John Butler Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) "PM has something in his hands. I use to think it was a coke. I now think it is a camera. The frame above informs the notion. There seems to be some sort of glow in his hands or more correctly between his hands. He appears to be holding a 2-handed camera holder used with cameras in those days to steady the camera. His hands are always positioned for such a device in Weigman, Darnell, and John Martin." Rich, This drew no response from anyone. Is there anyone out there who can explain the glow in PM's hands? To me, it is similar to the flash seen in PM's hands in the John Martin film. Edited July 1, 2018 by John Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) I have reread through this thread and the comment I made on two different shadow angles in Weigman (wrong frame here it is actually Darnell) drew no response or very little. The comment must have been made in another thread. It is not in this one. So, I will make it again. There are two shadow angles in Weigman. One is going at a certain angle in the TSBD doorway. I believe you folks have calculated that at about 18 degrees with some variation. What is the shadow angle of the people on the street? It appears to be significantly different than the doorway. Edited July 1, 2018 by John Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 On 6/11/2018 at 8:01 PM, Jim Hargrove said: Good grief! Regardless of the facts of where Sarah Stanton was standing on the TSBD stairs... Where does all your HATE come from? Can we not even discuss this politely? Jim, your are dragging ugliness into this forum from from elsewhere. On 6/14/2018 at 8:37 PM, Jim Hargrove said: Bart, Frankly, I could care less about how much of a bully you are. ........ Perhaps I'm wrong, but here are a few of the messages troppocrat@aol.com has sent me about you.... Jim: ....... In it Bart Kamp ignores ..... Kamp ignores ..Kamp flagrantly ignores ... Not only does Kamp .....but he ignores ...... Kamp is lying .What he flagrantly ignores ....Kamp insults .He's clearly trying to keep information he is aware refutes him from ......I think we know who the "faker" is... .....Stancak and they are incredible efforts at Rube Goldberg pseudo-analysis... Because the Education Forum has been trimmed down to only pro-Murphy posters no one takes a deserved wack at Stancak's pinata of ridiculous pseudo-science he tries to pass off as research... ....Stancak is making him 6 foot and directly comparable to Frazier...The Education Forum allows Stancak to run uncontrolled like a kid in a sandbox... .....if Stancak simply bothered to read what I've posted on my ........If you'll notice Stancak omits all of these ..... .... DiEugenio asked Kamp where he thought Stanton was and Kamp ......Really credible forum .... No one mentions to Andrej that ..Gordon has allowed Andrej and Kamp to be ....... What Andrej does is ....... Andrej is assisted by Gordon in avoiding ... Stancak listed ".... Stancak knew ....Stancak couldn't locate new imaginary Stanton was created out of thin air by Stancak .... Stancak ignored that ... Another thing Kamp and Stancak avoid with .... Why the hate? - Because Kamp is trying to pre-empt having to answer what he already knows to be true... I'm asking again, Bart. Where does all your HATE come from? Jim, Hargrove, it looks like you are trying to settle a score on wounds you have taken from outside this forum, by dragging all the baggage into this forum. I am sure it is not lost on you that this is just aggravating to the moderators, and it creates work for them. I am sure that it is not lost on you that this garbage is depressing to the sponsors, admins and moderators. I am sure that it is not lost on you that this garbage is depressing to the members, apart from a very few who like to see a good stirring of the pot; in fact those members have appeared to have been absent lately. I am sure that it is not lost on you that this garbage has repeatedly caused threads to be shut down in the past. I am sure that it is not lost on you that it is pretty selfish of you to try to settle a score here , which was earned elsewhere. Bart, don't get tro11ed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted July 1, 2018 Author Share Posted July 1, 2018 Michael, You’re right!! I had forgotten about that post. I (almost) always try to avoid this kind of divisiveness, but didn’t here. No more posting of other people’s criticism’s from me. Thanks for pointing it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 12 hours ago, John Butler said: I have reread through this thread and the comment I made on two different shadow angles in Weigman drew no response or very little. The comment must have been made in another thread. It is not in this one. So, I will make it again. There are two shadow angles in Weigman. One is going at a certain angle in the TSBD doorway. I believe you folks have calculated that at about 18 degrees with some variation. What is the shadow angle of the people on the street? It appears to be significantly different than the doorway. John in order to work out the angle of the people in the street, we would've to have fixed point with from which to calculate. At that time, 12.30 p.m. the angle of the sun's azimuth was 185.22 or 4.78˚ degrees west of South. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) Ray, Thanks for responding. Let me correct a mistake. The frame in question is not Weigman but, Darnell. I generally screw those two up when not thinking. There are two different shadow angles in Darnell. One for the corner of the landing at the TSBD doorway. And another shadow angle for people on the street. There is a significant difference in these angles. When light from a light source hits an object, the object casts a shadow directly away from the light source. The angle of that shadow is the angle of the light source to the object. If I have that wrong then I will stand corrected. At 12:30 on Nov. 22, 1963, the sun was at a certain point in the sky. Any object on earth at that time would cast a shadow directly off the sun. The angle of that shadow would be a reflection of the angle of the sun to the object at 12:30. Angles of shadows moving at two different directions at the same time is unnatural and physically impossible. Therefore the Darnell frame is a composite of two photos with different shadow angles taken at different times. That really screws up Prayer Man, doesn't? There is another problem with time in most people's reasoning involving Darnell, Weigman, and Couch. When were there films taken is the problem? How long after the assassination? The presidential motorcade broke up into more than 3 segments at the Houston and Elm intersection. Each segment traveled down Elm Street at a different time. First off, the first segment was of the first two motorcade vehicles. These traveled ahead of the rest of the motorcade and were not involved in the motorcade events. The second group consisted of those cars and motorbikes directly around the president's vehicle. We can see these in Zapruder, Bell, Altgens, and some other films. The 3rd group consisted of the Mayor's Car and the National Press Pool Car. I don't have any visuals on them traveling down Elm Street to the underpass. They were stopped at the intersection at then released by the Dallas Police. How long they were stopped and how long it took then to clear Elm Street and go under the Triple Underpass is not known. The 4th group begins with the Camera Car #1 and the vehicles following it. They were held up while the Mayor's Car left Dealey Plaza. After that, they were released to travel down Elm. The Couch film has a good frame showing these vehicles with Elm Street empty of cars in front of them. Again, the question is how long were they stopped and how long did it take them to travel down Elm Street and go under the Triple Underpass. My best guess is 2 minutes or more. The time involved in the assassination and the filming of Darnell and Couch would not really be that significant for shadows. You should not find a large discrepancy in shadows in Darnell. But, they are there and easily seen. So, the two different shadows in the Darnell frame showing Prayer Man is a real problem for theorists. There is such a degree of difference in the shadows mentioned that there is really no need to figure angles. Unless some one has to see the angle difference in numbers rather than just looking at it. Edited July 2, 2018 by John Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Reposted below Edited July 2, 2018 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 On 7/1/2018 at 3:30 AM, John Butler said: "PM has something in his hands. I use to think it was a coke. I now think it is a camera. The frame above informs the notion. There seems to be some sort of glow in his hands or more correctly between his hands. He appears to be holding a 2-handed camera holder used with cameras in those days to steady the camera. His hands are always positioned for such a device in Weigman, Darnell, and John Martin." Rich, This drew no response from anyone. Is there anyone out there who can explain the glow in PM's hands? To me, it is similar to the flash seen in PM's hands in the John Martin film. Looks more like to top of a coke can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 16 hours ago, John Butler said: Ray, Thanks for responding. Let me correct a mistake. The frame in question is not Weigman but, Darnell. I generally screw those two up when not thinking. There are two different shadow angles in Darnell. One for the corner of the landing at the TSBD doorway. And another shadow angle for people on the street. There is a significant difference in these angles. When light from a light source hits an object, the object casts a shadow directly away from the light source. The angle of that shadow is the angle of the light source to the object. If I have that wrong then I will stand corrected. At 12:30 on Nov. 22, 1963, the sun was at a certain point in the sky. Any object on earth at that time would cast a shadow directly off the sun. The angle of that shadow would be a reflection of the angle of the sun to the object at 12:30. Angles of shadows moving at two different directions at the same time is unnatural and physically impossible. Therefore the Darnell frame is a composite of two photos with different shadow angles taken at different times. That really screws up Prayer Man, doesn't? There is another problem with time in most people's reasoning involving Darnell, Weigman, and Couch. When were there films taken is the problem? How long after the assassination? The presidential motorcade broke up into more than 3 segments at the Houston and Elm intersection. Each segment traveled down Elm Street at a different time. First off, the first segment was of the first two motorcade vehicles. These traveled ahead of the rest of the motorcade and were not involved in the motorcade events. The second group consisted of those cars and motorbikes