Jump to content
The Education Forum

Understanding and Application of the "Bond" Evidence


Recommended Posts

Although at least one person here (whom I might add is also a true researcher) has obviously caught on to what some of these "Nostradamus" style riddles are all about, I would suppose that others who have interest in understanding the evidence

should also be brought in as well.

In event that one takes virtually any of the "Bond" photographs and reviews them, they will find that the Lamp Post

along the sidewalk directly in front of the Zapruder position, remains in virtually absolute direct alignment with the

alignment of Abraham Zapruder in the background and the pedestal upon which he was standing.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/gallery/thumbnails.php

Due to the distances from the "Bond Position", one can see that there is virtually ZERO Parallax problems with this photo,

which ultimately gives us a direct "3-point" alignment, much the same as in survey work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveying

As one can see that this "3-point" alignment remains constant and consistant, whether the Bond--to-- lamp post--to--Zapruder alignment remains centered within the plane of the photograph or not.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1

In addition, background and foreground items contained within the image are also of assistance in determination of the vertical as well as horizontal planes of the photograph.

Therefore, were the Lamp Posts of Dealey Plaza located in their true and original position, then, one could factually determine the exact location of Wilma Bond, merely by a visit to the site.

Or! In event that one knew no better, then they could attempt to utilize the Z-film, as in Z272, to locate the WILMA

Bond photographic position.

Which I might add, would be incorrect.

Wilma Bond WAS NOT standing directly adjacent to the large concrete column of the background pergola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In fact! WILMA Bond specifically informed us as to here position in Dealey Plaza.

http://www.jfk-online.com/bondshaw.html

Q: Now, Mrs. Bond, would you please step down from the witness stand and come over to this large map. I am going to give you a pin with a small flag which has your name written on it, and I ask you to please attach this pin to this large map at the location where you were at the alcove. Now, Mrs. Bond, I direct your attention to what, for purposes of identification, the State has marked as "S-34," and step over here, if you will. Now, I ask you whether or not you -- I ask you to place a small "x" on this which would indicate your position at the alcove.

A: On here?

Q: Yes.

A: If it is the last one, it is the last whatever you call that, a pigeonhole, so to speak. It was the last pigeonhole or whatever it was, the opening there that I went to.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z265.jpg

Most interesting; unfortunate; and coincidental that the Z-film just barely missed showing us Wilma Bond.

(assuming of course that she was where she said that she was)

Oh well!

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1

In event that one will look closely, I do believe that they will find Wilma Bond standing exactly where she testified

that she was standing, as well as in the process of taking another of here critically important photographs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now!

Had Wilma Bond actually been standing (located) in the Z272 vertical alignment with the lamp post, which would have placed here directly beside the large concrete column of the Pergola, then one would assume that such a fixed background object would be of critical relevance and importance in

determination of facts of the assassination.

Obviously not! Or at least not so to the US Secret Service during their December 1963 assassination

re-enactment and survey work.

In fact, the SS had no interest in anything which was past the LAST "pigeonhole" which was in the wall.

Of which they specifically had Mr. West locate and measure.

A: If it is the last one, it is the last whatever you call that, a pigeonhole, so to speak. It was the last pigeonhole or whatever it was, the opening there that I went to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Needless to say, the WC, during their work of May 1964, also recognized the importance of the holes, and had

Mr. West again specifically locate them.

P.S. For Jack.

Had you not made me mad, then I just may have told you exactly how to find the "nail" which is/was driven down

into the grass and represents the control Point in the Park which Mr. West utilized for this cross-check.

As well as the correlation between the "Pt in Park"; the sixth floor window; the Elm St. curb location where

vertical (elevation control) had been established during the SS Survey work; first shot impact point; the Z313 impact; etc; etc; etc;.

As well as the critical importance that the nail was placed there during the Time/Life survey work and became a

point of reference for all future works.

None of which you are likely to understand of course!

P.P.S. Were you eventually going to get around to telling everyone where Wilma Bond was actually located?

Or was it more important to determine whether or not Moorman was or was not in the street?

Truthfully, I would be most interested in exactly what relevance the "Moorman in the Street" issue would actually have.

Especially when one takes into consideration the highly unliklihood that you even knew exactly where Moorman

was standing.

P.P.P.S. I can assure you that Lyndal Shaneyfelt was fully aware of the EXACT location at which James Altgens was standing.

Which by the way happens to be of considerable relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...1268entry161268

Post #82

[i]Why am I apparently the only here who thinks his posts are ridiculous? [/i]=======================================================

Certainly a valid question!

And, just perhaps the answer lies within:

Post #81

Robin,

In case you had forgotten the aerial you introduced some time ago.

For tentative plotting of course.

chris

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

Perhaps those who gave proper attention, just may have picked up on something:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...t=0&start=0

Post #1

Richard Avedon:

"There is no such thing as inaccuracy in a photograph. All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth."

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

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...&fullsize=1

Without extensive digging, if one will recall, I long ago informed that this photo WAS NOT taken from the Zapruder

pedestal position, and was in fact taken from a location which although at the virtually exact same elevation (as was

the Z-camera), nevertheless was taken from a position which was actually somewhat to the left ( as one looks in

the direction of the photograph) from where Zapruder was actually standing.

