Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

Very interesting and very good work guys. Aside from the strong resemblance to LHO your work here is the most compelling work I have seen. I don’t give any credence to the idea that PM is anything but a man but, which is the subject of this thread, but your analysis is spot on if you needed to be convinced that there is a person behind Frazier and it could be Stanton.

The only measuring I would utilize from the enlargement is a more precise distance between the blue lines representing Frazier and Prayer Person.

In this case 73 pixels vs 63 pixels.

Then I would convert from pixels to mm and then onto inches.

73 x 25.4 = 1854.2mm = 73 inches

63 x 25.4 = 1600.2mm = 63 inches

What shoes were being worn?

If I believe the frame shows a person was straddling the top step that would make them approx 1/2" smaller than the 7 1/4" top riser or 63 + 7.25 - 1/2" - shoe height.

 = 69.75" - shoe height?

46976730805_6d0c828ac6_o.png

Edited by Chris Davidson
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So, it is in Mr. Frazier's hands. He just needs to say who this person was and we check whatever evidence there is if the person indicated by him could be Prayer Man. However, unless he does so, some of us will continue this research until the truth emerges whatever would it be. It is unsatisfactory to say that the figure is blurred because it is not about a blurred image - it is about the few people who we know stood on the top steps. The person of interest stood about 2 feet away from Mr. Frazier and was in Mr. Frazier's field of view. He should have known from the very beginning who was around him. And he knows - only one blind spot remained. However, that person there at the western wall was never addressed in any of Warren Commission testimonies. And that person bears a striking resemblance with Lee Oswald:

1. He was 5'9'' + 5/8'' which would fit Lee Oswald's body height.

2. He was a white Caucasian.

3. The body height says he was a male.

4. He was dressed as a worker.

5. There are striking similarities between Prayer Man's shirt and CE151, the reddish shirt which Oswald wore in the morning hours. 

6. Prayer Man's hairline suggests that he was a non-balding male placing him into the age range of 20-30 years.

7. He had to come from the inside of the building, therefore, he was most likely an employee.

Is it then that strange to ask if Lee Oswald could be Prayer Man? Who else could he be?

I should continue with the recent find of James Hosty's handwritten notes which say that Oswald went for the Coke to the second floor, returned to the first floor and then went out to view the P.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

The only measuring I would utilize from the enlargement is a more precise distance between the blue lines representing Frazier and Prayer Person.

In this case 73 pixels vs 63 pixels.

Then I would convert from pixels to mm and then onto inches.

73 x 25.4 = 1854.2mm = 73 inches

63 x 25.4 = 1600.2mm = 63 inches

What shoes were being worn?

If I believe the frame shows a person was straddling the top step that would make them approx 1/2" smaller than the 7 1/4" top riser or 63 + 7.25 - 1/2" - shoe height.

 = 69.75" - shoe height?

46976730805_6d0c828ac6_o.png

My guess for the camera that was used:

47105518864_cf3950a826_o.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

So, it is in Mr. Frazier's hands. He just needs to say who this person was and we check whatever evidence there is if the person indicated by him could be Prayer Man. However, unless he does so, some of us will continue this research until the truth emerges whatever would it be. It is unsatisfactory to say that the figure is blurred because it is not about a blurred image - it is about the few people who we know stood on the top steps. The person of interest stood about 2 feet away from Mr. Frazier and was in Mr. Frazier's field of view. He should have known from the very beginning who was around him. And he knows - only one blind spot remained. However, that person there at the western wall was never addressed in any of Warren Commission testimonies. And that person bears a striking resemblance with Lee Oswald:

1. He was 5'9'' + 5/8'' which would fit Lee Oswald's body height.

2. He was a white Caucasian.

3. The body height says he was a male.

4. He was dressed as a worker.

5. There are striking similarities between Prayer Man's shirt and CE151, the reddish shirt which Oswald wore in the morning hours. 

