Jump to content
The Education Forum

PRAYER PERSON - PRAYER MAN OR PRAYER WOMAN? RESEARCH THREAD


Guest Duncan MacRae

Recommended Posts

Michael,

You are ignoring the benchmarks I outlined in my synopsis of the Doyle-MacRae photo-argument. Their result is that you get a good approximation of PrayerMan's height, and it's far too short to be Oswald. That rebuts any propaganda to the contrary.

Andrej,

I meant what I said, that you did the best job I had seen anywhere explaining Doyle's sun-plane argument (even though I knew it was his). I still have hopes for you doing the correct computer graphics on this project. That's why I was "buddying" up to you, like a python, hoping to suffocate the ROKC propaganda out of you.

Vanessa,

I think you need to re-read this thread through to learn of the individual effort I attempted to get this film scanned.

Robert,

It is impossible that there is only a 3-inch difference in the TSBD individual steps, therefore it is impossible that PM is Oswald. Darnell's was a standard news camera without distortion.

Bart,

I'm in no hurry to meet your photo-demands. My next day off I will hopefully acquire Wiegman stills and add to those in the photo-section at jfkinsidejob.com. I'm not a geek, and doubt Albert Doyle is either, so maybe you should play to the crowd and show us the height differential between PrayerMan and Lovelady. Otherwise you're going to have to wait, and wait.

Two years ago, one of your ROKC compatriots threatened physical violence upon me, which is a cybercrime. You are seriously-skewed if you think I'm hurting from that lunchroom hoax debate; I cleaned your clock on it here at the EdForum.

ROKC has become a viper's nest that I will continue to fight against. Greg Parker has brought hooliganism to the JFK discussion table, his moral fiber completely dissolved in ethanol. He has forfeited his place as far as I'm concerned.

I can hardly wait for your resignation, but don't do ultimatums, and have to work for a living.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

http://jfkinsidejob.com/pm/

In the first photo, the entrance lobby radiator reflects in the plate glass and gives an accurate idea as to how wide the landing was. With a rectilinear correction for perspective, the radiator extends 7.2 cm and measures 4.6 cm high. Tony Fratini determined the radiator was about 30 inches high, comparing it to the 7-foot-high glass panel. We get (7.2/4.6) (30) = approximately 47 inches for the width of the landing, about 4 feet.

This is a bit less than the 4.3 feet Fratini obtained from a scale drawing of the TSBD, and a bit more than the 3.5 feet deduced by Andrej Stancak from other sources.

In the third sketch, PrayerMan & Frazier's relative positions on the 4 ft. x 11.5 ft. landing are shown, aligned with the vertical stripes behind them. Setting Frazier at 25 cm (i.e. 75 feet) from Darnell's camera position, PrayerMan measures at 25.5 cm (i.e. 76.5 feet). This will give a small correction factor to PrayerMan's height in the Darnell entranceway photo, (76.5/75) = 1.02 The compass arc demonstrates how nearly equivalent their camera-distances are.

In the Darnell entranceway photo, the line representing the landing aligns with the peristyles and is demarcated upon the brightly-lit top stair riser, as Fratini illustrates on p. 506 of the PrayerPerson giga-thread at http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,8916.4040.html

The ceiling forms a 20 degree angle with the west wall, and a similar 20 degree line constructed from the landing line makes an angle close to 70 degrees with the west column- so 20 degrees is a good approximation for Darnell's camera-line with the west wall.

Measured from the landing line, Frazier is 5.2 cm high and PrayerMan is 4.4 cm high. We get (4.4/5.2)(76.5/75)(72 inches) = about 62 inches, or 5'2", for PrayerMan's height.

I'm not claiming to have laserlike precision with this height-estimation method. Frazier may be standing back from the edge of the landing and so only measure 5.0 cm high. In this case PrayerMan calculates to 5' 4 1/2". It would be a plus to get a height estimation by comparing PM with Lovelady in Wiegman. Computer graphics may yield a slightly more accurate estimate, but can't change the fact that PrayerMan is way too short to be Oswald.

