Robert Prudhomme Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 22 hours ago, Michael Cross said: Fascinating to watch this debate. Robert is trying to find empirical evidence about height while others say opinion and appearance are enough. What's wrong with fact based data? It can only add to the investigation IMO. The problem with facts, Michael, is they don't always give you the answer you are seeking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Cross Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 (edited) On 11/9/2016 at 9:17 AM, Thomas Graves said: Dear Sandy, To whom are you referring? -- Tommy I was replying to a Michael Walton post. Edited November 10, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said: Michael, Sounds reasonable to me, although judging "Shelley's and Lovelady's" comparative heights from such a distance, and given the fact that one or both of them start running / changing direction in the clip, makes it a bit problematic, IMHO. That's why I tend to go with "Lovelady's" distinctive bald spot, hair line, and (obvious to me at least) boldly-pattered and distinctive plaid shirt. Maybe "my problem" is that I'm not sufficiently "paranoid" to seriously entertain the thought that Barto, or someone else, altered (like drawing in with a magic pencil, or something) the regular, geometrical (i.e., non- LSD spider-webbish) pattern on "Lovelady's" shirt. -- Tommy Tommy, The big problem I have with the pair walking west on the extension being Shelley and Lovelady is that 1) neither of them said they'd done that in their first-day affidavits, and 2) even in their later claims (which very well could be FBI tainted) they do not say they walked there. And in fact they said they walked down where the president's car had been when he was shot. Put me down for NOT believing the two are Shelley and Lovelady. (I used to believe that that was the case.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted November 10, 2016 Share Posted November 10, 2016 Has anybody proven that it was Shelley, who is allegedly walking down the street with Lovelady? Could it be Lovelady walking past some other guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted November 11, 2016 Author Share Posted November 11, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said: Has anybody proven that it was Shelley, who is allegedly walking down the street with Lovelady? Could it be Lovelady walking past some other guy? Ray, Actually, I would think that the Couch / Darnell clip isn't quite long enough for anyone to be able to determine with reasonable certainty whether or not that is the case But I think that the fact we know what his wardrobe was that day (dark suit), in conjunction with the fact that we can see his distinctive. "Kookie, Kookie, Lend Me Your Comb" hairdo and his slender frame in Couch / Darnell, strongly suggests that he is indeed Shelley, and even more so because he "just happens" to be walking next to a Lovelady-looking guy for a second or two in the synchronized Couch / Darnell GIF by Gerda Dunckel. -- Tommy Edited November 11, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted November 12, 2016 Author Share Posted November 12, 2016 (edited) On 11/10/2016 at 0:33 PM, Sandy Larsen said: Tommy, The big problem I have with the pair walking west on the extension being Shelley and Lovelady is that 1) neither of them said they'd done that in their first-day affidavits, and 2) even in their later claims (which very well could be FBI tainted) they do not say they walked there. And in fact they said they walked down where the president's car had been when he was shot. Put me down for NOT believing the two are Shelley and Lovelady. (I used to believe that that was the case.) Dear Sandy, If Shelley and Lovelady were up to no good on 11/22/63, what makes you think they would have been truthful and forthright on any of those documents and / or testimonies? -- Tommy PS It appears to me that your relatively steep "newbie" learning curve plus your willingness to comment on practically everything and then "advertise" your near-constant flip-flopping on issues is kinda impedin' the the overall progress of this here forum, IMHO. Anyone's continuing to seriously entertain the thought that Cinque and Fetzer were right about "Door Man," "Dwarf Man (Wearing Lovelady's Shirt While) Sitting In A Chair In Homicide and Robbery," "Neanderthal Man (Wearing Lovelady's Plaid Shirt) On The Steps After The Assassination," etc, all all prime examples of witting or unwitting JFK Assassination Debate obstructionism, IMHO. Edited November 13, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 OK, you guys have been verbally abusing one another for awhile now. Prudhomme wants facts, such as the actual heights of the two men. Why does that place him out in never-never land? If you men want to