Jump to content
The Education Forum

Blood Spatter


Recommended Posts

LMAO c'mon trying to deflect attention away from yourself onto Carrier is farcical ... Your in a tough spot right now, you've ventured onto unfamilair grounds and its showing, BIG time

There is nothing to deflect, David, but seeing how you are in a posting mode .... how about some of those details concerning the 'shots' you had at Sherry .... I am still most interested in hearing about them. Thanks in advance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

LMAO c'mon trying to deflect attention away from yourself onto Carrier is farcical ... Your in a tough spot right now, you've ventured onto unfamilair grounds and its showing, BIG time

There is nothing to deflect, David, but seeing how you are in a posting mode .... how about some of those details concerning the 'shots' you had at Sherry .... I am still most interested in hearing about them. Thanks in advance!

ask her.... it appears you're totally oblivious to the subject matter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ask her.... it appears you're totally oblivious to the subject matter...

Just as I suspected ... you have nothing to support your claim once again. You come onto an Education Forum and then make a general statement that may or not be true and refuse to offer any details when asked to do so. I guess that in a way you possibly did get a shot at Sherry, but most likely found yourself way over your head as usual and this could explain your reluctance to tell the interested parties on this forum as to what was discussed.

Thanks again for supporting my position by being your typical David (say nothing) Healy.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until then you are doing what Al Carrier (25 year police officer) called 'bringing a knife to a gun fight."I have been stabbed in the line of duty while being paid by taxpayers on three separate occasions"

(Al Carrier)

Now, let me figure this out. Carrier, a purportedlly highly qualilfied crime fighter, had a hand gun.

The criminal, had a knife!

Carrier has managed to get stabbed by the perpetrator, on three different occassions, while he was in possession of a gun!

Thus, it would appear that Carrier might best consider bringing a gun and a knife, as those with the knives appear to be doing relatively well.

I seem to recall you posting back at that time, thus you know the message and how there was more to the incidents that Al described, but just like with the JFK case, you tell only a part of the story so to mislead the reader. I must tell you that while this hurts your position when constantly using such a modus-operandi ... I certainly appreciate it! It's not my intention to argue with you, but rather to expose what you're attempting to do. It is comments like that you made about Carrier that helps me do this.

Thanks again!

It is comments like that you made about Carrier that helps me do this.

Hey Bill:

In event no one told you, you are the one who introduced "your hero" into this conversation.

Until then you are doing what Al Carrier (25 year police officer) called 'bringing a knife to a gun fight."

(Bill Miller)

Now, shall I also expand on the subject matter, that in addition to having a gun with which to defend himself with:

===============================================================================

Don't screw with me on an issue like this. You won't like the outcome! I am also a use of force instructor and will bury your aged ass if you speak out of line against my character on an issue such as this!

Al

===============================================================================

So, now we have a "use of force instructor" who is in possession of a gun in a knifefight, and those who carry the knives, it would appear, are ahead in the score?

And, incontinuation:

================================================================================

And as I recall, Al Carrier, who is a ballistics expert and experienced in CSI, also supported the work of the blood expert that you refer to as a 'whore'.

(Bill Miller)

================================================================================

OK! Now, correct me if I am wrong! (and I am most certain that you will)

Your Expert, of whom you reference:

1. Gets stabbed repeatedly in various encounters with purported criminals, even though he is a "use of force instructor", who is also armed with a firearm (pistol).

2. Is a purported "CSI" who does not even recognize that Dr. Boswell, long ago so informed that the back wound of JFK was an "atypical" (he probably thought that meant "a typical" (as did you) wound.

That the wound measured exactlly 4mm X 7mm in dimension, and that the deformed base of CE399 matches exactly that same 4mm X 7mm dimension.

That your CSI did not even know enough about JFK's back wound to understand that it was elongated HORIZONTALLY, when by all known standards, it should have been elongated VERTICALLY.

That your CSI was not even aware that the HSCA had determined that the back wound of JFK had the abrasion collarl located at the BOTTOM of the entry, which is in direct contradiction to a bullet fired on a downward angle of fire.

That your CSI was not even aware of the fact that the copper jacket base of CE399 had been removed by someone.

That your CSI fell for and believed the BS of LTC Daniel Marvin, United States Army Quartermaster Supply Corps, (Retired).

That your CSI had to attempt to pass himself off as having attended some mythological "Scout Sniper" school, and thereafter served in some such category, when in fact his military service was as an MP (probably gate guard).

