Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Altered Survey Data (also probably for the last time)

Not unlike any good puzzle, one must take the time and effort to find the "key" which will aid in further understanding of the other aspects of the puzzle.

The "Road Sign" issue IS NOT a single puzzle!

It is merely one phase of an overall plan of obfuscation of information and facts as relates to the impact point of the first shot fired in the assassination.

Just as it is no coincidence that the survey data of Z208 was changed by the WC to reflect Z210, and just as the usage of the "adjusted position" effectively moved the position of the JFK stand-in a few feet farther down Elm St., it is also no coincidence that the road signs were also slightly relocated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thomas H. Purvis

One could, if they so desire and have no other capabilities, speculate til hell freezes over in regards to the "Sign Problem", and still never have the answers.

Just more confusion and roaming in the land of the lost.

However, if one takes the time to research the matter, then there is acually very little that is difficult to understand in regards to the sign removal as well.

I do speculate and assure you I have many other - as you say "capabilities' and I will speculate till Hell freezes over as regards the "Sign Problem" and until

I am satisfied that I have the answers or at least know that there are no answers.

Why don't you, with all your "research" of the "matter", put us all out of our misguided and moronic-lack-of-understanding-misery

give us the benefit of your "research" of the "matter" and tell us all in this forum what you

have found that tells you there is " acually (sic) very little that is difficult to understand

in regards to the sign removal as well."

EBC

Why don't you, with all your "research" of the "matter", put us all out of our misguided and moronic-lack-of-understanding-misery

give us the benefit of your "research" of the "matter" and tell us all in this forum what you

have found that tells you there is " acually (sic) very little that is difficult to understand

in regards to the sign removal as well."

Although most of what you ask was done a considerably time back, it is highly unlikely that it will put you

"out of our misguided and moronic-lack-of-understanding-misery", as one has to take the time to read and understand it.

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

Then, it is most unlikely that you will also grasp the necessity for removal and replacement/relocation of the road sign just prior to the WC's re-enactment of the assassination.

And, it also helps to know that neither Time/Life nor the US Secret Service or FBI originally had any great difficulty in location of the approximate point of impact for the first shot fired.

(which information I also provided a considerable length of time back)

Thanks again for your posts and thoughts on this subject. Not being as knowledgeable, as others, and still trying to "fill in" some questions that always seem to nag us, one thing has become clear for me. The WC and others must have been going crazy trying to figure out what, and how, to make everything "jive" after finding out that people were asking alot of questions, and what a big part the Zfilm was starting to play. They had to somehow, to the best of their capabilities, come up with a solution to make everything they "claimed" happen, and what really did happen, come to a comparison that closely matched. But they also had to worry about all of the other "films" taken that day, along with pictures, didnt pop-up and completely "blow-up" what they were going to put forth. They surely didnt figure on "researchers" to be still checking and comparing the Zfilm to this day! It is painfully obvious that they went to great lengths to ensure, to the best of their ability and talents in 63' that what they said happened, was backed up, at least enought to satisfy the public. Considering that the film wasnt released publically until years later, thay still had to know that eventually they would have to face up to it sooner or later. Many of you here have proved years ago what was thought to of happened, did.............the "probable" altering of the film. I ,at least, have gotten alot of good information that i didnt have before, from this thread. It has also become painfully obvious to me that the film WAS altered, at least to some point to prove their findings.

It makes me wonder, at least, as to what other things the WC and others did, that we as a "group" havent found or touched on yet, to fall into their "version" of events?? I want to thank all of you that have posted here, and your input into my questions that were asked here. They all have helped me considerably. Just my opinion FWIW

thanks-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Smitty - not worth a dime, perhaps - Emmett Hudson's testimony as well as James Hicks and other related info - the possibility of the signs attached to the Stemmon's sign as being the possible location of a hit. The idea being that the sign briefly obscured the view from a 'knoll' location, with a clip to the edge of one of these signs, prior to the entrance to the throat - resulting in a mystery on the smallness of the size of the entry wound.

Puzzled on it before. See Cutler's plat of Dealey Plaza - and his possible on the throat shot - location for Man #1. Curious.

- lee

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eugene B. Connolly

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

I take it that one has studied the above litany can one nevertheless

give us and moi the insights of one's 'research' of this 'matter'.

Can we have some facts and perhaps the odd conclusion from one?

We look forward to a fuller and, indeed, more comprehensive report on one's findings.

Btw is that a green beret one is wearing?

EBC

Edited by Eugene B. Connolly
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eugene B. Connolly
My experience has been that 'Not being as knowledgeable' and the 'probable" altering of the film' are two statements that seem to go hand in hand.

Bill Miller

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and: STOP THERE! :hotorwot

Any knowledgeable person who has read the WC - I assume you mean Warren Commission here - knows that it is full of

inaccuracies,halftruths and downright lies and would be better referred to as the Warren Omission.

If you are basing your 'research' on the dubious tissue-of-lies WC then I am afraid that you are not going to convince me or

any more knowledgeable persons of the veracity of your 'research'. IMO a copy of the WC

deserves to be consigned to every WC across America and perhaps only there the WC may

serve a more useful purpose and, who knows, maybe even get to the bottom of the issue.

