How about an internet cemetery for Z-film alteration claims?

[Josiah Thompson]

Thanks for this thoughtful post. I was thinking of something a bit more radical. Besides Fetzer and company there are others who have offered tries at proving Zapruder film alteration. Harrison Livingstone is one that comes to mind. David Lifton is another. None of these attempted "proofs" can survive examination. Nor can any of the purported "proofs" advanced by Fetzer and company. By designating a particular site as a "graveyard" we could gather together all the various "proofs" and their debunkings. This would make it impossible for Fetzer to do what he did with Moorman-in-the-street... that is, resuscitate a dead "proof" after a number of years. Life the exposure of the Nigerian con game, it would free research in the case to get back to substantial issues.

Later, I'm going to try out a possible way to organize burials. We might even assign a particular number of "shovels" to the efficiency of the burial. We could have lots of fun here.

Josiah Thompson

"A space devoted to argue against Z-film alteration would have a credibility problem, IMO, unless it gave equal time to evidence contradicting the single-assassin theory."

Why? I don't see any connection between the two.

Josiah Thompson

There is widespread suspicion--you might even call it paranoia (I no longer do)--that any person choosing to focus on the errors of conspiracy theorists is someone with a pro-Warren Commission bias. At one point, I would have said I didn't get it. But after watching Inside the Target Car, where supposed conspiracy theorist Gary Mack helped push a whole lot of nonsense, all the while acting as though he was presenting a well-reasoned center, I've come to understand. (You can read my analysis of this con job here)

I just think your skills would be better spent debunking post Six Seconds single-assassin theorist nonsense (such as the Lattimer back wound location or Dale Myers' animation) than the findings of Fetzer and friends. There are points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty. The single-bullet theory trajectory does not line up. The back wound was at the same level or higher than the throat wound. The first shot did not miss. And yet single-assassin theorists and the mainstream media keep pretending these things aren't true. Let's change that.

Sounds good. But from what I've seen of discussions about Robert Kennedy's murder there seems to be some sort of general consensus out there among top researchers that Sirhan Sirhan was a programmed (mind-controlled) patsy who was somehow innocent despite firing all the bullets from a pistol and injuring several people. This might be or become an Article of Belief (based on very questionable evidence) similar to Z-film alteration idea(s) in the JFK case. It seems what Josiah is proposing is to concentrate information on all "points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty" regarding the illegitimacy of "the findings of Fetzer and friends" (Z-film alteration arguments). That's something that could be done without getting too ambitious on the numerous other issues involved in the JFK case.

So-called Conspiracy Research has a serious credibility problem if it involves debating about reptilian shapeshifters in Congress and armed midgets jumping out of gloveboxes in presidential limos. It should be just as important to debunk conspiracy theorist nonsense as it is to debunk single-assassin theorist nonsense, assuming we don't want to overlook or obscure the issues involved (with some who promote Z-film alteration arguments) for the sake of an imaginary unity.

[Paul Rigby]

By designating a particular site as a "graveyard"…I'm going to try out a possible way to organize burials. We might even assign a particular number of "shovels" to the efficiency of the burial. We could have lots of fun here.

A “graveyard,” “organized burials,” “lots of fun” – yes, you can take the philosopher out of Yale, but you can never quite remove Yale from the philosopher.

Yet who but the most heartless among us can resist the heady atmosphere of the nocturnal Old Blue initiation ceremony, complete with corpses, shovels, coffins, nudity (compulsory) and, who knows, a little light onanism (optional), all rounded off with a rousing chorus of Die Wacht am Fetzer*, not to mention that all-important certificate of membership for Yale’s latest, and least prized, secret society: Celluloid and Old Rope.

Yours for only £322 a throw! Pull the other one? No, it’s attached to WTC7.

*“As long as a drop of blood still glows,

a fist still draws the mouse,

and one arm still holds the keyboard,

no enemy will here enter our thread!”

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Thanks for this thoughtful post. I was thinking of something a bit more radical. Besides Fetzer and company there are others who have offered tries at proving Zapruder film alteration. Harrison Livingstone is one that comes to mind. David Lifton is another. None of these attempted "proofs" can survive examination. Nor can any of the purported "proofs" advanced by Fetzer and company. By designating a particular site as a "graveyard" we could gather together all the various "proofs" and their debunkings. This would make it impossible for Fetzer to do what he did with Moorman-in-the-street... that is, resuscitate a dead "proof" after a number of years. Life the exposure of the Nigerian con game, it would free research in the case to get back to substantial issues.

