Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 My study with Jim Marrs has now been republished by GLOBAL RESEARCH http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...a&aid=16224 under the title, "JFK Assassination. False Flag Attacks: How "Patsies" are Framed The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald". I have also had an exchange with Dartmouth: From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu To: "Carol L. Folt" <Carol.L.Folt@dartmouth.edu> Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: Photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald Carol L. Folt Acting Provost and Dean of Faculty Dartmouth College Dean Folt, How can you assert, "we have no reason to doubt the validity of Professor Farid's research", when I have sent you proof that he has committed enormous blunders and either did not even conduct a literature search or presented false findings in spite of it? I am most interested in who bears responsibility for the quality of research at Dartmouth College. Since there could hardly be a more blatant case of corruption, who enforces scholarly standards? I have supposed that this duty fell to you. If not you, then who? "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasaco", a study I co-authored with Jim Marrs, has now been republished by Global Research under the title, "JFK Assassination. How 'Patsies are Framed': The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald." I suggest you take the time to read it and think about it. As a former commissioned officer in the Marine Corp with a thirty- five-year career teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, I cannot imagine a greater abuse of position than this. Do you suppose this illustrates "Dartmouth in the nation's service"? In utter dismay, Jim James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. McKnight Professor Emeritus University of Minnesota Duluth http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ Editor, Assassination Science (1998) Editor, Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000) Editor, Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003) 800 Violet Lane Oregon, WI 53575 Quoting "Carol L. Folt" <Carol.L.Folt@dartmouth.edu>: Dear Professor Fetzer: President Kim has referred to me your e-mail of December 10, 2009 concerning Professor Hany Farid’s analysis of a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald. As with most colleges and universities, Dartmouth College does not take institutional responsibility for the scholarly activities of individual faculty members. While we have no reason to doubt the validity of Professor Farid’s research, he alone is responsible for it. If one scholar takes issue with another’s research methods or conclusions, the traditional vehicle to express such concerns is through the open scholarly literature. Sincerely, Carol L. Folt Acting Provost and Dean of Faculty Dartmouth College Thanks, Jack. Nice point. I did indeed mean "censure" and not "censor". I have now written (twice) the President of Dartmouth about this disgrace: Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:57:36 -0600 [12/10/2009 11:57:36 AM CST] From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu To: President's.Office@Dartmouth.edu Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco Jim Yong Kim, M.D., Ph.D. Dartmouth College Office of the President 207 Parkhurst Hall Hanover, NH 03755 Dear President Kim, Having written to you about a matter of importance in relation to the reputation and integrity of the institution over which you preside, I have been acutely disappointed to have received no acknowledgment of my letter, in which I offered a modest proposal for redeeming what can be redeemed of Dartmouth's involvement in this photographic fiasco. I have now co-authored an article about it with Jim Marrs, author of CROSSFIRE (1989), one of the principal sources for the film "JFK" by Oliver Stone, which we have recently published in OpEdNews, The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco by Jim Fetzer and Jim Marrs http://www.opednews.com/articles/THE-DARTM...091116-941.html where a google search on the title discloses a certain degree of interest, FIRST PAGE: 1. OpEdNews - Article: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO A Dartmouth computer scientist, Hany Farid, claims that it is 'extremely unlikely' that backyard photographs of accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald are fake ... www.opednews.com/.../THE-DARTMOUTH-JFK-PHOTO-FI-by-Jim-Fetzer-091116-941.html - Cached 2. OpEdNews - Page 7 of Article: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Page 7 of Article: Article: A Dartmouth computer scientist, Hany Farid, claims that it is 'extremely unlikely' that backyard photographs of accused assassin ... www.opednews.com/.../THE-DARTMOUTH-JFK-PHOTO-FI-by-Jim-Fetzer-091116-941.html - Cached Show more results from www.opednews.com 3. THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO BY DR. JAMES FETZER, WITH COMMENTS ... Nov 23, 2009 ... The Internet has buzzed with news that "the infamous backyard photos" of Lee Harvey Oswald have been found to be "authentic" through digital ... esciencenews.com/.../the.dartmouth.jfk.photo.fiasco.by.dr.james.fetzer.with.comments - Cached 4. THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO - The Education Forum 15 posts - 7 authors - Last post: Nov 20 THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Author: Jim Fetzer and Jim Marrs Description: A Dartmouth computer scientist, Hany Farid, claims that it is ... educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15017 - Cached 5. CONSPIRACY SCOPE: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Nov 20, 2009 ... Anti-Illuminati Blog · THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO · Internet Under Siege · CIA's "Great Pretense" Exposed in State-Secrets Fr.. ... conspiracyscope.blogspot.com/.../dartmouth-jfk-photo-fiasco.html - Cached 6. THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Author: Jim Fetzer and Jim Marrs ... 19 posts - 5 authors - Last post: Nov 20 Article : THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO > > Author: Jim Fetzer and Jim Marrs. Stop right there IT'S A HOAX ! 200% SURE FIRE ! ... groups.google.com/group/alt...jfk/browse.../48fbc686b1e9da2c?lnk... - Cached 7. Andy Plesser: Iconic Lee Harvey Oswald Photo is no Fake, Dartmouth ... Nov 5, 2009 ... THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Jim Fetzer and Jim Marrs Description: A Dartmouth computer scientist, Hany Farid, claims that it is ... www.huffingtonpost.com/.../iconic-lee-harvey-oswald_b_346990.html - Cached 8. American Historical Association Blog: Remembering JFK ? November ... Click on 'search' at Op Ed News and type in: "The Dartmouth JFK Photo Fiasco" by Dr. Fetzer and Jim Marrs. You'll see why many researchers are concerned ... blog.historians.org/resources/.../remembering-jfk--november-22-1963 - Cached 9. Iconic Lee Harvey Oswald Photo Authentic, Says Forensics Expert "THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO by Dr. James Fetzer, Jim Marrs, et al: http://www.opednews.com/articles/THE-DARTM...FI-by-Jim-Fetze. ... www.scientificblogging.com/.../iconic_lee_harvey_oswald_photo_authentic_says_forensics_expert - Cached 10. Open Discussion - 9/11 Scholars Forum The latest installment of HS that's appeared on the JFK front is from a ... Jim Marrs and I published "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco" at OpEdNews, ... 911scholars.ning.com/forum/topics/open.../showLastReply - Cached SECOND PAGE: 1. Rosalee Grable - FriendFeed OpEdNews - Page 4 of Article: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO ... OpEdNews - Page 4 of Article: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO ... friendfeed.com/webfairy - Cached - Similar 2. Digg Photo News ? 