David G. Healy Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) 'Evan Burton' wrote: I can't comment on the validity of Mr Costella's work because, as I have said many times, I don't have the necessary knowledge of the complex issues involved in the debate to make a meaningful contribution. At best, they'd be speculation by an uninformed observer. [...] thank you Evan duly noted. -- David Healy Edited February 25, 2006 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Since I've been invited into this topic, I'll make some thoughts known. I can't comment on the validity of Mr Costella's work because, as I have said many times, I don't have the necessary knowledge of the complex issues involved in the debate to make a meaningful contribution. At best, they'd be speculation by an uninformed observer.I do find interesting the comments made by Mr Costella regarding what he can or cannot do. To me, it doesn't make sense. When you are granted access to official information, it is on the understanding that it will not be released to unauthorised persons or discussed with persons who do not have the necessary 'need to know' and clearance. Part of gaining this access is to undergo a security assessment to determine if you are a fit and proper person to be granted access. Your background is discussed, as well as your political views, associations, and beliefs. If your views are incompatible with security guidelines, then you'd most likely be denied access - or your access would be only within certain areas. So how does this relate to Mr Costella's JFK research? I'm not sure. He would not be allowed to discuss conclusions he has reached that are based on his official work or information gained as part of his official duties. He should not discuss his duties. If it was felt that his JFK research somehow compromised his position, he would most likely be asked to remove that research from the public domain and cease participation in discussing the topic. I find it unlikely that he'd be allowed to maintain a public webpage but not discuss the contents. Sometimes you'd not comment on matters that might relate to employment because they might be interpreted as being an 'official' position from your employers. In most cases, as long as it was made clear that this was a personal opinion and did not necessarily reflect the views of your employer, there would be no problem (although statements to the media would be different). I don't see this situation being relevant to Mr Costella's JFK research. You are certainly not 'gagged' in expressing views and opinions on politics or other related subjects. For instance, in the public eye at the moment is the inquiry into the crash of a Royal Australian Navy helicopter, SeaKing SHARK 02 at Nias in APR 05. I have discussed this with many people in public forums. Because of my employment, there may be times that I cannot comment on aspects of the incident because they might be related to my work or information I have become aware of in an official capacity. In those cases, I don't comment - but it does not stop me talking about the subject. This is what I find so strange about Mr Costella's statement. It would actually seem to contravene good security practice by drawing attention to the matter, rather than the opposite. It is almost like standing on a soapbox in a public square and saying loudly that you have access to highly sensitive & classified information which reveals astounding facts - but you can't talk about that. Thanks for your insight Evan. This whole episode seems very contrived to me and the timing interesting to say the least. It was only a few days ago that Fetzer mentioned getting Costella to comment on the blood evidence...and whamo...this disclainer by Costella. His new job must be something, it seems he can't even make any further comments about how his consummer Kodak digital camera works...how silly is that? http://www.assassinationscience.com/johnco...ld_content.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 You’re correct Craig it sounds quite contrived esp. since Fetzer, White and Healy refuse to tell us what his new job is. Fetzer was asked on another forum but refuses to respond http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaimsDEBUNK/message/2398 . Might another motive be that he got tired but being derisively referred to as a “high school math and science teacher”. This of course is an honorable profession but a bit of ‘under employment for a PhD and makes less credible claims that he is an expert on any number of topics such as the Z film, electromagnetism, computers, math, optics, the way objects move, the ideal triangulation of listening devices and I’m probably forgetting a few. Quite a wide range for a scientist who has never published a peer reviewed paper.job is If Healy, White, Fetzer and Costella continue to refuse to tell us what his new .job is I'll assume they are too embarased to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 (edited) duplicate post deleted Edited April 1, 2006 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 1, 2006 Author Share Posted April 1, 2006 A month ago (March 1 to be exact) on another forum Fetzer promised to reveal Costella's new job "in a few weeks" but so far he hasn't said anything. Below is the text of a post I made in that forum So Jim, Has Costella "settled in" enough for you to reveal what his new job is yet? It doesn't involve the manufacture of liscence plates does it? LOL You said you would tell us in a few weeks, that was a month ago. Apperently he had already started the job a few weeks before how long does he need to settle in? I noticed the disclaimer disapeared, he didn't get canned did he? Len --- In jfk-research@yahoogroups.com, jfetzer@... wrote: > The guy has a new job and is "settling in". Why don't you give him the chance to do that before you spew your vicious venom in his direction?...Once he has settled in (a few weeks hence), he will let everyone know his position with the Australian