Hiring a professional photogrammetry analyst, or a computer graphics analyst, or doing a digital scan will not change that fact.

Edited by Richard Gilbride
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

You are ignoring the benchmarks I outlined in my synopsis of the Doyle-MacRae photo-argument. Their result is that you get a good approximation of PrayerMan's height, and it's far too short to be Oswald. That rebuts any propaganda to the contrary.

Andrej,

I meant what I said, that you did the best job I had seen anywhere explaining Doyle's sun-plane argument (even though I knew it was his). I still have hopes for you doing the correct computer graphics on this project. That's why I was "buddying" up to you, like a python, hoping to suffocate the ROKC propaganda out of you.

Vanessa,

I think you need to re-read this thread through to learn of the individual effort I attempted to get this film scanned.

Robert,

It is impossible that there is only a 3-inch difference in the TSBD individual steps, therefore it is impossible that PM is Oswald. Darnell's was a standard news camera without distortion.

Bart,

I'm in no hurry to meet your photo-demands. My next day off I will hopefully acquire Wiegman stills and add to those in the photo-section at jfkinsidejob.com. I'm not a geek, and doubt Albert Doyle is either, so maybe you should play to the crowd and show us the height differential between PrayerMan and Lovelady. Otherwise you're going to have to wait, and wait.

Two years ago, one of your ROKC compatriots threatened physical violence upon me, which is a cybercrime. You are seriously-skewed if you think I'm hurting from that lunchroom hoax debate; I cleaned your clock on it here at the EdForum.

ROKC has become a viper's nest that I will continue to fight against. Greg Parker has brought hooliganism to the JFK discussion table, his moral fiber completely dissolved in ethanol. He has forfeited his place as far as I'm concerned.

I can hardly wait for your resignation, but don't do ultimatums, and have to work for a living.

Richard

Great, you emailed "Gagnon, Peacock and Vereeke"" on 15 January about a power of attorney to get the film off the 6FM (and how much that would cost).

What was their response?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

You are ignoring the benchmarks I outlined in my synopsis of the Doyle-MacRae photo-argument. Their result is that you get a good approximation of PrayerMan's height, and it's far too short to be Oswald. That rebuts any propaganda to the contrary.

Andrej,

I meant what I said, that you did the best job I had seen anywhere explaining Doyle's sun-plane argument (even though I knew it was his). I still have hopes for you doing the correct computer graphics on this project. That's why I was "buddying" up to you, like a python, hoping to suffocate the ROKC propaganda out of you.

Vanessa,

I think you need to re-read this thread through to learn of the individual effort I attempted to get this film scanned.

Robert,

It is impossible that there is only a 3-inch difference in the TSBD individual steps, therefore it is impossible that PM is Oswald. Darnell's was a standard news camera without distortion.

Bart,

I'm in no hurry to meet your photo-demands. My next day off I will hopefully acquire Wiegman stills and add to those in the photo-section at jfkinsidejob.com. I'm not a geek, and doubt Albert Doyle is either, so maybe you should play to the crowd and show us the height differential between PrayerMan and Lovelady. Otherwise you're going to have to wait, and wait.

Two years ago, one of your ROKC compatriots threatened physical violence upon me, which is a cybercrime. You are seriously-skewed if you think I'm hurting from that lunchroom hoax debate; I cleaned your clock on it here at the EdForum.

ROKC has become a viper's nest that I will continue to fight against. Greg Parker has brought hooliganism to the JFK discussion table, his moral fiber completely dissolved in ethanol. He has forfeited his place as far as I'm concerned.

I can hardly wait for your resignation, but don't do ultimatums, and have to work for a living.