6. Prayer Man's hairline suggests that he was a non-balding male placing him into the age range of 20-30 years.

7. He had to come from the inside of the building, therefore, he was most likely an employee.

Is it then that strange to ask if Lee Oswald could be Prayer Man? Who else could he be?

I should continue with the recent find of James Hosty's handwritten notes which say that Oswald went for the Coke to the second floor, returned to the first floor and then went out to view the P.

 

 

 

 

I believe prayer person in Darnell is in complete shadow.

That person is either one of two heights(described previously) depending on what step you believe he/she is on.

The cycle cop is one step down from the landing moving from west to east.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tOaCp331tHfElzjdPQH_JWCAcOameGem/view?usp=sharing

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris:

Prayer Man stood with his chest parallel with the shadow line. Only half an inch or inch decide whether any of the three parts (right and left hand, left thigh) are exposed to the sun or not. Please have a look at the overhead view here. If I choose to pull Prayer Man's arm just a small part of an inch toward his chest, the right hand will not be in the sunlight. It was my decision  to expose this mannequin's hand to the sunlight after seeing that if I do not expose the hands to the sun, I would not get this slightly brighter tone on his hand. It is possible to maintain the same location of Prayer Man as shown in my model and only adjust the hands and they would not be taking any sunlight. The consequence of pulling hands to the chest, after trying it, was that his hands were as dark as Prayer Man's face. This was the reason for having his hands rather a fraction of an inch in the sunlight. As far as the left thigh is concerned, this is easier. The colour of Prayer Man's pants was light grey (worker's grey), and if such colour is illuminated, it would not change too much relative to the part in the shadow. 

This is an older version of Prayer Man mannequin, however, it is sufficient to explain my point that the hands could be just slightly pulled back and they would not be in sunlight.

 

top_reduced.jpg

 

However, the main point is that you are looking at my model which is super clear, crisp, colourful, and has sharp contrasts. To compare it with Darnell, you need to convert it into a greyscale, darken it, change the proportion between white and dark tones, and then blur it. I did this here to explain the point without any ambition of reproducing exactly the Darnell still. This may be possible but I will not spend hours doing it because your mentally deranged master does not understand anything and uses you to challenge me. He did so several times in the past and it never ended well for his messengers.

Here is the figure showing Prayer Man in my 3D model (top), after changing it to grey, tuning the dark-white tones, and blurring it (middle), and finally Darnell still (bottom). In the middle panel, the left thigh has a light tone which is hard even to recognise. 

blurring.jpg 

 

To show that the left thigh, in spite of blurring, was slightly brighter than the region of the waist, I applied the 3D surface analysis in ImageJ a few days ago. Please have a look at the shape of the left leg (illustrated also with the course of the purple light). The analysis accomplishes what our eyes cannot: it reconstructs the gradations of grey as distances with light tones being extruded and dark tones being pressed into the image. While I can see a bit lighter tone of Prayer Man's left thigh even using my eyes, you may say you do not. However, the 3D scatter plot analysis is objective and shows that there was indeed an increasing brightness in the area of the left leg starting from Prayer Man's waist. 

003627_withrad.jpg

 

A more dramatic reconstruction of the same. The yellow-orange would be perhaps the knee.

clormap_relief.jpg

 

However, I do not agree with your casual statement:

"That person is either one of two heights(described previously) depending on what step you believe he/she is on."

The location of Prayer Man is exactly the one I show. He cannot be a single inch to the left, right, back or forward. One inch would change his location relative to the objects around. He would not only fail to fit the contour of Prayer Man in an overlay of Darnell and the model, but his body would also be either too far or too close to other objects. For instance, if you would think that a location similar to the one I show but on the top landing would do, it would not. The reason is that the right elbow of Prayer Man would move about 5-6 inches into the doorway and you would see a gap between his elbow and the head of the man who stands on a lower step. This is not the end of the problem. A short Prayer Man who would somehow be placed on the top landing so that his head would be still crossed by the vertical aluminum pole of the door frame would have his arms higher than "my" Prayer Man who is 5'9'' and stands effectively on the second step.

