Sandy Larsen Posted December 31, 2022 Share Posted December 31, 2022 I agree with Ben that there is other evidence, like Connally's statements, that more easily refutes the SBT. And because of that, there would normally be no need to create the model in this thread's video. Especially given its cost. However, Dale Myer's cartoon is very impressive to watch for the average viewer. If this documentary is done well, I think it will blow the living daylights out of the Myers animation. Any positive opinion formed by Myers's animation can be undone with this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted December 31, 2022 Share Posted December 31, 2022 You guys should read about the advanced technology the modeler is using to take measurements from photos. It's called Photogrammetry and is discussed in this Wikipedia article. According to the article, There are many variants of photogrammetry. One example is the extraction of three-dimensional measurements from two-dimensional data (i.e. images).... Which isn't surprising given that it's just applying math along with perspective to make measurements. I've done this manually numerous times myself in my work on the JFKA. It's a tedious and often mind-bending job. But these days the math is all done on a computer. I didn't know till now that there are computer programs and equipment for doing this type of work. Also notable in the Wikipedia article is a discussion on stereophotogrammetry, which is where measurements are made from a stereo scanner, which is one of the methods they used in making their model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted December 31, 2022 Share Posted December 31, 2022 (edited) This is an impressive piece of modelling work which will allow to test all possible hypothetical scenarios of the shooting. I am not concerned about the exact location of the President and the Governor because the researchers clearly have a good understanding of all aspects of the modelling problem, and it is unlikely they would fit the two men to wrong locations. Maybe unrelated to their work, my model of the Depository doorway and testing the locations of the doorway occupants based on fitting the model onto a historic photograph is a very similar approach. However, instead of using a laser scan of the doorway, I used an archictectonic model of the doorway that was based on real measurements of the doorway. I will contact Mark Johnson regarding the possibility of joining our efforts to verify my reconstruction of Darnell's and Altgens's doorways. In case somebody would be interested in a 3D reconstruction of the Depository doorway in Altgens6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0Hwt-cIGq4 Edited December 31, 2022 by Andrej Stancak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted December 31, 2022 Share Posted December 31, 2022 4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I agree with Ben that there is other evidence, like Connally's statements, that more easily refutes the SBT. And because of that, there would normally be no need to create the model in this thread's video. Especially given its cost. However, Dale Myer's cartoon is very impressive to watch for the average viewer. If this documentary is done well, I think it will blow the living daylights out of the Myers animation. Any positive opinion formed by Myers's animation can be undone with this one. I have agreed that this animation can be used for propaganda purposes. What I meant by that is that it can be used by CTs or CT-friendly media to counter Dale Myers' nonsense. My concern is that its presentation of JFK's and JBC's relative positions is in error. By having JFK in the wrong position it supports Myers' cartoon as opposed to refuting it. By having JBC in the wrong position it supports Myers in that he can now claim the animation is incorrect and that if only JBC was in the correct position everything would align, etc. It's just not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted December 31, 2022 Author Share Posted December 31, 2022 https://i.imgur.com/eJcykr6.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrej Stancak Posted December 31, 2022 Share Posted December 31, 2022 17 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said: https://i.imgur.com/eJcykr6.mp4 Quite convinving in my view. Overlaying a model with the original photograph/frame is an ultimate proof of goodness of fit. I have extensive experience with fitting my doorway models onto Altens6 and Darnell; it is exteremely punishing to try to overlay a wrong model onto the original photograph as the disparities between the two are for everyone to see. In contrast, if the model matches the original accurately, one can be sure that the model is an adequate fit of the original scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted December 31, 2022 Author Share Posted December 31, 2022 We need more close-up views of the fade job. From the video we have now, I have a hard time differentiating between the clothing, shadows, and the interior of the car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 13 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: The criticism sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me. With the exception of noting where the model is inaccurate in some way. These exceptions should be brought to the attention of the modeler as soon as possible so that he can make correction. It's not sour grapes if you're referring to me. Are they correctable? The position of the seats? The torsos? Deflection of the projectile? I think these are good to describe a theory and possibly to refute or confirm Meyer's animation, but he concludes his effort to say he's established it as fact and I'm skeptical. I think they can get a nuts-on creation of the terrain and buildings but the position of the vehicles? I dunno. I applaud the effort to be sure and am definitely interested in