Guest Duncan MacRae Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 (edited) Posted previously last year, but worth posting again IMO for those who may have missed this study. My main reason for posting again is that if this is the same know and agreed BDM images as seen in Willis and Betzner, then it can not be Arnold who by would have been long vanished from the scene by the time this pic was taken. Duncan MacRae Edited November 14, 2008 by Duncan MacRae Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 (edited) Duncan...while studying Willis...how about looking at something more productive, like this... Jack Edited November 14, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 I guess Duncan did not look at the image I posted. I was calling attention to... 1. the sunlight on the end of the wall 2. the men on the steps I did not refer to blackdogman. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 Duncan...while studying Willis...how about looking at something more productive, like this...Jack I'm not sure i'm following you Jack. My point is that the shape seen in the later photograph is the EXACT, not close, EXACT same BDM shape as seen in the two known and accepted images of BDM in Willis in Betzner. If you're suggesting that the new BDM image is sunlight on the bush, I disagree. The good news, or is it bad news, is that Bill Miller would agree with you if this is your view Duncan Duncan...I have previously studied in great detail the image you call SECOND BDM. I cannot locate my study on the computer right now. It may be lost, since it is 8 or 10 years old. What you refer to is a man in a black hat walking on the sidewalk to the north. I suggested that you do something more productive. Here is another Willis observation you might also find more productive to study. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 (edited) I'm not sure i'm following you Jack. My point is that the shape seen in the later photograph is the EXACT, not close, EXACT same BDM shape as seen in the two known and accepted images of BDM in Willis in Betzner. If you're suggesting that the new BDM image is sunlight on the bush, I disagree. The good news, or is it bad news, is that Bill Miller would agree with you if this is your view Duncan The quality of these claims are simply amazing ... its like the loony forum has now immigrated to The Education Forum. In your opening post, you (Duncan) said that by the time the photo you posted showing a partial image of someone because the pyracantha bush is between it and the camera ... that Arnold would have been long gone by then. Could you please explain in any detail as to what justifies you to make such a statement. For instance, how long after the shooting did the first Press Buses roll down Elm Street? How does your picture of choice correspond with the Bond photos and Towner #3?? How long did Arnold remain on the knoll before leaving ... two minutes, three minutes, 4 minutes ... how long??? This is what I think ... I think you have not bothered to even examine the photographic record before making another fact-less claim. The reasons are as follows: 1) You chose a Willis photo that was taken only 30 seconds after the shooting while at the same time claiming that it represents a time frame that has allowed for Arnold to have had plenty of time to have left the knoll. Arnold could not have had time for the two cops to approach him - ask him questions - and to allow Gordon time to remove his film and hand it to them in less than 30 seconds. 2) The Bond photos and Towner #3 still show figures at the large tree. In Willis ... one of this figures is partly visible and the BDM shape you claim for this individual is created by the pyracantha bush blocking out part of him. 3) Arnold said he left after his meeting with the two cops, but he doesn't give an exact time that this occurred. Does it not seem interesting that someone wearing light colored clothing and what appears to be an over-seas Garrison Cap can be seen on the walkway as people are moving toward the RR yard ... post your choice image claiming Arnold has since left the area. Bill Miller[/b] Edited November 15, 2008 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 (edited) Yeah Yeah Yeah, clear as a windly day in the Sahara desert "Yeah Yeah Yeah" .... What now ... are you thinking you're a Beatle??? I'm not going to give you the time of day on this Bill. The point of my post is that the 2 shapes are the exact same shape. Now Arnold being or not being there at the time my comparison photo was taken is not an issue with me, because I know he was not there. Duncan, you made it a point to mention that the BDM figure COULD NOT be Arnold because of the amount of time that had passed to the moment of the Willis photo being taken, so it obviously was part of the issue with you. So I take it that we can agree that if Arnold was the BDM, then he could still be on the knoll 30 seconds after the assassination took place. As far as your 'knowing Arnold wasn't there' ... your deduction resembles the inaccuracy of your claiming that Gordon would have long since been gone from the area by using a photo that you thought had been taken several minutes AFTER the shooting when in reality it was taken only 30 seconds following the shooting. In fact, If Arnold wasn't there in Moorman's photo and was an illusion as you claim, then you have not bothered to explain the person in sunlight standing beyond the wall in the Nix film other than brushing it off as an illusion as well. Of course it is your prerogative to pretend not to understand the significance of this or maybe do as Miles suggested on another forum by saying this is just a falling leaf (sigh~), but rest assured that regardless if one believes Arnold was in Dealey Plaza or not, most people are smart enough to know that there are not too many things that can stand upright and go into motion along the walkway other than a human being. Oh by the way Bill, fantastic image to illustrate your point...just one question... WHAT IS IT? [/b]Duncan MacRae Oh ... I thought that seeing how you guys got off looking at the BDM figure and could somehow imagine seeing a baby being held on his or her hip ... that you'd also be able to pick up on this man in light clothing ... apparently tailored like a uniform ... and that you'd notice the wide 'V' shape of the lower brim of the hat against the hairline and apply that to the Garrison Cap that Arnold wore. After all, some of you were quick to latch on to a black woman seen in the area of the walkway several minutes after the shooting even though there were several black women and men alike who were through that area by that time and despite Sitzman never mentioning seeing a baby ... that you'd apply that same sense of unbias logic to that figure. That's all! Bill Miller Edited November 16, 2008 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