69th Edition « Photo News From Digg.com ... Nov 18, 2009 ... THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO A Dartmouth computer scientist, Hany Farid, claims that it is ?extremely unlikely? that backyard photographs ... www.fastcashphoto.com/2009/11/digg-photo-news-69th-edition/ - Cached 3. Lee Harvey Oswald: a Modern, Updated Biography Nov 20, 2009 ... JFK Kennedy Assassin 1963 marrs lee harvey oswald jack ruby warren ... of issues listed: viz Op Ed News: THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO URL= ... www.scribd.com/.../Lee-Harvey-Oswald-a-Modern-Updated-Biography - Cached 4. Lee harvey oswald - surchur Dartmouth College digital forensics expert Hany Farid built a 3-D model of Oswald's .... THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO Category: Political News Diggs: 1 ... surchur.com/all/lee+harvey+oswald - Cached 5. Sign Language On A Mobile Phone Aug 21, 2008 ... "THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO by Dr. James Fetzer, Jim Marrs, et al: http://www.opednews.com/articles/THE..." "While the response does not ... www.scientificblogging.com/.../sign_language_on_a_mobile_phone - Cached 6. CONSPIRACY SCOPE: Charles Manson and the Crushing of the Counter ... Oct 29, 2009 ... Anti-Illuminati Blog · THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO · Internet Under Siege · CIA's "Great Pretense" Exposed in State-Secrets Fr.. ... conspiracyscope.blogspot.com/.../charles-manson-and-crushing-of-counter.html - Cached 7. Canadian diplomat alleges troops in Afghanistan were complicit ... Nov 20, 2009 ... The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco<http://www.opednews.com/articles/THE-DARTMOUTH-JFK-PHOTO-FI-by-Jim-Fet zer-091116-941.html> By Jim Fetzer, ... groups.google.com/group/misc.activism.../861572d855742d23 - Cached 8. Professor finds that iconic Oswald photo was not faked (w/ Video) Nov 5, 2009 ... (PhysOrg.com) -- Dartmouth Computer Scientist Hany Farid has new evidence regarding a ... The fact that we supported the fiasco is what he was talking about. ... Rumour had it that JFK's pappy was involved with ... www.physorg.com/news176643721.html - Cached 9. Jim Marr - United Kingdom - Email, Address, Phone number ... jamesfetzer: The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco. 123people refers to websites and blogs which mention or quote Jim Marr. If you are Jim Marr and don't want to ... www.123people.co.uk/s/jim+marr 10. News & Additions to the Whale [2009 Nov] THE DARTMOUTH JFK-PHOTO FIASCO By Jim Fetzer · [2009 Dec] AIDS Day Scam: Doc Exposes Vaccine Cult Conspiracy by MIKE ADAMS ... www.whale.to/additions.html - Cached - Similar There is more, but I presume you get the idea. This has cast a considerable cloud over the reputation of the institution you head. A new study, moreover, demonstrates that even Farid's research on the shadow was not properly done: Brane Space: Hany Farid's Pixelated Illusions http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2009/11/ha...-illusions.html Now it is my understanding from this article that Hany Farid receives funding from the FBI, which misled the nation--at the direction of J. Edgar Hoover--about the state of evidence in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It is my suspicion that the FBI suggested to Hany Farid that he should publish a piece on the "backyard photographs" in furtherance of its efforts to confuse the public regarding what is known about the true causes of the death of JFK. As the president of an institution I have long admired, I hereby request that: (a) you formally acknowledge the receipt of this and my previous letter to you; and, ( advise me as to what concrete steps you intend to take to straighten it out. As a graduate of Princeton '62, I would note that this, alas!, is not what most would regard as an appropriate example of "Dartmouth in the nation's service". With appreciation, Jim James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. McKnight Professor Emeritus University of Minnesota Duluth http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ 800 Violet Lane Oregon, WI 53575 Quoting jfetzer@d.umn.edu: Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:47:48 -0600 [11/08/2009 09:47:48 AM CST] From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu To: President's.Office@Dartmouth.edu Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: About Hany Farid: A Modest Proposal . . . Jim Yong Kim, M.D., Ph.D. Dartmouth College Office of the President 207 Parkhurst Hall Hanover, NH 03755 Dear President Kim, As you are no doubt aware, a member of your faculty, Hany Farid, has entered into a long-standing dispute over the authenticity of photographs--know as "the Oswald backyard photographs"--related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. A summary of his claims, which are creating a sensation with some segments of the public but dismay among serious students of the photos and films, may be found at The Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/h...862.html&cp Unfortunately there are multiple photos and multiple indications that they are faked, where Farid's analysis dealt with only the shadows of one. He clearly had not taken the time to conduct a search of the literature or he would have discovered that there are at least three photographs, not just one, and that oddities about shadows are only one of many indications of fakery. Presenting only evidence favorable to your position is known as "special pleading", which I spent 35-years teaching freshmen to avoid. Even if he were right about the specific shadows on which he chose to work, that could not possibly justify the claim that the "photo" is authentic, because he did examine other shadows in the original nor the many additional features of concern to serious students of JFK. Farid has thus violated a basic canon of scientific research, which is that all the available evidence that makes a difference to a conclusion must be taken into account. Farid did a digital study of a non-digital photograph. Various features may have been obscured in the process of transformation. The chin of the figure in the "backyard photographs" is a block chin, not Oswald's chin, which was rather pointed and had a cleft. There is a clear insert line between the chin and his lower lip, and his finger tips appear to have been cut off. There are many features beyond the shadows he studied that indicate these photos were faked. This, alas!, is not the quality of research that the public expects of a member of the faculty at Dartmouth. Here is a summary addressing two of the photos--there turn out to have been at least three, as Farid could have found simply by googling "the Oswald 'backyard' photographs"--including testimony that Jack White, a legendary photo-analyst, presented to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) when it reinvestigated the case in 1977-78 but which it chose to disregard: http://www.pimall.com/nais/news/backyard.html In 1992, I organized a research group of the best qualified individuals to ever study the case, including Robert B. Livington, a world authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics; and David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., who is board-certified in radiation oncology, who would discover that the JFK autopsy X-rays have been altered and who has become the world's leading expert on his death. Our objective was to take rumor and speculation out of the case and place its study on an objective and scientific foundation. Other members of this