Later, I'm going to try out a possible way to organize burials. We might even assign a particular number of "shovels" to the efficiency of the burial. We could have lots of fun here.

Josiah Thompson

I like the shovels idea, Tink. :-)

Personally, I think a graveyard site is a great idea. The problem, as we have seen over and over for the nearly

a whole decade now, is that even after people have spent a lot of time and energy, and done a lot of good work assembling documentation and graphics and presenting arguments ... and even though the consensus is that the point/claim has been soundly debunked .... its promoters never concede any point, and instead just fall back, enjoy a quiet interlude, and then start the same claim with the same already debunked arguments up all over again. There are always newbies and new lurkers who then have questions, and off we go all over again.

A repository site could prevent all that repetition ... with the best most complete arguments for any particular claim (Moorman-in-the-street?, for example)

already on file (6ft under, so to speak), all one would need to do is post the url. People on forums who wanted to could still debate, but all the information, documentation, graphics would already be there, in one place with easy access for all.

A lot of people have done a lot of good work, especially with graphics and photos, and it is a shame to have all of that lost in the jungle of posts in assorted forums scattered across the net. For the site to serve its purpose, items do need to be floated publically and vetted for any errors, problems, things missed, etc first ... like we did with our Moorman essay on this and other forums. Definitive, documented ... only ... in this cemetery.

A lot of time could be freed up to be better spent on whatever other areas of research any one is interested in .... no need to keep repeat repeat repeating the same old issues over and over again, and we all know, they will stay on the conveyor belt.

It'll need a name.<g>

Bests,

Barb :-)

"A space devoted to argue against Z-film alteration would have a credibility problem, IMO, unless it gave equal time to evidence contradicting the single-assassin theory."

Why? I don't see any connection between the two.

Josiah Thompson

There is widespread suspicion--you might even call it paranoia (I no longer do)--that any person choosing to focus on the errors of conspiracy theorists is someone with a pro-Warren Commission bias. At one point, I would have said I didn't get it. But after watching Inside the Target Car, where supposed conspiracy theorist Gary Mack helped push a whole lot of nonsense, all the while acting as though he was presenting a well-reasoned center, I've come to understand. (You can read my analysis of this con job here)

I just think your skills would be better spent debunking post Six Seconds single-assassin theorist nonsense (such as the Lattimer back wound location or Dale Myers' animation) than the findings of Fetzer and friends. There are points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty. The single-bullet theory trajectory does not line up. The back wound was at the same level or higher than the throat wound. The first shot did not miss. And yet single-assassin theorists and the mainstream media keep pretending these things aren't true. Let's change that.

Sounds good. But from what I've seen of discussions about Robert Kennedy's murder there seems to be some sort of general consensus out there among top researchers that Sirhan Sirhan was a programmed (mind-controlled) patsy who was somehow innocent despite firing all the bullets from a pistol and injuring several people. This might be or become an Article of Belief (based on very questionable evidence) similar to Z-film alteration idea(s) in the JFK case. It seems what Josiah is proposing is to concentrate information on all "points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty" regarding the illegitimacy of "the findings of Fetzer and friends" (Z-film alteration arguments). That's something that could be done without getting too ambitious on the numerous other issues involved in the JFK case.

So-called Conspiracy Research has a serious credibility problem if it involves debating about reptilian shapeshifters in Congress and armed midgets jumping out of gloveboxes in presidential limos. It should be just as important to debunk conspiracy theorist nonsense as it is to debunk single-assassin theorist nonsense, assuming we don't want to overlook or obscure the issues involved (with some who promote Z-film alteration arguments) for the sake of an imaginary unity.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

"So-called Conspiracy Research has a serious credibility problem if it involves debating about reptilian shapeshifters in Congress and armed midgets jumping out of gloveboxes in presidential limos. It should be just as important to debunk conspiracy theorist nonsense as it is to debunk single-assassin theorist nonsense, assuming we don't want to overlook or obscure the issues involved (with some who promote Z-film alteration arguments) for the sake of an imaginary unity."

Precisely! Poop in the road is poop in the road, no matter who put it there.

There is a perception in much of the mainstream, including mainstream media, that CTs are paranoid nuts who see boogeymen lurking and plotting everywhere. JFK CTs are a motley crew with a wide range of interests, wide range of knowledge on varied subjects within the arena, and that includes some pretty fringie stuff. Unfortunately, those are the ones that seem to get the press, so CT credibility overall suffers because of it. We are not many bodies attached to one big befuddled brain ... and it serves us well to show that through the work we do, how well we do it ... and that we disspell CT myths/claims as much as any LN claim.

