Paul Brancato Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 I'm in the camp that thinks the film is unaltered and that it's a distraction to question it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Newton Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: This exact same answer came up months ago on another thread regarding the Z film. Missing frames = painted in blobs = altered = faked. We all mean the same thing here, Chris. Although not a complete report online, the Zavada report proved the Z film was not altered = faked. Did you do all your homework on Zavada, do you understand the controversies regarding that report and it's author? Apparently not. I'd suggest looking further than one thread "a few months ago". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Yes I did Chris. It got so bad that I was temporarily banned from this forum. And I've worked in the multimedia business for 30 years now. But more than that, Zavada actually touched and handled the film, studied it carefully, and concluded his report. The film is THE BEST evidence for conspiracy, Chris. Think about that for a minute - if the film was altered by the Bad Guys why in the world did they STILL LEAVE the evidence of conspiracy in it? It doesn't make sense and it's why, on 11/25/63, government lackey Dan Rather got on the air and in front of a national TV audience, began the long, sordid story of lies about what was in it. If an innocent government was truly trying to be transparent and inform the country of what really happened, they would have told the TV networks to pool their sources and show the film for all to see. Instead, Rather gets on, says as an objective reporter, that he sees the president's head and body violently FORWARD from the head shot. And, thus, began the long and many lies trying to cover up the evidence of conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Newton Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Michael, Great. For the last 15 years I've been the IT Director and a SVP of two video production companies so I'm not so uneducated in multimedia, as far as I can tell. With all due respect, and I mean that truly, if we agree that frames are missing then we both agree it's not the "camera original". If we don't agree on that, so be it, then we agree to disagree. All your other points are well taken and I agree with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul maggio Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_QIuu6hsAc&t=231s.......You all need to watch this video carefully and understand that Zavada did not examine the camera original but a 1st generation copy altered at the Kodak Hawkeye lab in Rochester,NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Sounds good we work in the same field, Chris. Have a good holiday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 (edited) Gif slowed down to quarter speed. http://vid46.photobucket.com/albums/f128/Fourbrick/Zap3_zpslmb6e6hx.mp4 Edited November 24, 2016 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 18 hours ago, Chris Newton said: Just curious Robin, Has anyone isolated (and maybe flipped for clarity) the reflections on the trunk of the limo? It would be interesting to see if there are any defects in the skyline it shows. Chris I have never looked at the reflections on the trunk of the limo, it could be an interesting exercise.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 Zapruder stabilized GIF ( slow version ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 Dorman GIF Showing the Limo as it turns the corner from Houston st on to Elm st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 To the good folks who think the Z film is altered, what's your theory as to why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 4 hours ago, Paul Brancato said: To the good folks who think the Z film is altered, what's your theory as to why? I saw a copy of the Zapruder in NYC in 1964. I have talked about that in my 2013 NID presentation "Midnight Blue to Black" in some detail. Here's a link to a photo of the Charles Theatre, where I viewed it: https://ss100x.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/mb2b-exhibit-5/ What I saw was clear, and it seemed to me that all the debris moved to the rear. I do not recall seeing a 'blob'. So I have questioned the provenance of the film(s) ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 I saw a copy of the Zapruder in NYC in 1964. I have talked about that in my 2013 NID presentation "Midnight Blue to Black" in some detail. Here's a link to a photo of the Charles Theatre, where I...... We're not talking about a chosen few who some how, some way got a sneak peek of it in a movie theater. You may support the idea that Rather is making your point for you too. But all you have to do is listen to him inaccurately describe what he "saw" in the film and it's obvious he's talking s##t on 11/25. Do you remember the moon landings, Pam? I do. And I remember them showing live coverage on all three networks. Now ask yourself - if an innocent, vigorous government was truly seeking the truth of what happened on 11/22, why didn't they show the Z film for all - and I mean everyone, every single citizen with a television set at home - to see? Finally, why was there such an uproar in 1975 when the film was finally shown to a mass audience, the one where Groden snuck a copy of it onto live late night TV? It was so uproarious it led to the Church committee hearings on assassinations. From your logic here, you make it sound it like "everyone" saw it in 1963 or '64, shrugged, then saw it again in '75 and everyone suddenly grew a conscious. You have to know this, which is the whole point of whether the film was altered/faked or not. It wasn't because you have to keep in mind too that the film SHOWS multiple shots from different angles. Why, pray tell, would the bad guys leave that in if they even bothered to alter it any other way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bristow Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 Chris Newton, "Has anyone isolated (and maybe flipped for clarity) the reflections on the trunk of the limo? It would be interesting to see if there are any defects in the skyline it shows." Yes I have looked very closely at the trunk reflections and in the end it all seemed correct. The buildings, sky, people, everything. The only thing I found is what appears to be a reflection of the white piece of trash on the grass is actually a pillar directly behind the trash on the South side of the plaza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bristow Posted November 25, 2016 Share Posted November 25, 2016 (edited) Quote I'm in the camp that thinks the film is unaltered and that it's a distraction to question it. Edited November 25, 2016 by Chris Bristow Double entry, see next post. 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