That your CSI long ago indicated that those members of the FBI who had successfully completed the FBI Course, to inclulde their ballistic evidence training, in reality knew little.

And on, and on,. and on!

And, YOU/aka BILL MILLER, quite apparantly believe all that Al Carrier has fed to you.

Which, combined with the BS of the "Blood Spatter", makes me wonder if you perhaps have mushrooms growing out of your ears.

KIDFOHS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ask her.... it appears you're totally oblivious to the subject matter...

Just as I suspected ... you have nothing to support your claim once again. You come onto an Education Forum and then make a general statement that may or not be true and refuse to offer any details when asked to do so. I guess that in a way you possibly did get a shot at Sherry, but most likely found yourself way over your head as usual and this could explain your reluctance to tell the interested parties on this forum as to what was discussed.

Thanks again for supporting my position by being your typical David (say nothing) Healy.

Bill Miller

What you suspect is irrelevant to me and/or this forum....

Do you need, or require Sherry's email address? Go to JFKLancer forum (here's the URL in case you lose your way: http://www.jfklancer.com/ ). I suspect you can find her address there. From what I understand Sherry happens to be part of management there. I'm amazed you aren't aware of that. I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course)....

p.s. I'm sure Al Carrier appreciates you dragging him into this... dum-da-dum-dumb... Do have a nice day!

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you suspect is irrelevant to me and/or this forum....

Do you need, or require Sherry's email address? Go to JFKLancer forum (here's the URL in case you lose your way: http://www.jfklancer.com/ ). I suspect you can find her address there. From what I understand Sherry happens to be part of management there. I'm amazed you aren't aware of that.

From observing the quality of your responses and desire to seriously participate in any of the discussions on this forum ... I bet that your flicking a light switch and seeing the light actually coming on amazes you.

I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course)....

p.s. I'm sure Al Carrier appreciates you dragging him into this... dum-da-dum-dumb... Do have a nice day!

Still waiting to hear what you remember about this so-called alleged 'shot' that you had at Sherry. Let me know if you remember anything.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you suspect is irrelevant to me and/or this forum....

Do you need, or require Sherry's email address? Go to JFKLancer forum (here's the URL in case you lose your way: http://www.jfklancer.com/ ). I suspect you can find her address there. From what I understand Sherry happens to be part of management there. I'm amazed you aren't aware of that.

From observing the quality of your responses and desire to seriously participate in any of the discussions on this forum ... I bet that your flicking a light switch and seeing the light actually coming on amazes you.

I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course)....

p.s. I'm sure Al Carrier appreciates you dragging him into this... dum-da-dum-dumb... Do have a nice day!

Still waiting to hear what you remember about this so-called alleged 'shot' that you had at Sherry. Let me know if you remember anything.

ahh, she's not responding to you... smart lady! Say, how is Al doing these day's? And, I love me in bold how about you? LMAO

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course)....

What concerns have you got concerning the 2D imagery of any film, David? If you have had any concerns about the 2D imagery of the assassination films ... you had forgot to mention them when Jack posted all those alteration claims based on them. You also failed to let Lifton know of the problem with him using them to make his assertions. The same can be said for Costella. Of course we know why that was - they'd simply tell you that the image being 2D had nothing to do with their claims being accurate or not.

ahh, she's not responding to you... smart lady!

I love me in bold how about you? LMAO

Sure Sherry is smart and thats exactly why I wanted to hear what you had to say about your so-called 'shot' at the smart lady. As usual, you had nothing to support what you said or implied as to have a 'shot' at a blood spatter expert.

And I love you in bold, too! In fact, I believe I posted in bold where you said that you've 'seen no signs of alteration'.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure she kept copies of our 2D imagery (Zapruder extant film -- something I do have some concern about) of a 3D world 'blood spatter' discussion... She should contact me re permission releasing an of my off-board emails concerning the subject matter, if in fact there are any... What was posted on the Lancer forum is in the public arena (unless you purged everything I posted there, of course)....

What concerns have you got concerning the 2D imagery of any film, David? If you have had any concerns about the 2D imagery of the assassination films ... you had forgot to mention them when Jack posted all those alteration claims based on them. You also failed to let Lifton know of the problem with him using them to make his assertions. The same can be said for Costella. Of course we know why that was - they'd simply tell you that the image being 2D had nothing to do with their claims being accurate or not.

ahh, she's not responding to you... smart lady!

