Swan-Song -- Math Rules

[Chris Davidson]

I'm posting this here for new people that visit this site. If you have made it this far into this thread called "Swan Song" (meaning the original author of this post thinks that he's found all of the answers to the case) and "Math Rules" (meaning he thinks math is the best and ultimate way to solve the case) and you're as confused as I am, you're not alone.

To give you some background, there is a clique of JFK assassination researchers who think that the film shot by Abraham Zapruder has been somehow, some way altered. For some reason these people (including the original author of this thread) think the film needed to be altered in some way to show or prove that President Kennedy was assassinated by a single assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald. In other words, the film needed to be altered to remove the elements showing a conspiracy.

I'm here to tell you that despite this thread receiving over 10,000 views, all of the math formulas, pictures, and so on prove nothing. Here are the reasons why this is true:

1. There was *no need* for the government to alter this film;

2. The government had no time to alter the film;

3. Because the film does show evidence of a frontal shot hitting President Kennedy in the head and, thus, a conspiracy, the film was kept from public view by the government for 12 long years;

4. The government made a reenactment film sometime in 1964. This film was an "eyes only" film, meaning it was only for high government officials. In this film, the government included a black and white copy of the Zapruder film. If you watch this film and compare it with the Z film widely available on the internet, you will note that both films look exactly alike;

5. Once the government had complete control of the film, they could easily control the message seen in the film. Two instances of this were when CBS reporter Dan Rather described what he saw in the film (but not actually showing it to the public) and completely eliminating the President's violent "back and to the left" movement; and when Life magazine fudged the description of some of the frames printed in their special edition on the assassination.

The points I've outlined above are far more solid evidence of a conspiracy than the math formulas, photos, and drawings posted on this thread. Yet, you will notice that the original author of this thread keeps it alive by continuing to post "updates" to the thread like:

"From extant to exant: 23.4 ft per sec rounded off to the nth degree"

and then a few days later:

"Height of slope in wall x 192 ft. and then rounded to 12.4 mph of the limo"

...and so on. How many versions of a math formula can someone come up with to try to prove the same result over and over again? It's not solving anything and it's being done to keep the thread high up in the HOT rankings of this forum's home page. It all means nothing and I encourage new readers to read elsewhere to learn about the assassination.

Refer back to post #54, I tried to make it easy, but it's just beyond some to put two and two together. Even with supporting frames, photos and testimony.

[David Josephs]

I'm posting this here for new people that visit this site. If you have made it this far into this thread called "Swan Song" (meaning the original author of this post thinks that he's found all of the answers to the case) and "Math Rules" (meaning he thinks math is the best and ultimate way to solve the case) and you're as confused as I am, you're not alone.

To give you some background, there is a clique of JFK assassination researchers who think that the film shot by Abraham Zapruder has been somehow, some way altered. For some reason these people (including the original author of this thread) think the film needed to be altered in some way to show or prove that President Kennedy was assassinated by a single assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald. In other words, the film needed to be altered to remove the elements showing a conspiracy.

I'm here to tell you that despite this thread receiving over 10,000 views, all of the math formulas, pictures, and so on prove nothing. Here are the reasons why this is true:

1. There was *no need* for the government to alter this film;

2. The government had no time to alter the film;

3. Because the film does show evidence of a frontal shot hitting President Kennedy in the head and, thus, a conspiracy, the film was kept from public view by the government for 12 long years;

4. The government made a reenactment film sometime in 1964. This film was an "eyes only" film, meaning it was only for high government officials. In this film, the government included a black and white copy of the Zapruder film. If you watch this film and compare it with the Z film widely available on the internet, you will note that both films look exactly alike;

5. Once the government had complete control of the film, they could easily control the message seen in the film. Two instances of this were when CBS reporter Dan Rather described what he saw in the film (but not actually showing it to the public) and completely eliminating the President's violent "back and to the left" movement; and when Life magazine fudged the description of some of the frames printed in their special edition on the assassination.

