Bursts of Cosmic Improbability

[John Butler]

Bursts of Cosmic Improbability

The Universe is bigger and more mysterious than we can imagine.  Bursts of Cosmic Improbability began to flash off an on in Dealey Plaza beginning about 12 noon on the 22^nd of November, 1963.  These bursts showed differing, alternative versions of reality.  This just didn’t happen for one place.  But, we will for the purposes of this discussion concentrate on one.  Can you see what is going on in the next photo imagery comparison.

 

The Motorcycle Policeman in both of these scenes is Glen McBride.  The left-hand photo from Mary Moorman was taken not much more than a couple of seconds after the Zapruder scene.  I believe the Moorman photo is taken in the Zapruder Gap.

In this short period of time the group of people I call Mannequin Row has disappeared from the Morman Polaroid.  Since there is a lot of people on this forum who do not believe in photo or film alterations of the media of Dealey Plaza, I have come up with an idea to explain this situation to the No Alterations group.

We are looking at some mysterious universal force allowing us to see two versions of reality.

If this is not true, then we seriously have to consider widespread photo editing in Dealey Plaza.  This is all I have to say about that.  I won’t argue the point.  There are some that say don’t pay attention to that man he’s just playing us for fools.

That’s not the intention at all.  The intention is to point out inconsistencies in the visual record that no one has noticed in over 50 years.  Or, at least any who have noticed these things they haven’t mentioned it.  

Edited June 19, 2018 by John Butler

[David Josephs]

The image on the left is BEFORE the limo arrives and is taken from much further down Elm

Your ability to completely botch a simple viewing of a photo is remarkable...

Not a single thing youve posted here has been correct... as if you try harder to be wrong just so someone will notice you...

Pathatic that Conspiracy Realists have to deal with Conspiracy Fanatics so wheat and shaft dont mix...

[Bernie Laverick]

8 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

The image on the left is BEFORE the limo arrives and is taken from much further down Elm

Your ability to completely botch a simple viewing of a photo is remarkable...

Not a single thing youve posted here has been correct... as if you try harder to be wrong just so someone will notice you...

Pathatic that Conspiracy Realists have to deal with Conspiracy Fanatics so wheat and shaft dont mix...

Ha ha ha!! Comedy gold. David Josephs reprimanding someone for being a fanatic. Ha ha ha!!!!!

[Michael Walton]

3 hours ago, John Butler said:

That’s not the intention at all.  The intention is to point out inconsistencies in the visual record that no one has noticed in over 50 years.  Or, at least any who have noticed these things they haven’t mentioned it.  

John, there was no cosmic or any other unseen forces in play that day. It was just another day where a president of the US drove down the street in his car and got his head blown off.

Nothing was removed from the Moorman photo.  Although it's hard to see, you can see the sign and then where the bystanders (mostly women) were standing there. I've highlighted one for you to see. It's just an angle that makes a group of folks look obvious in one photo and scarce in the other.

52 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Pathatic that Conspiracy Realists have to deal with Conspiracy Fanatics so wheat and shaft dont mix...

So let me get this straight - John Butler posts something here and Dave Josephs, who posted "It's all in the sloping shoulders" in the Oswald clone thread [see below], and yet calls *John Butler* useless and also a "Fanatic" while I'm assuming Dave thinks of himself as a "Realist?"

Like Bernie says, that IS comedic gold.

Put another way - where in the world is "play nice" EF cop Mike Clark when you really need him reporting Josephs on this kinder and gentler forum?

And Dave, it's "pathetic" with an "e" and "chaff" not "shaft." Unless you're trying to give Butler here the "shaft." LOL

Another of Joseph's comedic gold. You know, separating the wheat from the shaft - HAHA --

The conflicting testimonies are incredibly intriguing and even more so because of their numbers.

I hardly ever gave the "two Oswalds" story much thought and consideration but when one reads all the testimonies it is much harder to dismiss.

Regards the Carousel Club photo of a possible 2nd Oswald, this fellow looks a bit heftier ( stronger ? ) than the Oswald we all saw on national TV starting 11,22,1963. And his right ear seems to stick out farther and differently than the arrested Oswald.

And wasn't Oswald known as a total teetotaler? The Carousel Club Oswald looks like he's knocked back a few beers and has booze stupid eyes as he ogles the stripper on the stage.

The man known as Harvey Oswald, the man Ruby killed, did not drink or smoke, nor did he "beat his wife"...