I love me in bold how about you? LMAO

Sure Sherry is smart and thats exactly why I wanted to hear what you had to say about your so-called 'shot' at the smart lady. As usual, you had nothing to support what you said or implied as to have a 'shot' at a blood spatter expert.

And I love you in bold, too! In fact, I believe I posted in bold where you said that you've 'seen no signs of alteration'.

I'm impressed your so frightened about what I or any other person concerned with Dealey Plaza film authenticity issues.... so listen up guy, when you deal the humiliation your suffering at the hand of Tom Purvis don't bother to hide in my little corner of the world... Take it like a man.... you can can't you? No fair hiding behind Sherry's skirt!

My concerns are below? read it and weep, son!

http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html

(third article from the top been there since in that form since 2003 - since 1999 in the original form, YOU Lone Nutters haven't touched it yet -- Love it in bold, eh?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My concerns are below? read it and weep, son!

http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html

(third article from the top been there since in that form since 2003 - since 1999 in the original form, YOU Lone Nutters haven't touched it yet -- Love it in bold, eh?)

Yes David ... you did an article that had lots to say about film, but not Kodachrome film, and how someone could alter it. As you have said before ... you didn't say the film is altered, but rather suggested how it could be altered. Your article fails to say how Kodachrome II film can be altered in a way that could not be detected. In fact, you have since posted that you have 'seen no signs of alteration'.

Now it was YOU who posted that you had this 'shot' at Sherry and so far you have not offered any details about this alleged 'shot'. Your merely saying something without any details is just another example as to why you cannot sell this garbage to even the sorriest tabloid. Thanks again for making my point.

(smile)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My concerns are below? read it and weep, son!

http://jfkresearch.com/page3.html

(third article from the top been there since in that form since 2003 - since 1999 in the original form, YOU Lone Nutters haven't touched it yet -- Love it in bold, eh?)

Yes David ... you did an article that had lots to say about film, but not Kodachrome film, and how someone could alter it. As you have said before ... you didn't say the film is altered, but rather suggested how it could be altered. Your article fails to say how Kodachrome II film can be altered in a way that could not be detected. In fact, you have since posted that you have 'seen no signs of alteration'.

Now it was YOU who posted that you had this 'shot' at Sherry and so far you have not offered any details about this alleged 'shot'. Your merely saying something without any details is just another example as to why you cannot sell this garbage to even the sorriest tabloid. Thanks again for making my point.

son, you know where to find Sherry, right on that thar Lancer board you, shall we say, help rejuvenate, if not fund... Now if you choose not get in touch with her, that is your problem son....who am I to urge you on.... Lazy is as lazy does, eh?

For the record much better than you, Bill Miller (in fact all of them were better than you) tried to tear that article apart, they ALL failed miserably.... Amazing they all knew a bit about film compositing, a term I suspect you just learned about.... I suggest you get in touch with Roland Zavada, ask him if I'm aware of dual 8mm KodachromeII and/or Kodacolor. Anything short of you talking to Zavada is a non-starter with me. You're not competent enough holding ANY type of *Z-film authenticity*conversation ....

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page06.html

"Therefore, it is my opinion the bloodstain evidence is consistent with the injury to John F. Kennedy's head being the result of a single gunshot from the right front."

"Therefore, it is my opinion the bloodstain evidence is consistent with the injury to John F. Kennedy's head being the result of a single gunshot from the right front."

Is, without doubt, one of the most stupid and asinine statements ever made in regards to the facts of the assassination of JFK.

Yet! Has this kept some from actually believing it?? NOPE!

Has this kept some from attempting to "sell" it others??? NOPE!

"a single gunshot from the right front"

Came about as a result of an individual who purportedly claims expertise as a "Blood Spatter" expert, having conducted extensive testing into the subject matter.

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page01.html

And, thereafter published the results of this testing, along with multiple "references" in regards to the reseach of the subject matter.

Unfortunately, the cited "references" tend to completely discredit the presented hypothesis.

As example:

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page02.html

"Today, several books are available to those interested in blood stain pattern analysis, including Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction, Second Edition by Tom Bevel and Ross Gardner 2001; Interpretation of Bloodstain Evidence at Crime Scenes, Second Edition by Stuart H James and William G Eckert. 1998; and Scientific and Legal Applications of Bloodstain Pattern Interpretation by Stuart H. James 1998." (emphasis added)

-------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I can not speak for the actual research conducted, which derived the conclusion that JFK was struck in the head by one shot fired from the front.