The points I've outlined above are far more solid evidence of a conspiracy than the math formulas, photos, and drawings posted on this thread. Yet, you will notice that the original author of this thread keeps it alive by continuing to post "updates" to the thread like:

"From extant to exant: 23.4 ft per sec rounded off to the nth degree"

and then a few days later:

"Height of slope in wall x 192 ft. and then rounded to 12.4 mph of the limo"

...and so on. How many versions of a math formula can someone come up with to try to prove the same result over and over again? It's not solving anything and it's being done to keep the thread high up in the HOT rankings of this forum's home page. It all means nothing and I encourage new readers to read elsewhere to learn about the assassination.

MW -

Simply because you cannot follow the thread's points - there is no reason to attack what you don't understand.

Your "reasons" also betray a very shallow understanding of the events from the time Zapruder leaves the pedestal to SA Phillips sending Chief Rowley a Zfilm Friday night, to the events of Sat and Sunday night with two different teams of men at the NPIC working on two different fils yet both teams believing they had the one and only Original.

It amazes me that anyone can come onto a forum and disparage other people's work simply because it's over your head. So let's look at your 5 reasons:

1. There was *no need* for the government to alter this film; How would you have any idea about that Michael? Did you actually see the film prior to 1975? prior to it leaving Dallas? You've done the same work Horne or Costella have done?

2. The government had no time to alter the film; That's a joke right? why is it that people with only opinions rarely if ever have a clue about the evidence about which they are expressing said opinion? A Zfilm was in Washington DC by 2am Sat morning. Sr. Staff at the FBI claims to have seen a film in DC fri nite / sat morning while this film in the Chief of the SS's hands appears to have disappeared as there is no information about the fate of that film..

3. Because the film does show evidence of a frontal shot hitting President Kennedy in the head and, thus, a conspiracy, the film was kept from public view by the government for 12 long years; Again Mike - how would you know what was on any of these films unless you were at KODAK, with Rowley, at NPIC, at Hawkeyeworks or in Dallas with Zapruder, the FBI, the SS and Stolley watching it?

4. The government made a reenactment film sometime in 1964. This film was an "eyes only" film, meaning it was only for high government officials. In this film, the government included a black and white copy of the Zapruder film. If you watch this film and compare it with the Z film widely available on the internet, you will note that both films look exactly alike; that's close to the most absurd statement I've read. The briefing boards from Sunday night also exactly match the extant Zfilm - except those aren't the boards created Saturday night by Dino Brugioni and team who describes items in the film he saw that are not in the extant film.

5. Once the government had complete control of the film, they could easily control the message seen in the film. Two instances of this were when CBS reporter Dan Rather described what he saw in the film (but not actually showing it to the public) and completely eliminating the President's violent "back and to the left" movement; and when Life magazine fudged the description of some of the frames printed in their special edition on the assassination. And yet again, your opinions backed by anecdotes.

For those actually giving an effort to understand the math and how the Zfilm was taken at 48fps for long stretches - or how the anomalies in the film cannot be explained except for such cutting of frames, it all makes perfect sense.

Claiming the Zfilm is unaltered is as misinformed as claiming Oswald was in the 6th floor window. But then again you aint gonna learn what you don't wanna know... and it appears that zfilm alteration is a topic you simply do not wanna know about in any detail - if you did you'd understand what this thread is about.

If the Zfilm was unaltered - why is it necessary to do numerous recreations culminating with the FBI telling Robert West to "REMOVE THE 3RD SHOT FROM THE SURVEY"

If the Zfilm was a record of what occurred - why do you suppose it was reduced to photos and not shown as a film for 12 years?

Duplicity runs rampant throughout the JFK Evidence as I and many others have proven over and over.

In Warren Commission Doc 298 as well as CE875 we have the FBI and Secret Service presenting evidence of a shot well past z313's location - since there had to be 3 shots and there were no shots prior to JFK disappearing behind the Elm street Tree and no time for shots between #1 and #2 So the SS and FBI created a shot location for a shot that never existed, rather than describe and illustrate all the actual shots for which there is evidence.

Which of the final 2 shot scenario leaves the mark on the manhole cover?

You would agree that JFK was hit between 190 and 207 yet JC's reaction does not begin until z224... remember the FBI initially concluded JC was hit by his own bullet which did not change until Tague in April 64 and the famous Eisenberg and Redlich memos.

