David G. Healy Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 (edited) The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. Edited August 26, 2007 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. _______________________________ David, Excellent question! --Thomas _______________________________ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted October 26, 2007 Author Share Posted October 26, 2007 The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. _______________________________ David, Excellent question! --Thomas _______________________________ just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? Which leads to the question I've asked repeatedly on this forum: WHEN (the specific date) did FBI Agent Shaneyfelt number the Z-frames, WHERE did this event occur, WHO was present during the process and finally, WHAT film #0183-05-06-07 was utilized? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Robbins Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. _______________________________ David, Excellent question! --Thomas _______________________________ just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? Which leads to the question I've asked repeatedly on this forum: WHEN (the specific date) did FBI Agent Shaneyfelt number the Z-frames, WHERE did this event occur, WHO was present during the process and finally, WHAT film #0183-05-06-07 was utilized? My opinion? You will get no response from them. The NPIC is not an individual witness who can be; called a xxxx, said to have been mistaken, or, murdered to silence a source of inconvenient evidence. I guess they feel that if they ignore it long enough it will just go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. _______________________________ David, Excellent question! --Thomas _______________________________ just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? Which leads to the question I've asked repeatedly on this forum: WHEN (the specific date) did FBI Agent Shaneyfelt number the Z-frames, WHERE did this event occur, WHO was present during the process and finally, WHAT film #0183-05-06-07 was utilized? Simple question David...what is the standard frame rate for that B&H? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? I guess you are included in which ever side one is on, David. After all, you are only person so far who has said they believe the Zapruder film is altered and in the same thread then say that you have always said there is no proof of Zapruder film alteration. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted October 27, 2007 Author Share Posted October 27, 2007 just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? I guess you are included in which ever side one is on, David. After all, you are only person so far who has said they believe the Zapruder film is altered and in the same thread then say that you have always said there is no proof of Zapruder film alteration. Bill Miller Having a difficult time understanding english, willie? Answering the Shaneyfelt numbering question should be easy for you big guy, gird those loins--give it your best shot, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? I guess you are included in which ever side one is on, David. After all, you are only person so far who has said they believe the Zapruder film is altered and in the same thread then say that you have always said there is no proof of Zapruder film alteration. Bill Miller Having a difficult time understanding english, willie? Answering the Shaneyfelt numbering question should be easy for you big guy, gird those loins--give it your best shot, eh? xxxxx on, David ... you're another person who talks out of both sides of his mouth. And as far as understanding the English language ... maybe I should start a thread called the 'Disjointed say-nothing responses of David Healy'. If anyone wants to know about the Zapruder film, then go read the data already published on it. Edited October 27, 2007 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted October 27, 2007 Author Share Posted October 27, 2007 just a little house cleaning, Thomas -- apparently none of the Z-film non-alteration adherents have a answer, I wonder why? I guess you are included in which ever side one is on, David. After all, you are only person so far who has said they believe the Zapruder film is altered and in the same thread then say that you have always said there is no proof of Zapruder film alteration. Bill Miller Having a difficult time understanding english, willie? Answering the Shaneyfelt numbering question should be easy for you big guy, gird those loins--give it your best shot, eh? xxxxx on, David ... you're another person who talks out of both sides of his mouth. And as far as understanding the English language ... maybe I should start a thread called the 'Disjointed say-nothing responses of David Healy'. If anyone wants to know about the Zapruder film, then go read the data already published on it. perfectly fine Bill, I expect no less from you -- You're not the only Lone Nut xxxxx (hiding in CT respectability) that refuses to answer, if FACT, none in your camp CAN answer..... Keep pulling wool, Bill... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel Dehaeseleer Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 .../...Simple question David...what is the standard frame rate for that B&H? Link toward Zapruder camera: B&H 414PD Frame rate page: User's manual - page 13 answers your question! Marcel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 The NPIC got the Zapruder film sometime during the weekend (Nov 23-24, quite possibly late night, Friday 11/22). Based on Doug Horne's excellent work/interviews of NPIC personnel, complete with NPIC notes, work-timing sheets and Z-frame numbering. A question comes to mind. If the FBI received Zapruder's camera for testing around December 13th, how then, did the NPIC know (that Nov-22nd thru 24th weekend) that the Zapruder film ran at 18.3 frames a second? After all, the FBI determined Zapruder's camera ran at 18.3fps some 3+ weeks later. I don't suppose you can provide a citation that they had determined the frame rate that precisely in November? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 .../...Simple question David...what is the standard frame rate for that B&H? Link toward Zapruder camera: B&H 414PD Frame rate page: User's manual - page 13 answers your question! Marcel I've seen that but I was interested in the standard frame rate not the published one. IIRC that number would be 18fps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 perfectly fine Bill, I expect no less from you -- You're not the only Lone Nut xxxxx (hiding in CT respectability) that refuses to answer, if FACT, none in your camp CAN answer..... Keep pulling wool, Bill... David, you should really consider the validity of the things you say and how others will perceive them if you don't wish to be seen as someone who consistently says things that have no basis or merit. In the 'Men who Bowers saw' thread you posted twice and both times you said things that were not even about the topic - one of them being you saying peek-a-boo to someone named Gary and the other response was just as senseless. These two ridiculous childish post of yours came in a thread where I have been repeatedly saying how a shot came from the fence, supported by the smoke seen by the witnesses. So what do you then say ... 'dah, Miller's a lone nutter, dah!' Tokyo Rose came closer to citing more facts than you do. Now about the numbering problem you spoke about. I have discussed this with Gary Mack in the past and his analysis seems about the most sensible as any I have heard to date. Gary says that any researcher wanting factual documentation regarding the Zapruder film must read Richard Trask's book National Nightmare. The NPIC story appears on pages 298-304 where, using good source and reference material, it is obvious that the NPIC study was performed on one of the copies made in Dallas that first day, not on the original film. Furthermore, while the original NPIC examination may have occurred the weekend of the assassination, the charts were prepared or annotated on or after December 2nd as a result of a LIFE magazine article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted October 27, 2007 Author Share Posted October 27, 2007 perfectly fine Bill, I expect no less from you -- You're not the only Lone Nut xxxxx (hiding in CT respectability) that refuses to answer, if FACT, none in your camp CAN answer..... Keep pulling wool, Bill... David, you should really consider the validity of the things you say and how others will perceive them if you don't wish to be seen as someone who consistently says things that have no basis or merit. In the 'Men who Bowers saw' thread you posted twice and both times you said things that were not even about the topic - one of them being you saying peek-a-boo to someone named Gary and the other response was just as senseless. These two ridiculous childish post of yours came in a thread where I have been repeatedly saying how a shot came from the fence, supported by the smoke seen by the witnesses. So what do you then say ... 'dah, Miller's a lone nutter, dah!' Tokyo Rose came closer to citing more facts than you do. Now about the numbering problem you spoke about. I have discussed this with Gary Mack in the past and his analysis seems about the most sensible as any I have heard to date. Gary says that any researcher wanting factual documentation regarding the Zapruder film must read Richard Trask's book National Nightmare. The NPIC story appears on pages 298-304 where, using good source and reference material, it is obvious that the NPIC study was performed on one of the copies made in Dallas that first day, not on the original film. Furthermore, while the original NPIC examination may have occurred the weekend of the assassination, the charts were prepared or annotated on or after December 2nd as a result of a LIFE magazine article. surely there's testimony then stating how and where, and when FBI Shaneyfelt numbered the frames, eh? What the 6th floor museum thinks is irrelevant. This ain't PR hon. If things are so obvious to YOU then a cite must be in the offing, was it the original Z-film, or a first generation dupe? If a dupe, then THAT kind of testimony just blows the SBT/LHO did it all by his lonesome right out of the Dallas Texas water, doesn't it! Why are you Lone Nutter's so damn sloppy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 (edited) surely there's testimony then stating how and where, and when FBI Shaneyfelt numbered the frames, eh? What the 6th floor museum thinks is irrelevant. This ain't PR hon. If things are so obvious to YOU then a cite must be in the offing, was it the original Z-film, or a first generation dupe? If a dupe, then THAT kind of testimony just blows the SBT/LHO did it all by his lonesome right out of the Dallas Texas water, doesn't it!Why are you Lone Nutter's so damn sloppy? David, it matters little to me what the NPIC did when studying a Zapruder film copy for it doesn't effect the camera original. But I have given my answer below to you once again. If you get time to actually do what was suggested, then you might be a little closer to understanding the evidence rather than wasting time playing with ... er' uh ... tugging on ... lets say ... on peoples chains. And as far as I am concerned, my work on the location of Connally's coat sleeve in relation to his exit wound when he took the shot through the chest is more detrimental to the SBT than what any testimony could offer concerning the NPIC study. So is this supposed to be where I am supposed to say why do you Lone Nutters seem so bent on trolling and not doing any real research? By the way, please clarify which statement you made - 'I believe the Zfilm is altered and/or I have always said there is no proof of Zfilm alteration' is the LNr view and which one is the CT's view??? Form the previous response: "Now about the numbering problem you spoke about. I have discussed this with Gary Mack in the past and his analysis seems about the most sensible as any I have heard to date. Gary says that any researcher wanting factual documentation regarding the Zapruder film must read Richard Trask's book National Nightmare. The NPIC story appears on pages 298-304 where, using good source and reference material, it is obvious that the NPIC study was performed on one of the copies made in Dallas that first day, not on the original film. Furthermore, while the original NPIC examination may have occurred the weekend of the assassination, the charts were prepared or annotated on or after December 2nd as a result of a LIFE magazine article." Edited October 28, 2007 by Bill Miller 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