And, it is certainlyl most refreshing to see that there are those here who just may have "registered" this EEI.

P.S. That Pat Speer and a whole lot of others state it, does not make it a physical and/or photographic fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the Drommer plat laid over a modern day Google aerial.

The Drommer plat has the location of the lightpost as it was back in 1963.

The Google aerial shows it's modern day position.

I have drawn line of sights from the Z pedestal, through the lightpost extending outward.

If there is a flaw in this please correct me.

Hope this helps others who lack perspective, as I do.

Chris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the Drommer plat laid over a modern day Google aerial.

The Drommer plat has the location of the lightpost as it was back in 1963.

The Google aerial shows it's modern day position.

I have drawn line of sights from the Z pedestal, through the lightpost extending outward.

If there is a flaw in this please correct me.

Hope this helps others who lack perspective, as I do.

Chris.

There is always a "flaw" when dealing with such small scales as we are having to deal with.

However, perspective, often comes in various forms and formats.

One at times must "envision" as if they were a bird and that they could therefore fly directly vertical to a line drawn onto the ground.

So long as that line passes directly through two seperate and distinctive objects, then it's termination point as well as origin can be determined relatively accurately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the Drommer plat laid over a modern day Google aerial.

The Drommer plat has the location of the lightpost as it was back in 1963.

The Google aerial shows it's modern day position.

I have drawn line of sights from the Z pedestal, through the lightpost extending outward.

If there is a flaw in this please correct me.

Hope this helps others who lack perspective, as I do.

Chris.

There is always a "flaw" when dealing with such small scales as we are having to deal with.

However, perspective, often comes in various forms and formats.

One at times must "envision" as if they were a bird and that they could therefore fly directly vertical to a line drawn onto the ground.

So long as that line passes directly through two seperate and distinctive objects, then it's termination point as well as origin can be determined relatively accurately.

Great work Chris (IMO) particularly attention to the birdsview correction Tom alludes to. Still it's an aerial with diferences arising from elevations apart from a swinging angle of photons from the ground. Thanks for the topic Tom.

Bond took a number of pics some from different positions. Muchmore and Bonds comments re their movements are relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the Drommer plat laid over a modern day Google aerial.

The Drommer plat has the location of the lightpost as it was back in 1963.

The Google aerial shows it's modern day position.

I have drawn line of sights from the Z pedestal, through the lightpost extending outward.

If there is a flaw in this please correct me.

Hope this helps others who lack perspective, as I do.

Chris.

There is always a "flaw" when dealing with such small scales as we are having to deal with.

However, perspective, often comes in various forms and formats.

One at times must "envision" as if they were a bird and that they could therefore fly directly vertical to a line drawn onto the ground.

So long as that line passes directly through two seperate and distinctive objects, then it's termination point as well as origin can be determined relatively accurately.

Tom,

Using Drommer at full size and drawing the LOS from the Z pedestal through the lamppost still yields the same result as the previous aerial composite I supplied.

Could the original Drommer (pre-revision) have the lamppost just east, still at the curb, of where it appears now? While the latest Drommer(1981 revision) and aerial

I previously provided coincide.

That's from one of my movies shot from the pedestal.

chris

Edited by Chris Davidson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the Drommer plat laid over a modern day Google aerial.

The Drommer plat has the location of the lightpost as it was back in 1963.

The Google aerial shows it's modern day position.

I have drawn line of sights from the Z pedestal, through the lightpost extending outward.

If there is a flaw in this please correct me.

Hope this helps others who lack perspective, as I do.

Chris.

There is always a "flaw" when dealing with such small scales as we are having to deal with.

However, perspective, often comes in various forms and formats.

One at times must "envision" as if they were a bird and that they could therefore fly directly vertical to a line drawn onto the ground.

So long as that line passes directly through two seperate and distinctive objects, then it's termination point as well as origin can be determined relatively accurately.

Great work Chris (IMO) particularly attention to the birdsview correction Tom alludes to. Still it's an aerial with diferences arising from elevations apart from a swinging angle of photons from the ground. Thanks for the topic Tom.

Bond took a number of pics some from different positions. Muchmore and Bonds comments re their movements are relevant.

John/Tom,

All the different perspectives are hard to comprehend, primarily for me, and when trying to scale different plats/photos, this compounds the problem.

Let me start with this:

Tom has supplied me with part of the original West plat. What I am supplying is at 100% received from Tom.

1 inch = 10Ft. according to the West plat.

If I "grid the plat"(blue lines) with connections from 4+00 to 3+00 the grid measurement is not 100Ft.

What is wrong with my method?

If possible,

Take this gridded plat and show me how to get 1inch=10Ft so the distance between (3+00 to 4+00) = 10 inches, which=100Ft.

thanks

chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing I can see 'wrong' is the roughly 30 foot difference between houston and the roads at the underpass. You seem to have quite nicely matched at houston street level. On a wall sized virtual map the descrepancies could be a factor as a contoured distortion of the aerial one lens in one place, not stereographic, at a particular angle to level. Any survey steps from point to point shooting, distances, angles, and elevations. This produces the data that is projected into a 2D 'birdview'. The aerial is a one point photo of the 'birdviewing'.

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...