directly around the president's vehicle. We can see these in Zapruder, Bell, Altgens, and some other films. The 3rd group consisted of the Mayor's Car and the National Press Pool Car. I don't have any visuals on them traveling down Elm Street to the underpass. They were stopped at the intersection at then released by the Dallas Police. How long they were stopped and how long it took then to clear Elm Street and go under the Triple Underpass is not known. The 4th group begins with the Camera Car #1 and the vehicles following it. They were held up while the Mayor's Car left Dealey Plaza. After that, they were released to travel down Elm. The Couch film has a good frame showing these vehicles with Elm Street empty of cars in front of them. Again, the question is how long were they stopped and how long did it take them to travel down Elm Street and go under the Triple Underpass. My best guess is 2 minutes or more. The time involved in the assassination and the filming of Darnell and Couch would not really be that significant for shadows. You should not find a large discrepancy in shadows in Darnell. But, they are there and easily seen. So, the two different shadows in the Darnell frame showing Prayer Man is a real problem for theorists. There is such a degree of difference in the shadows mentioned that there is really no need to figure angles. Unless some one has to see the angle difference in numbers rather than just looking at it. As the sun moves 15 ˚ every hour, (360/24), that means that in 2 minutes it will have moved only 0.5˚ (15˚/30) in two minutes. Hardly a significant change in the shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Hi Ray, Thanks for your response. I have finally figured out why I have been confusing the Weigman and Darnell frames. I have two Google Images one marked Weigman frame and one marked Darnell frame. They are the same photo. So, folks please forgive. I going to shift the blame and blame it on Google Images. "As the sun moves 15 ˚ every hour, (360/24), that means that in 2 minutes it will have moved only 0.5˚ (15˚/30) in two minutes. Hardly a significant change in the shadow." Thanks for this info. It makes my by sight by guess of 2 minutes difference in shadows more acceptable to the mathematically inclined. Still, the angle difference in the two shadows I described is greater than this small not that significant amount. The amount is significant. Draw a line at the edge of the landing shadow for the length of the shadow. Do the same for any of the street people's shadows and you will see a noticeable difference in angle. Here's a factoid I think is true. The first canned coke was RC in 1964. Ray, I want to commend you. You are the first person to take the challenge. Nobody else has the courage to try. I know there are witnesses that say Oswald was drinking a coke. If you say that the object in Prayer Man's had is a coke then aren't you saying that Prayer Man is Oswald. There is no doubt in Bart Kamp's mind. It is a coke. My guess on the glowing object is a flash camera. Come on folks give it a try. Edited July 2, 2018 by John Butler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 John: your camera interpretation certainly has a number of defenders, as does the coke in Prayer Man's hand. It also can be that he did not hold anything and it was the back of his right hand which caused a reflection. My current view is that it is the bottom of a coke bottle orientated flat towards the sun what could cause the contrasting light spot in Wiegman. If so, Prayer Man may have put the bottle into the recess on the second step between Wiegman and Darnell because I cannot see any bottle in Darnell stills. Of course, this is a speculation, I have no data to prove the coke or anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. A. Copeland Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) On 6/19/2018 at 4:50 AM, Jim Hargrove said: Again, I have no horse in the PrayerMan race. I think the images are too fuzzy to say anything on the basis of the graphics alone. But the issue of whether Sarah Stanton saw Oswald carrying a Coke or soda pop inside the TSBD just prior to the hit is an important one, and this interview discusses that with Sarah Stanton’s granddaughter and daughter-in-law. You know Jim, I don’t think it’s about granting an absolute ID on PM (well perhaps it is but one need not know absolutely who the person is but we must or better be interested in who it is if a concrete ID hasn’t been established). I believe that the point is, whatever theory one hypothesizes, you MUST consider that fuzzy looking figure right at the top of those steps. No one, and I mean NO.ONE can work out ANY hypothesis concerning Dealey Plaza and the TSBD and NOT consider that fuzzy, shadowy figure which, when the dots are seemingly connected, strongly point to Oswald as very possibly being PM. That person must be accounted for, absolutely. Even Armstrong with H&L must be open to new developments that may challenge or corroborate his hypothesis, same with PM. When all the evidence (primarily collected and centralized by Kamp and others primarily at ROKC as far as I’m aware) is presented, it is difficult at this juncture to argue against PM being Oswald but by god I’m very open to other strong arguments. So far? PM: 1, Alternate Theories: 0. PM as LHO has explanatory scope and explanatory power and makes absolutely sense of the evidence we have today and don’t even get me started on a 1st generation Darnell film...wouldn’t that either