Please see here a comparison of two Prayer Men who have their heads at the same plane but one is small (5'2'') and stands on the top step with both his feet while the other is tall 5'9'' and stands with one foot on the second step. The small Prayer Man will have his arms about 2 inches higher than the tall Prayer Man. The panel (B) shows a detail of the hands of the two mannequins. The left one has his hands touching the transparent plane while the short man has part of his hands above the plane. I am sure that you are bright enough to understand the problem, however, I would be grateful if you could also convey this information to that mentally disturbed individuum on the other forum.

 

 

pm_height1.jpg

 

So, we have about six inches departure of the right elbow from the head of the man on the lower step (Lovelady?) but also additional vertical displacement by about 2 inches just due to the fact that a Prayer Man on the top landing would need to be short. 

I did a reconstruction of Mrs. Stanton posing as Prayer Man last year. I am sorry for repeating myself and hate to show the same pictures again and again. This is not my style, however, please also understand that I cannot spend time responding constantly to the same queries.

In the picture below, you see Mrs. Stanton modelled fairly accurately according to the family picture. with her grey and large body. She stands as close to the edge of the top landing as possible. The purple lines show where her head and her right elbow should be to match the contours of Prayer Man. I hope you appreciate the iron logic of this approach and reconstruction. One cannot just place Prayer Man somewhere in the doorway without violating the relationships of his figure with all other objects (e.g., people) in the doorway. This is the reason for modelling all doorway occupants - if all figures hold and Prayer Man's figure holds as well, the model can be considered for valid.

 

ss_withlines_and-problems.jpg

 

I hope this helps.

 

Late edit:

Please note that Mrs. Stanton's hand is also exposed to the sunlight. If I would like to achieve that her hand is in the shadow, I would need to move her as the whole figure backward and diagonally as the aluminum pole in the back still would have to cross her head. But this would prolong the distance between her right elbow and the head of the man on the second step even more. 

 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrej,

The old adage that a picture is worth 10,000 words certainly works here.  Substituting the image of Sarah Stanton for Prayer Man should cure folks of the notion that Prayer Man is a woman.  Claiming such was just a disinformation tactic used by disinformation artists to confuse and belittle an issue.  And, some still claim that if what Davidson said is something he believes in.

"That person is either one of two heights(described previously) depending on what step you believe he/she is on." 

I still don't get his work.  He is counting pixels between to misplaced lines and then offering some unrelated video not connected at all to what you are describing.  Huh?

I do have another thing you can work on if you have any interest and spare time.  Prayer Man is seen to be holding an object.  Almost all folks believe that object is a coke he supposedly obtained on the 2nd floor and then came outside the TSBD with.  Your models of Prayer Man's hands are the best I have seen.  But, those models indicate he is holding something other than a coke.  He is holding something about 10 inches give or take between his hands.  I guess he could be holding two cokes, but that is not plausible.

andrej-prayer-man-models.jpg 

This hand grip position is almost exactly the same or is the same as the alleged (by me) figure of Prayer Man on the Elm Street Curb in John Martin. 

The object in Prayer Man's hands in the Couch / Darnell frames occasional becomes brighter in some frames.  Since his hands are near sunlight the object he has in his hands may flash with the light indicating a metallic object.  Occasionally, this appears to be square object.

If you think this is interesting or of any value I would appreciate your thoughts.

 

Edited by John Butler
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

 This may be possible but I will not spend hours doing it because your mentally deranged master does not understand anything and uses you to challenge me. He did so several times in the past and it never ended well for his messengers.

 I am sure that you are bright enough to understand the problem, however, I would be grateful if you could also convey this information to that mentally disturbed individuum on the other forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, I don’t have an effin MASTER and nobody uses me for anything.

So cut with the cr—p.

I do my own research.

Do I converse with him on another forum and agree with him sometimes, yes.