group included Charles Crenshaw, M.D., who was present during efforts to revive JFK at Parkland Hospital and then, two days later, was responsible for the treatment of his accused assassin, Lee Oswald; Jack White, whom I have mentioned above; and John P. Costella, Ph.D., whose specialization is electromagnetism and who is the leading expert on the Zapruder home-movie in the world today. He has a tutorial about this at http://assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/. A professional philosopher of science and former Marine Corps officer, I have chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK and have published three collections of studies by experts on different aspects of the case. My books feature the research of Livingston, Mantik, Crenshaw, White, Costella and others. I maintain web sites that discuss the case at assassinationscience.com and at assassinationresearch.com, a journal for advanced study of the death of JFK that I currently co-edit with John Costella. Among my many lectures about JFK, including ones at Harvard, Yale, and Cambridge, the Cambridge lecture was peer-reviewed and published in the International Journal of the Humanities. It addresses the simple question of where JFK was hit in the back: at the base of the neck, as THE WARREN REPORT (1964) asserts, or about 5 1/2 inches below the collar? This is a simple question with vast ramifications. It is entitled, "Reasoning about Assassinations", and is also easily accessible via google. The answer to this question resolves the long-standing debate about the so-called "magic bullet" theory, on which the government's official account depends. During a conference on JFK held at the University of North Dakota, "John F. Kennedy: History, Memory, Legacy", 25-27 September 2008, I addressed what we know about the assassination and made a Powerpoint presentation to show the evidence that I was discussing. The papers from the meeting have been published as a book, which has been made available on-line for ease of access. As an indication of the seriousness of the event, the keynote speaker was Theodore Sorensen, who was JFK's most important aide. I turned my Powerpoint into my chapter, which discusses our findings in relation to the physical, medical, and photographic evidence. It can be downloaded as a pdf. http://www.und.edu/org/jfkconference/ I was introduced by John Tunheim, now a federal judge in Minneapolis, who served as the chair of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), a five-member civilian panel with the authority to declassify documents and records related to the assassination from the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, and other agencies. They succeeded in declassifying some 60,000 documents and records, where their work is discussed in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000). I feature one of the backyard photos already on the second page of my chapter, including a proof of fakery by Jack White based upon the newspapers that the figure is holding, whose dimensions are known. They show that this person is only 5'6" tall, while Oswald was 5'10" tall. If Hany Farid had conducted a search of the literature, he should have easily discovered it. My purpose in writing, however, is to suggest that Dartmouth has a unique opportunity to contribute to the public interest by resolving this issue. It would be unfortunate if the college were to have its reputation permanently tarnished by Farid's research. If you consider it appropriate, I recommend creating a panel to review his work, settle the issue, and thereby reaffirm Dartmouth's integrity. If you decide to do this, let me know if I can help. Incidentally, I should mention that, after founding the journal, MINDS AND MACHINES, which I edited for ten years, I invited Jim Moor of your Department of Philosophy to succeed me. We co-edited the journal for a year, after which Jim has been editing it on his own--and doing an exceptional job! You are welcome to ask him about me, since (although it is hard to believe) we have known each other for more than 35 years! With best wishes, Jim James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. McKnight Professor Emeritus University of Minnesota Duluth http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ 800 Violet Lane Oregon, WI 53575 Here is a nice piece discussing indications that the photo(s) are faked, where Farid's analysis dealt with only one. He clearly had not taken the time to conduct research, or he would have discovered that there are multiple indications of fakery, not just one. So even if he were right about the shadows, he would be wrong about the photo(s). Consider these: http://www.pimall.com/nais/news/backyard.html I presented a lecture on JFK that features the backyard photograph during the most recent conference on JFK held at the University of North Dakota. The papers from the meeting have been published as a book, which is now on-line for ease of access. My chapter is the last and can be downloaded as a pdf. I discuss the backyard photo already on the second page: http://www.und.edu/org/jfkconference/ Not only has a Dartmouth professor gone far beyond the scope of his competence by offering an opinion for which he has virtually no proof but, if he had only conducted a search of the literature, he would have known that many issues are involved here beyond the shadows. This is sloppy research on a topic of immense public interest. Dartmouth should censor him. Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/h...862.html&cp http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2009/11/05.htmlDartmouth Computer Scientist Hany Farid has new evidence regarding a photograph of accused John F. Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald. Farid, a pioneer in the field of digital forensics, digitally analyzed an iconic image of Oswald pictured in a backyard setting holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other. Oswald and others claimed that the incriminating photo was a fake, noting the seemingly inconsistent lighting and shadows. After analyzing the photo with modern-day forensic tools, Farid says the photo almost certainly was not altered. “If we had found evidence of photo tampering, then it would have suggested a broader plot to kill JFK,” said Farid, who is also the director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth. “Those who believe that there was a broader conspiracy can no longer point to this photo as possible evidence.” Farid added that federal officials long ago said that this image had not been tampered with, but a surprising number of skeptics still assert that there was a conspiracy. The study will appear in a forthcoming issue of the journal Perception. Farid and his team have developed a number of digital forensic tools used to determine whether digital photos have been manipulated, and his research is often used by law enforcement officials and in legal proceedings. The tools can measure statistical inconsistencies in the underlying image pixels, improbable lighting and shadow, physically impossible perspective distortion, and other artifacts introduced by photo manipulators. The play of light and shadow was fundamental in the Oswald photo analysis. “The human brain, while remarkable in many aspects, also has its weaknesses,” says Farid. “The visual system can be quite inept at making judgments regarding 3-D geometry, lighting, and shadows.” At a casual glance, the lighting and shadows in the Oswald photo appear to many to be incongruous with the outdoor lighting. To determine if this was the case, Farid constructed a 3-D model of Oswald’s head and portions of the backyard scene, from which he was able to determine that a single light source, the sun, could explain all of the shadows in the photo. “It is highly improbable that anyone could have created such a perfect forgery with the technology available in 1963,” said Farid. With no evidence of tampering, he concluded that the incriminating photo was authentic. ”As our digital forensic tools become more sophisticated, we increasingly have the ability to apply them to historic photos in an attempt to resolve some long-standing mysteries,” said Farid. Jim...I think you meant censure, not censor. We are all for free speech, no matter how dumb it is. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of its professors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of itsprofessors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack And those professors who don't tow the 'party' line and dare to speak out against the societal mythology are all too often somehow removed, denied tenure, or muzzled - the list is too long to even begin it here. Jack's point is well taken. Speak out against the prevailing propaganda and your university will probably make you or the press state that 'this professor speaks on his or her own, and doesn't represent the views of the university and its board of whatever....' Quite ironic that Fetzer a retired professor with controversial views calls for a university to interfere with the academic freedom or a professor whose conclusions he objects. Doubly ironic that in response Peter posts his agreement but complains about a lack of academic freedom. So Peter can you name some of the profs who were "removed, denied tenure, or muzzled" because of their views? Saying "the list is too long to even begin it here" is a cop out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 17, 2009 Author Share Posted December 17, 2009 Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of itsprofessors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack And those professors who don't tow the 'party' line and dare to speak out against the societal mythology are all too often somehow removed, denied tenure, or muzzled - the list is too long to even begin it here. Jack's point is well taken. Speak out against the prevailing propaganda and your university will probably make you or the press state that 'this professor speaks on his or her own, and doesn't represent the views of the university and its board of whatever....' Quite ironic that Fetzer a retired professor with controversial views calls for a university to interfere with the academic freedom or a professor whose conclusions he objects. Doubly ironic that in response Peter posts his agreement but complains about a lack of academic freedom. So Peter can you name some of the profs who were "removed, denied tenure, or muzzled" because of their views? Saying "the list is too long to even begin it here" is a cop out. Yea, I'm sure others have used the same tactic against Prof. Fetzer, and maybe John Belaquavelva can get him investigated, arrested and fired? BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) Bill, apart from kibitzing the work of others and writing reviews about books that are over your head, what else have you ever contributed to understanding the assassination of JFK? Since you like to insult me, in "Critical Thinking about Conspiracy Theories", I have challenged you to explain exactly what I have wrong. I hereby expand the challenge to include "What Happened to JFK--and Why it Matters Today". You appear to be no more than an ignorant, pompous ass. Prove me wrong! Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of itsprofessors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack And those professors who don't tow the 'party' line and dare to speak out against the societal mythology are all too often somehow removed, denied tenure, or muzzled - the list is too long to even begin it here. Jack's point is well taken. Speak out against the prevailing propaganda and your university will probably make you or the press state that 'this professor speaks on his or her own, and doesn't represent the views of the university and its board of whatever....' Quite ironic that Fetzer a retired professor with controversial views calls for a university to interfere with the academic freedom or a professor whose conclusions he objects. Doubly ironic that in response Peter posts his agreement but complains about a lack of academic freedom. So Peter can you name some of the profs who were "removed, denied tenure, or muzzled" because of their views? Saying "the list is too long to even begin it here" is a cop out. Yea, I'm sure others have used the same tactic against Prof. Fetzer, and maybe John Belaquavelva can get him investigated, arrested and fired? BK Edited December 17, 2009 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Well, in relation to 9/11 research, for example, Judy Wood was denied tenure, Kevin Barrett was denied appointments, and Steve Jones was removed from the classroom, where there is no reasonable alternative explanation than that they were punished for their research on 9/11. Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of itsprofessors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack And those professors who don't tow the 'party' line and dare to speak out against the societal mythology are all too often somehow removed, denied tenure, or muzzled - the list is too long to even begin it here. Jack's point is well taken. Speak out against the prevailing propaganda and your university will probably make you or the press state that 'this professor speaks on his or her own, and doesn't represent the views of the university and its board of whatever....' Quite ironic that Fetzer a retired professor with controversial views calls for a university to interfere with the academic freedom or a professor whose conclusions he objects. Doubly ironic that in response Peter posts his agreement but complains about a lack of academic freedom. So Peter can you name some of the profs who were "removed, denied tenure, or muzzled" because of their views? Saying "the list is too long to even begin it here" is a cop out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Jack, I liked your suggestion so much that I sent this as an addendum: Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:52:52 -0600 [11:52:52 AM CST] From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu To: "Carol L. Folt" <Carol.L.Folt@dartmouth.edu> Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: Photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald Dean Folt, As an addendum, without out the imprimatur of Dartmouth, no one would have taken this study seriously. Consider the cover story in The Huffington Post, "Hany Farid, Dartmouth Scientist, Says Controversial Oswald Rifle Photo Real", http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/h...e_n_347862.html Suppose the title has been, "Hany Farid Says Controversial Oswald Rifle Photo Real"? No media outlet in the world would have used the story unless backed by the school's reputation! Dartmouth's standing in the world is a function of its reputation. If your faculty are willing to do the bidding of the FBI, which is what appears to be the case here, then that will rapidly corrode it. Rather like that of a hooker, Dartmouth's reputation is becoming tattered and torn. In anguish, Jim Quoting jfetzer@d.umn.edu: [Hide Quoted Text] Carol L. Folt Acting Provost and Dean of Faculty Dartmouth College Dean Folt, How can you assert, "we have no reason to doubt the validity of Professor Farid's research", when I have sent you proof that he has committed enormous blunders and either did not even conduct a literature search