The Altgen's Metamorphosis

[Chris Davidson]

Take some time to grasp the entire picture (double entendre). If you still don't understand what is being presented, I'll help with the details in a little while.

Photos are just individual film frames. You stabilize film frames by aligning the same object in multiple frames.

Sometimes, you can apply that same concept to individual photos that have been (touched up) altered.

In terms of a photograph, it would be the object and its mask that align.

The Carl Jones mask was the first, obvious clue for me.

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Chris,

What do you mean by "an object's mask?" What is a mask, in your context?

I believe that Carl Jones's face was added to the original Altgens 6 photo, possibly to cover up (or "mask) the coke bottle he was drinking from. Is that what you mean by mask?

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

56 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe that Carl Jones's face was added to the original Altgens 6 photo, possibly to cover up (or "mask) the coke bottle he was drinking from. Is that what you mean by mask?

Why not .. I'll play along. Please enlighten us by what actual means Carl Jones' face "was added to the original Altgens 6 photo" so that it evaded detection by every JFK researcher until you happened to come along. I'd really love to know.

[Sandy Larsen]

15 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe that Carl Jones's face was added to the original Altgens 6 photo, possibly to cover up (or "mask) the coke bottle he was drinking from. Is that what you mean by mask?

15 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Why not .. I'll play along. Please enlighten us by what actual means Carl Jones' face "was added to the original Altgens 6 photo" so that it evaded detection by every JFK researcher until you happened to come along. I'd really love to know.

 

Beats me why nobody else noticed that Carl's face is missing from the Cronkite (very early) copy of Altgens 6. But it's missing, for everybody to verify:

 

   

(Ignore the flashing red.)

 

[Cory Santos]

20 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Why not .. I'll play along. Please enlighten us by what actual means Carl Jones' face "was added to the original Altgens 6 photo" so that it evaded detection by every JFK researcher until you happened to come along. I'd really love to know.

I tend to agree.    This every photo is faked argument really is odd at best.   If conspirators were sitting around that day playing on pictures then why did they not simply put Oswald in a picture of the sixth floor?

 

 

[Cory Santos]

4 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Beats me why nobody else noticed that Carl's face is missing from the Cronkite (very early) copy of Altgens 6. But it's missing, for everybody to verify:

 

   

(Ignore the flashing red.)

 

What are you talking about?   Nothing is missing!

[Sandy Larsen]

24 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

What are you talking about?   Nothing is missing!

 

Do you know which person is Carl Jones?

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

Right. So it would appear this entire argument is based on Sandy Larsen using a horrible copy of Altgens 6 as his source material.

[Cory Santos]

12 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Right. So it would appear this entire argument is based on Sandy Larsen using a horrible copy of Altgens 6 as his source material.

Thank you.  

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Right. So it would appear this entire argument is based on Sandy Larsen using a horrible copy of Altgens 6 as his source material.

 

It's not a horrible copy. You can even make out Carl drinking a coke. (Though all but the tip of his face is hidden by the column.)

I don't know why you insist on kicking against the pricks. The Cronkite photo has already proven what I've said from the beginning of this thread (and known for years), that what most researchers believe to be Lovelady's left arm in Altgens 6 is really Carl Jones's arm and hand. And now the photo has proven that Carl Jones's face has been added.

But if you want to keep your head buried in the sand, be my guest.

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

6 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The Cronkite photo has already proven what I've said from the beginning of this thread (and known for years), that what most researchers believe to be Lovelady's left arm in Altgens 6 is really Carl Jones's arm and hand. And now the photo has proven that Carl Jones's face has been added.

Neither you nor "the Cronkite photo" have "proven" anything of the sort, and it speaks volumes that you are completely unable to explain how on god's green earth Altgens 6 could have actually been altered in the way you allege.

[Alan Ford]

26 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

I tend to agree.    This every photo is faked argument really is odd at best.   If conspirators were sitting around that day playing on pictures then why did they not simply put Oswald in a picture of the sixth floor?