However, I can state as fact that Dr. William Eckert, with whom I spoke to many years ago on the subject of the JFK assassination*, does not support such a hypothesis.

*Dr. Eckert lives (lived) in Witchita, KS, and was readilly available to anyone who had the demonstrated ability to intelligently discuss the autopsy evidence. It is unknown if he is even still living, but in event that one wants to try:

Telephone: 316-685-7612---ask for Dr. Eckert!

In addition to Dr. Eckert:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page03.html

A bullet interacts with the head in several stages (17).

1. The bullet enters the skull by forming a small entrance hole.

2. Some blood and brain matter is ejected backward out this small hole as backspatter.

3. The bullet, which may expand, fragment or tumble, then passes through the brain.

4. This bullet passage creates both a permanent cavity and a temporary expanding cavity.

5. The bullet leaves the skull by creating a larger irregularly shaped exit hole.

6. After the bullet has left the skull, blood and brain matter continues moving outward from the path of the bullet until the head bursts from the accumulated pressure, creating an even larger and more irregularly shaped exit wound.

7. Brain matter is ejected out all available openings as forward spatter, the largest of which is usually the expanded exit wound, with its final size depending on how large the internal pressures became.

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/references.html

17. Gunshot Wounds : Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques by Vincent J. M. Di Maio--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page03.html

Although velocity and mass determine the bullet's kinetic energy, its wounding potential relies on the efficient transfer of kinetic energy to tissues. Tissue resistance, demonstrated in elasticity and density, slows the projectile. This transfers kinetic energy to the surrounding structures, which are displaced backward, forward, and sideward, producing a temporary cavity or wound (8).

8. A.C. Charters: Wounding mechanism of very high velocity projectiles. Journal Trauma 16:464, 1976

DiMaio VJM,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In gunshot wounds to the head, high velocity projectiles can produce a large wound surface (15).

15. Kirkpatrick JB, DiMaio V: Civilian gunshot wounds of the brain. Journal of Neurosurgery 49:185, 1978

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. DiMaio, another of the primary referece's, absolutely does not agree with the hypothesis:

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_to...high-speed.html

Implications for the physics of JFK’s head shot

"The quick forward motion proves that the killing shot came from the rear. "

"Thus JFK’s head was hit by only one bullet, from the rear"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thusly, at minimum, two of the authors of cited references, of which one is a forensic anthropologist and the other a noted MD Medical Examiner, are in direct opposition to the hypothesis.

Now, for those who "fell" for and attempt to "sell" to others this totally unsupported hypothesis:

1. Please explain exactlly how a bullet striking from a frontal position, could have sent bullet fragments completely backwards to the extent that these fragments had sufficient velocity to crack the limosine windshield as well as dent the windshield molding.

2. Please explain exactly how a bullet striking from a frontal position, tore/blew out a section of the parietal/parietal-frontal lobe of the skull of JFK, thus leaving a wound of EXIT in the skull bone in which the exiting projectile went forward in the limosine.

3. Please explain exactly how a bullet striking from a frontal position blew cerebral tissue forward all over the back of the jump seats in which Nellie & JBC sat, as well as blowing this cerebral tissue well forward in the limousine.

4. Please explain exactly why three separate autopsy surgeons (as well as everyone else in the autopsy room) observed as well as measured an entrance wound of the scalp and skull which was located in the rear/EOP vicinity, as well as having located and measured an missile exit wound of the skull which was located in the parietal/parietal-frontal lobe of the skull.

5. And, since the author of this totallly unsupported hypothesis is fond of the testimony of SS Agent Roy Kellerman:

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/references.html

Then, why not also utilized Roy Kellerman's additional testimony?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm

Mr. KELLERMAN. Entry into this man's head was right below that wound, right here.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the bottom of the hairline immediately to the right of the ear about the lower third of the ear?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right. But it was in the hairline, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. In his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Near the end of his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In summary!

The author of this hypothesis:

1. Cites as reference, some of the most qualified individuals in the fields of forensic sciences, to include two prominent MD's who are both recognized authors as well as one being an extremely well reknown Medical Examiner.

Yet, at minimum, two of the most prominent cited references (Dr. Eckert & Dr. DiMaio) are in complete disagreement with this hypothesis.

2. Attempts to utilize selective bits of testimony of SS Agent Roy Kellerman, yet ignores the fact that Roy Kellerman clearly testified that the entrance wound into JFK's head, which was observed during the autopsy, was in the rear of the head and just up from the hairline.