or presented false findings in spite of it? I am most interested in who bears responsibility for the quality of research at Dartmouth College. Since there could hardly be a more blatant case of corruption, who enforces scholarly standards? I have supposed that this duty fell to you. If not you, then who? "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasaco", a study I co-authored with Jim Marrs, has now been republished by Global Research under the title, "JFK Assassination. How 'Patsies are Framed': The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald." I suggest you take the time to read it and think about it. As a former commissioned officer in the Marine Corp with a thirty- five-year career teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, I cannot imagine a greater abuse of position than this. Do you suppose this illustrates "Dartmouth in the nation's service"? In utter dismay, Jim James H. Fetzer, Ph.D. McKnight Professor Emeritus University of Minnesota Duluth http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ Editor, Assassination Science (1998) Editor, Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000) Editor, Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003) 800 Violet Lane Oregon, WI 53575 Quoting "Carol L. Folt" <Carol.L.Folt@dartmouth.edu>: Dear Professor Fetzer: President Kim has referred to me your e-mail of December 10, 2009 concerning Professor Hany Farid’s analysis of a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald. As with most colleges and universities, Dartmouth College does not take institutional responsibility for the scholarly activities of individual faculty members. While we have no reason to doubt the validity of Professor Farid’s research, he alone is responsible for it. If one scholar takes issue with another’s research methods or conclusions, the traditional vehicle to express such concerns is through the open scholarly literature. Sincerely, Carol L. Folt Acting Provost and Dean of Faculty Dartmouth College Jim...since the reply to you she said Dartmouth had no responsibility for the actions of itsprofessors...you should remind her that the imprimatur of the school was already on the Farid study, since he was identified as a Dartmouth professor, backing him with the college's reputation. Indeed, all headlines said DARTMOUTH PROFESSOR SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED. Without this use of the school prestige, what newspapers would have headlined FARID SAYS LHO PHOTOS NOT FAKED...? No media outlet would have used the story unless backed by the school reputation! Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Well, in relation to 9/11 research, for example, Judy Wood was denied tenure, Lots of profs get denied tenure in some schools/departments less than half make it. She wasnot popular with her students and according to a Clemson student on another forum her area of specialty (dental fillings) didn't fit well with the rest of the dept. No evidence has been presented she was denied tenure because of her views over 9/11 rate your professors Kevin Barrett was denied appointments, During the controversy over his views UW stood by him, he left then cried foul when he couldn't get his old class back. He claims a less qualified candidate was hired for another position he applied for at another campus but provided no evidence to support his claim. Afterbeing arrested for being his own son he is unlikely to get a teaching appointment anywhere.Since he has calledfor the execution of Amy Goodman and various other journalists he hardly qualifies as a free speech martyr and Steve Jones was removed from the classroom, This is the only case I know of, he was allowed to keep his office and got severence and a full pension no reasonable alternative explanation than that they were punished for their research on 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 (edited) Len, once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Judy had more than 60 peer-reviewed publications when she was denied. During his career, Steve has had less than half that number, yet he was full professor and she assistant. I know how you love to use words to make stuff up, but these were bona-fide cases. The Barrett case was especially striking, because he was targeted for removal from his appointment at the University of Wisconsin specifically for discussing 9/11 in the classroom. He was attacked by the Governor and prominent members of the state legislature, in case you missed it! It was huge news. This is why I find you so disgusting: You act as though you were an expert, even when all the evidence is against you! Like the Energizer Bunny, you come back, again and again, spouting your crap! The Jones case was also spectacular and received a lot of coverage in the newspapers. It, too, was centered on his research on 9/11. Perhaps, by now, everyone knows that you are a fraud. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry, but your abuse of logic and of evidence is repulsive. Well, in relation to 9/11 research, for example, Judy Wood was denied tenure, Lots of profs get denied tenure in some schools/departments less than half make it. She wasnot popular with her students and according to a Clemson student on another forum her area of specialty (dental fillings) didn't fit well with the rest of the dept. No evidence has been presented she was denied tenure because of her views over 9/11 rate your professors Kevin Barrett was denied appointments, During the controversy over his views UW stood by him, he left then cried foul when he couldn't get his old class back. He claims a less qualified candidate was hired for another position he applied for at another campus but provided no evidence to support his claim. Afterbeing arrested for being his own son he is unlikely to get a teaching appointment anywhere.Since he has calledfor the execution of Amy Goodman and various other journalists he hardly qualifies as a free speech martyr and Steve Jones was removed from the classroom, This is the only case I know of, he was allowed to keep his office and got severence and a full pension no reasonable alternative explanation than that they were punished for their research on 9/11. Edited December 18, 2009 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Len, once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Judy had more than 60 peer-reviewed publications when she was denied. During his career, Steve has had less than half that number, yet he was full professor and she assistant. 60 papers are you sure about that perhaps you can post a list. I know Google Scholar is incomplete but I was only able to find 4 papers by her there and 2 were were conference papers and her own website only lists 22 about half of which were conference papers as well and almost half from when she was in grad school. The last of these was in 2004,2years before she was denied tenure. How many profs can you cite who got tenure despite not publishing anything for two years before their review? http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&am...o=&as_vis=0 http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/a/bio/Wood_Bio.html And her students did not like her http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRating...5285&page=1 The Barrett case was especially striking, because he was targeted for removal from his appointment at the University of Wisconsin specifically for discussing 9/11 in the classroom. He was attacked by the Governor and prominent members of the state legislature, in case you missed it! It was huge news. Yes but the school stood by him, they did NOT fiire him, then he walked away and wined when he didn't get his old job