the post holding up the Stemmons sign in Zapruder's film round or flat by merely looking at them on his film? These kinds of problems are common knowledge and have nothing to do with drinking. The sunlight from the southwest did extend over onto the east side of the wall and this is why the east side of the wall still rises at an angle to the left side of your vertical line before starting its downward decline when viewed from where Moorman stood.It doesn't affect the actual reality size of the wall. What it effects is where you placed the vertical line that effected the pitch of the line you drew under Arnold. That is what I am saying that you got wrong. I had Mack check the Museum's images before telling you this and he confirmed my observation. And I know that Chris has been contacted by Gary Mack and has been made aware of the shadows falling down on the top of the wall and why your lines are incorrect. Shadows do not add height to a physical object, they add shadows. They do when you have the wrong location for the exact spot where the middle of the dog leg starts. Edited January 27, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Bill, No!! Gary has not contacted me. Why should he. He can just have you pass on the information to the forum. As of yet, you still have not supplied this forum with any photo to support your claim, with regards to straight wall lines. So until you do, I'll just post a few more, and other's can draw their own conclusions. This one has shadows on the side wall for you. Bill's quote: "It's like math ... if you are ignorant as to how it works ... then all you see is numbers which means nothing to you. I can only assume that is why you failed to understand the purpose of the image." And the shortest distance between two points is a STRAIGHT line. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 (edited) Bill,No!! Gary has not contacted me. I'm sorry, Chris ... the email I was forwarded not too long ago must have been from a different Gary Mack pertaining to a different Chris Davidson in this thread. Sorry about the confusion. Edited January 27, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 (edited) Oh yeah..well I never did understand the term Drunken AOL guy term for the true shape of BDM, but I do remember the thread well, it's the same thread where you uploaded a magnificently clear image, as demended by the high standards you set for yourself and demand of others. It's so magnificent, I think you should share it's high definition clarity with everyone here. Picasso strikes again. There are several images of Arnold that I posted in that thread. Once again here is the link, not limited to the one crop you have carefully selected. I recommend seeing reply #6 http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...=&mode=full Unfortunately, and as you know, the flying Tarzan was on Rich's forum, and the records from that forum were destroyed because of a problem there at the time, but some, including Bernice remember it well. How could we forget I have never posted on the subject of a flying Tarzan and as I expected ... you have no link or image to offer to attribute to me. Edited January 27, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 (edited) Hi Chris, ..Do you know how much width the shadows added to the thickness of the side of the wall in your photograph? 6 inches? a foot? This might help Bill with his future calculations:wacko: Duncan Please point me to any calculations you have made??? calculation n 1: the procedure of calculating; determining something by mathematical or logical methods [syn: computation] 2: problem solving that involves numbers or quantities [syn: computation, figuring, reckoning] Edited January 27, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Bill,No!! Gary has not contacted me. I'm sorry, Chris ... the email I was forwarded not too long ago must have been from a different Gary Mack pertaining to a different Chris Davidson in this thread. Sorry about the confusion. Right Bill, I'm sure there are Gary Mack and Chris Davidson clones you correspond with. Why not post a snapshot of that email with time/date included, which you received. In the meantime, here's another for you. Shot by a professional for that Discovery Channel Special. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Bill,No!! Gary has not contacted me. Why should he. He can just have you pass on the information to the forum. As of yet, you still have not supplied this forum with any photo to support your claim, with regards to straight wall lines. So until you do, I'll just post a few more, and other's can draw their own conclusions. This one has shadows on the side wall for you. Bill's quote: "It's like math ... if you are ignorant as to how it works ... then all you see is numbers which means nothing to you. I can only assume that is why you failed to understand the purpose of the image." And the shortest distance between two points is a STRAIGHT line. chris Hi Chris, ..Do you know how much width the shadows added to the thickness of the side of the wall in your photograph? 