confirm either further or possibly nip this all in the bud? Edited July 3, 2018 by B. A. Copeland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 Mr. Copeland, I would LOVE it, and I’m know JA would love it, if PrayerSmudge could be proved to be Classic Oswald©. If so, that one image would be the death forever of the Warren Report’s conclusions. But wishing it were so isn’t going to make it so, no matter what the PrayerSmudge proponents say. The image is too damned fuzzy. Show it to anyone without an agenda, and ask them if that image, without a doubt, shows LEE HARVEY OSWALD. Can you imagine showing it to a real jury? P.S. By the way, I don’t think JA is opposed to the theory that PrayerSmudge might be Oswald. We’ve never talked about the fuzzy image, but John believes Lee HARVEY Oswald was probably outside the building watching JFK go by. John’s argument goes something like, Can you imagine a politically-inclined kid like LHO missing a chance to see the President of the United States drive right by his workplace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 Andrej, Glad to hear from you and thanks for your response. I think I like your idea of no real data to prove a coke or anything else. My notion of a flash camera comes from the John Martin film when someone, I think Prayer man, was on the curb of Elm Street filming the presidential limousine as it went by. Enough said. I’ve written of this before. What I actually believe is something for which there is little solid evidence. This consists of iffy blurred films, fake photos, and credibility challenged witnesses. It is not my preferences. It is based on what I see in the visual record. What I believe is based on Altgens 6, Weigman/ Darnell/ Couch/ John Martin films and testimony of witnesses. And, as I said this is iffy evidence. New evidence can change this as new evidence comes to light. Harvey Oswald is told by his masters to film the presidential motorcade. He goes home to get one of his expensive cameras. Based on the John Martin film showing Prayer Man on the Elm Street curb filming the presidential limousine as it goes by. This filming of the motorcade insures he is there that day for the assassination. What happened to his camera? He is not seen leaving the TSBD with it. Harvey tells Buell Frazier he is after curtain rods when he gets a ride home early. It is none of Frazier’s business. Frazier’s testimony says a bag of about 24 inches. In other words, a large grocery bag which were 17 inches or larger. Big enough for a camera and mount not, a rifle. And, can be easily carried under one’s arm. The motorcade breakup into more than 3 parts gives time for Prayer Man time to walk back up to the TSBD landing in order to be filmed as Prayer Man in Weigman and Darnell. The part of the motorcade for Camera Car #1 and those behind it have been held on Houston Street. Why Houston Street? It is because Weigman, Darnell, and Couch are shot as the motorcade is moving pass the TSBD. Doorway Man is either an Oswald (Lee) or, an Oswald double. Doorway Man and Prayer Man are dressed differently during those brief moments of the assassination. Sleeves up or down on the same appearing shirt. Wearing the same shirt was an Oswald Project gag to make different Oswalds appear to be the same. Doorway Man is wearing a face mask of Billy Lovelady and will probably remain unknown. I’ve seen Frazier on several videos and he seems like an honest guy. He even tells you that in a convincing manner. When people do that it always makes me a bit uncomfortable. The problem is I can’t square this honesty with his statements about standing on the TSBD landing and the people there. He’s there at the time of the assassination and he’s there at the time of Weigman/ Darnell/ Couch driving pass the TSBD on Elm Street. The time between when the presidential limousine passed the TSBD and Weigman/ Darnell/ Couch has to be about 2 minutes more or less. I tried to explain this to Ray Mitcham earlier. I don’t know how well I put out the idea. So, Frazier is there about 2 minutes. He doesn’t see the Oswald double who is later covered in a face mask in Altgens 6. He sees Billy Lovelady. To me this is a falsehood. He is still there when Weigman/ Darnell film Prayer Man. He doesn’t see Prayer Man either. That’s what bothers me. He doesn’t see Prayer Man. He doesn’t see an Oswald or an Oswald double. I’m firmly convinced that Doorway Man in Altgens 6 is wearing a Billy Lovelady face mask. Frazier doesn’t see who that individual is. Is it an Oswald double or who? Who needs to be disguised? Who ever that is wears his shirt differently than Prayer Man. To me, Prayer Man is Oswald or an Oswald double. Prayer Man wears his shirt differently than Doorway Man. If he sees Doorway Man in Altgens 6 as Billy Lovelady then why doesn’t he see Prayer Man in the later films? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted July 3, 2018 Share Posted July 3, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, John Butler said: The time between when the presidential limousine passed the TSBD and Weigman/ Darnell/ Couch has to be about 2 minutes more or less. I tried to explain this to Ray Mitcham earlier. I don’t know how well I put out the idea. If you could post exactly which three photos you are talking about, I might be able to discuss them with you. If you think anybody in Altgens 6 is wearing a mask, I'm afraid to say you might be losing it. Edited July 3, 2018 by Ray Mitcham 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