Jack White Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) As Purvis would know if he ever went to Dealey Plaza with an Altgens 6 photoand lined up landmarks which are still there, Altgens was standing several feet off the curb when he took the photo. Robert Cutler came to this same conclusion in his famed plaza map on pages 48-49 in Computers and Automation, May 1970. Altgens IN THE STREET further gives lie to Zapruder, which shows him on the grass. I also wonder about the Purvis statement that Altgens 6 has been cropped. I would appreciate any source information about this. Trask published what is claimed to be the full negative, though I have doubts about that. Jack Jack; I for one am somewhat tired of doing your homework research for you, and still seeing you fail the course of instruction. The Altgens/Z255 photo, as presented by the WC, was cropped on each side, which removes important/key background items in the event that one went to dealy Plaza an attempted to secure the same alignment and determine Altgens exact position along the Elm St. Curb. (down by the second yellow curb mark I might add) Add to that the fact that new stripes were painted along the center of Elm St., and only the most proficient, and just about requiring an instrument, would or could achieve the exact Altgens alignment, The "Photograph From Re-enactment": http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0054a.htm Is nothing more than the "scam" in which the wool was pulled over your eyes in making one think that James Altgens was considerably farther up Elm St. towards the TSDB, than he actually was. Thereby selling you and everyone else that the LAST SHOT that he referenced as striking JFK, was the Z313 shot. As one moves from Altgens true location down at the SECOND yellow curb marking, up Elm St. towards the TSDB, then one also moves farther to the right of the alignment. Thusly, the Re-enactment photo, as should be evident to most anyone, is actually from a position which is RIGHT (as looking in direction of photo towards TSDB) of the actual Altgens Z255 photo. Now, for all I know (since I was not there), the photo could have been taken from way out in the grassy area behind James Altgens location, in which one could obtain the same camera alignment. However, one can rest assured that it was not taken from the Altgens position or the Altgens camera alignment. I also wonder about the Purvis statement that Altgens 6 has been cropped. Had you done even the smallest "smidget" of research, then you would know that the WC "comparative version" of the Altgens photo has been cropped on each side. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0054a.htm As well as the fact that what is purportedly the "full" photo has been around for a considerable length of time. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1 So, while you have been chasing mythological creatures throughout Dealey Plaza and attempting to determine if Mary Moorman was or was not standing in the street. A few of us have been accumulating and evaluating evidence in order to attempt to make some sense out of the obfuscation of this evidence on the part of the WC/aka Specter & Company, INC. P.P.S. If Purvis would spend less time pontificating and more looking at the evidence, he might learn something. The Altgens photo HE CLAIMS TO BE FULL SIZE is cropped considerably. The closest to full size I know of is found in Computers and Automation, May, 1970, pages 44-45. It has consierably more image on the left than the one the know-it-all Purvis says is FULL SIZE, which crops out the woman with the camera as well as three other people. How can he expect to be taken seriously when he cannot even get something as simple as Altgens 6 right? Purvis obviously has never been in the plaza trying to locate lines of sight. Jack Purvis smugly said he showed us the FULL SIZE Altgens 6. But he did not. His was missing much on the left side, which is shown here. I am sure there is MORE, because the magazine had to allow for 1/8-inch bleed (trim). So there is even more cropped. Those who claim to know it all usually don't. Jack Edited January 8, 2009 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Jack Here is Copy showing the jack Ruby Look alike, and what appears to be a man in a dark suit standing to his right. The man in the dark suit has his fist raised in the air, partially blocking out the back part of the Ruby look alike's hat. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...ns_6__Large.jpg I beleive this is VERY close to "Full Frame" The only thing missing is that in the "full frame" you can see a fraction more of the Dal-Tex brick wall at the top of the image on the right hand side. Edited January 8, 2009 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Bond (4) Full Frame: Showing the Stemmons Sighn. Note: we still have the Bond / Light Post / Pedestal alignment, in both of the images below. Bond (9) What appears to be a small Crop of the original. Tom. I will make up a "composite image" showing all the Bond photo's together, so as best to see the Bond /light Pole/ pedestal alignment.. Edited January 8, 2009 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 JackHere is Copy showing the jack Ruby Look alike, and what appears to be a man in a dark suit standing to his right. The man in the dark suit has his fist raised in the air, partially blocking out the back part of the Ruby look alike's hat. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...ns_6__Large.jpg I beleive this is VERY close to "Full Frame" The only thing missing is that in the "full frame" you can see a fraction more of the Dal-Tex brick wall at the top of the image on the right hand side. Thanks! What is that "patch job" at the right? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) JackHere is Copy showing the jack Ruby Look alike, and what appears to be a man in a dark suit standing to his right. The man in the dark suit has his fist raised in the air, partially blocking out the back part of the Ruby look alike's hat. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...ns_6__Large.jpg I beleive this is VERY close to "Full Frame" The only thing missing is that in the "full frame" you can see a fraction more of the Dal-Tex brick wall at the top of the image on the right hand side. Thanks! What is that "patch job" at the right? Jack I don't beleive it's in the image Jack, just a mark on the book page i used when Scanning it. ! Edited January 8, 2009 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Agbat Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Tom, Your speed calculations are correct. The math is perfect. The only possible flaws are the number of frames or the distance involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) Tom....... You should be appreciative, when documentation or corrective information is offered... As far as I am concerned it always is... John... Take care.... Jack... This Altgens may be what you seek....from what is available....The most complete I have be able to find.. The frames are from the Marsh collection where he states the wall is cropped.. The last is the full in width but has the bottom cropped...... Best B..... Edited January 9, 2009 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 JackHere is Copy showing the jack Ruby Look alike, and what appears to be a man in a dark suit standing to his right. The man in the dark suit has his fist raised in the air, partially blocking out the back part of the Ruby look alike's hat. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...ns_6__Large.jpg I beleive this is VERY close to "Full Frame" The only thing missing is that in the "full frame" you can see a fraction more of the Dal-Tex brick wall at the top of the image on the right hand side. Thanks! What is that "patch job" at the right? Jack I don't beleive it's in the image Jack, just a mark on the book page i used when Scanning it. ! No, it is a splice in the photo. Note the offsets at the splice line. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Here is how to locate the Altgens line of sight/location. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Tom.......You should be appreciative, when documentation or corrective information is offered... As far as I am concerned it always is... John... Take care.... Jack... This Altgens may be what you seek....from what is available....The most complete I have be able to find.. The frames are from the Marsh collection where he states the wall is cropped.. The last is the full in width but has the bottom cropped...... Best B..... Thanks, Bernice...for posting my study from about ten years ago showing the right hand side cropped. But it does not explain the "splice" I mentioned. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Tom.......You should be appreciative, when documentation or corrective information is offered... As far as I am concerned it always is... John... Take care.... Jack... This Altgens may be what you seek....from what is available....The most complete I have be able to find.. The frames are from the Marsh collection where he states the wall is cropped.. The last is the full in width but has the bottom cropped...... Best B..... Thanks, Bernice...for posting my study from about ten years ago showing the right hand side cropped. But it does not explain the "splice" I mentioned. Jack I'm not with you Jack. ? you have lost me, can you point out the "splice" Area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 for Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 for Robin Thanks Jack. OK. Now i'm with you. ! Yes it appears to be a join between two images. " Splice " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 For Tom. Bond " Composite " with the street light and pedestal in alighnment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted January 9, 2009 Author Share Posted January 9, 2009 As Purvis would know if he ever went to Dealey Plaza with an Altgens 6 photoand lined up landmarks which are still there, Altgens was standing several feet off the curb when he took the photo. Robert Cutler came to this same conclusion in his famed plaza map on pages 48-49 in Computers and Automation, May 1970. Altgens IN THE STREET further gives lie to Zapruder, which shows him on the grass. I also wonder about the Purvis statement that Altgens 6 has been cropped. I would appreciate any source information about this. Trask published what is claimed to be the full negative, though I have doubts about that. Jack Jack; I for one am somewhat tired of doing your homework research for you, and still seeing you fail the course of instruction. The Altgens/Z255 photo, as presented by the WC, was cropped on each side, which removes important/key background items in the event that one went to dealy Plaza an attempted to secure the same alignment and determine Altgens exact position along the Elm St. Curb. (down by the second yellow curb mark I might add) Add to that the fact that new stripes were painted along the center of Elm St., and only the most proficient, and just about requiring an instrument, would or could achieve the exact Altgens alignment, The "Photograph From Re-enactment": http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0054a.htm Is nothing more than the "scam" in which the wool was pulled over your eyes in making one think that James Altgens was considerably farther up Elm St. towards the TSDB, than he actually was. Thereby selling you and everyone else that the LAST SHOT that he referenced as striking JFK, was the Z313 shot. As one moves from Altgens true location down at the SECOND yellow curb marking, up Elm St. towards the TSDB, then one also moves farther to the right of the alignment. Thusly, the Re-enactment photo, as should be evident to most anyone, is actually from a position which is RIGHT (as looking in direction of photo towards TSDB) of the actual Altgens Z255 photo. Now, for all I know (since I was not there), the photo could have been taken from way out in the grassy area behind James Altgens location, in which one could obtain the same camera alignment. However, one can rest assured that it was not taken from the Altgens position or the Altgens camera alignment. I also wonder about the Purvis statement that Altgens 6 has been cropped. Had you done even the smallest "smidget" of research, then you would know that the WC "comparative version" of the Altgens photo has been cropped on each side. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol18_0054a.htm As well as the fact that what is purportedly the "full" photo has been around for a considerable length of time. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1 So, while you have been chasing mythological creatures throughout Dealey Plaza and attempting to determine if Mary Moorman was or was not standing in the street. A few of us have been accumulating and evaluating evidence in order to attempt to make some sense out of the obfuscation of this evidence on the part of the WC/aka Specter & Company, INC. P.P.S. If Purvis would spend less time pontificating and more looking at the evidence, he might learn something. The Altgens photo HE CLAIMS TO BE FULL SIZE is cropped considerably. The closest to full size I know of is found in Computers and Automation, May, 1970, pages 44-45. It has consierably more image on the left than the one the know-it-all Purvis says is FULL SIZE, which crops out the woman with the camera as well as three other people. How can he expect to be taken seriously when he cannot even get something as simple as Altgens 6 right? Purvis obviously has never been in the plaza trying to locate lines of sight. Jack As well as the fact that what is purportedly the "full" photo has been around for a considerable length of time. Jack; In event that you would learn to read, along with taking courses in a whole lot of other things, then you just may actually convince someone that you know something about which you speak. And, this one: http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...cat=0&pos=8 Has more than sufficient orientation for me to determine the virtual exact location of James Altgens. Purvis obviously has never been in the plaza trying to locate lines of sight. For that, consider yourself off my mailing listing of giving directions to the "pin's"/nails which Mr. West set in the grass at various locations for reference points in taking "backshots" and cross-checks. As many times as Bill Miller has made you look completely foolish, were it I, then I would put a sack over my head; change my name; and not allow anyone to know who I truly was. 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