Craig Lamson Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) Why? This one too hard for you cliffy? It obviously doesn't point out the upper and lower margins of the fold. Why can't you point out the upper and lower margins of the fold, instead of drawing a thick line to represent something that isn't there? Why is it so hard for you to show us what 3+ inches of bunched shirt and jacket fabric look like? Why can't you back up any of your claims? Your purpose here has nothing to do with photo-analysis, it's all about your hatred for all things Kennedy. Be honest, Craig. Tell you what cliffy, I'm going to the lake for the rest of the day. I'll deal with your "statement" when I return. Until I return, perhaps you time would be well spent trying to deal with this and the bombshell Varnell Magic GROWING FOLD! ROFLMAO! You are TOAST cliffy. Why not man up and admit you have been wrong for a decade? Edited July 7, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) Craig, You still haven't posted your Betzner analysis with the two arrows: the one arrow pointing to the upper margin of the horizontal artifact, and the other arrow pointing to the lower margin of the horizontal artifact. You acknowledge that both MUST be apparent in Betzner. And yet you fail to point them both out. Why can't you perform this simple task, Craig? Edited July 10, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) Craig, You still haven't posted your Betzner analysis with the two arrows: the one arrow pointing to the upper margin of the horizontal artifact, and the other arrow pointing to the lower margin of the horizontal artifact. You acknowledge that both MUST be apparent in Betzner. And yet you fail to point them both out. Why can't you perform this simple task, Craig? Not going to happen Cliff. I posted a very nice graphic that clearly shows the top and the bottom margins of the highlight on the top of fold in Betzner. I'm sorry you are just too ignorant to understand a simple graphic. Your continuing display of utter ignorance does not an objection make. But heck why should we be suprised? You can't even understand where YOU think the top and bottom margins are for YOUR own FANTASY fold. Why look...it grew more than two fold in just 5 days! Now it's the Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold. How silly is that? LOL! Which one is it now Cliff? The tiny Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? or The large Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? After an entire decade of pimping his silly fantasy Varnell STILL can't figure out how big his Fantasy Fold really is! ROFLMAO! What a sad, silly joke CLiff Varnell has become as he tries in vain to salvage his totally disproven ( in an unimpeachable manner I might add) claim that JFK's jacket fell! We are witnessing perhaps one of the greatest examples of gross intellectual honestly ever by Cliff Varnell. Why in the world should anyone ever take anything he says seriously ever again? And of course all of that brings us back to the end of the arguement...the point were Cliff Varnell, fantasy master, MUST show us how his MAGIC GROWING Fantasy Fold can producer the artifacts seen in Betzner given the strict confines of sunlight, shadow and angle of incidence. So Varnell will you produce this experimental, empirical proof of concept evidence? The burden of proof in this instance is now all yours. Or are you just a scared little chickin now, running around like his head has been cut off.... And to imagine you demand that someone else produce anything when he can't produce even the most basic of proofs for your own silly claims. Can you say hypocrite? I knew that you could. Edited July 10, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) Not going to happen Cliff. I posted a very nice graphic that clearly shows the top and the bottom margins of the highlight on the top of fold in Betzner. No, your graphic does NOT point to both the upper and lower margins of the highlight. The artifact I have pointed out in the below -- and bracketed in another analysis -- didn't change shape or size at all. Where do you come up with this gibberish? Point out the upper and lower margins of the 1/8" "return, as I have done below. If I can do it, why can't you manage it? Edited July 10, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) No, your graphic does NOT point to both the upper and lower margins of the highlight. Of course the graphic CLEARLY shows both the top and bottom margins of the highlight on the top edge of the horizontal fold.That you are too stupid to understand does not a rebutttal make. The artifact I have pointed out in the below -- and bracketed in another analysis -- didn't change shape or size at all. Where do you come up with this gibberish? Why from YOU of course...its YOUR work... (cliff posted this in regards to the first photo below) I'll show you how easy this is...According to the immutable laws of light and shadow the lip of the fold we see in Towner and Croft MUST be visible in Betzner as a horizontal artifact with 1) a visible upper margin, and 2) a visible lower margin. I'll go first, then it's your turn... (posted