Jump to content
The Education Forum

Costella and the DP rain sensors


Recommended Posts

Sneering derisive comments have been posted by

ill-informed provocateurs about Dr. Costella's questioning

of 6 or more suspicious wireless devices around Dealey Plaza.

He became suspicious when he saw two of the devices only

forty feet apart (see photo). We searched the plaza and found

at least 4 more of the devices. We found at least one device

sheltered from rain (see photo). We searched and found that

the plaza sprinkler system was largely old and in disrepair,

and seemingly manually located at one location. We took

photos of many sprinkler heads that were inoperative.

We took photos of the manual sprinkler controls.

We considered that the plaza has groundkeepers who are

AWARE OF ANY RAIN AND WHETHER OR NOT THE GRASS

NEEDS WATERING. We considered the manual controls

for the water pipes, WHICH HAD NO RECEIVER FOR RADIO

SIGNALS. It was clearly a case of mysterious OVERKILL if

these were indeed rain sensors...which of course may be the

case. He noted that the Federal Building was on the south

edge of the plaza...a perfect location to monitor radio

transmissions from the plaza.

We both agreed that six "rain sensors" seemed unneeded for

the two block area, and perhaps suspicious. They may REALLY

be rain sensors, but very curious given our examination of

the area.

Good researchers check out every possibility...because

sometimes a hand can be mistaken for a foot or a

black woman for a white one, and sans proof, all opinions

are worth pursuing.

I emailed the Dallas Park Department, including a photo, asking

for particulars. They refused to reply.

Listening devices...or sprinker controls? We don't know, do we?

But we did not know about Umbrella Guns till the HSCA, did we?

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Good researchers check out every possibility...because

sometimes a hand can be mistaken for a foot or a

black woman for a white one, and sans proof, all opinions

are worth pursuing.

Yet you didn't do any of those things concerning the above comment you made. You and Costella's lack of understanding of the subject matter was addressed three years ago.

http://home.comcast.net/~dperry1943/rainsenless.html

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the very few operable sprinklers we could find in Dealy Plaza

was oddly located right by the electric eye for the flag spotlight. This

seemed like gross incompetence to us...a sprinkler to water the flagpole.

Very odd.

Jack

Jack, if like most sprinklers ... they can be set to water in a 360 drgee spray pattern right down to to a 1/4 spray pattern by simply adjusting them, so did you or Costella bother to see how they were adjusted? And considering that they can throw spray a good distance, the pole seems to be of little significance. I might also add that the low wattage light to that pole gets heavy Texas rain storms pouring down on it from time to time and with no worries concerning the wiring or ability of operating with water falling upon it. So when you make statements like the one above - I have to wonder if you or Costella had bothered to give a lot of thought to this matter at all.

Also, the sensor mounted on the sign was not under the lip of the angle iron support beam, but rather it was sticking out to the side of it ... much the same way the man is mounting one on a gutter in the photo on the link below.

http://www.rainsensor.com/WRS1P-Cut1.htm

Bill Miller

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the very few operable sprinklers we could find in Dealy Plaza

was oddly located right by the electric eye for the flag spotlight. This

seemed like gross incompetence to us...a sprinkler to water the flagpole.

Very odd.

Jack

Jack, if like most sprinklers ... they can be set to water in a 360 drgee spray pattern right down to to a 1/4 spray pattern by simply adjusting them, so did you or Costella bother to see how they were adjusted? And considering that they can throw spray a good distance, the pole seems to be of little significance. I might also add that the low wattage light to that pole gets heavy Texas rain storms pouring down on it from time to time and with no worries concerning the wiring or ability of operating with water falling upon it. So when you make statements like the one above - I have to wonder if you or Costella had bothered to give a lot of thought to this matter at all.

Also, the sensor mounted on the sign was not under the lip of the angle iron support beam, but rather it was sticking out to the side of it ... much the same way the man is mounting one on a gutter in the photo on the link below.

http://www.rainsensor.com/WRS1P-Cut1.htm

Bill Miller

Bill Miller

with the understanding Dr. John Costella is *thorough*, when I first read his comments regarding rain sensors, I laughed through every sentence -- I knew what the Lone Nutter/non-Zfilm alteration crowd response would be. They met my every expectation, and then SOME.

Having been in DP many times, I never saw these devices [nor was I looking for them and wouldn't know what to do if I had found them]. Now a few have stated; DP is a small place, so I say; so small in fact, its a wonder they need all those rain sensors in determining how much the lawn needs public works watering...

So, JCostella's concerns have never been answered. Lots of excuses why all those "rain" sensors are needed. It would be best if City of Dallas Park Services comment rather than second-rate landscape, irrigation wannabes....