6 inches? a foot? This might help Bill with his future calculations. I think if he multiplies the shadows by 2 and then subtracts the glare of the sunspots, and divides by the foliage he might come closer then we have managed. Duncan Duncan, Your formula rivals Einstein's theory of relativity. Add the slope-intercept element to it, and it's ready for peer-review. imo chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Right Bill,I'm sure there are Gary Mack and Chris Davidson clones you correspond with. I don't really think that there are clones ... I think you're just loopy. But I did email Mack a little while ago reminding him of the email he forwarded me and how you claimed not to have received it. I requested that he consider sending it to you once again. I am not sure what you are trying to get at by showing that the top of the wall forms a straight edge against the background behind it. The point I have made is that the poor degraded Moorman image that you jokers have used doesn't offer such detail and that Duncan didn't get his line correct. I had Mack check this and he also reached the same conclusion as I and did in fact email me where I saw a message where he said the same to you. You not getting it or not remembering it doesn't mean that I didn't get such a message any more than your use of the poor Moorman image means that Duncan got his lines correct. If you or Duncan wish to challenge this statement, then feel free to email Gary Mack and let him repeat it to you. He can be reached at GMack@JFK.ORG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 Please point me to any calculations you have made???calculation n 1: the procedure of calculating; determining something by mathematical or logical methods [syn: computation] 2: problem solving that involves numbers or quantities [syn: computation, figuring, reckoning][/b] I used logical methods Re: your Dictionary.com reference Duncan I have never heard using poor images - incorrect lines - and a refusal to consult someone who has the best images and the most data on the subject as being 'the logical method' before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 Right Bill,I'm sure there are Gary Mack and Chris Davidson clones you correspond with. I don't really think that there are clones ... I think you're just loopy. But I did email Mack a little while ago reminding him of the email he forwarded me and how you claimed not to have received it. I requested that he consider sending it to you once again. I am not sure what you are trying to get at by showing that the top of the wall forms a straight edge against the background behind it. The point I have made is that the poor degraded Moorman image that you jokers have used doesn't offer such detail and that Duncan didn't get his line correct. I had Mack check this and he also reached the same conclusion as I and did in fact email me where I saw a message where he said the same to you. You not getting it or not remembering it doesn't mean that I didn't get such a message any more than your use of the poor Moorman image means that Duncan got his lines correct. If you or Duncan wish to challenge this statement, then feel free to email Gary Mack and let him repeat it to you. He can be reached at GMack@JFK.ORG Well Bill, Since you're the one who stated you received the email, and it's in your possession, why don't you forward it to me or the forum, as previously asked. Gary has my address, and has sent emails relating to other topics, the LAST in regards to my animation thread. And while your at it, please send us that quality copy of Moormon, with straight lines, you so describe. The one without shadow/highlight contrast corrections. Throw in the original Z film too. I won't hold my breath waiting, though. On my end, photos have been taken, posted. On your end, NOTHING. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 (edited) Duncan,Your formula rivals Einstein's theory of relativity. Add the slope-intercept element to it, and it's ready for peer-review. imo chris True Chris. Not a lot of people know this, keep it quiet. This is above top secret...Einstein invented another formula at the same time as his theory of relativity, but considered it too dangerous to reveal to the world......remember shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh It has been said that the man was extremely smart in mathematics, but didn't know squat about much of anything else .... looks like the two of you have the latter part in common. Edited January 28, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 (edited) Well Bill,Since you're the one who stated you received the email, and it's in your possession, why don't you forward it to me or the forum, as previously asked. Gary has my address, and has sent emails relating to other topics, the LAST in regards to my animation thread. Chris, I deleted Gary's email to me after reading it ... I believe I had posted that I had to email him again asking that he send it to you. It appears he has now sent me another copy of several email exchanges we have had. Below is such an email ... From: Gary Mack Sent: Thu 1/24/2008 9:18 