Jump to content
The Education Forum

Multiple Ejecta or Single Piece?


Recommended Posts

I've always assumed the fragment sailing upwards in 313 was the same object, and in recent years have come to assume it was the largest object ejected from the skull, the Harper fragment, which was found about a hundred feet forward of the limo at 313, on the grass across from the steps.

(I know, I know. Harper originally told the FBI the fragment was found behind the limousine's location. But he didn't know the limo's location during the shooting when he said this, and almost certainly assumed all the wreaths thrown on the grass across from the steps signified the limo's location. He subsequently marked maps to show where he found the fragment, and claimed he'd found the fragment across from the steps.)

Mr. Speer

I have heard the theory expressed a couple of different ways. One theory expounds, as you feel, that this was the Harper fragment. As the theory goes, it appears to be several fragments due to its turning. Each time one surface came around, it would reflect light to Zapruder's camera and be captured as an image; giving the illusion in z313 of several fragments following each other in a line. The other theory expounds that there are, indeed, several fragments in a train, one behind the other, all ascending skyward. Each theory is both believable and unbelievable.

If, as you say, the Harper fragment landed one hundred feet ahead of the limousine's position at z313, this tells us a very important fact; one corroborated looking at z314 and z315. The fragment, or fragments, visible ascending skyward forward of JFK's head in z313 had to be moving at a speed of at least 90 feet per second (60 mph), depending whether or not one believes the fragment to still be visible in z314. I have circled what appears to be the same fragment in z314.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/z314artifact_zps5a35747c.jpg

If this is, indeed, the same fragment in z314 as seen in z313, we can get a rough idea of its velocity. By comparing the distance between the highest fragment in z313 and the fragment in z314 to Mary Moorman (a very short woman just over five feet in stature), we can deduce that this fragment may have travelled five feet between the two frames. At a speed of 18.3 frames per second x 5 feet, we can assume the fragment to be moving 91.5 feet per second (62.38 mph). Would this, combined with the trajectory it was travelling, be sufficient to land the fragment 100 feet ahead of the limo, against a headwind?

Now, should we choose to believe the object in z314 is not the fragment seen in z313, the ceiling on the fragment's velocity is much higher.

Either way, there is something very important here to consider, one which questions the authenticity of z313 itself. If the fragment was travelling at a minimum of 90 ft/second (60 mph), it would make it the fastest thing in the entire film, excluding the assassin's bullets, of course. In fact, nothing in the film comes even close to it for velocity. The next fastest thing is likely the limousine itself, moving at the blinding velocity of 17.6 ft/second (12 mph), and yet we see many blurred objects in the Zapruder film, due to the fact Zapruder's camera was not designed to capture high speed action (or even slow speed action, it appears).

How on earth was Zapruder's camera able to capture, so clearly, a fragment moving in excess of 60 mph?

The more I think about it the more I think you could be right and that the fragment could be spinning and only reflecting at specific angles, this would produce sort of a stobelike effect and could explain why the items don't appear 'blurred' to you. I think you meant elongated but then notice that one of them actually is a bit elongated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Tom Scully

Len,

The gambler has revised the description of his wager, would you please revise your quote of that description, appearing near the bottom of each of your posts?

Moving further up from that quote, Jack White is deceased. Taking that fact into account, would you consider revising the line displayed in each of your posts, quoting Jack, while you're at it?

Second request, Len. Displaying Robert's reference to his ______ is not an option. Remove the word. Continuing to display the Jack White quote in every one of your posts is an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always assumed the fragment sailing upwards in 313 was the same object, and in recent years have come to assume it was the largest object ejected from the skull, the Harper fragment, which was found about a hundred feet forward of the limo at 313, on the grass across from the steps.

(I know, I know. Harper originally told the FBI the fragment was found behind the limousine's location. But he didn't know the limo's location during the shooting when he said this, and almost certainly assumed all the wreaths thrown on the grass across from the steps signified the limo's location. He subsequently marked maps to show where he found the fragment, and claimed he'd found the fragment across from the steps.)

Mr. Speer

I have heard the theory expressed a couple of different ways. One theory expounds, as you feel, that this was the Harper fragment. As the theory goes, it appears to be several fragments due to its turning. Each time one surface came around, it would reflect light to Zapruder's camera and be captured as an image; giving the illusion in z313 of several fragments following each other in a line. The other theory expounds that there are, indeed, several fragments in a train, one behind the other, all ascending skyward. Each theory is both believable and unbelievable.

If, as you say, the Harper fragment landed one hundred feet ahead of the limousine's position at z313, this tells us a very important fact; one corroborated looking at z314 and z315. The fragment, or fragments, visible ascending skyward forward of JFK's head in z313 had to be moving at a speed of at least 90 feet per second (60 mph), depending whether or not one believes the fragment to still be visible in z314. I have circled what appears to be the same fragment in z314.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/z314artifact_zps5a35747c.jpg

If this is, indeed, the same fragment in z314 as seen in z313, we can get a rough idea of its velocity. By comparing the distance between the highest fragment in z313 and the fragment in z314 to Mary Moorman (a very short woman just over five feet in stature), we can deduce that this fragment may have travelled five feet between the two frames. At a speed of 18.3 frames per second x 5 feet, we can assume the fragment to be moving 91.5 feet per second (62.38 mph). Would this, combined with the trajectory it was travelling, be sufficient to land the fragment 100 feet ahead of the limo, against a headwind?

Now, should we choose to believe the object in z314 is not the fragment seen in z313, the ceiling on the fragment's velocity is much higher.