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

with the understanding Dr. John Costella is *thorough*, when I first read his comments regarding rain sensors, I laughed through every sentence -- I knew what the Lone Nutter/non-Zfilm alteration crowd response would be. They met my every expectation, and then SOME.

It's always good to see one of your "thorough" and detailed responses, David. Costella's lack of thoroughness has been shown several times ... one instance that comes to mind was when he mistakenly wrote about this big window of time when Moorman's photograph could have been altered because he hadn't bothered to even find out the first time it was publicly displayed. Had Costella of done so, he would have discovered that it was filmed in the Plaza not 30 minutes following the assassination and while always being in Mary Moorman's possession. As far what the non-alteration crowd would say ... you should know the answer because you are one of them. It certainly shouldn't be necessary to constantly keep reminding you that you have said that you have never seen proof of alteration.

Having been in DP many times, I never saw these devices, now a few have stated; DP is a small place. So I say, so small in fact its a wonder they need all those rain sensors to determine if they need to water the damn lawn...

So, JCostella's concerns have never been answered. Lots of excuses why all those "rain" sensors are needed. It would be best if City of Dallas Park Services comment rather than second-rate landscape, irrigation wannabes....

I would think that common sense would tell someone that depending on whether you are talking about areas that are flat and have little to no run-off, areas that are shaded most of the day, or areas that are on slopes and do not hold water easily would need to be watered differently. My question to you, Jack, or Costella is ... What have any of you done to check with other parks similar to Dealey Plaza to see how their watering system is set up so to determine if DP is operating no different than other alike parks?

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. White....

as a veteran of many large and small irrigation installs, the things you've pointed out, re: the sprinklers, just aren't that uncommon.

not trying to be a "provocateur", just passing it on.

hang in there, keep lookin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with the understanding Dr. John Costella is *thorough*, when I first read his comments regarding rain sensors, I laughed through every sentence -- I knew what the Lone Nutter/non-Zfilm alteration crowd response would be. They met my every expectation, and then SOME.

It's always good to see one of your "thorough" and detailed responses, David. Costella's lack of thoroughness has been shown several times ... one instance that comes to mind was when he mistakenly wrote about this big window of time when Moorman's photograph could have been altered because he hadn't bothered to even find out the first time it was publicly displayed. Had Costella of done so, he would have discovered that it was filmed in the Plaza not 30 minutes following the assassination and while always being in Mary Moorman's possession. As far what the non-alteration crowd would say ... you should know the answer because you are one of them. It certainly shouldn't be necessary to constantly keep reminding you that you have said that you have never seen proof of alteration.

Having been in DP many times, I never saw these devices, now a few have stated; DP is a small place. So I say, so small in fact its a wonder they need all those rain sensors to determine if they need to water the damn lawn...

So, JCostella's concerns have never been answered. Lots of excuses why all those "rain" sensors are needed. It would be best if City of Dallas Park Services comment rather than second-rate landscape, irrigation wannabes....

I would think that common sense would tell someone that depending on whether you are talking about areas that are flat and have little to no run-off, areas that are shaded most of the day, or areas that are on slopes and do not hold water easily would need to be watered differently. My question to you, Jack, or Costella is ... What have any of you done to check with other parks similar to Dealey Plaza to see how their watering system is set up so to determine if DP is operating no different than other alike parks?

Bill Miller

and the DRONE goes on - most importantly, the DP rainsensor mystery persists.... LMAO! ! !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. White....

as a veteran of many large and small irrigation installs, the things you've pointed out, re: the sprinklers, just aren't that uncommon.

not trying to be a "provocateur", just passing it on.

hang in there, keep lookin'.

Hi, Tom...thanks. In your opinion, were SIX rain sensors needed to

determine whether it rains in a TWO BLOCK AREA?

I wish you would examine the sprinklers in the plaza...nearly all were

for shrubs...none for the big grass infield, and many were broken, though

the rain sensors looked much newer than the sprinkler heads. And the

sprinkler heads were all the small pop-up residential type, not the type

typically seen in parks. Attached...another of the many sensors.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it, there is some question as to why there appears to be a larger amount of rain sensors in DP than necessary. If there continues to be no information forthcoming from the Dallas Parks and Rec/City, what is the thought about the rain sensors? I guess I will address this to two individuals most involved on the topic, Mr. White and Mr Costella (absent).

1. If not rain sensors, do you theorize or speculate that they are some type of monitoring device?

2. If the answer to the above is "yes", what is it that you purport the devices to be monitoring?

3. Lastly, for what purpose is the information gathered by the sensors to be utilized?

Jason Vermeer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John theorized that the six wireless devices "could" be positioned to transmit conversations in the plaza to the nearby federal offices.