debate the facts, this IS the place for that. If you simply want to swap insults, why not just PM each other until THAT gets tiresome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted November 12, 2016 Share Posted November 12, 2016 But, I like it here in Never-Never Land, Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted November 13, 2016 Author Share Posted November 13, 2016 2 hours ago, Mark Knight said: OK, you guys have been verbally abusing one another for awhile now. Prudhomme wants facts, such as the actual heights of the two men. Why does that place him out in never-never land? If you men want to debate the facts, this IS the place for that. If you simply want to swap insults, why not just PM each other until THAT gets tiresome? Mark, Who implied, or outright stated, that Cowboy Bob was out there in never-never land? -- Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 I'm not sure the Americans on this forum are aware or not, or if they particularly care but, where I live, to address someone by their last name (unless you are a close personal friend) is considered to be an attempt at demeaning this person. I'm not sure if Thomas is persistently addressing me by my last name because he likes the unusual sound of it, or if he feels it gives him the upper hand in a debate. Either way, I ask that he stop this practice, as well as addressing me as "Cowboy Bob". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted November 13, 2016 Author Share Posted November 13, 2016 2 minutes ago, Robert Prudhomme said: I'm not sure the Americans on this forum are aware or not, or if they particularly care but, where I live, to address someone by their last name (unless you are a close personal friend) is considered to be an attempt at demeaning this person. I'm not sure if Thomas is persistently addressing me by my last name because he likes the unusual sound of it, or if he feels it gives him the upper hand in a debate. Either way, I ask that he stop this practice, as well as addressing me as "Cowboy Bob". Robert / Bob, Fair enough. And my preferred name is "Tommy." -- Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted November 13, 2016 Share Posted November 13, 2016 Just call me Bob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted November 13, 2016 Author Share Posted November 13, 2016 (edited) On 11/12/2016 at 5:58 PM, Robert Prudhomme said: Just call me Bob. Howdy, Robert / Bob ! Pray tell, is that a demand or a request? -- Tommy PS ever find Lovelady's height? You know, his arrest in Maryland while still in the Air Force, etc? And what about Shelley? Was he on the high school basketball team? Or was he always typecast as one of the dwarfs in the drama's department's annual production of "Snow White"? Edited November 15, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted November 14, 2016 Share Posted November 14, 2016 On 11/12/2016 at 0:36 PM, Thomas Graves said: Dear Sandy, If Shelley and Lovelady were up to no good on 11/22/63, what makes you think they would have been truthful and forthright on any of those documents and / or testimonies? I didn't know that Shelley and Lovelady were up to no good. (Other than being manipulated later on by WC-friendly agents.) -- Tommy PS It appears to me that your relatively steep "newbie" learning curve plus your willingness to comment on practically everything and then "advertise" your near-constant flip-flopping on issues is kinda impedin' the the overall progress of this here forum, IMHO. The reason I flip-flop sometimes is because new information warrants it. Unlike some here, I am not an ideologue and I'm willing to change my thinking when the evidence warrants it. Furthermore, I am not ashamed of doing that because it is the right thing to do. If anybody is impeding progress on the forum, it is the ideologues. Because they misguide others. Also, members who demonize those they disagree with. Because they discourage open discourse. (BTW some of my flip-flops have been the result of my being misguided by said ideologues.) Anyone's continuing to seriously entertain the thought that Cinque and Fetzer were right about "Door Man," "Dwarf Man (Wearing Lovelady's Shirt While) Sitting In A Chair In Homicide and Robbery," "Neanderthal Man (Wearing Lovelady's Plaid Shirt) On The Steps After The Assassination," etc, all all prime examples of witting or unwitting JFK Assassination Debate obstructionism, IMHO. When someone you or others like to demonize is right, or appears to be right, about something, I am going to say so. I've never thought that Door Man was Oswald, but if the evidence ever points to that being the case, I am going to say so. Damn the demonizers. It appears you are afraid of my doing that. Or maybe you just don't like it when I disagree with you on something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now