back. How many adjuncts can you cite who after teaching 1 class for 1 semester quit then get there jobs back at top notch schools like UW? The Jones case was also spectacular and received a lot of coverage in the newspapers. It, too, was centered on his research on 9/11. Yes it was AFAIk the only confirmed caseof somone being fired for being a truther Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) Len, what is your background related to academia? Having spent 35 years as a college and university professor, I have my doubts that you know what you are talking about. Take the case of Kevin Barrett. He was hired to teach a course on Islam and spent one week on 9/11, explaining both the official account and its alternatives. For that, he was pilloried, principally by GOP politicians, especially one Rep. Steven Nass, who savaged him and insisted that he be fired. Even the governor climbed on the bandwagon. He did not "quit" as you claim, but was not rehired to teach the course again. Public nstitutions like UW are very much dependent upon the good will of their state legislatures and take steps to remain in their good graces. I was here and lived through it. You have no idea how bad it was. After that, he was blackballed for several positions for which he was eminently qualified, such as one in Islamic studies at the Whitewater Campus of the UW system. There were three candidates, of whom he is the only only who speaks French and Arabic and is a convert to Islam. Moreover, his background in this area is more extensive. When the other two took positions elsewhere, even though he was the right candidate for the job, the campus closed the search and left the position unfilled. This is so extraordinary that there really is no reasonable alternative explanation. The school, moreover, is in the district represented by Nass! If you had only conducted a google search on "Kevin Barrett and Steve Nass", for example, you would have known better. But, in your characteristic selective fashion, you didn't bother. Here's some of what's there. I suggest you study this before you make further pronouncements that are easily refuted. But then, that's your style! It's time for you to give it a rest. Search Results Results include your SearchWiki notes for Kevin Barrett and Steve Nass. Share these notes 1. University of Wisconsin-Madison: The Kevin Barrett case at UW-Madison Documents from State Rep. Steve Nass. Legislative resolution condemning Kevin Barrett PDF, July 12; Letter to Gov. Jim Doyle PDF, July 24 ... www.news.wisc.edu/barrettissue/ - Cached - Similar - 2. Nass still seeking Barrett's removal. - WI State Journal (Madison ... Steve Nass of Whitewater came after they...lecture on Sunday by Kevin Barrett titled 9/11: Folklore and Fact. Barrett said the British Broadcasting...who ... www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-148156324.html - Cached - 3. BARRETT, NASS OUGHT TO GIVE IT A REST.(LOCAL)(Column) - Wisconsin ... Steve Nass of Whitewater came after they...lecture on Sunday by Kevin Barrett titled 9/11: Folklore and Fact. Barrett said the British Broadcasting...who ... www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-148888365.html - Cached - 4. Barrett to Confront Steve Nass, Announce Morocco "Hijacker" Search ... Kevin Barrett has never met his would-be nemesis, Steve Nass, in person. But that may change this morning outside Nass's office, Rm. 12, at the Wisconsin ... www.911blogger.com/node/8304 - Cached - 5. Kevin Barett vs the fury of ignorance [building a Pyramid] With lawmakers at the Capitol to act on state employee contracts, Representative Steve Nass is pushing a resolution on Kevin Barrett. ... pyramid.blog-city.com/kevin_barett_vs_the_fury_of_ignorance.htm - Cached - Similar - 6. 9-11 Nutcase to Visit UWO [on Kevin Barrett's visit to Univ ... If you don't know who Kevin Barrett is I'm surprised that you bothered to pick up this ... In July of 2006, Assembly Representative Steve Nass of Whitewater ... www.campus-watch.org/article/id/3096 - Cached - 7. Steve Nass vs. the UW - Isthmus | The Daily Page Sep 27, 2007 ... Steve Nass is a remarkably quiet man. ... And last year, Nass pressured UW-Madison to fire Kevin Barrett, an instructor on Islam who ... www.thedailypage.com/isthmus/article.php?article=8991 - Cached - Similar - 8. 9/11 INSIDE JOB EXPLAINED....Dr. Kevin Barrett Jul 21, 2006 ... Dr. Kevin Barrett, U.W.-Madison lecturer who has received ... Here is Barrett's letter to Steve Nass challenging him to a debate, ... www.apfn.net/Messageboard/07-21-06/discussion.cgi.95.html - Cached - 9. Kevin Barrett 9/11 Truth CV Kevin Barrett's TRUTHJIHAD.COM. "You cannot fool all the people all the time" — Abraham ... for the smear campaign was doltish Wisconsin State Assemblyman Steve Nass, .... With Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan. Boulder, Colorado 10/29/2006, ... www.truthjihad.com/cv.htm - Cached - Similar - 10. Amazon.com: Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie ... Pearl Harbor, Selected Screeds, David Griffin, Bin Laden, Truth Jihadi, World Trade Center, Commission Report, Kevin Barrett, Steve Nass, David Ray Griffin, ... www.amazon.com › ... › Leaders & Notable People › Political - Cached - Similar - Len, once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Judy had more than 60 peer-reviewed publications when she was denied. During his career, Steve has had less than half that number, yet he was full professor and she assistant. 60 papers are you sure about that perhaps you can post a list. I know Google Scholar is incomplete but I was only able to find 4 papers by her there and 2 were were conference papers and her own website only lists 22 about half of which were conference papers as well and almost half from when she was in grad school. The last of these was in 2004,2years before she was denied tenure. How many profs can you cite who got tenure despite not publishing anything for two years before their review? http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&am...o=&as_vis=0 http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/a/bio/Wood_Bio.html And her students did not like her http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRating...5285&page=1 The Barrett case was especially striking, because he was targeted for removal from his appointment at the University of Wisconsin specifically for discussing 9/11 in the classroom. He was attacked by the Governor and prominent members of the state legislature, in case you missed it! It was huge news. Yes but the school stood by him, they did NOT fiire him, then he walked away and wined when he didn't get his old job back. How many adjuncts can you cite who after teaching 1 class for 1 semester quit then get there jobs back at top notch schools like UW? The Jones case was also spectacular and received a lot of coverage in the newspapers. It, too, was centered on his research on 9/11. Yes it was AFAIk the only confirmed caseof somone being fired for being a truther Edited December 18, 2009 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 You got one thing right in your recent posts; we’ve been debating for several years. What never changes is that you continuously get your facts wrong. He left UW for personal reasons. I forgot that when Barrett reapplied for a class at UW it was for a class he wasn’t really qualified to teach. It could be argued he abused academic freedom,I don’t like Arthur Butz but he keeps his views about the Holocaust out of his electrical engineering classes Barrett taught his 9/11 theories in a class about Islamic “Religion and Culture". As for what happened at the Whitewater campus so far e've only gotten his spin on it Barrett calls it quits for