Bill Miller Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 51 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said: How can anybody judge the girth (circumference of a solid object) of somebody from a 2d photo. Do you mean width? It would take someone skilled in Photogammetry to do that, Ray. However, Oswald was a very thin individual and his size can be compared to other people around him. In this particular case, Lee's shoulder width could be visually compared against that of Prayer Man's to see if they are similar or if there is a noticeable difference. Several people have posted that Prayer Man looked rather large to be Lee Oswald. I am certain that Kamp is aware those observations and is why he made a big deal that I had shown a photo of Lee in just a T-shirt. The implication could only be that had Lee had his second shirt on - then he would appear as large as Prayer Man. But I asked just how thick could the material of Lee's second shirt be because to me he still looked like a skinny man with a second shirt on. I also suggested that the thickness of Lee's shirt could not have been more than 1/8th of an inch in additional thickness. For some reason Kamp has not seemed very eager to find the answer to the question of whether Prayer Man is too large to be Oswald. I can think of one damaging reason ... If Prayer Man is not Lee Oswald, then that would explain why Frazier, Lovelady, Shelley, Molina, etc., did not report that Lee was outside standing with them. That means the theory that all these witnesses were leaned on even before Oswald had been thought to be the assassin of the President is hogwash. And who knows - maybe Prayer Man and Lee will appear to be very similar in size. I am certainly not afraid to find out if there is a way to check it.
Bill Miller Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 57 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said: Stop deflecting. Show the girth!!!!! So summarizing your comments is deflecting .... nice!
Guest Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 Just now, Bill Miller said: So summarizing your comments is deflecting .... nice! Show the girth!!!!!
Bill Miller Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Bart Kamp said: Show the girth!!!!! I am getting to it .... then I will look forward to your next excuse for why it should be ignored.
Guest Posted March 24, 2017 Posted March 24, 2017 How much longer do you need Miller???? If you see it so clearly then it must be a piece of piss to show everyone else, surely you do not need three days to do so. Show us all the girth!!!
Bill Miller Posted March 24, 2017 Posted March 24, 2017 3 hours ago, Bart Kamp said: How much longer do you need Miller???? If you see it so clearly then it must be a piece of piss to show everyone else, surely you do not need three days to do so. Show us all the girth!!! You have been all this time with not caring to do a physical size comparison - waiting a little longer isn't going to hurt you.
Guest Posted March 24, 2017 Posted March 24, 2017 For weeks you have been yapping about this.......and now you expect us all to wait once confronted with presenting it. If it is so obvious then it ought to be produced in a relative short time, but no........... And physical size comparison? As related to? Try and tell me for certain what step he was on. And simce no one can do this with the quality of the films available at this time you have a non starter.
Thomas Graves Posted March 24, 2017 Posted March 24, 2017 22 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said: For weeks you have been yapping about this.......and now you expect us all to wait once confronted with presenting it. If it is so obvious then it ought to be produced in a relative short time, but no........... And physical size comparison? As related to? Try and tell me for certain what step he was on. And simce no one can do this with the quality of the films available at this time you have a non starter. Barto, Please be patient. It takes a lot of time to manipulate photographic images in such a way as to make them look both accurate and convincing. (lol) -- Tommy
James R Gordon Posted March 25, 2017 Posted March 25, 2017 Admin has decided to close this thread. It is clear - that after 76 pages - the debate is going nowhere. The proponents of PrayerMan are so grounded in “their truth” that any alternatives suggested are quickly dismissed. There does exist a forum that supports this theory and - maybe - that is where the supporters of this proposition should now congregate and endlessly repeat their views to the like minded resident there. The Education Forum stands for thoroughly researched evidence and theories and although serious attempts have been to introduce logic and discipline into this topic the supporters of PrayerMan have made that impossible.
Recommended Posts