Either way, there is something very important here to consider, one which questions the authenticity of z313 itself. If the fragment was travelling at a minimum of 90 ft/second (60 mph), it would make it the fastest thing in the entire film, excluding the assassin's bullets, of course. In fact, nothing in the film comes even close to it for velocity. The next fastest thing is likely the limousine itself, moving at the blinding velocity of 17.6 ft/second (12 mph), and yet we see many blurred objects in the Zapruder film, due to the fact Zapruder's camera was not designed to capture high speed action (or even slow speed action, it appears).

How on earth was Zapruder's camera able to capture, so clearly, a fragment moving in excess of 60 mph?

The more I think about it the more I think you could be right and that the fragment could be spinning and only reflecting at specific angles, this would produce sort of a stobelike effect and could explain why the items don't appear 'blurred' to you. I think you meant elongated but then notice that one of them actually is a bit elongated.

Mr. Colby

Well, as I said earlier, it is one of several theories. Its proponents point out that, in z313, it is seen as several fragments due to the strobelike effect you mentioned, while in z314, it is seen as one fragment, due to wind resistance slowing down the spinning effect and only allowing one reflection back at the camera. Its detractors, on the other hand (mostly alterationists), claim that the chances of the fragment spinning in such a fashion, as to be lined up perfectly to reflect the sun directly back at Zapruder's camera in a strobelike effect, are slim, indeed.

I have reserved opinion on the matter as I do not believe you or I have the analytical talents to fully appreciate what we are looking at here.

That being said, there is something else about this fragment(s) that still perplexes me. As I stated earlier, the limousine was, reportedly, travelling down Elm St. at 12 mph (17.6 ft/second) and Mr. Zapruder was tracking this limo with his camera, as proven by the clarity of the limo and its occupants. Any stationary objects in the film should show a certain amount of blur to them which, in many but definitely not all cases, is quite apparent. Further to this, due to Mr. Zapruder not being a stabilized camera platform, there are a number of exaggerated blurs in this film. Z313 gives us some good examples of this exaggerated blurring, yet presents us with paradoxes at the same time.

As can be seen in z313 below, the white object lying in the grass just above the windshield (believed by many to be a paper wrapper) is quite elongated, to use your reference.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/z313secondartifact_zps7a4f15cb.jpg

By z315, it is back to its normal size.

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee363/Traveller111/z315secondartifact_zps4780ecc1.jpg

What perplexes me is that, while this object is elongated by at least a factor of three, none of the other stationary objects, including Mary Moorman and Toni Foster, show this kind of distortion, other than the expected amount of blurring from Mr. Zapruder's tracking of the limo. Considering the degree of elongation in the piece of paper and the slow speed of the limo, I would expect to see some degree of elongation in the limo and its occupants, as well.

This brings us to the fragment(s). While I strongly believe the fragment(s) to be travelling almost vertically at 60 mph (90 ft/second), their forward motion, as relative to Mr. Zapruder's tracking, should be negligibly faster than the limo. Therefore, should we not see some degree of lateral elongation in the fragment(s)?

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert the elongation will be more pronounced the closer the item is to the camera. Do you think it's possible the "wrapper" got blown a couple in inches in 313? As for the fragment if it was spinning the 'strobe effect' would have limited elongation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Colby

If the elongation of an item is more pronounced the closer it is to the camera, the white object in the grass and Mary Moorman should be elongated laterally an equal amount, as it is obvious they are almost identical distances from the camera lens.

No, I do not think the wind blew the paper wrapper. If you take a blowup of z313 and z315 and measure the distance from the left (Mary's left) bottom skirt of Mary Moorman's raincoat to the white object, you will find the distance to be the same in both photos or actually slightly closer in z313, depending on which end of the elongated white object in z313 you measure to. This presents a problem, as the wind was blowing from right to left on the photo that day and the object would have to be moving AGAINST the wind to support movement by the wind.

I think you are also wrong about the strobe effect eliminating elongation of the fragment in z313. As I stated before, the object was ascending with an estimated velocity of 90 ft/second (60 mph) but was moving horizontally at the same velocity as the limo; namely, 17.6 ft/second (12 mph). Although the "strobelike effect", undoubtedly almost as unbelievable as the Single Bullet Theory, might preclude vertical elongation, a lateral movement by Zapruder, large enough to make such an elongated blur on the white object in the grass, should have been able to produce an elongated effect on the ascending fragments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

These photos from pages 505 and 507 of ‘Commission Document 87 - Secret Service report of 08 Jan 1964 re: Oswald’ show the point of impact of the first, second and third shot as determined by Secret Service, probably from viewing their copy of Zapruder’s authentical film (not the Zapruder film).

First and second shot: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/a/a0/Photo_wcd87_0505.jpg

Third shot: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/1/1a/Photo_wcd87_0507.jpg

Bjørn Gjerde

The re-enactment photograps are in fact from the Time/Life assassination re-enactment of November, 1963.

And, although the shot#1 and shot#3 positions are relatively accurate, the #2 position represents the location back up Elm St. to which the FBI made attempt at "moving" this impact location in order to correlate with JBC's actions & position.

The survey plat for this little attempt at "sleight-of-hand" is in my possession along with the survey notes that Mr. Robert West completed for this maniipulation of the facts.

For reasons (which have been fully explained to others), the FBI never presented this attempt at manipulation of the facts, and were it not for Mr. Robert West having provided me with the survey plat, survey notes, as well as having explained what actually transpired, this little event would have been lost in the other confusion surrounding the subject.

Tom Purvis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...