now Monday, November 13, 2006 12:00 a.m With the end of the semester approaching, University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett said he has opted not to apply to teach at UW next semester. Barrett said his decision has nothing do with the adversity that has recently surrounded his UW teaching career. Barrett's publicized views that the U.S. government orchestrated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, have caused statewide controversy about the lecturer and his methods since this summer. Barrett — who has a semester-long contract teaching the course "Islam: Religion and Culture" — said he would "absolutely" apply to teach the course in the spring semester, but the class is only available in the fall. […] Barrett said he could not teach in the spring semester because of conflicting plans. "I couldn't accept something even if they offered, which I doubt they will," Barrett said. UW professor of political science and president of the Committee of Academic Freedom and Rights, Donald Downs, said he was surprised that Barrett will not be returning in spring 2007 and is curious to see what will happen if Barrett does apply for a teaching position in fall 2007. [...] http://badgerherald.com/news/2006/11/13/ba...alls_it_qui.php University denies Barrett position By Pedro Oliveira Jr. Monday, August 6, 2007 12:00 a.m. Former University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett was denied a fall teaching position he had applied for in the English department, university officials confirmed in July. Barrett, who brought a great deal of scrutiny to UW last year for his outspoken defense of a Sept. 11 conspiracy theory, wanted to teach a 300-level English course on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales but was not hired because the other candidates were more qualified, according to UW spokesperson Brian Mattmiller. "The UW-Madison English department received three applications to teach the fall 2007 course on Chaucer. The person who was ultimately chosen … was the best qualified and most experienced candidate," Mattmiller said. The hired candidate, teaching assistant Brian O'Camb, is a specialist in medieval-era British literature and has extensive experience teaching for the UW-Madison English department. Barrett has a doctorate in Arabic literature and a master's degree in English literature. […] http://badgerherald.com/news/2007/08/06/un...y_denies_ba.php Since your Holocaust denying buddy (Barrett not Butz) has at various times called for Amy Goodman, Fox News employees, the producers of [the movie] United 93, the authors of the State department pages about 911 and “anybody who has drawn a paycheck from the major mainstream journalistic outlets in the past should be up on the scaffold for the crimes of high treason and crimes against humanity.” He’s not much of a free speech martyr. And since he made most of these calls for people whose views he doesn’t like to killed before he was turned down for those teaching post he gave the schools good reason not to hire him. http://www.oilempire.us/mujca.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) My only advantage compared to you is that I know Kevin personally, have made a dozen or more presentations on 9/11 with him, co-hosted an RBN radio show, "The Dynamic Duo", with him for a year and a half, and have lived through the events you only know from a distance and by interpretation. When it comes to sins of omission, you are an expert. Kevin may have not applied at the University of Wisconsin-Madison for one of these jobs, but he did apply at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater--and it played out exactly as I have described. You are a slipper fish, Len, a clever manipulator who places rhetoric ahead of truth, which is the classic distinction between Sophistry and Philosophy. One is the art of persuasion, the other a search for truth. I suppose everyone on this forum knows you are one and not the other. You got one thing right in your recent posts; we’ve been debating for several years. What never changes is that you continuously get your facts wrong. He left UW for personal reasons. I forgot that when Barrett reapplied for a class at UW it was for a class he wasn’t really qualified to teach. It could be argued he abused academic freedom,I don’t like Arthur Butz but he keeps his views about the Holocaust out of his electrical engineering classes Barrett taught his 9/11 theories in a class about Islamic “Religion and Culture". As for what happened at the Whitewater campus so far e've only gotten his spin on itBarrett calls it quits for now Monday, November 13, 2006 12:00 a.m With the end of the semester approaching, University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett said he has opted not to apply to teach at UW next semester. Barrett said his decision has nothing do with the adversity that has recently surrounded his UW teaching career. Barrett's publicized views that the U.S. government orchestrated the events of Sept. 11, 2001, have caused statewide controversy about the lecturer and his methods since this summer. Barrett — who has a semester-long contract teaching the course "Islam: Religion and Culture" — said he would "absolutely" apply to teach the course in the spring semester, but the class is only available in the fall. […] Barrett said he could not teach in the spring semester because of conflicting plans. "I couldn't accept something even if they offered, which I doubt they will," Barrett said. UW professor of political science and president of the Committee of Academic Freedom and Rights, Donald Downs, said he was surprised that Barrett will not be returning in spring 2007 and is curious to see what will happen if Barrett does apply for a teaching position in fall 2007. [...] http://badgerherald.com/news/2006/11/13/ba...alls_it_qui.php University denies Barrett position By Pedro Oliveira Jr. Monday, August 6, 2007 12:00 a.m. Former University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett was denied a fall teaching position he had applied for in the English department, university officials confirmed in July. Barrett, who brought a great deal of scrutiny to UW last year for his outspoken defense of a Sept. 11 conspiracy theory, wanted to teach a 300-level English course on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales but was not hired because the other candidates were more qualified, according to UW spokesperson Brian Mattmiller. "The UW-Madison English department received three applications to teach the fall 2007 course on Chaucer. The person who was ultimately chosen … was the best qualified and most experienced candidate," Mattmiller said. The hired candidate, teaching assistant Brian O'Camb, is a specialist in medieval-era British literature and has extensive experience teaching for the UW-Madison English department. Barrett has a doctorate in Arabic literature and a master's degree in English literature. […] http://badgerherald.com/news/2007/08/06/un...y_denies_ba.php Since your Holocaust denying buddy (Barrett not Butz) has at various times called for Amy Goodman, Fox News employees, the producers of [the movie] United 93, the authors of the State department pages about 911 and “anybody who has drawn a paycheck from the major mainstream journalistic outlets in the past should be up on the scaffold for the crimes of high treason and crimes against humanity.” He’s not much of a free speech martyr. And since he made most of these calls for people whose views he doesn’t like to killed before he was turned down for those teaching post he gave the schools good reason not to hire him. http://www.oilempire.us/mujca.html Edited December 18, 2009 