3. Completely ignores the testimonies of ALL three of the autopsy surgeons, who have clearly and repeatedly stated that the missile/bullet entry point which they observed was in the EOP/rear of the head.

4. Completely ignores the testimonies of the autopsy surgeons who have clearly and repeatedly stated that in a portion of skull which fit in the parietal/parietal-frontal lobe of the skull, they found an EXIT wound of a missile/bullet fragment which went FORWARD in exiting the skull from rear to front.

5. Completely ignores the evidence of bullet fragments which were found in the forward/front seating area of the Presidential Limousine.

6. Completely ignores the evidence which indicates that bullet fragments from the headshot at Z313 went forward with sufficient velocity to strike the windshield of the limosine and crack the windshield, as well as create a dent in the windshield molding.

7. Completely ignores the testimonies of those witnesses within the Presidential Limousine in which it is stated that cerebral tissue from the brain of JFK was blown FORWARD all over the occupants of the limousine.

Yet, despite all of the forensic; ballistic; pathololgical; and physical evidence, as well as the published books of noted (and highly qualified individuals cited as references, which contradict the hypothesis) has derived a hypotheses based on some mythological ability to look at the Zapruder and Nix films, as coupled with the statements of motorcycle cops who drove into a cloud of cerebral tissue which was blown up into the air, and has thusly derived the conclusion that JFK was struck in the head by a bullet which was fired from the front.

Of which at least two persons (Bill Miller & Al Carrier) have swallowed, hook; line; and sinker!

Would everyone else who is this ignorant of the facts, please raise their hand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

son, you know where to find Sherry, right on that thar Lancer board you, shall we say, help rejuvenate, if not fund... Now if you choose not get in touch with her, that is your problem son....who am I to urge you on.... Lazy is as lazy does, eh?

As usual ... you throw out the remark about having your 'shot' at someone and when asked for details so to see if you are stating the record correctly - you evade the issue altogether. I guess that little dance that led to you saying, "I have seen no proof of alteration" taught you a lesson after all.

For the record much better than you, Bill Miller (in fact all of them were better than you) tried to tear that article apart, they ALL failed miserably.... Amazing they all knew a bit about film compositing, a term I suspect you just learned about.... I suggest you get in touch with Roland Zavada, ask him if I'm aware of dual 8mm KodachromeII and/or Kodacolor. Anything short of you talking to Zavada is a non-starter with me. You're not competent enough holding ANY type of *Z-film authenticity*conversation ....

I don't have to ask Zavada a question that is irrelevant to this discussion. Any moron can look up on the Internet as to what Kodachrome II and/or Kodacolor film is. Film Compositing is a side step from reality for you use it as if to insinuate that it can alter Kodachrome film where it cannot be detected by experts and that is where you are misleading the reader. There is nothing in your article that deals with the heart of the matter. Zavada is the head scientist that invented that film, and unlike you, he not only knows all there is about the characteristics of this type of film, but also has used that knowledge when examining the alleged Zapruder original. Zavada stated that he has found the Zapruder film to be the in camera original.

I then went to Robert Groden to get his findings. In case you have forgotten - Robert is one of the main conspiracy believers in the JFK assassination. If anyone has a motive for wanting the Zapruder film to be altered so to show conspiracy - it is Groden. But Robert had examined the alleged Zapruder original film and checked it for clarity, sharpness, and color shifting. Robert said that his examination found the characteristics of the said Zapruder original to hold up to every thing that he looked for.

So this isn't about some paranoid individual trying to look important by talking about what might have been done, but rather two individuals who are far more qualified to examine Kodachrome II film and tell if it is the original or not. Even yourself, as well as Jack White, has said openly that copies of the original film lose detail with each copy generation. This is a must that cannot be prevented. The alleged Zapruder original stood up to all of this, thus your article is irrelevant. The fact that your article doesn't mention where you examined the alleged camera original or that you even knew how to go about detecting it being a copy film only supports what I have said. Just once it would be grand if you just admitted that you were wrong. So far the best you have done is to say two things which cancel the other. You said, 'I believe the Zfilm is altered' and 'I have seen no proof of alteration'. If people wonder why the alleged earth-shattering information said to be found in the hoax book Fetzer published hasn't gotten any attention ... its because its only full of innuendos without facts to back them up.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

son, you know where to find Sherry, right on that thar Lancer board you, shall we say, help rejuvenate, if not fund... Now if you choose not get in touch with her, that is your problem son....who am I to urge you on.... Lazy is as lazy does, eh?