PM To: Chris Davidson (chris@3125.us) Subject: The Gordon Arnold Competition, Terms & Conditions Apply Chris, What's wrong? Your interpretation of the picture. The answer is simple: shadows. Nothing more than shadows from the tree branches and leaves. Gary Here is yet another email Gary sent me pertaining to where the top of the wall meets Arnold's body as seen in 'good prints' ... Bill The version below comes from a UPI print I found on the net somewhere. It's darker than most. Arnold's torso can be seen in good copies of Moorman all the way down to the top of the wall. Gary And still another email ... Bill, regarding the image Chris posted in #974, that picture, from the old Discovery Channel program, was taken AFTER the fence was replaced and installed about two inches farther to the east than the original fence. I certainly wouldn't use it for a Moorman comparison. Gary And while your at it, please send us that quality copy of Moormon, with straight lines, you so describe. You must have 'Duncan-itis' whereas simple messages are very hard for you to understand. I don't have my laptop and its programs that allow me to do illustrations or it would have been done immediately like all the many other times I have had to create illustrations to show the pitiful ridiculous mistakes that end up on this forum ... and usually by the same individuals. On my end, photos have been taken, posted. None relevant to the points that have been made, I might add. Edited January 28, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 I have never heard using poor images - incorrect lines - and a refusal to consult someone who has the best images and the most data on the subject as being 'the logical method' before.Bill The gif which you posted in post Post #971 totally contradicts what you say above. Duncan I see you have taken the Miles Scull course on merely posting an opinion, but adding nothing in support of why you said what you did ... or is this just another one of your claims where you come up with a conclusion first and then you'll look for evidence to support it later??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 (edited) Miller dronned: [...] You must have 'Duncan-itis' whereas simple messages are very hard for you to understand. I don't have my laptop and its programs that allow me to do illustrations or it would have been done immediately like all the many other times I have had to create illustrations to show the pitiful ridiculous mistakes that end up on this forum ... and usually by the same individuals.[...] what-a-excuse, NOW Miller can't create a illustration, what a joke. (man, Gary Mack sure hits this thread a lot, must be catching up on the new employees posting) Edited January 28, 2008 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 Well Bill,Since you're the one who stated you received the email, and it's in your possession, why don't you forward it to me or the forum, as previously asked. Gary has my address, and has sent emails relating to other topics, the LAST in regards to my animation thread. Chris, I deleted Gary's email to me after reading it ... I believe I had posted that I had to email him again asking that he send it to you. It appears he has now sent me another copy of several email exchanges we have had. Below is such an email ... From: Gary Mack Sent: Thu 1/24/2008 9:18 PM To: Chris Davidson (chris@3125.us) Subject: The Gordon Arnold Competition, Terms & Conditions Apply Chris, What's wrong? Your interpretation of the picture. The answer is simple: shadows. Nothing more than shadows from the tree branches and leaves. Gary Here is yet another email Gary sent me pertaining to where the top of the wall meets Arnold's body as seen in 'good prints' ... Bill The version below comes from a UPI print I found on the net somewhere. It's darker than most. Arnold's torso can be seen in good copies of Moorman all the way down to the top of the wall. Gary And still another email ... Bill, regarding the image Chris posted in #974, that picture, from the old Discovery Channel program, was taken AFTER the fence was replaced and installed about two inches farther to the east than the original fence. I certainly wouldn't use it for a Moorman comparison. Gary And while your at it, please send us that quality copy of Moormon, with straight lines, you so describe. You must have 'Duncan-itis' whereas simple messages are very hard for you to understand. I don't have my laptop and its programs that allow me to do illustrations or it would have been done immediately like all the many other times I have had to create illustrations to show the pitiful ridiculous mistakes that end up on this forum ... and usually by the same individuals. On my end, photos have been taken, posted. None relevant to the points that have been made, I might add. Why not supply photos with the proper aspect ratio, first. As is always stressed by Gary and you, Bill. Your guilty of the same carelessness that you berate others for. And I suppose this will show us what the other supposed lousy reproductions don't? chris 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