The case of the missing man in black...

[Jack White]

Another composite for your study. Think. Observe. Form your own conclusions.

[Jack White]

Jack,

Might also ask where the guy in white pants is.

Should be somewhere near the missing man in black.

chris

Thanks, Chris, for pointing out the two guys by the traffic sign. It caused me to

do this study, which I think conclusively prove fakery.

We have previously gone to great lengths to prove the Z films a HOAX.

It would have been much easier to prove the MINOR FILMS are fabricated!

I have spotted DOZENS of blatant anomalies. I wish someone would help

me on this. It is far easier than the Z film. Any volunteers?

The animation errors are much more blatant in the MINOR FILMS and are

easily shown by comparisons such as this. I wish someone would pitch in

and help with other comparisons from the MINOR FILMS. None of them

match each other. THIS IS A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH.

Thanks, Chris. Anyone want to help? I have shown what to look for.

It is easy once you start, as they say...like shooting fish in a barrel.

Jack

[Jack White]

Jack,

Might also ask where the guy in white pants is.

Should be somewhere near the missing man in black.

chris

Thanks, Chris, for pointing out the two guys by the traffic sign. It caused me to

do this study, which I think conclusively prove fakery.

We have previously gone to great lengths to prove the Z films a HOAX.

It would have been much easier to prove the MINOR FILMS are fabricated!

I have spotted DOZENS of blatant anomalies. I wish someone would help

me on this. It is far easier than the Z film. Any volunteers?

The animation errors are much more blatant in the MINOR FILMS and are

easily shown by comparisons such as this. I wish someone would pitch in

and help with other comparisons from the MINOR FILMS. None of them

match each other. THIS IS A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH.

Thanks, Chris. Anyone want to help? I have shown what to look for.

It is easy once you start, as they say...like shooting fish in a barrel.

Jack

I hope this study draws meaningful responses, since I consider it

POSITIVE PROOF of tampering of the minor films. But I expect all I will get

is the usual fumferring from the usual suspects.

[John Dugan]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

[Jack White]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

1963 was NOT the dark ages. All films should be better in quality than these films, and WITHOUT anomalies. By 1963

color film had been in use 30 years, and the quality was excellent. I have Kodachrome transparencies shot in the 1950s

that are EXCELLENT in quality. The same cannot be said of Ektachrome, which often has suffered color shifts.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

[Bernice Moore]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

HI JOHN YES THEY ARE 63 FOOTAGE BUT MANY OF THE FILMS HAVE BEEN UPDATED AND DIGITALIZED...CHRIS COULD EXPLAIN MUCH IN THAT AREA FOR YOU..WHAT ARE SEEN TODAY IS MUCH BETTER THAN WHEN TAKEN...THEY ARE ALSO STABILIZED....THE THING IS THERE IS SIMPLY TOO MANY ANOMALIES AND ODDITIES FOUND AND SEEN TO HAVE BEEN A RESULT OF POOR FOOTAGE TODAY OR COINCIDENCE, THE WHY THEY WOULD CHANGE MEN STANDING ON HOUSTON...I REALLY DO NOT HAVE ANY SATISFACTORY ANSWER..EXCEPT THEY COULD SO IT APPEARS THEY DID...PERHAPS JACK MAY HAVE..THANKS B..

Edited February 24, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Jack White]

Some will fumfer that 8mm Kodachrome does not have the excellent quality of 35mm Kodachrome.

NONSENSE. They are exactly the same. Any difference in image quality results from either the

camera or photographer.

Jack

[Robin Unger]

Jack,

Might also ask where the guy in white pants is.

Should be somewhere near the missing man in black.

chris

Thanks, Chris, for pointing out the two guys by the traffic sign. It caused me to

do this study, which I think conclusively prove fakery.

We have previously gone to great lengths to prove the Z films a HOAX.

It would have been much easier to prove the MINOR FILMS are fabricated!

I have spotted DOZENS of blatant anomalies. I wish someone would help

me on this. It is far easier than the Z film. Any volunteers?

The animation errors are much more blatant in the MINOR FILMS and are

easily shown by comparisons such as this. I wish someone would pitch in

and help with other comparisons from the MINOR FILMS. None of them

match each other. THIS IS A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH.

Thanks, Chris. Anyone want to help? I have shown what to look for.

It is easy once you start, as they say...like shooting fish in a barrel.

Jack

Hi Jack

To my eyes it looks like the two men in Dorman are man (47) and (48) ?

[John Dugan]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

Edited February 24, 2010 by John Dugan

[Jack White]

Jack,

Might also ask where the guy in white pants is.

Should be somewhere near the missing man in black.

chris

Thanks, Chris, for pointing out the two guys by the traffic sign. It caused me to

do this study, which I think conclusively prove fakery.

We have previously gone to great lengths to prove the Z films a HOAX.

It would have been much easier to prove the MINOR FILMS are fabricated!

I have spotted DOZENS of blatant anomalies. I wish someone would help

me on this. It is far easier than the Z film. Any volunteers?

The animation errors are much more blatant in the MINOR FILMS and are

easily shown by comparisons such as this. I wish someone would pitch in

and help with other comparisons from the MINOR FILMS. None of them

match each other. THIS IS A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH.

Thanks, Chris. Anyone want to help? I have shown what to look for.

It is easy once you start, as they say...like shooting fish in a barrel.