LOL! 235-183-roll.gif

Lordy, the conceit and self-importance expressed in this forum is beyond belief. God help the Fed whose job it is to "eavesdrop" on Jack and friends. But you're too smart for them Jack! You've seen through their diabolical, eeeevvvil scheme! Good for you.

P.S. Black socks in public? Are you a retiree in Miami Beach? You might want to rethink that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

with the understanding Dr. John Costella is *thorough*, when I first read his comments regarding rain sensors, I laughed through every sentence --

Of course that's the problem with Costella...he is NOT "thorough"!

He shows us this when he failed at the Moorman.

He shows us this when he is unable to understand a simple shadow in an Apollo photograph and does not do a simple photograph to see how it actually works.

He shows us this when he fails to understand how much a shadow moves when a lamp post leans and does not attempt to actually see real results but rather simply "tells" us it "can't" be that much.

He shows us that when he tell us that it physics makes it impossible for a vertical object (line) to change angles in a photograph (Stemmons Sign) when the sign in question is NOT vertical.

He shows us that when he tells us he can alter images to make them appear to be from the same camera position and then whan called on it admits that well yea, you cant do that when the camera has moved

He shows us that when he tells us that it is impossible to sharpen a photograph pre computer when in fact the opposite is true.

AND

He shows us that when he writes about Rain Sensors WITHOUT DOING ANY RESEARCH AT ALL.

He's a piss poor example of "thorough" David, but exactly what we have come to expect of ANYONE connected to either you OR Fetzer.

In other words...laughing stocks!

While I expect a nonsense reply from you, why not BUCK your usual trend for ignorant rants and addresss the above IF YOU CAN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. White,

there are numerous reasons why there are so many sensors.

I've never been to Texas, but in Florida, it can put down 3 inches of water on one side of the street and not a drop on the other side.

or....

"we bought 6 sensors....you will install them in the Plaza....needed or no."

municipal budgets, lol....

take care, t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Craig Lamson'

with the understanding Dr. John Costella is *thorough*, when I first read his comments regarding rain sensors, I laughed through every sentence --

Of course that's the problem with Costella...he is NOT "thorough"!

dgh: oh-my gosh, the lone Nutter's found a physicist foolish enough to challenge Dr. John Costella, I missed that, who is it and is his/her specialty optics? You clowns might get a book deal after all...

He shows us this when he failed at the Moorman.

dgh: speculation -- our pedestal base in Moorman 5 is thicker than your Moorman 5 pedestal base

He shows us this when he is unable to understand a simple shadow in an Apollo photograph and does not do a simple photograph to see how it actually works.

dgh: one source of light on the moon, yes?

He shows us this when he fails to understand how much a shadow moves when a lamp post leans and does not attempt to actually see real results but rather simply "tells" us it "can't" be that much.

dgh: "post leans" -- what post physically leans? You talking about the Stemmons Fwy. sign that was taken down right after the assassination?

dgh: should be a piece of cake to prove, yes? I'm sure your sides physicist can explain all the discrepencies[/b]

He shows us that when he tell us that it physics makes it impossible for a vertical object (line) to change angles in a photograph (Stemmons Sign) when the sign in question is NOT vertical.

dgh: you'd do yourself a favor if you read the book -- better yet, have Josiah recap it for you.

He shows us that when he tells us he can alter images to make them appear to be from the same camera position and then whan called on it admits that well yea, you cant do that when the camera has moved

dgh: my you guys getting sensitive about a physicist's study -- would you like to buy the DVD's of his presentation, or a copy of the book?

He shows us that when he tells us that it is impossible to sharpen a photograph pre computer when in fact the opposite is true.

dgh: of course its true in 'optical printing', Ray Fielding tells us how its done....

AND

He shows us that when he writes about Rain Sensors WITHOUT DOING ANY RESEARCH AT ALL.

dgh: I bust out in a smile EVERY time I hear 'rainsensors'

He's a piss poor example of "thorough" David, but exactly what we have come to expect of ANYONE connected to either you OR Fetzer.

In other words...laughing stocks!

dgh: of course he ISN't a piss poor example, he caught on to the Lone Nutter's game, early on. First hand experience... see here:

http://assassinationscience.com/johncostel...ld_content.html

then to (same page) 'Gang' link -- I believe your mentioned there, Craig

While I expect a nonsense reply from you, why not BUCK your usual trend for ignorant rants and addresss the above IF YOU CAN!

dgh: why not read Costella's reply to the lone Nutter's -- my response is irrelevant, of course you expect that, nothing ignorant about Dr. Costella's response, all lurker's need do is go to the below:

http://assassinationscience.com/johncostel...ld_content.html

nice to have your cheery disposition back, I trust you had a nice vacation - as for mine, the weather in Huntsville, Al was horrible, can't stand humidity...

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...