For Robin--This is the "Education Forum"

[Jack White]

As Purvis would know if he ever went to Dealey Plaza with an Altgens 6 photo

and 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

[Robin Unger]

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

[Robin Unger]

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

[Jack White]

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.

Thanks! What is that "patch job" at the right?

Jack

[Robin Unger]

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.

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

[Frank Agbat]

Tom,

Your speed calculations are correct.

The math is perfect. The only possible flaws are the number of frames or the distance involved.

[Bernice Moore]

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

[Jack White]

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.

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

[Jack White]

Here is how to locate the Altgens line of sight/location.

Jack

[Jack White]

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

[Robin Unger]

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

[Jack White]

for Robin

[Robin Unger]

for Robin

Thanks Jack.

OK. Now i'm with you. !

Yes it appears to be a join between two images. " Splice "

[Robin Unger]

For Tom.

Bond " Composite " with the street light and pedestal in alighnment.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

As Purvis would know if he ever went to Dealey Plaza with an Altgens 6 photo

and 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.