Zapruder film altered claim a red herring ?

[Craig Lamson]

For once you get something right... way to go Lammy...

Wrong phrasing davie jo. It should read, AS USUAL you get something right...

The WCR tries to tell us this FANTASY EVENT was what actually took place...

that this information EXPLAINS the Zfilm which in turn illustrates the assassination.

No, they tell us 'here are the results from our ATTEMPT to recreate the event" and here are the conclusions we draw from it.

As is you sop, you just make stuff up to fit your fantasy. Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

Now, why on earth would the WCR offer incorrect information in their attempts to explain the situation...

Why davie jo, you do that EVERY time you attempt (and badly) to play photo analyst.

They offered the results of their work, and it appears they did so KNOWING it id not match the real event. But again. They were INTELLIGENT enough to know their data was FLAWED compared to the real event. That's something that still elude you.

Is there a data entry error? Don't really know. Sure looks like it. Stuff happens.

You continually ASK OTHERS for answers when you have none of your own...

and are further befuddled when the answer is provided...

YOU make a claim, its YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DEFEND IT. Can't or wont do that, you lose. Welcome to the real world.

Your (and Davidsons's) answer is flawed just like your data. The only befuddled ones are you two, who think inherently flawed data can be used to impeach the real film. You are delusional.

I have an answer. YOU don't.

Keep up the good work reinforcing the obvious... there's hope for you yet...

Oh I will. I will continue to reinforce the obvious...that reality escapes you and your simply don't have a clue.

[David G. Healy]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

[Craig Lamson]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

Oh my.

Have me on the run? You really are a few floors short...

Recreations will ALWAYS be flawed, that's just reality davie. Why I could give to a simple photo of a pop can on a white sweep and it would be impossible for you to recreated the photo accurately. Oh wait, you can't photograph your way OUT of a pop can. My bad.

So why did they do it? Why not. They were looking for answers and this was ONE avenue...flaws and all.

[David G. Healy]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

Oh my.

Have me on the run? You really are a few floors short...

Recreations will ALWAYS be flawed, that's just reality davie. Why I could give to a simple photo of a pop can on a white sweep and it would be impossible for you to recreated the photo accurately. Oh wait, you can't photograph your way OUT of a pop can. My bad.

So why did they do it? Why not. They were looking for answers and this was ONE avenue...flaws and all.

Not short, just lightyears ahead of you..... so, position of a pop can = the position of president of the United States head, that the comparison? Really? You are getting worn out with all the mental gymnastics you're performing here.

Z-film alteration is not going away, is it? In fact, you can't live without Z-film alteration mis-direction! Heaven forbid trolls, WCR supporters and .johnites have to deal with JFK (assassination) case medical evidence, eh?

Edited April 7, 2013 by David G. Healy

[Craig Lamson]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

Oh my.

Have me on the run? You really are a few floors short...

Recreations will ALWAYS be flawed, that's just reality davie. Why I could give to a simple photo of a pop can on a white sweep and it would be impossible for you to recreated the photo accurately. Oh wait, you can't photograph your way OUT of a pop can. My bad.

So why did they do it? Why not. They were looking for answers and this was ONE avenue...flaws and all.

position of a pop can = the position of president of the United States head? Really? You are getting worn out with all the mental gymnastics you're performing here.

Z-film alteration is not going away, is it? In fact, you can't live without Z-film alteration mis-direction! Heaven forbid trolls, WCR supporters and .johnites have to deal with JFK (assassination) case medical evidence, eh?

You proving you you are a few floor short again davie...

Learn to read. I know its a REALLY big stretch for you but ry it anyway...

z-film alteration is TOAST davie. 50 years and the very best you can do is dr john failing parallax 101..

You got nothing left.

No game at all.

[Chris Davidson]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

Oh my.

Have me on the run? You really are a few floors short...

Recreations will ALWAYS be flawed, that's just reality davie. Why I could give to a simple photo of a pop can on a white sweep and it would be impossible for you to recreated the photo accurately. Oh wait, you can't photograph your way OUT of a pop can. My bad.

So why did they do it? Why not. They were looking for answers and this was ONE avenue...flaws and all.

Craig,

Recreations can be intentionally flawed when the real facts are known. And the WC knew them.

There is no need to figure out what happened down the street when you first need to understand what happened up the street.

Frames are just one aspect of the game.

Another is angles.

1inch =10ft.

I'll give you a little hint if you don't understand it.

Station 2+00 is not Position "A". It is where CE884 starts its measurements from.

The real distance from rifle LOS to (JFK) Position "A" is 80ft.

chris

P.S.

I entered the Station# of Position "A" in CE884, for those interested.