This case is like a 1000 piece puzzle, but there are 3000 pieces in the box. We need to sort out which pieces belong in the box and toss out any that don't ... and that includes any piece that derails and/or disrupts working for the truth, regardless of which side of the knoll it came from. And the more bad pieces we are able to toss from the box, the more focus other pieces can get.

The "you're either with us or agin' us" mentality has no place in good research. It has been my experience for years, that mainstream CTs and LNs largely understand this (I know some CTs who are like oil and water with some others, and CTs don't own the whole market on nuts, there are some outrageous LNs as well ) and work this way, and sometimes work involves a mix of CTs and LNs ... some post in forums, some don't, but there is a big network and many, if not most, are usually hooked up with others in work taking place through e-mail sharing, phone, private meetings, etc. Major work of some sort is always going on in the underground, there has been some great work making real progress over the last couple of years ... and I am sure there is plenty that I am not involved in/know about as well.

We don't need negative factions, we need positive actions.

Thank you for your comment.

Barb :-)

"A space devoted to argue against Z-film alteration would have a credibility problem, IMO, unless it gave equal time to evidence contradicting the single-assassin theory."

Why? I don't see any connection between the two.

Josiah Thompson

There is widespread suspicion--you might even call it paranoia (I no longer do)--that any person choosing to focus on the errors of conspiracy theorists is someone with a pro-Warren Commission bias. At one point, I would have said I didn't get it. But after watching Inside the Target Car, where supposed conspiracy theorist Gary Mack helped push a whole lot of nonsense, all the while acting as though he was presenting a well-reasoned center, I've come to understand. (You can read my analysis of this con job here)

I just think your skills would be better spent debunking post Six Seconds single-assassin theorist nonsense (such as the Lattimer back wound location or Dale Myers' animation) than the findings of Fetzer and friends. There are points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty. The single-bullet theory trajectory does not line up. The back wound was at the same level or higher than the throat wound. The first shot did not miss. And yet single-assassin theorists and the mainstream media keep pretending these things aren't true. Let's change that.

Sounds good. But from what I've seen of discussions about Robert Kennedy's murder there seems to be some sort of general consensus out there among top researchers that Sirhan Sirhan was a programmed (mind-controlled) patsy who was somehow innocent despite firing all the bullets from a pistol and injuring several people. This might be or become an Article of Belief (based on very questionable evidence) similar to Z-film alteration idea(s) in the JFK case. It seems what Josiah is proposing is to concentrate information on all "points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty" regarding the illegitimacy of "the findings of Fetzer and friends" (Z-film alteration arguments). That's something that could be done without getting too ambitious on the numerous other issues involved in the JFK case.

So-called Conspiracy Research has a serious credibility problem if it involves debating about reptilian shapeshifters in Congress and armed midgets jumping out of gloveboxes in presidential limos. It should be just as important to debunk conspiracy theorist nonsense as it is to debunk single-assassin theorist nonsense, assuming we don't want to overlook or obscure the issues involved (with some who promote Z-film alteration arguments) for the sake of an imaginary unity.

[David G. Healy]

...

The "you're either with us or agin' us" mentality has no place in good research. It has been my experience for years, that mainstream CTs and LNs largely understand this (I know some CTs who are like oil and water with some others, and CTs don't own the whole market on nuts, there are some outrageous LNs as well ) and work this way, and sometimes work involves a mix of CTs and LNs ... some post in forums, some don't, but there is a big network and many, if not most, are usually hooked up with others in work taking place through e-mail sharing, phone, private meetings, etc. Major work of some sort is always going on in the underground, there has been some great work making real progress over the last couple of years ... and I am sure there is plenty that I am not involved in/know about as well.

We don't need negative factions, we need positive actions.

...

Barb :-)

Positive Actions? What the JFK research community needs is for the old-timers to move out of the way and let the young turks take over... PERIOD! 45+ years and what have we got today? Enough documentation to choke MOTHRA and her entire clan, that's what.... Look around... It's time for the old hands (being nice here) to write books, appear on the occasional radio/cable talk show, sit in the back of the room at lectures or presentation nodding yea or nay, that's it! Their day in the sun is over! Now THAT would be a positive action! But we know the reality, specific EGO'S just won't pass the baton....... Why? There is a sect some call the self-declared preservers of Dealey Plaza history, and they can be found throughout the internet research community, and many of them are right here on this forum....