the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 7 hours ago, Pat Speer said: Myers' nonsense. My concern is that its presentation of JFK's and JBC's relative positions is in error. The video showing Leiloglou's model includes clips from somebody else's animation. (Dale Myers's?) I'll bet that your complaint pertains to that animation. If you look at the link Micah posted, you will see that JFK and Connally are positioned correctly in Leiloglou's model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted January 1, 2023 Author Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) I don't know if this is copium or not, but it really does seem unlikely that the margin of error on Connally could account for the Single Bullet Theory being possible. The trajectory shows a multiple inch difference, not just a couple centimeters. Edited January 1, 2023 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bristow Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) On 12/31/2022 at 10:42 PM, Micah Mileto said: I don't know if this is copium or not, but it really does seem unlikely that the margin of error on Connally could account for the Single Bullet Theory being possible. The trajectory shows a multiple inch difference, not just a couple centimeters. Yes there is a large margin. Connally's face sheet shows the entry 7.5 inches from the spine. Assuming J.C. was sitting 7 inches inboard of JFK the entry would be at the spine. So I assume we have to account for 7.5 inches of lateral movement for the bullet to line up with his entry wound. Testing a 30 rotation combined with a 10 degree rearward lean I find it only accounts for 4 inches of the 7.5 needed. But there are some unknowns I can't pin down. Usually we assume the limo aligned with the direction of the lane marker next to the limo. But if Greer was starting to point the limo towards the next set of marker he could be facing a degree or two left. Secondly, J.C. might have shifted slightly to his left as he positioned himself to turn around. Third, I have heard the distance between JFK's neck exit and J.C.'s entry as being either 30 or 36 inches. Both JFK and J.C. could have been 3 inches forward or backward at the moment of the shot. The 6 inch difference changes the entry by one inch. finally I don't know if J.C. was 6 or 7 or 8 inches inboard from JFK. These slight changes are near impossible to measure from the Z film. They could make a total difference of about 5 inches. The basic 30 degree turn gives 4 or 5 inches of the 7.5 inches needed. If J.C. was sitting more than 8 inches inboard and he shifted left a bit as he prepared to turn, and if the distance between JFK and J.C was 30 inches then the shot could feasibly line up. Including the limo direction there are 4 unknowns, 2 or 3 of them would be enough to make the shot possible. I don't personally buy the SBT but I think the trajectory may line up. Below are some overexposed frames of J.C. that show the coat pretty well. I think the entry location looks too close to the armpit and needs to go inboard about 2 inches. Edited February 16 by Chris Bristow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 This is just what Pat is complaining about. Myers got the measurements wrong inside the limousine about how inboard that jump seat was. And JFK was not hugging the right side of the car either. And anyone can see this in the complete version of Zapruder as the car disappears behind the sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted January 1, 2023 Author Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) Somebody should make a stabalized gif of z170-195 where you can tell the difference between Kennedy's body movements and the camera shaking - because I can't tell the difference, I've just heard others (including a scientific study and the hsca) say they think Kennedy reacted oddly at this time. Edited January 1, 2023 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) On 12/30/2022 at 11:47 AM, Bob Ness said: Yeah, the problem is with any of these recreations it's very difficult to establish any certainty. It's great they're creating the models and I think the point clouds are accurate and all which is great for a historical record but there are so many variables in the end I think they'll only be able to demonstrate probabilities rather than make any conclusions. Myer's "proof" is ridiculous of course, as anyone in the field would likely point out. I don't even know whether they can accurately establish when the shots were fired which could introduce a large error from a difference of a fraction of a second. It's tempting to say work backwards from a conclusion and see if it agrees with the data but that has problems also. What they're using now I tried to develop in 1994 or so (when Windows was known as Chicago) as an as-built system for large and technical construction projects (biotech, hospitals etc). The project was called Attic (archive) and unfortunately predated the capabilities of the time. It's interesting to see someone try their hand at it in almost exactly the same way. Frankly, when I do architectural/design pre-viz stuff today I still find inaccuracies after I went out with a tape and measured the damn thing hahaha. This type of effort is a good way to explain a theory and I applaud the effort but remain skeptical regardless of the result. Myer's conclusion is ridiculously advanced as proof but is over-baked methinks. Bye Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Deignan Posted January 1, 2023 Share Posted January 1, 2023 23 minutes ago, Lance Payette said: Why was the bullet yawing when it entered Connally's back? If it wasn't from Oswald's rifle, where did the fragments go? Will the video team deal with questions such as these, or just the "impossible" trajectory? https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/BigLieSmallWound/BigLieSmallWound.htm 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