If you paid attention to what I have previously said, I stated my Wiegman enhancements look like a woman. I still stick by that. I do not and have never hinged my so-called research reputation on those enhancements. If it’s Oswald, fine. If it’s not, fine. If it’s two different people, fine.

I have never said I believe that person to be who my so called master thinks it is.

Anyone can search that if desired.

In fact, way back when this first started, I hinted the Darnell prayer person looks more male than female.

That doesn’t necessarily mean I think that it’s Oswald.

I gave two different heights for the Darnell person, one which doesn’t fit a person who is 5’4”/5”6” tall unless that person was standing a certain distance back from the landing edge. Imo

Now that I addressed that, I’ll take a look at the rest of your points.

My first response is:

If prayer persons hand in Darnell is in sunlight, how can the tonal value equal that of a white helmet and white police hat in similar shadow locations?

I’ve always been under the impression that prayer person (if they are the same person in both Wiegman and Darnell) was raising and lowering a white object in Wiegman a few seconds apart.

Whereas the time difference between the two films was approx 30 seconds.

26dab48f-147c-45e1-a31d-a2fcf9ab7bb1-ori

56e41941-9cd6-4390-bd4a-56e9978dc126-ori

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, John Butler said:

"That person is either one of two heights(described previously) depending on what step you believe he/she is on." 

I still don't get his work.  He is counting pixels between to misplaced lines and then offering some unrelated video not connected at all to what you are describing.  Huh?

 

 

 

I'd be very careful when assessing other people's research.

I'll just mention the Altgens/Stemmons sign perspective and leave it at that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Altgens 5, 6, and 7 are all fakes.  The position of the Stemmons sign rules out Altgens 6 and Zapruder 255 being the same.  I'll leave that at that.

Have you noticed in this gif that Lovelady is shorter than PM and than is taller than PM.  Taller in Weigman and shorter in Couch.  What's it all about, Alfie?

56e41941-9cd6-4390-bd4a-56e9978dc126-ori

Well, it could mean that 30 or more seconds have gone by and Lovelady has changed step positions.  Or, it could just be bad photo editing.  The first frame of the gif shows a blurred Lovelady and the second shows a sharper, clearer Lovelady.  How do we do that?  Why aren't all frames shown at the same speed?

BTW, people in the early part of this thread thought that Weigman and Couch happened directly after Altgens 6.  At least that part of the lore of Dealey Plaza has been improved.

I don't get this:

"This may be possible but I will not spend hours doing it because your mentally deranged master does not understand anything and uses you to challenge me. He did so several times in the past and it never ended well for his messengers.

 I am sure that you are bright enough to understand the problem, however, I would be grateful if you could also convey this information to that mentally disturbed individuum on the other forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, I don’t have an effin MASTER and nobody uses me for anything.

So cut with the cr—p.

I do my own research.

Do I converse with him on another forum and agree with him sometimes, yes."

Where did Andrej say this in this thread?  I read through twice and haven't seen that.  Has something been erased?  Why else is Davidson going through this rant?  Whose his "effin MASTER"?  Just curious?

The gift shows PM drinking a coke as most people think.  Or, is he doing something else with a shiny object?  How would a dark green 6 1/2 ounce coke bottle with a dark liquid in it put out that much illumination in the dark shadows of the doorway.

Edited by John Butler
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 10:44 AM, Pat Speer said:

I have talked with Frazier four or five times as I recall, twice at the Bethesda conference, and at least twice at Lancer conferences. He has been asked about prayerman in my presence on two or three of those occasions. As I recall, he insists Oswald was not on the front steps. As I recall, he looked at "prayerman" briefly and said he didn't know who that was--but that it most definitely was not Oswald. 

The last time he spoke at Lancer, for that matter, he spoke with his son, and they said they were working on a book on Frazier's connection to the case, and hinted that this book would deal with the prayer man issue as well. I have no idea if this book is still in the works, but was told by Frazier in 2016 that he was still working on it--to which I requested he include as much as he could remember on his co-workers---Shelley, Dougherty, Lovelady, Jarman, etc.