by cliff in relation to the second images shown below.) Upper margin indicated by the red line, lower margin indicated by the green line (below). The artifact I have pointed out in the below -- and bracketed in another analysis -- didn't change shape or size at all. By Varnells own hand, his notations for the location os hte upper and lower margins of his FANTASY FOLD have changed over two fold in just 5 days and he says and I quote... "The artifact I have pointed out in the below -- and bracketed in another analysis -- didn't change shape or size at all." Yet another perfect example of Varnell's total lack of honesty. Point out the upper and lower margins of the 1/8" "return, as I have done below. If I can do it, why can't you manage it? I've posted it more than once. Do you have any functioning brain cells left cliffy? So...Which one is it now cliffy? The tiny Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? or The large Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? After an entire decade of pimping his silly fantasy Varnell STILL can't figure out how big his Fantasy Fold really is! ROFLMAO! And of course all of that brings us back to the end of the arguement...the point were Cliff Varnell, fantasy master, MUST show us how his MAGIC GROWING Fantasy Fold can producer the artifacts seen in Betzner given the strict confines of sunlight, shadow and angle of incidence. So Varnell will you produce this experimental, empirical proof of concept evidence? The burden of proof in this instance is now all yours. Or are you just a scared little chickin now, running around like his head has been cut off.... And to imagine you demand that someone else produce anything when he can't produce even the most basic of proofs for your own silly claims. Can you say hypocrite? I knew that you could. Edited July 10, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) Craig, unlike you I don't draw lines on top of the artifact. Unlike you, I'm not trying to conceal anything. This is a very simple task for you, Craig. Draw an arrow to point out the upper margin of your artifact, and then use another arrow to point out the lower margin of the artifact. It can't be that difficult. Look, see how easy this is? Edited July 10, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 10, 2010 Share Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) Craig, unlike you I don't draw lines on top of the artifact. Unlike you, I'm not trying to conceal anything. This is a very simple task for you, Craig. Draw an arrow to point out the upper margin of your artifact, and then use another arrow to point out the lower margin of the artifact. It can't be that difficult. Look, see how easy this is? Is the LINE too hard for you to understand cliffy? Too bad! How in the world can I conceal anything Cliff? The Betzner image is in evidence all over this thread. Only an idiot would even consider that something is concealed. Would that be YOU Varnell? Inquiring minds really want to know? So which fold have you indicated there cliffy? The tiny Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? or The large Varnell MAGIC GROWING Fantasy fold? It can't be that difficult for you to decide now can it? And of course all of that brings us back to the end of the arguement...the point were Cliff Varnell, fantasy master, MUST show us how his MAGIC GROWING Fantasy Fold can producer the artifacts seen in Betzner given the strict confines of sunlight, shadow and angle of incidence. So Varnell will you produce this experimental, empirical proof of concept evidence? The burden of proof in this instance is now all yours. Or are you just a scared little chickin now, running around like his head has been cut off.... And to imagine you demand that someone else produce anything when he can't produce even the most basic of proofs for your own silly claims. Can you say hypocrite? Edited July 10, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) This is the graphic that is making Craig Lamson's brain meltdown. Please note, gentle reader, that the red lines in this graphic do not represent the upper and lower margins of the fold artifact -- I have no idea where Craig got that impression, since the artifact is between the red lines and not under them. The red lines frame the obvious horizontal artifact with it's upper and lower margins. Craig draws a line on blurry shadow and insists that the line is an artifact, where no such artifact exists. Can Craig show us what 3+ inches of bunched shirt and jacket fabric look like? No, he has FAILED to show that such a thing is even possible. Can Craig point out the upper and lower margins of his teabagger bunch? No, he FAILED to point out the upper and lower margins of his imaginary fold, since no such things exist in Betzner. Can Craig explain how JFK's shirt and jacket scaled his upper back and neck in ten seconds? No, Craig has FAILED to show how such a thing occurred. No wonder Craig has to resort to puerile rhetoric, it's all he has... Edited July 11, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 Yet another blatant and quite failed attempt by the huckster Ckiff Varnell to deflect attention AWAY from