So, Why again... Because the bitter divide is ALL the oldtimers have left, that's why!

[Chris Davidson]

Solve the math/timing problems related to the Z film/WC and then we can move on.

WC document 884.

chris

[Jack White]

Solve the math/timing problems related to the Z film/WC and then we can move on.

WC document 884.

chris

Chris...do I understand correctly that the distance the limo moves between

the two frames is nine-tenths of a foot? If so, that is absurd. It moves the

distance from the front bumper to the rear of the tire...about 6 feet!

Or am I misinterpreting?

Jack

[Chris Davidson]

Jack,

You are correct.

Whatever the distance from front bumper to center/rear of front tire is.

Which is not close to 9/10 of a foot.

chris

[Pat Speer]

Chris, the problems with that exhibit have long been noted. The exhibit is incorrect, and no one knows why. (Although Tom Purvis has a theory). If you believe that the exhibit--which is clearly incorrect, as it has the limousine slamming on the brakes and starting back up again for no reason at a point before anyone even heard a shot--is evidence the FILM was altered, then I think you're chasing ghosts.

As far as a website devoted to debunking claims of Z-film alteration...I've changed my mind. If it allows the likes of Tink and Barb to respond to alteration claims simply by posting a link, and frees them up to research other aspects of the case, it could be a very good thing.

[Don Jeffries]

I echo Pat Speer's initial comments on this thread.

Josiah, Bill Miller, Barb- in terms of credibility, how do you feel Jim Fetzer and Jack White stand in comparison to Dale Myers, for instance? Do you agree that a dishonest effort to prop up scientifically impossible things like the single-bullet theory is a greater sin than the notion that the Zapruder film is altered? Just curious. Or perhaps now some (or all) of you are willing to state that it is possible for CE 399 to have caused all the non-fatal wounds in Kennedy and Connally. If that's the case, it is your credibility, and not Fetzer or White's, which is destroyed, imo.

I know I'm being an unrealistic idealist here, but the level of vitriol on this subject just astonishes me. There are no long threads taking Tom Purvis to task for all the nonsense he posts. I know that Bill agrees with me on this issue, but why doesn't Josiah Thompson feel the need to destroy Purvis's absurd notions in long, excruciating detail, as he relishes doing with the alterationist claims? I know it is very hard to figure out exactly what Purvis is claiming, but consider it a healthy challenge. Is it just because Purvis hasn't published books? Certainly Dale Myers-with his new found role of advisor on television documentaries-must be considered important enough to demolish in thread after thread. I must have missed all those threads....

Josiah, Bill, Barb- what did you think of the "Inside The Target Car" documentary? As Pat noted, Gary Mack played an important role in that very distorted program. What do you all think of that? Do you agree that the program was at least as misleading as any of the "wildest" alteration claims? Where are the long, detailed posts from you on that subject?

Josiah, with all due respect, I think this has become a personal issue with Fetzer for you. You acknowledged this yourself, in stating that you received some pleasure in puncturing his "ego." If you've ever traded posts with Dale Myers on a forum, you know how arrogant and egotistic hs comes off as. Fetzer hasn't been given a chance to promulgate his theories on widely broadcast television shows, as Myers has. Why don't you feel the need to puncture his ego and bring him down to size? If you're concerned about Fetzer disemminating incorrect information, what must you think of Myers, who has been permitted to peddle his single-bullet nonsense to millions of t.v. viewers?

I'm not declaring this to be a one-sided thing; Jim and Jack often come off in a less than sterling light during these debates. Certainly David Healy's contributions add nothing constructive. That, however, doesn't change the reality that Josiah Thompson seems to only post on these forums to respond to Jim Fetzer. To my knowledge, Josiah's only real involvement on this forum was in the film alteration or 911 conspiracy threads. In both cases, his motivation appears to have been to discredit Jim Fetzer's theories on those two subjects. He didn't, for instance, jump into any of the threads debating Jack White's Apollo hoax theories. Thus, it seems clear to me that he has a personal issue with Fetzer, but not Jack White, since Jack's Apollo claims revolve around the same sort of film alteration that these threads do, and the same kind of massive conspiracy claims that the 911 threads did.

I respect Josiah Thompson for his "Six Seconds In Dallas." It was an important book, and I certainly don't mean to sound like I'm attacking him. I also think, though, that "Assassination Science," at least, was an important book, as well. I don't know any of the people involved in this debate, except through their posts on this forum (and less frequently on Lancer), so I do consider myself unbiased.