government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 A month ago (March 1 to be exact) on another forum Fetzer promised to reveal Costella's new job "in a few weeks" but so far he hasn't said anything. Below is the text of a post I made in that forum So Jim, Has Costella "settled in" enough for you to reveal what his new job is yet? It doesn't involve the manufacture of liscence plates does it? LOL You said you would tell us in a few weeks, that was a month ago. Apperently he had already started the job a few weeks before how long does he need to settle in? I noticed the disclaimer disapeared, he didn't get canned did he? Len --- In jfk-research@yahoogroups.com, jfetzer@... wrote: > The guy has a new job and is "settling in". Why don't you give him the chance to do that before you spew your vicious venom in his direction?...Once he has settled in (a few weeks hence), he will let everyone know his position with the Australian government. Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 (edited) Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Still jerking around on the forums - hey David! You sound like the fool who wants someone to address the effects of gasoline on a motor that runs soley on a battery. Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that has been washed out, thus the effort was a waste of time. Who in their right mind would wish to argue optical printing effects with you when you cannot address the next step which is the tell-tale signs of alteration when trying to do it on the type of film Zapruder used. Are we to assume that you are the only person who cannot see the problem with what you are trying to purpose? I would be curious to know if you could find another person experienced in optical printing who knew about the problems with Kodachrome II film and still then would waste so much time following a path that cannot go anywhere. Bill Edited April 1, 2006 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 (edited) Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Still jerking around on the forums - hey David! You sound like the fool who wants someone to address the effects of gasoline on a motor that runs soley on a battery. Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that has been washed out, thus the effort was a waste of time. Who in their right mind would wish to argue optical printing effects with you when you cannot address the next step which is the tell-tale signs of alteration when trying to do it on the type of film Zapruder used. Are we to assume that you are the only person who cannot see the problem with what you are trying to purpose? I would be curious to know if you could find another person experienced in optical printing who knew about the problems with Kodachrome II film and still then would waste so much time following a path that cannot go anywhere. Bill actually, I'd be happy if the non-alteration camp could put forth any, ANY optical film printing expert, been three years and counting.... rofl.... so you want to play the big leagues, mano? -- till you demonstrate to me and others sufficient knowledge of film compositing and reversal films of 1963-64 vintage, you'll maintain a "constant nusiance status", a title you richly deserve.... Telltale 'film' signs -- listen, you're busom buddies with Groden, get'em over here, we'll talk film -- Have Bob explain to me and the rest of the world what Roland Zavada and Ray fielding will put forth.... roflmfao! Better yet, have him post a few 35mm frames from one of "Moe Weitzman's" 8mm bump to 35mm -- then we'll talk. Oh, have him bring a KODAK Wratten manual....Thanks for making my weekend... Edited April 1, 2006 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Still jerking around on the forums - hey David! You sound like the fool who wants someone to address the effects of gasoline on a motor that runs soley on a battery. Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that has been washed out, thus the effort was a waste of time. Who in their right mind would wish to argue optical printing effects with you when you cannot address the next step which is the tell-tale signs of alteration when trying to do it on the type of film Zapruder used. Are we to assume that you are the only person who cannot see the problem with what you are trying to purpose? I would be curious to know if you could find another person experienced in optical printing who knew about the problems with Kodachrome II film and still then would waste so much time following a path that cannot go anywhere. Bill actually, I'd be happy if the non-alteration camp could put forth any, ANY optical film printing expert, been three years and counting.... rofl.... so you want to play the big leagues, mano? -- till you demonstrate to me and others sufficient knowledge of film compositing and reversal films of 1963-64 vintage, you'll maintain a "constant nusiance status", a title you richly deserve.... Telltale 'film' signs -- listen, you're busom buddies with Groden, get'em over here, we'll talk film -- Have Bob explain to me and the rest of the world what Roland Zavada and Ray fielding will put forth.... roflmfao! Better yet, have him post a few 35mm frames from one of "Moe Weitzman's" 8mm bump to 35mm -- then we'll talk. Oh, have him bring a KODAK Wratten manual....Thanks for making my weekend... Just curious David, exactly when is YOUR camp planning on putting up an optical printing expert? We know its not YOU! Hell you cant even do a decent computer composite. Poser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 (edited) Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Still jerking around on the forums - hey David! You sound like the fool who wants someone to address the effects of gasoline on a motor that runs soley on a battery. Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that has been washed out, thus the effort was a waste of time. Who in their right mind would wish to argue optical printing effects with you when you cannot address the next step which is the tell-tale signs of alteration when trying to do it on the type of film Zapruder used. Are we to assume that you are the only person who cannot see the problem with what you are trying to purpose? I would be curious to know if you could find another person experienced in optical printing who knew about the problems with Kodachrome II film and still then would waste so much time following a path that cannot go anywhere. Bill actually, I'd be happy if the non-alteration camp could put forth any, ANY optical film printing expert, been three years and counting.... rofl.... so you want to play the big leagues, mano? -- till you demonstrate to me and others sufficient knowledge of film compositing and reversal films of 1963-64 vintage, you'll maintain a "constant nusiance status", a title you richly deserve.... Telltale 'film' signs -- listen, you're busom buddies with Groden, get'em over here, we'll talk film -- Have Bob explain to me and the rest of the world what Roland Zavada and Ray fielding will put forth.... roflmfao! Better yet, have him post a few 35mm frames from one of "Moe Weitzman's" 8mm bump to 35mm -- then we'll talk. Oh, have him bring a KODAK Wratten manual....Thanks for making my weekend... Just curious David, exactly when is YOUR camp planning on putting up an optical printing expert? We know its not YOU! Hell you cant even do a decent computer composite. Poser. roflmao! Even YOU can't save BM.... keep swing'in champ, maybe Groden will drop by and give you a hand -- changing the subject to computer graphics seems like the last breath -- LOL! btw, my camp is ME! What's the matter with you? Edited April 2, 2006 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... Still jerking around on the forums - hey David! You sound like the fool who wants someone to address the effects of gasoline on a motor that runs soley on a battery. Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that has been washed out, thus the effort was a waste of time. Who in their right mind would wish to argue optical printing effects with you when you cannot address the next step which is the tell-tale signs of alteration when trying to do it on the type of film Zapruder used. Are we to assume that you are the only person who cannot see the problem with what you are trying to purpose? I would be curious to know if you could find another person experienced in optical printing who knew about the problems with Kodachrome II film and still then would waste so much time following a path that cannot go anywhere. Bill actually, I'd be happy if the non-alteration camp could put forth any, ANY optical film printing expert, been three years and counting.... rofl.... so you want to play the big leagues, mano? -- till you demonstrate to me and others sufficient knowledge of film compositing and reversal films of 1963-64 vintage, you'll maintain a "constant nusiance status", a title you richly deserve.... Telltale 'film' signs -- listen, you're busom buddies with Groden, get'em over here, we'll talk film -- Have Bob explain to me and the rest of the world what Roland Zavada and Ray fielding will put forth.... roflmfao! Better yet, have him post a few 35mm frames from one of "Moe Weitzman's" 8mm bump to 35mm -- then we'll talk. Oh, have him bring a KODAK Wratten manual....Thanks for making my weekend... Just curious David, exactly when is YOUR camp planning on putting up an optical printing expert? We know its not YOU! Hell you cant even do a decent computer composite. Poser. roflmao! Even YOU can't save BM.... keep swing'in champ, maybe Groden will drop by and give you a hand -- changing the subject to computer graphics seems like the last breath -- LOL! btw, my camp is ME! What's the matter with you? Hell David, I would be stunned to see ANY composite created by your hand, film or digital, that could pass muster. So far you have a totally failing grade. Perhaps when you grow up you will actually learn how its done. Then you might have what it take to play with the adults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 (edited) Telltale 'film' signs -- listen, you're busom buddies with Groden, get'em over here, we'll talk film -- Have Bob explain to me and the rest of the world what Roland Zavada and Ray fielding will put forth.... roflmfao! Better yet, have him post a few 35mm frames from one of "Moe Weitzman's" 8mm bump to 35mm -- then we'll talk. Oh, have him bring a KODAK Wratten manual....Thanks for making my weekend... David, I have been holding back a little bit to see if you would actually tell this forum anything factual in support of your position, but as usual you appear to not have anything intelligent to say about the main issues. For instance ... you have been going on about optical printing and not addressing the processes of the film transfer that would take place when attempting to alter a film. As someone who thinks he knows it all about optical printing - you must be aware that by using that process that you cannot capture the area between the sprocket holes. As Groden points out - the going from 8MM Kodachrome film to 35MM film causes contrasting changes within the image. There are also cyanic color changes that take place. Moe never transfered 8MM film to 35MM film and then back to 8MM film. But lets assume that Moe had done all those things .... an optical printer would not allow him to have access to the area between the sprocket holes, thus the contrast and color changes that take place from film generation to film generation with Kodachrome II film would not have the same appearance as those areas between the sprocket holes that the optical printer never had access to. Your not seeing these obstacles tells me just how little you have bothered to learn the subject matter before wanting to debate with experts such as Groden. Once again you have done little more than make unfounded allegations without knowing the facts beforehand. Now do we need to bother Groden over the basics that