Actually the dogma followed by some CTs that no photo was faked is what's really odd. We're supposed to believe that the 'investigating' authorities moved heaven and earth to alter witness statements, physical evidence, ballistic evidence, the documentary record, timelines, etc., but when it came to the visual record they were pure as the driven snow. What nonsense. If an image or two existed showing Mr. Oswald in the doorway at the time of the assassination, there is no way they would have allowed that to set all their work at naught. A little retouching, and the problem's solved.

As for why the 'investigating' authorities didn't put Mr. Oswald in a photo of the sixth floor------------------they couldn't. Too much of a hostage to fortune. The case against Mr. Oswald as the sixth-floor shooter was extremely precarious. One photo or film emerges showing him in the doorway, and it's over. The fake SN window photo is exposed as a hoax.

Same reason why 'the' cop/Truly encounter with Mr. Oswald couldn't be put way up near the sixth floor: it had to be physically compatible with Mr. Oswald's having just come from the front entrance.

The official story does everything humanly possible to make the Oswald-in-SN fiction seem like the plausible inference. Beyond that it simply could not go.

[Sandy Larsen]

11 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

Actually the dogma followed by some CTs that no photo was faked is what's really odd. We're supposed to believe that the 'investigating' authorities moved heaven and earth to alter witness statements, physical evidence, ballistic evidence, the documentary record, timelines, etc., but when it came to the visual record they were pure as the driven snow. What nonsense. If an image or two existed showing Mr. Oswald in the doorway at the time of the assassination, there is no way they would have allowed that to set all their work at naught. A little retouching, and the problem's solved.

As for why the 'investigating' authorities didn't put Mr. Oswald in a photo of the sixth floor------------------they couldn't. Too much of a hostage to fortune. The case against Mr. Oswald as the sixth-floor shooter was extremely precarious. One photo or film emerges showing him in the doorway, and it's over. The fake SN window photo is exposed as a hoax.

Same reason why 'the' cop/Truly encounter with Mr. Oswald couldn't be put way up near the sixth floor: it had to be physically compatible with Mr. Oswald's having just come from the front entrance.

The official story does everything humanly possible to make the Oswald-in-SN fiction seem like the plausible inference. Beyond that it simply could not go.

 

Exactly!

And these anti-alterationists seem to think that only a few researchers are alterationists. Oh really? I need to point out the fact that most researchers believe (for good reason) that Kennedy had a blowout wound on the back of his head. Well guess what folks... if they believe that (and they do) they must also believe that the back-of-head autopsy photo has been altered! (Or isn't even JFK.)

And that's just one example.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

35 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

42 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The Cronkite photo has already proven what I've said from the beginning of this thread (and known for years), that what most researchers believe to be Lovelady's left arm in Altgens 6 is really Carl Jones's arm and hand. And now the photo has proven that Carl Jones's face has been added.

35 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Neither you nor "the Cronkite photo" have "proven" anything of the sort, ...

 

This is the "head-in-sand" part. The proof is above.

 

35 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

... and it speaks volumes that you are completely unable to explain how on god's green earth Altgens 6 could have actually been altered in the way you allege.

 

Of course I know how it could have been altered. Film alteration has history nearly as long as the history of photography itself. Simple alterations can be done with a pencil.

I recall back in the 1970s that I was displease with some pimples I had when I got a passport photo taken. The photographer asked, "You don't like those?" I said no. He took a pencil and marked up the negative. Made another print, and the pimples were gone! Took him three seconds. (Plus the time to make the new print.)

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

14 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

And these anti-alterationists seem to think that only a few researchers are alterationists. Oh really? I need to point out the fact that most researchers believe (for good reason) that Kennedy had a blowout wound on the back of his head.

You are beyond wrong if you think this is what "most researchers believe." It speaks to your lack of understanding of who these researchers actually were and on what they based their conclusions.