 

Suppose for a moment that Prayer Man is Oswald and that Frazier knows he is Oswald. Does anybody honestly believe that Frazier would admit so?? After keeping Oswald's innocence a secret for fifty years? What a ridiculous notion.

Maybe on his deathbed, but I doubt it.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandy:

you have a point. It is difficult for me to even discuss all options because we speak about a good man who by a twist of fate occurred in a precarious situation. Mr. Frazier always defended Lee as a kind man and excluded the possibility that Lee would kill the President. And yet, his testimonies served the Warren Commission in a decisive way to pin the guilt on Lee Oswald.

There are a few logical options here:

1. Mr. Frazier was not aware at that time that there was someone to his right. This is possible because he was transfixed to the area of Tripple underpass and may have not spotted someone squeezing in front of him and taking Prayer Man's location. The minimum time for which Prayer Man was at his spot would be about 30-35 seconds. He may have stayed longer but we cannot know because there is no visual evidence. 

If this option is true, Prayer Man could have been Lee Oswald and Mr. Frazier's recent refutation of this possibility has no relevance. Actually, when Mr. Frazier was shown Darnell a few years ago he said that he had not been aware that there was anyone to his right. (However, the film evidence clearly show there was a man there).

2. Mr. Frazier saw Lee Oswald but suppressed the memory of seeing this man. In this scenario, Mr. Frazier knew that there was someone next to him and maybe even that it was Lee Oswald but forgot this bit. This happens in people undergoing severe life incidents, are subject to violence, injured or witnessed some kind of horror. Today, these memory lapses are known to be a part of post-traumatic stress disorder. This situation could have been exacerbated if he had perceived threats to not only himself but also his family.

According to this scenario, Mr. Frazier underwent through a horror situation in which he was forced to pin the guilt of President's killing on innocent man, a friend, and he could only handle it by suppressing the memory of the event. Statements such as not being aware someone stood to his right or evasions such as the image is too blurred suggest that this subconscious memory suppression could be in place. 

3. Mr. Frazier knew all too well that Lee Oswald popped up in the doorway during a period excluding him as the assassin. Therefore, he was always at ease saying that Lee was kind and that he could not believe Lee had committed the crime, however, there clearly was a script he needed to play. He was lucky that no one has raised the issue of Prayer Man for 50 years and therefore, he was not challenged about Prayer Man, and all was all right on the surface. So, he needed to deal primarily with the long bag which clearly could not contain the rifle (and which bag did not exist) and with the small lunch bag which Lee claimed to have on his lap during their ride to work on Friday morning. If I have any feeling of despair about Mr. Frazier's statements, it is actually the small bag part. Lee Oswald claimed he took a small paper bag with a sandwich and an apple for lunch, however, this possibility was clearly denied by Mr. Frazier. If Lee had a bag with lunch in it, his first-floor lunch and his short walk to the second floor to buy a Coke would make a very good sense and would stifle Lee' alibi. Take the lunch sack away from Lee and what remains is a lone wolf on the sixth floor redying for shooting. 

If this scenario is valid, Mr. Frazier's statements could not be used to exclude Lee as Prayer Man.

4. Lee Oswald was not Prayer Man and Mr. Frazier correctly denies Lee was there as Prayer Man. But how can he positively know Lee was not in the doorway if he was not aware of the presence of anyone to his right and if the picture is too blurred to say who Prayer Man was?  If it is only due to a consensus among the employees that Lee was not on steps, that sounds like an organised group whitewash. There was no real interview with any of the doorway occupants about the minutes spent there and about what happened during and after the shooting.  Mr. Billy Lovelady, admitted in his HSCA testimony that someone could be behind him without him knowing it, and this is the closest admission that actually, someone could have popped up in the doorway and that person was behind him.

I sincerely do not know which of the scenarios is true and would like to talk to Mr. Frazier and ask him not only about Prayer Man but also about the small and large bag. I view these three elements as inter-connected.