If the film was authentic, from what info would Redlich write the paragraphs below in relation to the Zfilm and Leo's model which was delivered in January 1964 when the reports of the FBI (WCD1 & WCD298) & SS (CE875) "are totally incorrect"

Mr. SPECTER. And where have these models been maintained since the time they were prepared by the FBI?

Mr. GAUTHIER The models were delivered to the Commission's building and installed in the exhibits room on the first floor, on January 20, 1964.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, I now move for the admission into evidence of the photographs 878, 879, 880, and 881.

Michael - the image at the bottom of this post is the original Model as presented with 3 strings to each of the cars representing an impact yet CE879 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=925&tab=page is a different angle and no suggestion that the cars relate to any shots even though the model cars are in exactly the same position as the WCD298 model.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy. For those reading Michael's post and agreeing the Zfilm as it is today is the same as what was filmed - you may wish to investigate why every other item in evidence is not authentic to the crime but only indicative of an innocent man's guilt - and then ask yourself why not the Zapruder film - the one permanent record the SS/FBI agree upon in it's current form.

Try this Michael... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21767#entry298458 shows a FBI memo stating that PRIOR to LIFE buying the films, prior even to Zap negotiating for this sale - the FBI has a copy of the film from Zapruder himself...

"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied" or the converse "Never believe anything if it has been officially endorsed"

The Zfilm has been the government's ace-in-the-hole while the Nix original disappears and Muchmore claims she did not film the motorcade on Elm. Bronson somehow gets a few frames exactly at the headshot with nothing else filmed on Elm.

April 27, 1964

MEMORANDUM

TO: J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Norman Redlich

<snip>

We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine

whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to

frame 190. We could locate the position on the ground which

corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish

by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the

President prior to this point.

Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the

hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

I had always assumed that our final report would be

accompanied by a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the

approximate location of the three shots. We certainly cannot prepare

such a diagram without establishing that we are describing an

occurrence which is physically possible. Our failure to do this will,

in my opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty

that others will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same

questions which have been raised by our examination of the films. If

we do not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer

them with facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with

fanciful theories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions

by the investigatory methods available to us.

I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession,

submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service,

are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected,

will present a completely misleading picture.

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the

FBI and Secret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a

staff project.

Edited June 17, 2016 by David Josephs

[Chris Davidson]

3.27ft vertical elevation relationship for "rifle angle to JFK 's head"

WCD298 and extant z207-z208-(z222 Added on edit)

WCD298 23.00degrees

CE884 z207 21deg 50min = 21.83degrees

Difference of 1.17degrees = 1degree 10.2 minutes

CE884 z208-z222 = 21deg 34min - 20deg 23min = 1deg 11min difference.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Chris Davidson

[Chris Davidson]

[Michael Walton]

For David Josephs:

1. Did you actually see the film prior to 1975? prior to it leaving Dallas?

Here is the timeline of the film:

http://www.jfklancer.com/zapruder/Tabular_Z%20Film_Chronology.html

None of us had seen the film prior to 1975, so that cancels out your statement of you and others knowing better than me. You seem to think that the government had an army of film editors at the ready splicing, removing and rotoscoping. The timeline shows that the film was being moved from one place to another to get it developed, then to make copies, and so on.

2. That's a joke right?

According to the above timeline, there was no time to alter the film. How did anyone even know what to "alter?" No one knew what the official story was going to be that early in the game. Just like during the autopsy that night, no one told Humes about the front throat wound. The same for this film.

3. Again Mike...

Again, none of us had seen the film prior to 1975, so that cancels out your statement of you and others knowing better than me. This was back in the early 60s when film technology was organic. Even Hollywood couldn't always produce clean film dissolves for their million dollar movies. So the best they could do is bury the film until '75.

4. The briefing boards from Sunday night also exactly match

You just confirmed it all for me with this statement. Did you even bother to watch this reenactment film with the Z-film in it?

5. And yet again, your opinions backed by anecdotes.

Did you even bother to watch Rather's live presentation? If the briefing boards match the BW version of the film from the reenactment film, and then if the current copies of the Z film match the BW film, then yes, Rather was fudging the film and, thus, it's not an anecdote.

