Jack White Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Here's another...Jackie's fast hand movement. There are many others.Jack I don't think there's anything unusual about the speed of the hand movements. 1 mile = 5280 feet 5280 feet/ 60 minutes = 88 feet per minute 88 feet/ 60 seconds = 1.4666 feet per second 1.4666 x 12 = 17.6 inches per second Normal walking speed is 3-4 miles per hour 17.6 x 4 = 70.4 inches per second Zapruder film was timed at 18.3 frames per second 70.4/18.3 = 3.85 Thus, the hands if moving at normal walking speed would move 3.85 inches per frame. I don't know about you, but I move my hands at least as fast as I walk. These calculations are non-sequitur regarding real life actions seen in the film. Hand not seen---hand moved to top of head---hand removed from head---hand jerked to rear. Try doing all that in 3/18th of a second. Let us know the results of your TEST, instead of theoretical calculations of what might be possible. Looking forward to your test results. Please calculate the speed at which your eyes, nose, and mouth disappear from your face. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) Jack? I wonder how you would behave/move at that age when the phenomenal infusion of various chemicals to the body happens.However, thats a minor point. Her hand moves little faster in all the sequence. Her wrist twists. Jack, sometimes you're really on the ball and on others you off with the pixels... What does age and infusion of chemicals have to do with Jackie's features disappearing? With his brains blown out, how does JFK keep his arm raised to shoulder level...infusion of chemicals? Jack Edited January 14, 2010 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 I don't see any disappeared features. During the time of exposure various blurs ocured not least being during the time of exposure her head moved in three, not two dimensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hey Jack? Have you ever ( in your youth ) been in a fight where you are being pummeled but after the first hit you feel nothing as endorphines kick in, adrenalin surges and your intellect takes over and time seems to slow as endorphines are pumped out and your reactions speed up quite phenomenally ( reminds me of an account of a woman in africa running and leaping meters in the air to grab a branch and swing up with a lion close behind ) , or falling off a motorbike at high speed, or any other stupid things that youth do to go that extra mile? I can only speak from experience, but it's possible to when something like that, and I think seeing the Love of your life, the Father of you children, Mr President, blown to bits before your eyes, and reacting with a mind in full control (the shatter came later) qualifies. (If the SS were anything as sharp ( blldy drunkards, n* haters ) as she and some others like the guy who dives to the (our left) ground Kennedy would probably lived and the world would be very different today.) * I've been named a wigger, and hence given limited rights to use this term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hey Jack? Have you ever ( in your youth ) been in a fight where you are being pummeled but after the first hit you feel nothing as endorphines kick in, adrenalin surges and your intellect takes over and time seems to slow as endorphines are pumped out and your reactions speed up quite phenomenally ( reminds me of an account of a woman in africa running and leaping meters in the air to grab a branch and swing up with a lion close behind ) , or falling off a motorbike at high speed, or any other stupid things that youth do to go that extra mile? I can only speak from experience, but it's possible to when something like that, and I think seeing the Love of your life, the Father of you children, Mr President, blown to bits before your eyes, and reacting with a mind in full control (the shatter came later) qualifies. (If the SS were anything as sharp ( blldy drunkards, n* haters ) as she and some others like the guy who dives to the (our left) ground Kennedy would probably lived and the world would be very different today.)* I've been named a wigger, and hence given limited rights to use this term. Hi John, I agree her hand is not moving at some impossible speed ... particularly given the circumstances. What I do see in that sequence, is right after the frames shown, she starts to put her hand on the back of JFK's head....pulls it back and places it down more at the bottom of his neck/top of back there. Follow the sequence to 335, 337 .... I find those two slides haunting. The first time I saw the 1st generation slides at the Archives, I was struck by how clear they were, and how in those two frames, she looks to me like she is looking right at the back of JFK's head with that horrified look on her face. I think she repositioned her hand because as she was about to place it on the back of his head, she saw the big wound in the rear of his head. Just my take on it. Bests, Barb :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josiah Thompson Posted January 14, 2010 Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 Dr. Thompson,Miller help you with this image? It's blown out. Of not much use, IMHO... Can you be absolutely sure the LIFE 4x5 trannies you had access to (in 1966) were 1st generation, off the alleged in-camera original Zapruder film or, possibly off of Z-dupe 1, 2 or 3? And would you of known then the difference between the 4 films? Thanks DHealy This print was made in 1966 and used for measurements in 1967. I don't know what you mean by "blown out." At LIFE in the fall of 1966, I was told by Edward Kern and Dick Billings that the 4" by 5" transparencies we were working with were made from the camera original film. You ask, "Miller help you with this image?" That has a kind of nasty, snide tone to it that is completely unnecessary. Was Bill Miller even born in 1966? Josiah Thompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josiah Thompson Posted January 14, 2010 Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 A lot. I'll to count them. The Greer "bionic Man" head snap was debunked years ago by James Gordon. Josiah Thompson I agree. Josiah, how many photos did you take of the 1st gen copy Z film? Jack, you forgot #6 on your top 5, the William Greer "Bionic Man" head snap. To me, that's the most suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Dunno, Jack. ( With his brains blown out, how does JFK keep his arm raised to shoulder level...? ) However, the frontal lobes are primarily responsible for motor control, and given the practically demolished right front of the brain and considering the cross over of bodily function re brain, ie left controls right, there could have been some kind of brain impulses that made it so. In severe traumas this becomes complex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dugan Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 A lot. I'll to count them. The Greer "bionic Man" head snap was debunked years ago by James Gordon.Josiah Thompson What I first thought of when I noticed this head snap, was that a frame was missing from the time he started turning his head till the time when he is looking at the President, the frame in between these to frames. Would taking said frame out skip a portion of the movement and make the head turn seem super fast? What's the simplified/short version of Gordon's debunking of the Greer head snap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 A lot. I'll to count them. The Greer "bionic Man" head snap was debunked years ago by James Gordon.Josiah Thompson What I first thought of when I noticed this head snap, was that a frame was missing from the time he started turning his head till the time when he is looking at the President, the frame in between these to frames. Would taking said frame out skip a portion of the movement and make the head turn seem super fast? What's the simplified/short version of Gordon's debunking of the Greer head snap? Never trust anyone who says something has been "debunked". That is an opinion. Others may think that the proclaimed "debunking" is bunk. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 A lot. I'll to count them. The Greer "bionic Man" head snap was debunked years ago by James Gordon.Josiah Thompson What I first thought of when I noticed this head snap, was that a frame was missing from the time he started turning his head till the time when he is looking at the President, the frame in between these to frames. Would taking said frame out skip a portion of the movement and make the head turn seem super fast? What's the simplified/short version of Gordon's debunking of the Greer head snap? Never trust anyone who says something has been "debunked". That is an opinion. Others may think that the proclaimed "debunking" is bunk. Jack Jack is right There is no "debunking" court that decides if the topic is debunked or not debunked Tink saying Gordon debunked Twymans research is crazy Im going to stick with Twyman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) The COINCIDENCE THEORISTS keep talking irrelevancies regarding the Z film. How about concentrating on just these 5 things:1. Doug Horne's discovery of fakery in the film provenance at Hawkeyeworks. 2. The redaction of the limo stop on Elm. 3. The removal of the early Z frames showing the wide turn 4. The redaction of Officer Chaney speeding forward to the Curry car. 5. Moorman/Hill on the grass instead of in the street. Jack I'm missing something because I'm busy and haven't caught up with it. I understand that Chaney (4) is believed to have caught up with Chief Curry's car under the overpass. At what point(s) should Chaney's action be visible in the extant Z-film in relation to the head shot, or relative to numbered frames? Edited January 14, 2010 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Rigby Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 I'm missing something because I'm busy and haven't caught up with it. I understand (4) that Chaney is believed to have caught up with Chief Curry's car under the overpass. At what point(s) should Chaney's action be visible in Z in relation to the head shot, or relative to numbered frames in the extant Z-film? “I was riding on the right rear fender. We had proceeded west on Elm Street at approximately 15 to 20 miles per hour. We heard the first shot. I thought it was a motorcycle backfiring and, uh, I looked back over to the left and also President Kennedy looked back over his left shoulder. Then the, uh, second shot came, well then I looked back just in time to see the President struck in the face by the second bullet. He slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy’s lap, and uh, it was apparent to me that we’re being fired upon. I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital, and he had Parkland standing by. I went on up ahead of the – to notify the officer that was leading the escort that he had been hit and we’re going to have to move out. [The shot,] it was back over my right shoulder,” Bill Lord interview of James Chaney for WFAA-TV, 11/22/63, cited within Richard Trask. That Day in Dallas: The Photographers Capture on Film The Day President Kennedy Died (Danvers, Mass: Yeoman Press, expanded edition, 2000). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 (edited) OK, thanks for the Chaney interview, Paui. I like the way Chaney has to count to keep up with the Single Bullet Theory. Any other locating of Chaney woould be welcome. Is Chaney the reason for the close frames of the limo, and the black bar at the bottom of the frames? Was he showing up Greer by passing the limo? Or demonstrating the limo stop? Edited January 15, 2010 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 The COINCIDENCE THEORISTS keep talking irrelevancies regarding the Z film. How about concentrating on just these 5 things:1. Doug Horne's discovery of fakery in the film provenance at Hawkeyeworks. 2. The redaction of the limo stop on Elm. 3. The removal of the early Z frames showing the wide turn 4. The redaction of Officer Chaney speeding forward to the Curry car. 5. Moorman/Hill on the grass instead of in the street. Jack I'm missing something because I'm busy and haven't caught up with it. I understand that Chaney (4) is believed to have caught up with Chief Curry's car under the overpass. At what point(s) should Chaney's action be visible in the extant Z-film in relation to the head shot, or relative to numbered frames? All frames after the head shot. The Curry car is seen in the underpass. Chaney went forward BEFORE the limo speeded up. Read the testimony. Jack 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