Take it or leave it- that's my two cents worth.

[Jack White]

Chris, the problems with that exhibit have long been noted. The exhibit is incorrect, and no one knows why. (Although Tom Purvis has a theory). If you believe that the exhibit--which is clearly incorrect, as it has the limousine slamming on the brakes and starting back up again for no reason at a point before anyone even heard a shot--is evidence the FILM was altered, then I think you're chasing ghosts.

As far as a website devoted to debunking claims of Z-film alteration...I've changed my mind. If it allows the likes of Tink and Barb to respond to alteration claims simply by posting a link, and frees them up to research other aspects of the case, it could be a very good thing.

How can you blithely state that a PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR has erred

without presenting evidence? Just scanning the figures, they seem progressive

and correct. Professional surveyors pride themselves on accuracy to within

a tiny fraction of an inch, yet you dismiss their numbers as a mistake! Could it

be YOU who is wrong?

Demonstrate to us WHY it is wrong, and HOW professionals erred.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

Chris, the problems with that exhibit have long been noted. The exhibit is incorrect, and no one knows why. (Although Tom Purvis has a theory). If you believe that the exhibit--which is clearly incorrect, as it has the limousine slamming on the brakes and starting back up again for no reason at a point before anyone even heard a shot--is evidence the FILM was altered, then I think you're chasing ghosts.

As far as a website devoted to debunking claims of Z-film alteration...I've changed my mind. If it allows the likes of Tink and Barb to respond to alteration claims simply by posting a link, and frees them up to research other aspects of the case, it could be a very good thing.

How can you blithely state that a PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR has erred

without presenting evidence? Just scanning the figures, they seem progressive

and correct. Professional surveyors pride themselves on accuracy to within

a tiny fraction of an inch, yet you dismiss their numbers as a mistake! Could it

be YOU who is wrong?

Demonstrate to us WHY it is wrong, and HOW professionals erred.

Jack

Like that will make ANY difference to you. You lack intellectual honesty. Hell you can't even deal with these simple demonstrations as to why a "professional" is wrong...

www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm

www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm

[William Kelly]

Although I agree with Josiah Thomson on most points, I must take exception to the idea that,

"At one point in time decades ago, research in the case had significant political importance. Now it doesn't."

More governments change hands by political assassination than by democratic means, and since being assassinated is President Obama's most serious threat today, political assassination is the most serious threat to the national security of the United States, and that is the case because the assassination of President Kennedy remains unresolved.

The murders of MLK and RFK only happened because the assassination of the president was not properly investigated, and such political assassinations in the United States will continue to be THE major threat to our national security until the major questions of the JFK assassination are resolved. Those questions must be answered, and will be answered.

And answering those questions are much more pressing than proving, once again, that Moorman and Hill were two dizzy broads witnessing a homicide and the Z film is accurate.

Rather than dwell on the discarded, once the so-called evidence is in the trash, the real evidence should be followed to those responsible for the assassination.

Bill Kelly

Well, I guess I have to say to begin with that I don't give a damn where you think my skills at debunking should be employed. After all, they are my skills and I guess I get to choose where I'd like to employ them.

The more important point is that that you... and others... seem to think that research in the Kennedy assassination is some sort of tribal warfare. It isn't.If someone believes it was possible for a single lone nut to have brought this off, then that is his/her prerogative. It bewilders me why I or anyone else should pay much attention to such an odd judgment. It seems to me that topics for research in this area should be chosen on the basis of what interests one. They certainly should not be chosen out of some misguided sense of what lyou propose "ought" to be investigated.

Fetzer is something else. First, he is such a pompous ass that taking him down has a certain enjoyment connected with it. Secondly, again because of his expanded ego, taking him down is not that difficult to do. Thirdly, because of the tactics he uses, he brings into disrepute not only research on the Kennedy assassination but also the integrity usually associated with being a professor of philosophy. Being a member of both groups, I find Fetzer and his "fetzering" not only an embarrassment but truly offensive. So that is why I continue to puncture his pomposity whenever I encounter it.

My other research interests are varied.

Josiah Thompson

"A space devoted to argue against Z-film alteration would have a credibility problem, IMO, unless it gave equal time to evidence contradicting the single-assassin theory."

Why? I don't see any connection between the two.