 

Late edit: 

5. Mr. Frazier will say who according to his best recollection Prayer Man was. If his candidate passes the tests and the person is someone else than Lee Oswald, the Prayer Man problem is solved. It is the only alternative under which Mr. Frazier's statement would be both relevant and decisive. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris:

thanks for your explanations. The tonal values of objects in black-and-white photographs taken by different cameras and film materials are not comparable. There is no point in comparing a white helmet in a shadow with a human skin exposed to sunlight.

The body height problem: if you think Prayer Man was 5'6'' and was standing further back on the top landing, you would face the problem of comparing his 5'6' with Mr. Frazier's 6'. This would put the level of Prayer Man head (the top) to about the root of the nose in Frazier's figure. This is not the case. If you place Prayer Man closer toward the aluminium frame, his right elbow will be hopelessly far from the head of the man standing on the second step.

I have done very little modelling with Wiegman film and cannot comment on all details of Prayer Man's location and body posture yet. However, it appears that he stood in much the same way as in Darnell, however, he was rotated slightly more to his right and may also be shifted an inch or two closer to the western wall. I would see nothing strange in seeing such minor differences in Prayer Man's posture between Wiegman and Darnell.

 

 

 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2019 at 10:44 AM, Pat Speer said:

As I recall, [Frazier] looked at "prayerman" briefly and said he didn't know who that was--but that it most definitely was not Oswald.

 

Andrej makes a good point. How could Frazier say that the person being pointed out -- Prayer Man -- wasn't Oswald when he had no idea who it was? An objective person would say that it might be Oswald for all he knows.

I wish the person asking the question would have asked Frazier how he knew that it wasn't Oswald standing there. Did he know that Oswald was somewhere else at the time?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Andrej makes a good point. How could Frazier say that the person being pointed out -- Prayer Man -- wasn't Oswald when he had no idea who it was? An objective person would say that it might be Oswald for all he knows.

I wish the person asking the question would have asked Frazier how he knew that it wasn't Oswald standing there. Did he know that Oswald was somewhere else at the time?

 

When Frazier says he doesn't know who Prayer Man was is where I lose confidence in Frazier's veracity.  Any time I watch a Frazier video I come away with a similar impression.  Just a good old boy doing the best he could with what he had.  Maybe or maybe not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a table outlying different statements and scenarios (some of which Mr. Frazier said) and their relevance. There are only two scenarios in which Mr. Frazier's statement regarding Prayer Man could be considered relevant: 1. Lee Oswald was Prayer Man and Mr. Frazier confirms. 2. Someone else than Lee Oswald was Prayer Man and Mr. Frazier reveals his/her identity which will be proved to be the truth. Every other scenario leaves the possibility of Lee Oswald being Prayer Man open. The research on Prayer Man has great significance because it is only the knowledge that has been acquired in the process of finding Prayer Man's identity that can be used to test any of Mr. Frazier's statements. Further, this research can provide a number of clues which together provide compelling circumstantial evidence allowing to decide whether Lee Oswald was Prayer Man. 

 

Scenario

Mr. Frazier denies Prayer

Man being Lee Oswald  

Mr. Frazier confirms Prayer Man was Lee Oswald

Mr. Frazier was not aware of Prayer Man’s presence (attentional blink)

    irrelevant

  irrelevant

Mr. Frazier suffered a selective loss of memory and cannot recall Prayer Man’s presence

   irrelevant

 irrelevant

Mr. Frazier saw Lee on steps as Prayer Man

   irrelevant

 relevant

Mr. Frazier saw someone else than Lee Oswald on steps but he cannot recall his/her identity

   irrelevant

 irrelevant

Mr. Frazier saw someone else than Lee Oswald on steps and provides an incorrect identification

  irrelevant

  not applicable

Mr. Frazier saw someone else than Lee Oswald on steps and provides a correct identification

  not applicable

 relevant

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...