Moorman-in-the-street? The logic of the paper Pt. I

[Paul Rigby]

In addition, the famous Altgens photo shows the shadows of Moorman and Hill standing in the grass at Z frame 255. Hence, all the photographic evidence shows exactly the same thing...

Does it really?

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...bum=2&pos=5

Altgens cropped to focus on Chaney…

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z255.jpg

…who has mysteriously vanished in the alleged corresponding Z-fake frame.

Wonderful things, telephoto lenses – they can make interposed objects and people disappear.

It seems both teams are comfortable falling prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. If things were that simple, we might as well just believe the WCR.

Sometimes, Pam, things really are just that simple.

But I'm a reasonable sort of bloke, always ready and willing to offer a sucker an even break, so I hereby throw in the use of a limited amount of scaffolding to assist the anti-alterationists in explaining how Zappy's ground-breaking telephoto lens missed Chaney alongside the right side of the presidential limo. How much fairer or more reasonable can a man be?

Bill Miller can then discourse on the rapidity with which the Altgens photo hit the wires; Lamson can hammer that club on his keyboard concerning the extraordinary properties of the telephoto lens in question; "Tink" can quote a Danish philosopher (or two); and Barb can tell us that the comparison is odious because it's perfectly apparent that Chaney was a shifty Commie. And so on and so forth.

Now wouldn't all that be worth the hearing?

Paul

[Craig Lamson]

I suggest that anyone writing anything about the Moorman line of sight

present their own research instead of insulting the work of others.

Lamson, Thompson, Miller, Junklady, anyone...travel to Dealey Plaza

with an enlargement of Moorman. Bring a transit, camera, ANYTHING

that is helpful. Take as many photos as you want. Find the line of sight

and document it in any way you desire. Find the height of the LOS two

feet south of the curb and two feet north of the curb. Inform us of your

findings. Unless you do this, nobody should pay any attention to your

wild imaginings and insults.

Jack

Uh Jack, thats been DONE. Learn to read. AS for YOUR work, it is INSULTING to anyone with a brain that functions.

If anyone doubts your decided lack of understanding of the basics of photography, this is an interesting primer:

www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm

BTW, when can we expect your admission that you simply were clueless about afocal photogrpahy and that your claims of impossibility was blatant disinformation? Your next post will; be just fine.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Craig Lamson

[Barb Junkkarinen]

I suggest that anyone writing anything about the Moorman line of sight

present their own research instead of insulting the work of others.

Lamson, Thompson, Miller, Junklady, anyone...travel to Dealey Plaza

with an enlargement of Moorman. Bring a transit, camera, ANYTHING

that is helpful. Take as many photos as you want. Find the line of sight

and document it in any way you desire. Find the height of the LOS two

feet south of the curb and two feet north of the curb. Inform us of your

findings. Unless you do this, nobody should pay any attention to your

wild imaginings and insults.

Jack

Ahhh, Jack, you sweet thing! Since you seem to want to persist in endearing little pet

names for one another, would you prefer I add "off" or "ass" to Jack?

As for others traveling to Dealey Plaza and checking things out for themselves

... didn't you read the essay?

Barb :-)

[Craig Lamson]

In addition, the famous Altgens photo shows the shadows of Moorman and Hill standing in the grass at Z frame 255. Hence, all the photographic evidence shows exactly the same thing...

Does it really?

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/galle...bum=2&pos=5

Altgens cropped to focus on Chaney…

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z255.jpg

…who has mysteriously vanished in the alleged corresponding Z-fake frame.

Wonderful things, telephoto lenses – they can make interposed objects and people disappear.

It seems both teams are comfortable falling prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. If things were that simple, we might as well just believe the WCR.

Sometimes, Pam, things really are just that simple.

But I'm a reasonable sort of bloke, always ready and willing to offer a sucker an even break, so I hereby throw in the use of a limited amount of scaffolding to assist the anti-alterationists in explaining how Zappy's ground-breaking telephoto lens missed Chaney alongside the right side of the presidential limo. How much fairer or more reasonable can a man be?

Bill Miller can then discourse on the rapidity with which the Altgens photo hit the wires; Lamson can hammer that club on his keyboard concerning the extraordinary properties of the telephoto lens in question; "Tink" can quote a Danish philosopher (or two); and Barb can tell us that the comparison is odious because it's perfectly apparent that Chaney was a shifty Commie. And so on and so forth.

Now wouldn't all that be worth the hearing?

Paul

Well gee Paul. perhaps, since it's YOUR claim, you can illustrate exactly WHY Chaney SHOULD be seen in the frame you list. Inquiring minds REALLY want to know. I'm a reasonable sort of fellow, but if you want to make a claim YOU need to back it up. So hop to it "bloke".

Edited April 24, 2009 by Craig Lamson

[Bill Miller]

So where are the photos that show HOW you aligned the reference points? Surely with 2 PhD's and a self proclaimed photo expert on the job, we should expect photographic evidence. So exactly WHERE are the photos of the alignment of the reference points as seen from your transit position? You have some..right? Or is it STILL your claim that it was IMPOSSIBLE to take them?

These crack investigators can take a photo just a few degrees SW of the transit which doesn't show us their LOS, but couldn't take a camera and hold it in front of the transit so we could see what the transit saw pertaining to their LOS... How absurd!

Then if one goes down to the street and looks at the pedestal from where Fetzer is standing ... the infamous Jack White "Replication of Sightline" view is what you'll see with the gap missing.

I am deeply troubled as to why if these jokers really believe they have exposed the cover-up of the past century, then how serious are they when they can't go take the most important photo so to validate their claim. Very suspicious in my view.

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

I suggest that anyone writing anything about the Moorman line of sight

present their own research instead of insulting the work of others.

Jack

We did just that, Jack. Note the closed gap image coming over the top of Moorman's photo. The writing on that image came from 'Hoax' I believe ... and it reads 'view through the lens'. So you clowns did represent your "Replication of Sightline'" photo as the view through the transit.

So my question for you, Jack White is .... Is that photo in 'Hoax' saying "Replication of Sightline" an untrue statement of fact in that book???

Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

But I'm a reasonable sort of bloke, always ready and willing to offer a sucker an even break, so I hereby throw in the use of a limited amount of scaffolding to assist the anti-alterationists in explaining how Zappy's ground-breaking telephoto lens missed Chaney alongside the right side of the presidential limo. How much fairer or more reasonable can a man be?

Paul

You make about as much sense, Paul as having a water bucket with no bottom in it. Hey, here is another one for you ... Some witnesses said JFK stood up when shot and the films do not show that either ... are the films then fake or did the witness get it wrong???

Bill