If The Hat Don't Fit

[Miles Scull]

If you have anything else to say -

Bill Miller

Well, that's different, quite different.

Condolences, Bill.

I'm sure you take comfort in your faith.

All the best to you & your family.

Miles

[Alan Healy]

X

Edited November 13, 2007 by Alan Healy

[Chris Davidson]

Comparison request by Bill.

Bond over Moorman.

chris

[Bill Miller]

Comparison request by Bill.

Bond over Moorman.

chris

Thanks, Chris. Now if you will - will you take the middle stuff out so to show how the foliage fell down to the fence line just as I had said all along would happen. Your gif is great, but let them see it with just both images so to show the amount of shifting between camera locations that took place.

Thanks again!

Bill

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I cannot see a hat persay,

This is Latin a la Damon Runyan. it should read per se

but what I can see is something blocking out the Dallas sky that cannot be accounted for as being a permanent object in the RR yard. Its an object that seems to have the shape of two rounded shoulders - a head - and something on top of the head that could be a hat. It's not a RR tower, and it cannot be a vehicle,

If you take the Moorman photo and cover Emmett Hudson's body, leaving only his head and shoulders, and compare Hudson's head and shoulders with the "Hatman" image, there is no question that we are looking at a human figure behind the fence.

Larry Ray Harris, may he rest in peace, took me to the spot where "Hatman" stood and there is no denying that it is within easy handgun range of JFK's limo at Z312/313.

and as far as I know - Bowers and Hoffman mentioned someone being near the fence when they last saw them. Holland mentions a shot being fired from the fence just seconds after Willis took that photograph and several witnesses saw smoke come out from under the trees - which is supported by the acoustic evidence, thus what would common sense tell you it would be???

Bill [/b]

Agreed, except as to Hoffman's contribution, and except as to the acoustic evidence. I have trouble believing acoustic evidence which claims that 3 shots came from the TSBD.

[Chris Davidson]

Comparison request by Bill.

Bond over Moorman.

chris

Thanks, Chris. Now if you will - will you take the middle stuff out so to show how the foliage fell down to the fence line just as I had said all along would happen. Your gif is great, but let them see it with just both images so to show the amount of shifting between camera locations that took place.

Thanks again!

Bill

Middle portion removed.

chris

[Bill Miller]

Middle portion removed.

chris

(Smile~) Chris ... as much as I appreciate you making this two image gif ... could you slow it down to about 1 to 1.5 second intervals. This will allow people to have time to take in what changes occurred between the image intervals. If you don't want to use up any more forum space - just changing out the gif you just made with the slower version will do.

Thanks again!

Bill

[Bill Miller]

As Chris must be offline, i've taken the liberty of lining up the images a bit better and slowing it down. Note the hat is still there

Duncan

I had hoped that you would have picked up on the left to right shifting that has taken place, as well. You have chosen a spot to the right of the tree that "IS NOT" the same spot seen in Moorman's photo. This is important. For some reason you have merely picked a small area and just merely overlaid the two together. When I return back home - I will take that particular area from Robin's good scan - enlarge it even more - and show it to you again to better explain what I am saying. One is a forked overhanging tree branch that is not at the same place that Hat Man was, but because the two cameras were at different angles to the tree - you have thought them to be one in the same.

For instance, do you see that little cluster of foliage just above and to the left of Hat Man in Moorman's photo? Ok, take that cluster and turn it slightly and bring it down and now shift it left to right and it ends up where you say Hat Man is still standing. The little narrow tree trunk to the left of the tree now shifts from view and a small trunk is seen coming out from behind the Hudson tree. Point being is that the foliage all shifted to the east (our right) and came downward at the same time. That is why the upside-down forked tree branch took Hat Man's place in the Bond photo and only is that one particular clean image does it show up as such. I think you will better see this when I get to where I can use my software.

Bill

Edited November 7, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Of course I notice shifts. The photographs are from different heights and angles, so that is unavoidable. I have done another gif, which for the same reasons can never be accurate, or an exact comparison...but...I have marked the common points of interest to make it easier for people to understand, and see why you are wrong in saying that I have hatman in the wrong location in Bond.

Duncan

Sometimes Duncan - I can't tell if you really don't know what you are doing or if you are doing it on purpose. In the animation ... you only place one line on the Bond image. Why would you not leave all the lines in place??? All the things in the Bond image have shifted to our right and yet what you mistake to be Hat Man has shifted to the left. Does it not dawn on you that the foliage above and to the left of Hat Man in Moorman must also shift to the right and downward? If you apply the shifting equally to everything - the white area above and to the right of Hat Man in Moorman's photo has become a little white dot over the line you placed in the Bond image. The foliage above and to the left of Hat Man in Moorman has now shifted downward and to the right, thus causing you to think that a downward forking tree branch is Hat Man.