should have been common knowledge to anyone like yourself that surely would have bothered to educate himself on the other aspects of the processes concerning film alteration? In an earlier post I used the following scenario concerning the approach you had taken about the possibility of optical printing being used to alter the Zapruder film .... "Another example would be wanting to discuss why someone should take a certain route on a trip to save time while knowing that doing so would mean coming to a bridge that was already known to have been washed out, thus the effort was a total waste of time." You have now come to that washed out bridge and unless you find a way around it that the experts cannot find - you have little choice but to turn around and go back and put an end to these unfounded allegations you have purposed. Bill Miller JFK assassination researcher/investigator Edited April 2, 2006 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted April 4, 2006 Author Share Posted April 4, 2006 Well Len, why don't you write a book on the subject, perhaps he'll give you a call. Till then, get along with the Zavada-Fielding/Healy discussion regarding the Zapruder film .... So, how is Roland Zavada/Ray Fielding doing? You're the self appointed representative/presenter for the Zavada side of the equation, whats the latest? Why the delay? Thought this was a slam-dunk? Been what, 5-6 weeks now? Too damn many editors; "wide purchase...", can be a problem at times! Having optical film printing problem/issues? I know a few specific SMPE/SMPTE periodicals that might help! Just trying to move this along.... 1- Do you really think you're on the same level as Feilding and Zavada? Don't fool yourself, If any one half as authoritative as them supported your position it would have a little but of credibility. Since you don't even claim to have any FILM post production experience you just don't cut it. 2 - David you’re like a quadruple amputee on this issue not only don’t you have a leg to stand on you don’t have any hands to grasp at straws. You promised to make your “formal claim soon” on January 19* (74 days ago). 33 days later on Feb. 21 Zavada said he would “…take the time to put together a dissertation… Further this project will not be done “tomorrow” – it will take some time.” Personally I would expect something that a person said ‘would not be done “tomorrow” ’ and ‘would take some time’ to take at least twice as long as something promised soon. So let’s do it like this. First we’ll wait for you to present your “formal claim”, well count how many days it took you double that and that many days after Feb. 21 (2006) you can semi-legitimately ask Zavada where his ‘dissertation’ is. Even if you submit your “formal claim” tomorrow that gives Rollie till July 19. Until then just shut up about it instead of continuing to make an ass of yourself. And with all your braying for Zavada to submit a new thesis on why the Zapruder film can’t be a fake you haven’t even dealt with his last one from 2 ½ years ago in which he stated at the conclusion of a 6 page paper, “There is no detectable evidence of manipulation or image alteration on the "Zapruder in-cameraoriginal" and all supporting evidence precludes any forgery thereto.” The film that exists at NARA was received from Time/Life, has all the characteristics of an original film per my report. !The film medium, manufacturing markings, processing identification, camera gate image characteristics, dye structure, full scale tonal range, support type, perforations and their quality, keeping shrinkage and fluting characteristics, feel, surface profile of the dye surface. !It has NO evidence of optical effects or matte work including granularity, edge effects or fringing, contrast buildup etc.Rollie Zavada, 9/23/03 http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zapho...comments-r1.pdf *http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=5708&view=findpost&p=51765 and WTF did you mean by “formal claim”? I’ve never heard that phrase used outside a legal context. 3 - The way you keep bleating out "SMPE/SMPTE periodicals" one could not be faulted for wondering if you suffer from Turret’s syndrome or maybe a better comparison would be to Pavlov and his dogs each time you see someone question the possibility of Z- film alteration you reflexively bark out “SMPE/SMPTE”. I like what Joe Durnavich said a few months ago “I'm not a drinking man, but I think you could make one of those drinking games for Healy. You know, take one drink every time he mentions "optical printer", take two drinks every time he mentions the SMPTE, and so on.” So when are you ever going to get around to actually citing a specific issue? Or better yet quote a passage from an article (or even Fielding’s book) to support your little theory. 4 – Back to the original topic of this thread, just what is Costella’s mysterious new job? Or is that information on "a need to know basis" (LOL) it isn't like John Nash’s "job" with the federal government is it? He dropped the disclaimer, did he get canned? Len Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 If Colby works for the CIA, I wonder if he would tell us? If Costella works for Australian intelligence...oh, never mind. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 (edited) Len, it is obvious that David didn't know as much as he let on. He may know about optical printing, just as Groden does, but he didn't know squat about the rest of the equation that needed to be addressed in order to logically discuss the probability of the Zapruder film being altered. David could have learned about these other obstacles had he just bothered to put forth a little effort and sought out the people who might know the answers instead of constantly making off-the-wall replies saying how we are 'on the run' and so on. David is nothing more than the Baghdad Bob of the photo alteration position. Bill Edited April 4, 2006 by Bill Miller 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