Josiah Thompson

There is widespread suspicion--you might even call it paranoia (I no longer do)--that any person choosing to focus on the errors of conspiracy theorists is someone with a pro-Warren Commission bias. At one point, I would have said I didn't get it. But after watching Inside the Target Car, where supposed conspiracy theorist Gary Mack helped push a whole lot of nonsense, all the while acting as though he was presenting a well-reasoned center, I've come to understand. (You can read my analysis of this con job here)

I just think your skills would be better spent debunking post Six Seconds single-assassin theorist nonsense (such as the Lattimer back wound location or Dale Myers' animation) than the findings of Fetzer and friends. There are points that can be proven to a reasonable certainty. The single-bullet theory trajectory does not line up. The back wound was at the same level or higher than the throat wound. The first shot did not miss. And yet single-assassin theorists and the mainstream media keep pretending these things aren't true. Let's change that.

[Bill Miller]

Positive Actions? What the JFK research community needs is for the old-timers to move out of the way and let the young turks take over... PERIOD! 45+ years and what have we got today?

Well let us think about this, David ... You are 63, Fetzer is 68, and White is 82. This would certainly take care of much of the senility problems associated with these alleged alteration discovery claims. But wouldn't it be nice before you fellas go for that last ride to the pasture of no return that you actually do write that request to the NARA to allow YOU to examine the Zapruder film so to authenticate it once and for all.

You must admit that just talking about it isn't as effective as actually doing it. It's been over a year now since we learned that while you have spent a lifetime complaining about not getting to examine it - that you never actually made a formal request to do so. I don't get it ... are you suffering from writers block and can't formulate a couple of simple coherent sentences so to actually make the needed request to allow you to examine the film so to put all the nonsense to rest once and for all? If that's the case, then allow one of these younger guys to help you.

I would use white paper and black ink in case you haven't gotten that far yet in laying out your plan of action. I would find out what your address is, as well as the NARA's and put it onto the request accordingly. I would tell them what your qualifications are and why you believe that you can be of help in authenticating this historic film.

I wouldn't use any of the claims made in 'Hoax' as your reason for this examination needing to be done or any credibility you have going in that you are not a lunatic will be lost. Instead tell them that a critical thinker and ex-Professor has said that he has evidence that Zapruder was made of rubber - that Jean Hill may have been slipped a mickey to get her to say she was not in the street when the shooting started - and that countless hours of life are being lost by people with nothing better to live for than to make up claims of girls turning into boys and so on. Then if they don't allow you to handle this historic piece of film, as insane as that would be, then at least you know you did all you could to end it one way or the other.

I hope this advice has helped you in some way before being put out to pasture.

Bill Miller

[Pat Speer]

Chris, the problems with that exhibit have long been noted. The exhibit is incorrect, and no one knows why. (Although Tom Purvis has a theory). If you believe that the exhibit--which is clearly incorrect, as it has the limousine slamming on the brakes and starting back up again for no reason at a point before anyone even heard a shot--is evidence the FILM was altered, then I think you're chasing ghosts.

As far as a website devoted to debunking claims of Z-film alteration...I've changed my mind. If it allows the likes of Tink and Barb to respond to alteration claims simply by posting a link, and frees them up to research other aspects of the case, it could be a very good thing.

How can you blithely state that a PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR has erred

without presenting evidence? Just scanning the figures, they seem progressive

and correct. Professional surveyors pride themselves on accuracy to within

a tiny fraction of an inch, yet you dismiss their numbers as a mistake! Could it

be YOU who is wrong?

Demonstrate to us WHY it is wrong, and HOW professionals erred.

Jack

Jack, as I recall, the obviously bogus numbers in the WC box were not put in there by Robert West, but were changed by the WC for some unknown reason. It may have been a simple typo. Purvis--who has West's original numbers--has his own theory about the change, although I don't remember exactly what it is. I think Chuck Marler discussed this in Assassination Science as well.

In any event, until now, people have always assumed the obviously incorrect numbers for frame 166 and at least one other frame were signs the WC was up to something, and not evidence that the film itself is a fake. I mean, just what are you saying here? That the strange measurements were made from the original film, and that another film was put in its place? Does that make sense?

If I recall, the measurements were supposedly taken from the May 24 survey. As posted by Gary Murr on another thread, the FBI had made notes on the film as we know it today as early as January. Are we to believe the FBI's Shaneyfelt knew what was to be changed as early as January? Perhaps even we are to assume his "notes on the film" were actually "notes on changes to be made to the film"? So now it's the FBI who changed the film? In 1964? I thought the operating thesis was that the film was changed/created in 63, by the NPIC?