his failed position. He thinks repeating questions asked and answered somehow make his failed postion look tenable. It won't work. His claims fail the simple test of light, shadow and angle of incidence as we will see below. But lets not lose sight of the value of Varnell's post in highlighting his distict and total lack of honesty. He simply can't help himself and once again resorted to outright falsehoods. Varnell is not only lacking intellectual honesty but OUTRIGHT HONESTY. I would really prefer to call a spade a spade here but the forum rules prevent using the word that describes Varnell to a tee. Lets stay within the rules and just say he does not tell the truth. This is the graphic that is making Craig Lamson's brain meltdown. Please note, gentle reader, that the red lines in this graphic do not represent the upper and lower margins of the fold artifact -- I have no idea where Craig got that impression, since the artifact is between the red lines and not under them. The red lines frame the obvious horizontal artifact with it's upper and lower margins. Craig draws a line on blurry shadow and insists that the line is an artifact, where no such artifact exists. Lets review Varnells previous words in relation to the red lines he is now l-----, upps..not telling the truth about. I'll show you how easy this is...According to the immutable laws of light and shadow the lip of the fold we see in Towner and Croft MUST be visible in Betzner as a horizontal artifact with 1) a visible upper margin, and 2) a visible lower margin. I'll go first, then it's your turn... His actual post. So why must Varnell resort to telling outright falsehoods and endlessly askeding queations that have been answered time and time again? Because the unbendable laws of light, shadow and angle of incidence prove in an unimpeachable manner that ONLY a 3+inch fold of fabric on JFK's back can produce the artifact seen in Betzner. And this has been proven with unimpeachable experimental, empirical proof pf concept images. Images that totally destroy Varnells MAGIC GROWING Fantasy Fold Theory. This which renders his decade old fanatasy claim theat he jacket fell in the plaza destroyed as well. Given the inability to refute the unimpeachable evidence Varnell resorts to obfuscation and dishonesty. What a sorry sight he has become. His actions have rendered his words meaningless and it cuts him to the bone. He has totally melted down. His fantasy bubble is busted for good. Why? Because his claim simply will not pass scientific muster. It it is all BLUSTER. He can't do this... He avoids this simple question like the plague because he simply cannot answer it. His arguement fails. Don't take my word for it. Test it yourself. See exactly WHY Varnells fantasy is now residing in the dustbin of stupidity. It's now game over for Cliff Varnell.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) You answer NO questions, Craig. What does 3+ inches of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric look like? No answer. Where are the distinct upper and lower margins of your fantasy fold? No answer. How did JFK's shirt and jacket hike up his back in 10 seconds? No answer. Your bluff has been called, Craig. You're holding 7-Duece off-suit and none of that matches the board. Show us what 3+" of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric looks like. Point out the upper and lower margins of your teabagger bunch which the unbendable laws of light and shadow dictate MUST be apparent in Betzner. Demonstrate how JFK's shirt and jacket hiked up his back and neck 3+" in 10 seconds. We don't get answers to these direct questions, just more bluff from the ideologically addled Craig Lamson. Edited July 11, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) You answer NO questions, Craig. What does 3+ inches of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric look like? No answer. Answered many times Where are the distinct upper and lower margins of your fantasy fold? No answer. Answered many times How did JFK's shirt and jacket hike up his back in 10 seconds? No answer. Answered many times Your bluff has been called, Craig. You're holding 7-Duece off-suit and none of that matches the board. Nope I'm the only one holding ANY cards. You have none left. Show us what 3+" of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric looks like. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&search_in=core Point out the upper and lower margins of your teabagger bunch which the unbendable laws of light and shadow dictate MUST be apparent in Betzner. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&search_in=core Demonstrate how JFK's shirt and jacket hiked up his back and neck 3+" in 10 seconds. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=core&module=search&search_in=core We don't get answers to these direct questions, just more bluff from the ideologically addled Craig Lamson. Nope the bluff that has been called is YOURS cliffy, and you lost the house,the car and all the possessions. THE question VARNELL can't answer.....can't even try because it will only display his utter ignorance.... Maybe it might be best if you stick to dealing poker CLiff, if they don't mind your massive levels of dishonesty. Clearly you fail at simple things like understanding how SUNLIGHT works. Flopping out cards just might be the limit of your ability. Who knows? One thing is for certain... Stick a fork in Varnell...he is DONE! Edited July 11, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 What does 3+ inches of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric look like? No answer. Answered many times Never answered. None of Craig's "proof of concept" photos show bunched fabric, much less 3+" of bunched fabric, much less 3+" of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric. All we get is bluff and bluster. Where are the distinct upper and lower margins of your fantasy fold? No answer. Answered many times Answered not at all. The unbendable laws of light and shadow dictate that the "return" at the top of the fold show distinct upper and lower margins. I can show these on the ONLY horizontal artifact that matches the criteria to which Craig himself stipulated. All we get from Craig is bluff and bluster. How did JFK's shirt and jacket hike up his back in 10 seconds? No answer. Answered many times Answered not at all. Because Craig can't replicate his claims he can't explain how his fantasy fold occurred. Three straight strikes where Craig can't even swing a bat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) What does 3+ inches of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric look like? No answer. Answered many times Never answered. None of Craig's "proof of concept" photos show bunched fabric, much less 3+" of bunched fabric, much less 3+" of bunched up shirt and jacket fabric. All we get is bluff and bluster. Of course it was ANSWERED. In this very thread. You are just to dishonest to admit the truth. Where are the distinct upper and lower margins of your fantasy fold? No answer. Answered many times Answered not at all. The unbendable laws of light and shadow dictate that the "return" at the top of the fold show distinct upper and lower margins. Of course it was ANSWERED. In this very thread. Your are just to dishonest to admit the truth. I can show these on the ONLY horizontal artifact that matches the criteria to which Craig himself stipulated. Nope you only show the shadow created by the natural curve of hte jacket shoulder nd the SHADOW created by the left corner of the 3+ inch fold of fabric on JFK's back as seen in Betzner. In fact its been proven in an unimpeachable fashion the the 3= inch fold is the ONLY arrangement of fabric that can create the artifact seenin Betzner. The Varnell Magic Growing Fantasy Flod cannot produce the artifact. It's against the laws of nature. All we get from Craig is bluff and bluster. Transference by Varnell. I offer unimpeachable, experimental, empirical proofs. Its VARNELL who is all bluff and bluster as witnessed by his complete refusal to deal directly with this... How did JFK's shirt and jacket hike up his back in 10 seconds? No answer. Answered many times Answered not at all. Because Craig can't replicate his claims he can't explain how his fantasy fold occurred. Of course it was ANSWERED. In this very thread. You are just to dishonest to admit the truth. Of Three straight strikes where Craig can't even swing a bat. Sorry to inform you Varnell, but I've hit a home run. Cliff Varnell and his claim the jacket fell have been shown to be nothing more than dishonesty. THE question VARNELL can't answer.....can't even try because it will only display his utter ignorance....and betray his bogus claiom. Maybe it might be best if you stick to dealing poker CLiff, if they don't mind your massive levels of dishonesty. Clearly you fail at simple things like understanding how SUNLIGHT works. Flopping out cards just might be the limit of your ability. Who knows? One thing is for certain... Stick a fork in Varnell...he is DONE! Edited July 11, 2010 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) Craig, You claim to have replicated the 3+" elevation of JFK's shirt and jacket. Please post this replication showing shirt and jacket fabric. Since you've yet to show any such photo, why would we take your word for it? You claim to have identified the distinct upper and lower margins of the horizontal artifact you claim to see in Betzner. Please post your analysis with arrows pointing to these distinct upper and lower margins. Thank you. Edited July 11, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 11, 2010 Share Posted July 11, 2010 (edited) More of the same meaningless and dishonest drivel from Varnell.... Here is his Waterloo THE question VARNELL can't answer.....can't even try because it will only display his utter ignorance....and betray his bogus claim. Maybe it might be best if you stick to dealing poker CLiff, if they don't mind your massive levels of dishonesty. Clearly you fail at simple things like understanding how SUNLIGHT works. Flopping out cards just might be the limit of your ability. Who knows? One thing is for certain... Stick a fork in Varnell...he is DONE! Edited July 11, 2010 by Craig Lamson 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