Take a look for instance at the horizontal line you placed on the top of the fence to our right of the Hudson tree. The patter of light just at the west tip of that line has two overhanging tree branches on both sides of the gap in Moorman's photo. In Bond the gap has closed and the two overhanging branches have lowered down to the fence and are almost touching one another. The same thing occurs with the two overhanging Branches above and to the left of Hat Man in Moorman's photo. The foliage on the right of Hat Man in Moorman has fallen down behind the fence and the branch above and to the left of Hat Man has shifted closer to the foliage that fell below the fence and it too has moved downward, thus leaving a little speck of light just at the top of the fence.

I am sure that I can show you this just a forked tree branch with Robin's higher resolution Bond enlargement when I get home.

Bill

Edited November 7, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Alan Healy]

X

Edited November 13, 2007 by Alan Healy

[Robin Unger]

Alan's bond 4 LIFE

[Bill Miller]

Does it not dawn on you that the foliage above and to the left of Hat Man in Moorman must also shift to the right and downward?

That's not true, if you want an explanation why, just ask. Think about it carefully, and respond with caution

Oh yeah, Duncan ... please enlighten me because I can see no Hat Man in Robin's image while you are trying to say there is. When I get to where I can work on Robin's enlargement - I will post your alleged Hat Man.

Bill

[Chris Davidson]

As if we need another.

Since my Life Magazine scan holds more detail on the wall than the previous Bond used, here it is once more.

Thought it might be easier to see alignment between objects in both photos using the wall shadows/branches.

Loops back and forth.

chris

P.S.

Duncan, thanks for cleaning that earlier one up for me.

[Bill Miller]

Oh yeah, Duncan ... please enlighten me because I can see no Hat Man in Robin's image while you are trying to say there is.

I didn't say I could see Hatman in Robin's image, or in Alan's for that matter. Please point out from any prevous posts where I have claimed this. I have used his image as I stated previously, in conjunction with the Bond images to come to an overall conclusion.

Duncan

Wow! Maybe someone posted those images (Moorman photo and Bond #8) onto your initial post and several times after that without you knowing it. Shame on the culprit!!! Each of your illustrations show a box in both images that say "HAT MAN". Maybe this is like Bowers testimony ... when you place a box on an image and write 'Hat Man" on it ... maybe you meant "No Hat Man".

Then in Post #45, Robin posted an enlargement of Bond #8 ... that would be the same #8 photo you used on the first page 4 to 5 times with a box to the right of the Hudson tree area with Hat Man written on it.

Bill Miller

Edited November 8, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Are you aiming for vice presidency of your Magoo club Bill?. If so, I think you are well on the way to achieving that ambition. Feel free to use your inability to read properly what I am saying as a reference. The Bond images I used were from a different source, ie scans sent to me via email by Chris. The results obtained have nothing to do with the images which Robin posted. Best regards to Waldo

Duncan

Duncan, let me remind you of what you said, " I didn't say I could see Hatman in Robin's image, or in Alan's for that matter. Please point out from any prevous posts where I have claimed this. I have used his image as I stated previously, in conjunction with the Bond images to come to an overall conclusion."

In your very first post you used Bond #8 (the same Bond #8 that Robin posted the enlargement of) You then boxed in the same forked branch in your Bond #8 that I said was visible in Robin's. So no matter how you try to spin it or play with words ... Bond #8 is Bond #8 no matter who posted it.

Now where did you say that you could see Hat Man in Bond #8 .......

"In this case the hat does fit, putting an end to the claim that "Hatman" appears only in Moorman 5.

This discovery also rules out completely, the possibility that "Hatman" could have been a shooter."

Next, if you still w ant to say 'dah ... I never said I could see Hat Man in Robin's Bond #8'. Below is the exchange we had ............................

BM) You posted a obvious low-res scan of Bond and claimed that you could see Hat Man at a said location. I view my 1st generation slide of the same and see nothing there. Robin then post an enlargement of Bond 8 and while not quite as sharp as lets say a good first generation print

DM) The image Robin posted is the image I used in conjunction with Bond 4

So in fact you did say that you could see Hat Man in Robin's Bond #8 because you said it was the same image that you used and in your post using Bond #8 - you said that you saw the same Hat Man in Bond #8 as in Moorman #5. You went on to say, "The discussion is not about me being able to see forked branches or birds flying past or whatever, it's about me seeing and identifying the hatman shape, which I have did to my satisfaction."

Then I referenced Robin's Bond #8 enlargement again and how his scan made it easy to see the forked tree branch that you had called Hat Man. Your reply was, "I've already pointed out the hat, now how about you pointing out the branches instead of playing God".

So it appears that you not only said you saw Hat Man in Robin's enlargement, but that you referenced your alleged Hat Man several times concerning Robin's Bond #8.

Bill Miller