Lee, on the other hand,  was bigger, bull necked, fighter, drinker, leader...  There is also very good evidence that Lee was gay along with Clay, Ferrie and Ruby... I doubt he'd be ogling lady dancers or even sitting in the audience....

In my work with H&L I've come to find a pattern...  Harvey's shoulders are squared off, while Lee has sloped shoulders

I believe you will find this to be the case in every instance.  Even relaxed, Harvey's shoulders are much higher than Lee's.

just how I see it

DJ

[John Butler]

Thanks for the comments Bernie,

I occasionally do something snarky just to bring folks like Josephs out of the woodwork.  I’m supposed to be on his ignore list.  Obviously, not.  On the “kinder gentler forum” folks like him are not allowed to express their true self.  The worst ad hominem attack I have received on the forum came from him.  And, I mean a vile attack. 

It might be that he is jealous.  I know he can’t tell time.  He’s the fellow that said in the PM thread that the Darnell or Weigman film is before the presidential limousine came through.  The Zapruder scene is also from before the presidential limousine came through.  And, before the Moorman Polaroid was taken from down Elm. 

Let me take it slow for that fellow.  Zapruder first then a few seconds later Moorman.  Zapruder Mannequin Row vanishes in the Moorman Polaroid.  It can’t be explained naturally.

[John Butler]

Michael,

That is the R. L. Thornton sign rather than the Stemmons Freeway.  Did you notice that the tree next to the west face of the TSBD is twice as large as it should be?

Thanks for your comments on a certain fellow.

Edited May 27, 2018 by John Butler

[David Josephs]

On 5/27/2018 at 9:54 AM, Bernie Laverick said:

Ha ha ha!! Comedy gold. David Josephs reprimanding someone for being a fanatic. Ha ha ha!!!!!

My bad...

glad I could brighten your day

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by David Josephs

[Lawrence Schnapf]

unless i misunderstand your what your saying, it appears the the line of women are visible in the Moorman photo in the background behind the McBride

[John Butler]

Sorry Lawerence,

I am not clear on what you are saying.  There are two scenes.  Z frame 62 and the McBride Polaroid are before the President arrives.  They  are within a couple of seconds.  Z frame 62 is first.  

In z frame 62 there are 19 people on north Elm between the R L Thornton sign and the Stemmons Freeway sign.  The McBride Polaroid taken just a couple of seconds later hardly shows any people there.  It is an unnatural situation.  The Zapruder scene is a fake.  Or, the Polaroid is a fake.  First people there then no line of people there.

Walton has cut off the relevant area of the McBride Polaroid.  Check that against what I posted.  And, the Stemmons sign from Z frame 62.

 

Edited May 31, 2018 by John Butler

[John Butler]

“So let me get this straight - John Butler posts something here and Dave Josephs, who posted "It's all in the sloping shoulders" in the Oswald clone thread [see below], and yet calls *John Butler* useless and also a "Fanatic" while I'm assuming Dave thinks of himself as a "Realist?"

Like Bernie says, that IS comedic gold.

Put another way - where in the world is "play nice" EF cop Mike Clark when you really need him reporting Josephs on this kinder and gentler forum?

And Dave, it's "pathetic" with an "e" and "chaff" not "shaft." Unless you're trying to give Butler here the "shaft." LOL

Another of Joseph's comedic gold. You know, separating the wheat from the shaft - HAHA --

  On ‎6‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 7:23 AM, Joe Bauer said:

The conflicting testimonies are incredibly intriguing and even more so because of their numbers.

I hardly ever gave the "two Oswalds" story much thought and consideration but when one reads all the testimonies it is much harder to dismiss.

Regards the Carousel Club photo of a possible 2nd Oswald, this fellow looks a bit heftier ( stronger ? ) than the Oswald we all saw on national TV starting 11,22,1963. And his right ear seems to stick out farther and differently than the arrested Oswald.

And wasn't Oswald known as a total teetotaler? The Carousel Club Oswald looks like he's knocked back a few beers and has booze stupid eyes as he ogles the stripper on the stage.

The man known as Harvey Oswald, the man Ruby killed, did not drink or smoke, nor did he "beat his wife"...

Lee, on the other hand,  was bigger, bull necked, fighter, drinker, leader...  There is also very good evidence that Lee was gay along with Clay, Ferrie and Ruby... I doubt he'd be ogling lady dancers or even sitting in the audience....

In my work with H&L I've come to find a pattern...  Harvey's shoulders are squared off, while Lee has sloped shoulders

I believe you will find this to be the case in every instance.  Even relaxed, Harvey's shoulders are much higher than Lee's.

just how I see it

DJ “

 

This is from Michael Walton’s post and allows me to change to another topic since the fraudulent Zapruder film / Moorman Polarod did not generate much interest.