For those actually giving an effort to understand the math and how the Zfilm was taken at 48fps for long stretches - or how the anomalies in the film cannot be explained except for such cutting of frames, it all makes perfect sense.

Oh my goodness, so you think some how, some way either a 1960s off-the-shelf consumer camera was filming at either 18 fps and then bumped up to 48 fps, that some frames were then removed or altered, or whatever you think - and *that's* your theory of the film being altered? And what was taken out or put in? And why do you think bumping up the film speed to 48 fps would matter?

And then to top it off, you think math - the discipline of science - is going to help you prove all of this? Have you taken a step back to just think about how absurd all of this sounds?

Claiming the Zfilm is unaltered is as misinformed as claiming Oswald was in the 6th floor window. But then again you aint gonna learn what you don't wanna know...

Funny you say this. Again, you know nothing about me and for that matter, you haven't even bothered to look me up elsewhere on EF to see where I really stand on the JFK case.

If the Zfilm was a record of what occurred - why do you suppose it was reduced to photos and not shown as a film for 12 years?

I explained this above and previously. Because they knew they had a very hot potato on their hands. The violent back and to the left movement is proof enough that a shot came from the front of the limo. Further, it also proves that the Single Bullet Theory is just that - a joke, a theory dreamed up by lawyers.

The Zfilm has been the government's ace-in-the-hole...

I'll let you think what you want, but it's really not. It's the opposite. That's why Rather (government mouthpiece) fudged his description of it, not once mentioning the back and to the left movement, on live TV. And that's why it took an ordinary citizen like Groden to sneak a copy of it on broadcast TV for the public to finally get a chance to see it in '75. And because of the outrage of what they saw, the hornet's nest was kicked hard enough for the government to finally do something about it, which led to the Church hearings. This is all documented and not dreamed up ideas by me. I'm not going to put the links here though - you need to take a step back from this math silliness and do the research.

MEMO

Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

Exactly. You've just proven many of my points with this blurb from the memo. They knew the hot potato they had on their hands was going to be suppressed from public view; they knew that the most the public would see of the film are still images (like in Life). So there was no need to vigorously pursue the truth of what really happened. The Katzenbach memo, too, is almost a copy of the above memo's blurb you highlighted in red.

I wrote my recent reply to this thread not for you and Chris but for new people who are curious about this case. If you do a search, McAdams is always going to come up first. If they arrive here to EF, they're obviously going to look through it and when they see this thread, it's really going to cause a lot of head shaking and browser closing. This thread is really falling into Jim Fetzer territory.

And even if I believed in this thread's theories, which I do not, it's presented in a convoluted way. I mean even the title "Swan Song - Math Rules" sounds like a grunge rock band's name instead of a serious analysis of the Z-film. And then the very first thread of "Zfilm alteration equation coming up" makes no sense. You should present your theories in a clear concise manner at the very top but then you get "...coming up" on the first post and then it just gets more confusing with animated GIFs, photos, math formulas, more math formulas, and so on.

For a JFK case newbie, they're just going to walk away shaking their heads and this thread does nothing for serious researchers of the case. But it just keeps going on and on, with a post of:

"See Post #413 per 45fps to nth degree"

...and so on.

I highly encourage you to read the analysis written by Tony Marsh and Clint Bradford about the film. No amount of math is going to prove the film was faked, because it didn't need to be faked. Once the film was in the government's hands and out of public view, they could say and do anything they wanted about the film - and the case - to cover up the truth.

Ask yourself this. If the government had really wanted to vigorously pursue the truth of this case, they most probably would have shown the film to the public that very weekend. If Kennedy had been beloved or best buddies with Johnson, Hoover, Dulles and all the rest, and if he had really been cut down by a crazy lone nut like Oswald, they would have been hell-bent on finding out the truth.

They would have grabbed the Z film, taken a look at it, and then told the networks to pool it and show it to the public on all three networks like they used to do on the Apollo space shots. The back and to the left movement would have immediately raised suspicion, triggering further vigorous investigation.