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Frantz Toussay Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 (edited) FrantzI'm not sure whether you are a prankster or a bit eccentric but your studies look more like mold samples or bad computer art than anything else and are absolutely useless as tools to understanding the assassination. Len Len, I am neither one nor the other. Infra red pictures and films also look very different from usual pix and film, and they nevertheless contain very pertinent information used daily by law agencies, armed forces, etc.... Same goes for X-rays,which don't represent the "reality" of what we see with our own eyes, but do contain very pertinent and useful information. So don't let the appearance of the images bother you, you should concentrate on the information contained within. You should, I think, refrain from forming a definitive opinion without having tested the methodology I described, or without examining the material I proposed to make available. As explained, I posted on purpose a result obtained on the Moorman pix (Relman Morin version) to show the type of enhancement that can be achieved. The image, showing the back head wound, is not controversial because it shows no possible shooters or accomplices, so you should be able to see very clearly the tremendous information gain derived from the process I use, just by comparing what I posted to your best version of Moorman. Do this, and let me know if you still think the process I described has no value.... I am posting a different crop ,of man n°1 of the Fence team: again, raw results, no retouching. The colors are not manually added... If you look carefully you will notice that the man is wearing glasses, and that you can actually see the part where the temple piece attaches to the glass frame. You will probably also notice the expression on the man's face as JFK's head explodes... That's what I mean when I say that the enhancement obtained is intriguing. Frantz, two things, firstly, just what am I supposed to be seeing here? and secondly, unless John or Andy have given you permission not to, could you please post a photo of youself as an Avitar, its Forum rules. if you are unsure how to do this PM me. ..hi I have contacted Peter who proposed to help me with it...should be done shortly... I am posting a roughly detoured of the image of interest. I have tried to indicate the contour of the picket fence top, but my drawing skills are limited, as you can see... What you are looking at are the head (the man is wearing a military / police type of cap, clearly visible in Z 472), neck, shoulders and upper torso of a man in dark clothing behind the fence. The white, clergyman-like collar is sunlight bouncing off the white fabric of the shirt collar Edited December 19, 2009 by Frantz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Frantz Toussay Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 FrantzI'm not sure whether you are a prankster or a bit eccentric but your studies look more like mold samples or bad computer art than anything else and are absolutely useless as tools to understanding the assassination. Len Len, I am neither one nor the other. Infra red pictures and films also look very different from usual pix and film, and they nevertheless contain very pertinent information used daily by law agencies, armed forces, etc.... Same goes for X-rays,which don't represent the "reality" of what we see with our own eyes, but do contain very pertinent and useful information. Except that useful X-rays and infra-red images are prepared and interpreted by trained people following a set methodology you on the other hand admit that you amateur playing around with low level consumer software and don't really know what you are doing. "So don't let the appearance of the images bother you, you should concentrate on the information contained within." Therein lies the problem there isn't any useful info "You should, I think, refrain from forming a definitive opinion without having tested the methodology I described" You meaning playing around with DP images beyond recognition until I imagine I've conjured up some useful info,its like an interactive Rorschach test "...or without examining the material I proposed to make available." That's a novel way to dispel criticism, tell your critics to "refrain from forming a definitive opinion" till they've reviewed material you haven't posted yet As explained, I posted on purpose a result obtained on the Moorman pix (Relman Morin version) to show the type of enhancement that can be achieved.The image, showing the back head wound, is not controversial because it shows no possible shooters or accomplices, so you should be able to see very clearly the tremendous information gain derived from the process I use, just by comparing what I posted to your best version of Moorman. Do this, and let me know if you still think the process I described has no value.... I am posting a different crop ,of man n°1 of the Fence team: again, raw results, no retouching. The colors are not manually added... If you look carefully you will notice that the man is wearing glasses, and that you can actually see the part where the temple piece attaches to the glass frame. You will probably also notice the expression on the man's face as JFK's head explodes... That's what I mean when I say that the enhancement obtained is intriguing. Sorry the value of your method seems to existonly in your imagination My friend, I suggest you read more carefully what I posted: *I explained in details the reasoning behind the methodology (basically, that by viewing simulteanously N numbers of different duplicate of the same image processed as transparencies, you would have acces to extra information not visible to the naked eye on the original image), and gave a step by step of the process. What I cannot explain is the scientific mechanism behind it, which is as you may be aware something totally different. *you don't have to be a specialist to get useful infomation information from infra red or x-ray pictures, as you claim: all you have to do is simply adjust your mindset to "acknowledge" the image and then interpret it as a valid source of information (we see with our brain, not our eyes). You've probably seen the footage of the Apache copter shooting Iraqis, and did not have the slightest need of a specialist to interpret them for you... And you don't have to be a doctor get at least 80% of the valuable information from an x-ray * I am not playing around with a computer: I described precisely what I do,i.e generating different duplicates of an image , then viewing them all together at the same time *I explain that I work with big files, that there is apparently a limit to what can be posted here, and I proposed to send material to anyone interested: I don't think you requested anything from me that I am aware of *I already reply to you re the Rorschach line of argument. I have posted a result obtained on the rear headwound from Moorman: I have suggested twice already that, to test the validity of the enhancement process without the encumbrance of controversial images being present or not, you compare this post to yr best version of the same area from the same picture. This is a very simple thing to do, and could demonstate you are right if there is no difference of information content between my image and yours. Let me hear from you....or maybe you could post a composite of the 2 images here... *last point: I do feel your criticism could be explain more urbanely. I used to appreciate this forum precisely for the quality of exchange between people of opposing opinions... 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