As usual ... you throw out the remark about having your 'shot' at someone and when asked for details so to see if you are stating the record correctly - you evade the issue altogether. I guess that little dance that led to you saying, "I have seen no proof of alteration" taught you a lesson after all.

For the record much better than you, Bill Miller (in fact all of them were better than you) tried to tear that article apart, they ALL failed miserably.... Amazing they all knew a bit about film compositing, a term I suspect you just learned about.... I suggest you get in touch with Roland Zavada, ask him if I'm aware of dual 8mm KodachromeII and/or Kodacolor. Anything short of you talking to Zavada is a non-starter with me. You're not competent enough holding ANY type of *Z-film authenticity*conversation ....

I don't have to ask Zavada a question that is irrelevant to this discussion. Any moron can look up on the Internet as to what Kodachrome II and/or Kodacolor film is. Film Compositing is a side step from reality for you use it as if to insinuate that it can alter Kodachrome film where it cannot be detected by experts and that is where you are misleading the reader. There is nothing in your article that deals with the heart of the matter. Zavada is the head scientist that invented that film, and unlike you, he not only knows all there is about the characteristics of this type of film, but also has used that knowledge when examining the alleged Zapruder original. Zavada stated that he has found the Zapruder film to be the in camera original.

I then went to Robert Groden to get his findings. In case you have forgotten - Robert is one of the main conspiracy believers in the JFK assassination. If anyone has a motive for wanting the Zapruder film to be altered so to show conspiracy - it is Groden. But Robert had examined the alleged Zapruder original film and checked it for clarity, sharpness, and color shifting. Robert said that his examination found the characteristics of the said Zapruder original to hold up to every thing that he looked for.

So this isn't about some paranoid individual trying to look important by talking about what might have been done, but rather two individuals who are far more qualified to examine Kodachrome II film and tell if it is the original or not. Even yourself, as well as Jack White, has said openly that copies of the original film lose detail with each copy generation. This is a must that cannot be prevented. The alleged Zapruder original stood up to all of this, thus your article is irrelevant. The fact that your article doesn't mention where you examined the alleged camera original or that you even knew how to go about detecting it being a copy film only supports what I have said. Just once it would be grand if you just admitted that you were wrong. So far the best you have done is to say two things which cancel the other. You said, 'I believe the Zfilm is altered' and 'I have seen no proof of alteration'. If people wonder why the alleged earth-shattering information said to be found in the hoax book Fetzer published hasn't gotten any attention ... its because its only full of innuendos without facts to back them up.

Bill Miller

I see, so what Roland Zavada (as a KODAK project manager) helped create and knows inside and out Kodak 8mm film, that's irrelevant, eh? That sum up your position? Funny, you use to spout all that film gamma info, post foolish dot graphs and the like, now its irrelevant, who is paranoid here? I'm detecting fear... Lazy is as Lazy does..... Ya need to get off your duff and do real JFK assassination DP film-photo research work....

By the way, don't let me interrupt the thrashing you seem to be getting from Tom Purvis... (re this thread, in which you'd desperately like to change the title or avoid)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Please explain exactlly how a bullet striking from a frontal position, could have sent bullet fragments completely backwards to the extent that these fragments had sufficient velocity to crack the limosine windshield as well as dent the windshield molding.

2. Please explain exactly how a bullet striking from a frontal position, tore/blew out a section of the parietal/parietal-frontal lobe of the skull of JFK, thus leaving a wound of EXIT in the skull bone in which the exiting projectile went forward in the limosine.

3. Please explain exactly how a bullet striking from a frontal position blew cerebral tissue forward all over the back of the jump seats in which Nellie & JBC sat, as well as blowing this cerebral tissue well forward in the limousine.

You are asking for answers to assumptions that may or may not be true, more likely the latter IMO. That thumb-sized dent in the chrome stripping between the sun visors has the characteristics of a solid hit by the nose of the bullet. I know this because Groden had placed the nose of a bullet in that dent and it fit perfectly. I suspect that the damage that you claim to be from mere fragments was the result of that 'flury of shots that came into the car that Kellerman spoke of'.

And if you look at the Nix film which exposed a frame closer to the bullet's impact to JFK's head than the Zapruder film did ... you would see the much wider pattern of back spray is at the top front half of the head and the more narrow exiting matter traveling at a higher speed coming out the back of the head. To show how this is done ... Sherry showed many high speed pictures of various objects detailing this occurrence.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...