The above scenario is the essence of why the Z film was *not* altered. There were many people in high places who wanted the Kennedys out. And when he was out, the higher ups could easily suppress dangerous evidence or just sweep everything under the rug, which is what happened to the Z film. It showed way too much - the timing of the shots from different directions didn't match up a single person on the 6th floor of the building doing it all by himself; and the back and to the left movement showed conspiracy even more. So it was suppressed, but *not* altered. And the whole plan was probably never to reveal it to the public anyway if Groden hadn't sneaked a copy of it on TV in '75.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Michael Walton

[Chris Davidson]

I plan to start an "unaltered Z" thread when I'm ready.

We're still waiting.

Quote from MW:

I wrote my recent reply to this thread not for you and Chris but for new people who are curious about this case. If you do a search, McAdams is always going to come up first. If they arrive here to EF, they're obviously going to look through it and when they see this thread, it's really going to cause a lot of head shaking and browser closing. This thread is really falling into Jim Fetzer territory.

Why don't you start your new thread and reply there?

You can then get into another fruitless discussion about the validity of the film.

There was a shot around the extant z207 location, there is a splice at 208, where are the sprocket holes in Groden's version for those frames? Most newbies can understand that correlation.

Please don't answer here!!! Do it on your own dime!!!

I'll take Shaw's expertise over your's any day.

[Chris Davidson]

The gif was created from footage of the 1967 CBS special " The Warren Report".

The distance between the two frames (11mph@3sec) in terms of (dummy travel from shooter) is approx 175 then 225 ft. I'm accentuating the rifle barrel angle/height change for you.

The firing range was set up in Maryland to match the layout of Dealy Plaza. i.e. 6th floor height, Elm St slope, target distances, even a support box in some instances.

Notice the change in angle/height of the rifle barrel as the dummy travels down the track.

[Chris Davidson]

Copied formula from post #105:

The WC used 3.27ft as JFK's head elevation in every single frame surveyed (CE884), I can subtract that from the base elevation of the triangle ( 427.02)

and add 3.27ft to the height (65.05) =

427.02 - 3.27 = street elev of 423.75

Subtract this street elev of 423.75 from the windowsill elevation of 490.9ft, since this is to the street.

490.9 - 423.75 = 67.15

and add 3.27ft to the height (65.05) = 68.32 elev

And finally, subtract 68.32 - 67.15 = 1.17ft

You can now apply that method to CE884 zframe222, which will tell you how high above the window frame sill the WC placed the rifle barrel end.

[Chris Davidson]

CE884 Z222 Converted:

Elev 426.11 - 3.27ft = 422.84

490.9 - 422.84 = 68.06

65.68ft + 3.27ft = 68.95ft

68.95 - 68.06 = .89ft rifle barrel end above window frame sill.

Difference between rifle barrel end height of z207 and z222:

1.17ft - .89ft = .28ft x 12" = 3.36 inches

See post #187 graphic for contradiction.

[Chris Davidson]

[David Josephs]

I'm with you brother....

[Chris Davidson]

I wonder if this type of rifle would make a fire-cracker noise when fired?

http://www.pyramydair.com/article/Airgun_Calibers_June_2003/4

Diversion shot to the back?

Speculation on my part, of course.

[Ian Lloyd]

Chris,

I remember looking into the JFK docs on MF some years ago trying to find information on weapons sounding like firecrackers and actually found something - can't recall whether it was an FBI doc or whatever but it definitely described a handgun of some kind that, when fired, made a sound like a firecracker...may be worth a search?

[Chris Davidson]

Thanks Ian,

I'll keep that in mind going forward. What I'm most interested in(at this time) is the drop (lead height) figure at the fps entered.

Especially when Frazier was utilizing a 6.7inch lead height for z207 using CE560.

That's 6.7" lead height and 3.36" elevation problem applied to z222 which = a total elevation change of 10.06" or a difference of 6.7 - 3.36 = 3.34 = equal split in up and down elevation.

Since the SS/FBI determined the first shot at Station# 3+81.3 or what would be approx extant z218, which is between z207 and z222, I would say 10" total wouldn't be out of the question.

[Chris Davidson]

I'm with you brother....

I'll try and find the quote from Robert West to Tom Purvis (something about the rifle being jacked-up) which pretty much supports your graphic.