P.P.S

I think Shaneyfelt was confused again. lmao

[Craig Lamson]

...

Anyone with a fully functioning brain will understand that an ATTEMPT to recreate will be flawed. Welcome to reality davie jo.

I see these guys have you on the run, eh Craigster? Btw, if planned recreation is anticipated to be flawed, beforehand, why do it? Seems kinda dumb, unless you're into disinfo of course.... just curious.

Oh my.

Have me on the run? You really are a few floors short...

Recreations will ALWAYS be flawed, that's just reality davie. Why I could give to a simple photo of a pop can on a white sweep and it would be impossible for you to recreated the photo accurately. Oh wait, you can't photograph your way OUT of a pop can. My bad.

So why did they do it? Why not. They were looking for answers and this was ONE avenue...flaws and all.

Craig,

Recreations can be intentionally flawed when the real facts are known. And the WC knew them.

There is no need to figure out what happened down the street when you first need to understand what happened up the street.

Frames are just one aspect of the game.

Another is angles.

1inch =10ft.

I'll give you a little hint if you don't understand it.

Station 2+00 is not Position "A". It is where CE884 starts its measurements from.

The real distance from rifle LOS to (JFK) Position "A" is 80ft.

chris

P.S.

I entered the Station# of Position "A" in CE884, for those interested.

P.P.S

I think Shaneyfelt was confused again. lmao

You will never get it Chris. You are lost in your own little world and it appears there will never be an y escape for you back to reality. The only confusion here is yours. What a shame.

[James R Gordon]

Craig,

I am not sure where your basis is for criticising Chris. As I understand it, the basis of Chris' postings is the survey work that Robert West did for the Secret Service and the FBI. I have partial copy and I believe Chris has a complete copy.

From what I understand of Chris' postings he is commenting on the implications of West's calculations.

I assume you are not in dispute with Robert West's work. His work I believe is above dispute.

Having a copy of much of West's material, what Chris said in his last post, and that you said he "will not get it" is perfectly correct. That is precisely what the West survey plat shows.

Where there is serious errors in the West survey material - and it is because he was instructed to do so - is his calculation of the angle of the gun to JFK. That angle is to the camera gun and not to the position of Oswald gun had it been there.

Where i belive people misunderstand Chris' work is that one of his concerns is - and correct me Chris if I am wrong - that he focus' on the difference between the FBI conclusions compared to the SS conclusions. If I remember there is a 14 foot difference in their conclusions. And this difference does indeed have significance on the position of the car and body positions at various points in the film.

As I understand it, Robert West was placed in difficult positions in trying to correlate this survey difference. Although the May '64 recreation ended on 24th, Robert West was still undertaking adjustments well into June.

I agree Chris can be challenging to follow, but unless you are in dispute with the survey work of Robert West, I do not see your point. If you believe Chris has misunderstood Robert West's survey data, I would be interested to see where you feel he is in error. That would be a serious contribution. However saying that Chris 'will not get it', especially when what he has said is right - does not help to further the discussion.

James.

[Craig Lamson]

Craig,

I am not sure where your basis is for criticising Chris. As I understand it, the basis of Chris' postings is the survey work that Robert West did for the Secret Service and the FBI. I have partial copy and I believe Chris has a complete copy.

From what I understand of Chris' postings he is commenting on the implications of West's calculations.

I assume you are not in dispute with Robert West's work. His work I believe is above dispute.

Having a copy of much of West's material, what Chris said in his last post, and that you said he "will not get it" is perfectly correct. That is precisely what the West survey plat shows.

Where there is serious errors in the West survey material - and it is because he was instructed to do so - is his calculation of the angle of the gun to JFK. That angle is to the camera gun and not to the position of Oswald gun had it been there.

Where i belive people misunderstand Chris' work is that one of his concerns is - and correct me Chris if I am wrong - that he focus' on the difference between the FBI conclusions compared to the SS conclusions. If I remember there is a 14 foot difference in their conclusions. And this difference does indeed have significance on the position of the car and body positions at various points in the film.

As I understand it, Robert West was placed in difficult positions in trying to correlate this survey difference. Although the May '64 recreation ended on 24th, Robert West was still undertaking adjustments well into June.

I agree Chris can be challenging to follow, but unless you are in dispute with the survey work of Robert West, I do not see your point. If you believe Chris has misunderstood Robert West's survey data, I would be interested to see where you feel he is in error. That would be a serious contribution. However saying that Chris 'will not get it', especially when what he has said is right - does not help to further the discussion.

James.

The problem is Chris is trying to use recreation data to try and impeach the Zapruder film. Recreations...all of them are flawed. Trying to using faulty data makes Chris's work faulty as well. Chris is living a fantasy. It's really too bad but it's simply a case go GIGO.

