Zapruder film altered claim a red herring ?

[David G. Healy]

of course you care, who are you kidding... case photo's are subjective, no one, NO ONE will be putting the photo-film originals (if, in fact they can be proven to be originals) under the microscope for forensic testing, there will be NO forensic testing... so, all you've been doing here is fanning speculation, which does nothing more than reinforce WCR disinfo. There is no other purpose for you being here, unless you care of course, which you've told us you don't..... LMAO!

My my davie your fear really runs deep. What's the problem? Getting too hot for you? Must be since you mostly only post to try and defuse a CT getting trashed. And here you are trying to save poor Chris. Well keep it up, it speaks volumes.

And Forensics? Really? ROFLMAO! SIlly CTs have been making alteration claims for decades. and you want to tell me that we need forensics to show they got things like parallax, properties of light and shadow, perspective, or even ...like in this instance...simple reading and comprehension correct? LMAO!

When davie speaks the laughter begins. Keep up the good works davie. The entertainment value is priceless.

Now back to business. Tell us davie, does Chris have the work in question correct? Come davie, get in the game, put your sorry fanny on the line. You got it in you?

I have you on the end of a string hon, and have so 10 years running now. I post, you feel a desperate need to respond. Always have ALWAYS will.

Not too bad for a guy who claims he can't prove the Zapruder film was altered, eh Craigster? LMAO!

Where would you be today if not for The Great Zapruder Film Hoax --2003? Btw, Chris is running you around in circles, imagine what he could do to your camp testing the alleged in-camera Zapruder original... perhaps you can explain to our audience here how parallax effects the official Dealey Plaza topo's?

Perhaps your lone nut/LHO did it all by his lonesome schuck-n-jive has run it limit, eh?

[Craig Lamson]

I have you on the end of a string hon, and have so 10 years running now. I post, you feel a desperate need to respond. Always have ALWAYS will.

Not too bad for a guy who claims he can't prove the Zapruder film was altered, eh Craigster? LMAO!

You really are delusional davie...I post YOU feel a desperate need to respond... 10 years worth. Your attempts at damage control are really weak and totally transparent. And usually completely void of any substance. Does that make you a xxxxx davie?

Where would you be today if not for The Great Zapruder Film Hoax --2003?

Same place I was before that piece of garbage killed a few trees and poisoned a few minds....trashing silly CT alteration claims.

Btw, Chris is running you around in circles, imagine what he could do to your camp testing the alleged in-camera Zapruder original... perhaps you can explain to our audience here how parallax effects the official Dealey Plaza topo's?

Once again you prove you are deathly afraid to go on the record. Color me shocked. [/sacrasm] You really are a xxxxx. Poor Chris can't even read and understand the words he posts let alone have the first clue what he would be looking at if he had the Z film in his hands.

And you prove you can't read either... let me refresh your failing memory.

"...like in this instance...simple reading and comprehension correct". His failure (and now yours) has nothing to do with parallax.

Parallax DOES however play a role in some of the elevations West surveyed, given many of them were the the result of visually TRYING to align things from a DIFFERENT location that that of the Zapruder camera. GIGO I guess you must have failed photo 101 while you were learning to become a video camera repairman.

Perhaps your lone nut/LHO did it all by his lonesome schuck-n-jive has run it limit, eh?

You projecting again davie?

[David G. Healy]

I have you on the end of a string hon, and have so 10 years running now. I post, you feel a desperate need to respond. Always have ALWAYS will.

Not too bad for a guy who claims he can't prove the Zapruder film was altered, eh Craigster? LMAO!

You really are delusional davie...I post YOU feel a desperate need to respond... 10 years worth. Your attempts at damage control are really weak and totally transparent. And usually completely void of any substance. Does that make you a xxxxx davie?

Where would you be today if not for The Great Zapruder Film Hoax --2003?

Same place I was before that piece of garbage killed a few trees and poisoned a few minds....trashing silly CT alteration claims.

Btw, Chris is running you around in circles, imagine what he could do to your camp testing the alleged in-camera Zapruder original... perhaps you can explain to our audience here how parallax effects the official Dealey Plaza topo's?