Dear Richard,

I admit that I do not understand why you would be "buddying" me like a python, and why you find necessary to "suffocate the ROKC propaganda" out of me. I joined ROKC because of their goals and basic premises that resonate with mine: it would be good the assassination case to be reopen, and: Prayer Man was Oswald. I am consistent in pursuing these two ideas, and after spending more time on trying to understand the geometry and locations of different people in the doorway, I am even more convinced that Prayer Man was a man 5'9'', which means it could only be Lee Harvey Oswald. However, I respect your different view. I hope there comes a day when your and my solutions would be tested in a well-planned photographic reenactment of Darnell's and Wiegman's scenes.

I have noted that you again question Prayer Man as a man 5'9'', this time based on some height difference in Wiegman's film. I can assure you that there is an elegant solution for Prayer Man (5'9'') in Wiegman's film as it was the case in Darnell's scene. I will post it when I decide that my work is complete and perfect enough, however, it will not be in this thread. This thread is yours, Richard, you made it so as you do not to know how to disagree.

I have summarised my analysis of Prayer Man's location in Darnell' still on my blog, and also included alternative solutions such as Prayer Man being a man 5'9'' but standing on the top platform, or a man 5'6'', or even a person 5'3''.

https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Richard, - I admit that I do not understand why you would be "buddying" me like a python...



Andrej,


I just read your blog and you did a great job of re-creating the doorway scene in Sketchup. I, too, have used Sketchup and because you can make precise measurements in this software, your work confirms for me that Oswald was Prayer Man and is taking a single step down, which is why it makes him to appear shorter than he really is (5-9).


The only thing I'm wondering though is PM is shown in the film and seconds later, too, in the exact same position so would someone have continued to stand with one leg down the steps all of that time? It just seems like an awful long time for someone to stand that way which can get quite uncomfortable.


Also, and for what it's worth, I disagree with you about the Altgens photo being altered. I just don't think there was a need for it to be altered because the government's proof of showing that the doorway man was not Oswald and was instead Lovelady is that it *was* a case of mistaken identity. Therefore, there was no need to alter the photo.


Also, the photo was in the public domain within hours of the murder so there's no way that they could have forged it anyway.


But great job on the Sketchup work.


Michael Walton

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Richard, - I admit that I do not understand why you would be "buddying" me like a python...

Andrej,
I just read your blog and you did a great job of re-creating the doorway scene in Sketchup. I, too, have used Sketchup and because you can make precise measurements in this software, your work confirms for me that Oswald was Prayer Man and is taking a single step down, which is why it makes him to appear shorter than he really is (5-9).
The only thing I'm wondering though is PM is shown in the film and seconds later, too, in the exact same position so would someone have continued to stand with one leg down the steps all of that time? It just seems like an awful long time for someone to stand that way which can get quite uncomfortable.
Also, and for what it's worth, I disagree with you about the Altgens photo being altered. I just don't think there was a need for it to be altered because the government's proof of showing that the doorway man was not Oswald and was instead Lovelady is that it *was* a case of mistaken identity. Therefore, there was no need to alter the photo.
Also, the photo was in the public domain within hours of the murder so there's no way that they could have forged it anyway.
But great job on the Sketchup work.
Michael Walton

Hello Michael,

thanks for your comments and for viewing my blog. I will continue presenting my work on EF, however, the blog offers more space to post supplementary images, data and details of methods. It may be a good idea to post enough material on EF but also provide supporting images and further information on a blog.

We tend to think that Prayer Man stood in one particular pose for a long time. However, it may not be true - Prayer Man shows a bit different stance in Wiegman's film than in Darnell's film, and the films were only maybe some 10 seconds apart (if we take the time difference between the last doorway frame in Wiegman and the first doorway still in Darnell's film. Darnell's film is short too, and we cannot know for how long did Prayer Man remain in the way suggested in Darnell's film. Then, within about 2 minutes, Occhus Campbell already sees Oswald in the small storage room next to the main lobby.