No amount of shucking and jiving will ever overcome the problem of faulty.

There is nothing else to discuss. His entire body of work is based on bad data.

That's what he will never get. West could have done the most accurate survey, but other than fixed landmarks every other data point is nothing more than a guess.

The entire concept off Chris's work fails because of this.

And he will never get it.

[Chris Davidson]

Craig,

Here, this should make it obvious.

You're the one that's not 'getting it'

Read Shaneyfelt's testimony I previously supplied and apply it to the plat.

As you always like saying, use the LOS.

Well use it to the Sniper's nest from Position A and Station# 2+00

chris

[Craig Lamson]

Craig,

Here, this should make it obvious.

You're the one that's not 'getting it'

Read Shaneyfelt's testimony I previously supplied and apply it to the plat.

As you always like saying, use the LOS.

Well use it to the Sniper's nest from Position A and Station# 2+00

chris

Oh I get it, you are playing with made up data. You can't prove anything with made up data.

GIGO and you are the king of it.

Welcome to reality.

[Chris Davidson]

Craig,

I am not sure where your basis is for criticising Chris. As I understand it, the basis of Chris' postings is the survey work that Robert West did for the Secret Service and the FBI. I have partial copy and I believe Chris has a complete copy.

From what I understand of Chris' postings he is commenting on the implications of West's calculations.

I assume you are not in dispute with Robert West's work. His work I believe is above dispute.

Having a copy of much of West's material, what Chris said in his last post, and that you said he "will not get it" is perfectly correct. That is precisely what the West survey plat shows.

Where there is serious errors in the West survey material - and it is because he was instructed to do so - is his calculation of the angle of the gun to JFK. That angle is to the camera gun and not to the position of Oswald gun had it been there.

Where i belive people misunderstand Chris' work is that one of his concerns is - and correct me Chris if I am wrong - that he focus' on the difference between the FBI conclusions compared to the SS conclusions. If I remember there is a 14 foot difference in their conclusions. And this difference does indeed have significance on the position of the car and body positions at various points in the film.

As I understand it, Robert West was placed in difficult positions in trying to correlate this survey difference. Although the May '64 recreation ended on 24th, Robert West was still undertaking adjustments well into June.

I agree Chris can be challenging to follow, but unless you are in dispute with the survey work of Robert West, I do not see your point. If you believe Chris has misunderstood Robert West's survey data, I would be interested to see where you feel he is in error. That would be a serious contribution. However saying that Chris 'will not get it', especially when what he has said is right - does not help to further the discussion.

James.

Thanks James,

No since in dealing with Craig on this, everything is flawed, according to him.

I'll keep posting tidbits for the rest of you.

chris

[Paul Baker]

The Newman's were particularly impressive--Bill Newman in particular. "I don't care what the film at the Archives shows," he told me. "I was there. The car stopped." And his wife agreed.

I asked him how certain he was--and he invoked the Ivory Soap ad: "99%".

DSL

Hi David,

Do you believe that the limo was stationary at the moment of the headshot, and that the Zapruder film was altered to conceal that? And therefore do you believe that the other films that show the limo in motion at the moment of the headshot were also altered?

Paul.

According to the 5 witnesses I interviewed back in 1971, the car stopped (momentarily), and some said that was to permit Clint Hill to climb on board.

As I'm sure you know, 15 mph ~ a four minute mile.

Even if you knock off 25%, none of the witnesses I interviewed perceived the assassination to have occurred that way.

FYI: I interviewed both Newmans, John Chism, Jack Franzen, and Mary Moorman.

I'm relating what I was told, which sparked my original interest in this area. Ultimately, the film will be impeached because of other evidence--i.e., optical evidence and/or credible accounts of where the work was done, and by whom. Film alteration and autopsy fraud are the keys to the truth about the Kennedy assassination.

DSL

4/5/13; 7:30 PM PDT

Los Angeles, California

Hi David,

Thanks for replying.

Do you believe that the limo was stationary at the moment of the headshot, and that the Zapruder film was altered to conceal that? And therefore do you believe that the other films that show the limo in motion at the moment of the headshot were also altered?

Paul.

[Craig Lamson]

Thanks James,

No since in dealing with Craig on this, everything is flawed, according to him.

I'll keep posting tidbits for the rest of you.

chris

So Chris, are all the data points (not including fixed landmarks) generated by the recreations exact matches for the actual points we see in the assassination films?

A simple yes or no will do.

[John Dolva]

I want a full copy of the survey notes and the plat. Tidbits begs a degree of blind faith. I'm not into blind faith. If there will be no such release forthcoming I want a rational reason for it not being so.