Once again you prove you are deathly afraid to go on the record. Color me shocked. [/sacrasm] You really are a xxxxx. Poor Chris can't even read and understand the words he posts let alone have the first clue what he would be looking at if he had the Z film in his hands.

And you prove you can't read either... let me refresh your failing memory.

"...like in this instance...simple reading and comprehension correct". His failure (and now yours) has nothing to do with parallax.

Parallax DOES however play a role in some of the elevations West surveyed, given many of them were the the result of visually TRYING to align things from a DIFFERENT location that that of the Zapruder camera. GIGO I guess you must have failed photo 101 while you were learning to become a video camera repairman.

Perhaps your lone nut/LHO did it all by his lonesome schuck-n-jive has run it limit, eh?

sorry to dissappoint ya there Lampoon, as a published author, which I sure much to your regret and chagrin, my claims are on the record, both written and on video. Search is your friend poopsie!

I do however recognize you as the country's leading photographer of movie theater loge seats (en masse and singular) and no one can take a picture of a school bus better than you. Satisfied?

And yet again, I post and you can't help yourself.

But wait, surely Tink Thompson and Gary Mack-Dunkel have forgiven you for not knowing a damn thing about film-photo composition, haven't they?

Projecting? Pssssst, the Zapruder film is tainted, forever suspect, as is your beloved WCR...

I didn't realize you had a Civil Engineering degree, where from, Walmart or K-Mart?

Come to Papa! LMAO!

[Ian Kingsbury]

Civil ?.

[Craig Lamson]

sorry to dissappoint ya there Lampoon, as a published author, which I sure much to your regret and chagrin, my claims are on the record, both written and on video. Search is your friend poopsie!

ROFLMAO! "published author" LMAO! can you still get your head in the door? LOL! You did pretty poor job of it ("took" a few photos too). And geeze, I write like crap but man...you are about as bad as they come.

So what where those "claims" again davie? Why don't you summarize them for the lucky souls that have yet to read the dreck you wrote. LOL!

I do however recognize you as the country's leading photographer of movie theater loge seats (en masse and singular) and no one can take a picture of a school bus better than you. Satisfied?

Sheesh you can't even get something as simple as this right davie. You wanna try again? Oh wait I suspect you would only fail again.

And yet again, I post and you can't help yourself.

But wait, surely Tink Thompson and Gary Mack-Dunkel have forgiven you for not knowing a damn thing about film-photo composition, haven't they?

Wanna go head to head on compositing daive? Or are you afraid the world will find out you are all copy and no actual experience? Oh wait you did you take a 101 class somewhere? LMAO. You are a xxxxx davie, pure and simple.

Projecting? Pssssst, the Zapruder film is tainted, forever suspect, as is your beloved WCR...

So say the goofballs. And yet in 50 years none of you can prove it has been altered. All you have is very empty rhetoric.

I didn't realize you had a Civil Engineering degree, where from, Walmart or K-Mart?

Whats the matter? This to hard for you to comprehend?

Edited April 21, 2013 by Craig Lamson

[Craig Lamson]

Lets drag this back to the reality davie is trying to obfuscate.

Chris can't read nor understand this simple document he posted...

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20094&st=60#entry271165

[Chris Davidson]

Reality =

Chris understands completely what he is posting.

Craig doesn't understand what Chris is posting.

Once Craig understands the 15.5ft conversion process, then Craig will understand what Chris has posted.

I haven't given up on you Craig, I'm just inching along. (Plat talk verbiage).

chris

[Craig Lamson]

Reality =

Chris understands completely what he is posting.

Craig doesn't understand what Chris is posting.

Once Craig understands the 15.5ft conversion process, then Craig will understand what Chris has posted.

I haven't given up on you Craig, I'm just inching along. (Plat talk verbiage).

chris

There is no 15.5 conversion process. It's a figment of your garbage measurements and failure to even understand what you read, Chris can't even figure out what the face of the TSBD looks like

That's reality. It's beyond your ken.

Your game is over. Deal with it.

.