I appreciate also your comment on Altgens6 doubting that the picture was altered. I think it was altered but in a much less dramatic way than I thought back then, few months after I started my research on Kennedy's assassination. To understand Altgens6, every (and I mean EVERY) single detail of the doorway, particularly details seen in human figures, need to be modelled as accurately as possible which is a time consuming process. The geometry of the doorway is so tricky than one can easily misunderstand the relations between the figures depicted. It will be a privilege to post my final thoughts on Altgens6 here on EF once I fully understand this picture. In the meantime, I hope my wife keep taking pictures of me in different postures, from different angles, in different lights, and wearing different shirts. After I finish my analysis of the doorway, the conclusion may also be that Altgens6 was not altered after all and I will be able to clear my doubts about e.g, shadows in the neck and V area and the one below Lovelady's right nostril. I really want to know.

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Michael, thanks for your comments and for viewing my blog...


Sounds great, Andrej, I look forward to reading more on your blog. As I said you've done a really nice job with Sketchup. I made a short SU clip a while back of my patio area:




...so I know you can make some very detailed and precisely measured models with it. I agree about the time consuming process too. It does take a long time to set stuff up in SU.


Is there any way you can alert me to let me know your blog has been updated? Maybe send me a PM through the EF messenger?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Michael, thanks for your comments and for viewing my blog...
Sounds great, Andrej, I look forward to reading more on your blog. As I said you've done a really nice job with Sketchup. I made a short SU clip a while back of my patio area:
...so I know you can make some very detailed and precisely measured models with it. I agree about the time consuming process too. It does take a long time to set stuff up in SU.
Is there any way you can alert me to let me know your blog has been updated? Maybe send me a PM through the EF messenger?

Hello Michael,

you made a great animation of your patio. I appreciate your knowledge of the process of making a SU model. I will send you a PM once I have anything to show, I hope in some near future. Thanks again for your comments which reflect your own experience with SU modelling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrej,

FWIW, I also believe Altgen 6 has been altered. Even though it was released early and would have had to be altered quickly, I still believe it was altered. It's hard to believe that officials would release a photo that needed altering, but I still believe it's been altered.

I believe it's been altered because:

  1. Lovelady's right shoulder is not all there. It simply doesn't look right.
  2. Regarding the fellow with the tie standing behind and to Lovelady's right, it very much appears that his image has been pasted there. Parts of him appear to be covering parts of Lovelady, like Lovelady's shoulder and even part of his cheek. Lovelady's left cheek shouldn't have a darker, shadow-like area there. (Nor a bright white area, which is also what I see on the Altgen6 I have. Not sure it's on all Altgen 6s.)
  3. So it looks like the guy's image was pasted there, and then someone attempted to blend it in with a pencil. I've seen similar things like this done before. It's pre-photoshop "technology."

Of course, if the image of the man was pasted there, there had to have been a reason for doing so. What I've wondered is if Prayer Man could be Oswald, and if Oswald may have been visible in Altgen 6 to the side and behind Lovelady. If so, PM would have had to have been near the center of the entrance-way at that time Altgen 6 was shot.

Anyway, I thought I'd mention this. If for no other reason than to give you encouragement on your Altgen 6 work.

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sandy:

so pleased to read that there are fellow researchers who would also consider the possibility that Altgens6 may have been altered. I have also spotted the features (shoulder, relation to the other man) you mentioned in your post. However, the more I look on the picture and try to model it, the more it looks to me that there may actually be nothing wrong with Lovelady's shirt, posture and his relation to the men in black suit next to him (Bill Shelley - he was on the top landing and wore a suit which is evidenced in Couch film).