Jack

Hi Jack

To my eyes it looks like the two men in Dorman are man (47) and (48) ?

48 is possible. I don't think 47 is possible. And that leaves out 49.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Jack

[Jack White]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

A good question for which there is no documentable answer. We can only speculate.

My THEORY is not yet formulated, but it involves genuine films taken by genuine spectators being altered

to conform to some scenario, using FOOTAGE FROM REMOTE CONTROLLED CAMERAS. These minor films

were not deemed critical, BUT HAD TO SHOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT SHOW CERTAIN THINGS. As

a result the extant films are an amalgam of original footage, retouched footage, and fabricated footage.

This is very similar to the Z film. However the Z film was fabricated with greater precision than the minor

films, which were deemed less important. So far my theory is just in the work stage. It involves the

aluminum van on Elm, which I think may have been the command center for the operation as well as

the control center for remote cameras.

Jack

[Todd W. Vaughan]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

A good question for which there is no documentable answer. We can only speculate.

My THEORY is not yet formulated, but it involves genuine films taken by genuine spectators being altered

to conform to some scenario, using FOOTAGE FROM REMOTE CONTROLLED CAMERAS. These minor films

were not deemed critical, BUT HAD TO SHOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT SHOW CERTAIN THINGS. As

a result the extant films are an amalgam of original footage, retouched footage, and fabricated footage.

This is very similar to the Z film. However the Z film was fabricated with greater precision than the minor

films, which were deemed less important. So far my theory is just in the work stage. It involves the

aluminum van on Elm, which I think may have been the command center for the operation as well as

the control center for remote cameras.

Jack

Jack,

Do you have even one single witness who reported seeing any remote cameras in Dealey Plaza?

Todd

[Jack White]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

A good question for which there is no documentable answer. We can only speculate.

My THEORY is not yet formulated, but it involves genuine films taken by genuine spectators being altered

to conform to some scenario, using FOOTAGE FROM REMOTE CONTROLLED CAMERAS. These minor films

were not deemed critical, BUT HAD TO SHOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT SHOW CERTAIN THINGS. As

a result the extant films are an amalgam of original footage, retouched footage, and fabricated footage.

This is very similar to the Z film. However the Z film was fabricated with greater precision than the minor

films, which were deemed less important. So far my theory is just in the work stage. It involves the

aluminum van on Elm, which I think may have been the command center for the operation as well as

the control center for remote cameras.

Jack

Jack,

Do you have even one single witness who reported seeing any remote cameras in Dealey Plaza?

Todd

They were hidden or disguised. They did not have signs saying "REMOTE CAMERA TO PHOTOGRAPH

THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT. Where seen in photos, they were retouched out.

[John Dugan]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

A good question for which there is no documentable answer. We can only speculate.

My THEORY is not yet formulated, but it involves genuine films taken by genuine spectators being altered

to conform to some scenario, using FOOTAGE FROM REMOTE CONTROLLED CAMERAS. These minor films

were not deemed critical, BUT HAD TO SHOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT SHOW CERTAIN THINGS. As

a result the extant films are an amalgam of original footage, retouched footage, and fabricated footage.

This is very similar to the Z film. However the Z film was fabricated with greater precision than the minor

films, which were deemed less important. So far my theory is just in the work stage. It involves the

aluminum van on Elm, which I think may have been the command center for the operation as well as

the control center for remote cameras.

Jack

Jack,

Do you have even one single witness who reported seeing any remote cameras in Dealey Plaza?

Todd

I'd like to know this as well.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

i'll try not to fumferr.....

.....but for what reason/motive would the animators have for removing characters from the sidewalk on Houston?

and I am not trying to disagree with the study (which is pretty good), just trying to understand the purpose of this alteration. Everything has a purpose.

All these old films of the motorcade have strange things going on, it's 1963, the footage is of poor quality, so one should expect to see anomolies throughout.

They are not PURPOSES. Each alteration or animation was done by a separate team for the sake of SPEED probably.

They are MISTAKES, because of the lack of coordination. Therefore the films do not match in many details.

Thanks for not fumferring.

Jack

But why would anything need to be altered in an area of away from where the assassination took place?

A good question for which there is no documentable answer. We can only speculate.

My THEORY is not yet formulated, but it involves genuine films taken by genuine spectators being altered

to conform to some scenario, using FOOTAGE FROM REMOTE CONTROLLED CAMERAS. These minor films

were not deemed critical, BUT HAD TO SHOW CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT SHOW CERTAIN THINGS. As

a result the extant films are an amalgam of original footage, retouched footage, and fabricated footage.

This is very similar to the Z film. However the Z film was fabricated with greater precision than the minor

films, which were deemed less important. So far my theory is just in the work stage. It involves the

aluminum van on Elm, which I think may have been the command center for the operation as well as

the control center for remote cameras.

Jack

Jack,

Do you have even one single witness who reported seeing any remote cameras in Dealey Plaza?

Todd

They were hidden or disguised. They did not have signs saying "REMOTE CAMERA TO PHOTOGRAPH

THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT. Where seen in photos, they were retouched out.

Hmmmm.

If they could be seen in photos, then woudn't they also be seen by the witnesses in those photos? And if they were "hidden or disguised", why would they need to be "retouched out" of photos.

So which is it, Jack, were they seen in photos or were they hidden or disguised?

Edited February 24, 2010 by Todd W. Vaughan