And, I will further risk the ire of DJ or David Josephs.  This is a topic near and dear to me.  The identification of Lee Harvey Oswald in the visual record.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations hired “Forensic Anthropologists” to determine many things.  They conducted many scientific studies and measurements.  One of the things they determined is that all the photos showing Lee Harvey Oswald is in reality Lee Harvey Oswald and not a double or imposter.

I use quotes around “Forensic Anthropologists” because they missed certain things about identifying Lee Harvey Oswald and his doubles.

Here is a photo of Lee Harvey Oswald as identified by “Forensic Anthropologists” 

 

Can you say this is Harvey Oswald or Lee Oswald using John Armstrong’s dichotomy? 

Is this :

1. Lee Harvey Oswald

2. Harvey Oswald

3. Lee Oswald

4. None Of The Above

Since this photo is of Marina and this was taken in Russia shouldn't we assume this is Harvey Oswald?

Edited June 19, 2018 by John Butler

[John Butler]

One of the ways “Forensic Anthropologists” missed the boat is the issue of earlobes / no earlobes.  No Physical Anthropologist worth his salt would have missed the identifying characteristics that separates out Harvey Oswald from Lee Oswald.  See the high school photo of Lee Oswald and the middle school photo of Harvey Oswald.

Let’s begin with a study of usable identification traits.  These traits are based on the Harvey Oswald’s, the man killed by Jack Ruby, mug shot at the Dallas police station.  This image is from the discussion on the Oswald Project Part I where this is discussed in greater detail:

http://jfkrunningthegauntlet.com/2018/05/05/who-was-lee-harvey-oswald-the-oswald-project-part-i/

 

In case the notes on this photo are not readable:

1. Earlobes (this is a significant trait)

2. Narrow nose

3. Narrow chin

4. Two bends or crooks in the upper rim of the left ear (this is a significant trait)

5. A wide and sloping downward neck

You can also add the following:

1. The left upper, first incisor is shorter than the other incisors (this trait is not that useful since Harvey doesn’t smile that often)

2. Sloping shoulders as mentioned already by David Josephs

There are the gross traits and specific traits listed above.  When used in common they will identify Harvey Oswald in any photo or move someone into the category of Not Harvey.  The specific traits are earlobes / no earlobes and two bends in the upper rim of Harvey’s left ear.  The gross traits are a narrow nose, narrow chin, and wide neck.  And, you can also add the next 1 and 2 descriptions.

Why the category of Not Harvey?  It is because most of the photos of Lee Oswald have been destroyed, or, altered into Harvey Oswald or, someone else.  An attempt was made to eliminate Lee Oswald from the visual record.  The “Forensic Scientists” were for the most part on the right track in saying that Lee Harvey Oswald is the only one represented in pictures of Lee Harvey Oswald.  That is if you consider Harvey Oswald as Lee Harvey Oswald.

Verification of these traits is seen in photos that convert Lee Oswald into Harvey Oswald such as the Civil Air Patrol photo of Harvey Oswald.  The photo editors knew these traits and used them in their work with such as the photo ID of Alek James Hidell.

If you run across a photo of Harvey with the left upper rim ear trait but, a broad chin or broad nose then that is someone other than Harvey Oswald and can be placed in the category Not Harvey.  Or, if an alleged photo of Harvey Oswald aka Lee Harvey Oswald does not have one of the two specific traits then that is not Harvey Oswald. 

Now that you are armed and dangerous, is this Lee Oswald or, Harvey Oswald with Marina mentioned in the photo posted earlier?

The answer to the question is Not Harvey which could mean C. Lee Oswald or D. None Of The Above.  This Oswald double in the photo lacks the specific detail of two bends in the upper rim of the left ear.  This is a very distinctive Harvey Oswald trait and if the Oswald in question doesn’t have it then it is not Harvey Oswald. 

You cannot tell whether this Oswald has an earlobe or not.  A suspicious black spot mars the lower ear area of the photo.  However, upon a higher magnification of the area one could conclude that there is no earlobe there.  The neck is not excessively wide or thick as seen in Harvey Oswald.  This might throw you off in determining if this is Lee Oswald.

Altogether, this might be one of the rare photos of Lee Oswald that didn’t need that much alteration to disguise Lee Oswald into Harvey.  At first glance this looks like Harvey Oswald.

 

Edited June 19, 2018 by John Butler
cleaning up errors