However, I agree completely about the shadows problem, and think that shadows could have been easily added in few minutes, directly on the negative. I would prefer not commenting on this issue until I know how would Lovelady fare in the 3D model and whether it is possible that he would show the shadows we see in Altgens6 for natural reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Andrej I look forward to receiving your PM when you're ready. One other thing - I used to think doorway man was Oswald. I was so sure of it I made a video about it back in 2013 that you can see here:

https://youtu.be/KOA7QOCJtv0

You'll see in the above video how I thought LHO was the man in the doorway. But with all of the work that's been put into PM now, I realize it was Lovelady who was the man in the doorway and LHO is PM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Andrej I look forward to receiving your PM when you're ready. One other thing - I used to think doorway man was Oswald. I was so sure of it I made a video about it back in 2013 that you can see here:

https://youtu.be/KOA7QOCJtv0

You'll see in the above video how I thought LHO was the man in the doorway. But with all of the work that's been put into PM now, I realize it was Lovelady who was the man in the doorway and LHO is PM.

Hello Michael,

I like your video. There are some interesting moments in it that were novel to me, in particular the point that Umbrella man lifted his umbrella to capture President's attention. Maybe I am too a conspiracy nut but I somehow never accepted the HSCA explanation of the umbrella being a symbol of Chamberlain's appeasement politics against Hitler to which Joseph Kennedy encouraged Chamberlain. And the protest, ventilated against Joseph's son Jack some 25 years after the fact, happened right in the moment when the President was being murdered. What a construction... It could be used in the funny TV series "Did it happen or not?" in which 5-6 strange stories are presented, and the listener decides whether it could have happened or not, and the "true" scenarios are revealed at end of the program.

I let myself carried away, and would not like to drive this thread away from its topic, I apologise.

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sandy:

so pleased to read that there are fellow researchers who would also consider the possibility that Altgens6 may have been altered. I have also spotted the features (shoulder, relation to the other man) you mentioned in your post. However, the more I look on the picture and try to model it, the more it looks to me that there may actually be nothing wrong with Lovelady's shirt, posture and his relation to the men in black suit next to him (Bill Shelley - he was on the top landing and wore a suit which is evidenced in Couch film).

However, I agree completely about the shadows problem, and think that shadows could have been easily added in few minutes, directly on the negative. I would prefer not commenting on this issue until I know how would Lovelady fare in the 3D model and whether it is possible that he would show the shadows we see in Altgens6 for natural reasons.

Andrej,

The man whose profile we see next to Lovelady in Altgens 6 cannot be Bill Shelley, in my opinion. Shelley was slender and the guy in the photo isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrej,

FWIW, I also believe Altgen 6 has been altered. Even though it was released early and would have had to be altered quickly, I still believe it was altered. It's hard to believe that officials would release a photo that needed altering, but I still believe it's been altered.

I believe it's been altered because:

  1. Lovelady's right shoulder is not all there. It simply doesn't look right.
  2. Regarding the fellow with the tie standing behind and to Lovelady's right, it very much appears that his image has been pasted there. Parts of him appear to be covering parts of Lovelady, like Lovelady's shoulder and even part of his cheek. Lovelady's left cheek shouldn't have a darker, shadow-like area there. (Nor a bright white area, which is also what I see on the Altgen6 I have. Not sure it's on all Altgen 6s.)
  3. So it looks like the guy's image was pasted there, and then someone attempted to blend it in with a pencil. I've seen similar things like this done before. It's pre-photoshop "technology."

Of course, if the image of the man was pasted there, there had to have been a reason for doing so. What I've wondered is if Prayer Man could be Oswald, and if Oswald may have been visible in Altgen 6 to the side and behind Lovelady. If so, PM would have had to have been near the center of the entrance-way at that time Altgen 6 was shot.

Anyway, I thought I'd mention this. If for no other reason than to give you encouragement on your Altgen 6 work.

Good luck!

Sandy I believe you are wrong about Lovelady's shoulder. I'm sure you meant his left shoulder rather than his right. He is leaning forward at an angle similar to the guy in this photo.

Leaning_zpshcm7ffiu.jpg

Altgensprint_zps6edfc418.jpg

Edited by Ray Mitcham
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...