EBC

Edited by Eugene B. Connolly
Link to post
Share on other sites

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and: STOP THERE! :hotorwot

Any knowledgeable person who has read the WC - I assume you mean Warren Commission here - knows that it is full of

inaccuracies,halftruths and downright lies and would be better referred to as the Warren Omission.

If you are basing your 'research' on the dubious tissue-of-lies WC then I am afraid that you are not going to convince me or

any more knowledgeable persons of the veracity of your 'research'. IMO a copy of the the WC

deserves to be consigned to every WC across America and perhaps only there the WC may

serve a more useful purpose and, who knows, maybe even get to the bottom of the issue.

EBC

EBC, I have bought two sets of the complete 26 volumes almost a decade ago and have read nearly every volume completely through .... how far along are you in your set? As far as the points you listed above, I don't buy the WC's evidence, but instead I rely on the views from those key locations and when it comes to the road sign - it was not a factor. I have also logged several hundred hours in Dealey Plaza while taking photos from about every possible position with the exception of the alleged sniper's window. I have actually went into the middle of Elm Street to run test in between the light changes .... sometimes having traffic have to make a lane change to get around me because I didn't complete a task fast enough. I also took the time to shoot 360 degree panoramas so to have those views to work with upon my return home. I have taken several rides in the replica car while sitting in JFK's place while holding a video camera to my eye so to see what locations were visible and at what points - have you?

As far as a first shot(s) coming from the RR yard and passing through the road sign - I do not buy it for several reasons. One is that once a shot is fired from that loaction ... there were plenty of witnesses who would have their attention immediately drawn there. Gordon Arnold for instance never mentioned a shot coming from behind him until the President was at the kill spot. You are welcoome to go to Dealey Plaza and do as I did and report what you found ... I will look forward to hearing what ever information you bring back with you.

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to post
Share on other sites
And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and: STOP THERE! :hotorwot

Any knowledgeable person who has read the WC - I assume you mean Warren Commission here - knows that it is full of

inaccuracies,halftruths and downright lies and would be better referred to as the Warren Omission.

If you are basing your 'research' on the dubious tissue-of-lies WC then I am afraid that you are not going to convince me or

any more knowledgeable persons of the veracity of your 'research'. IMO a copy of the the WC

deserves to be consigned to every WC across America and perhaps only there the WC may

serve a more useful purpose and, who knows, maybe even get to the bottom of the issue.

EBC

EBC, I have bought two sets of the complete 26 volumes almost a decade ago and have read nearly every volume completely through .... how far along are you in your set? As far as the points you listed above, I don't buy the WC's evidence, but instead I rely on the views from those key locations and when it comes to the road sign - it was not a factor. I have also logged several hundred hours in Dealey Plaza while taking photos from about every possible position with the exception of the alleged sniper's window. I have actually went into the middle of Elm Street to run test in between the light changes .... sometimes having traffic have to make a lane change to get around me because I didn't complete a task fast enough. I also took the time to shoot 360 degree panoramas so to have those views to work with upon my return home. I have taken several rides in the replica car while sitting in JFK's place while holding a video camera to my eye so to see what locations were visible and at what points - have you?

As far as a first shot(s) coming from the RR yard and passing through the road sign - I do not buy it for several reasons. One is that once a shot is fired from that loaction ... there were plenty of witnesses who would have their attention immediately drawn there. Gordon Arnold for instance never mentioned a shot coming from behind him until the President was at the kill spot. You are welcoome to go to Dealey Plaza and do as I did and report what you found ... I will look forward to hearing what ever information you bring back with you.

Bill Miller

dgh: Now if you could get Groden to cough up something worthwhile, we might get someplace... Like one or two first generation prints of DP films... what-do-you-say?

Speaking of which, reminds me of a docu I once saw, a researcher in DP on Elm Street with the re-creation limo [stopped], dummy in the backseat with a white spear coming out of his back trying to align the spear with the 6th floor window... looked like a third rate cluster fu*k.... remind you of anyone?

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to post
Share on other sites
And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and: STOP THERE! :hotorwot

Any knowledgeable person who has read the WC - I assume you mean Warren Commission here - knows that it is full of

inaccuracies,halftruths and downright lies and would be better referred to as the Warren Omission.

If you are basing your 'research' on the dubious tissue-of-lies WC then I am afraid that you are not going to convince me or

any more knowledgeable persons of the veracity of your 'research'. IMO a copy of the the WC

deserves to be consigned to every WC across America and perhaps only there the WC may

serve a more useful purpose and, who knows, maybe even get to the bottom of the issue.

EBC

EBC, I have bought two sets of the complete 26 volumes almost a decade ago and have read nearly every volume completely through .... how far along are you in your set? As far as the points you listed above, I don't buy the WC's evidence, but instead I rely on the views from those key locations and when it comes to the road sign - it was not a factor. I have also logged several hundred hours in Dealey Plaza while taking photos from about every possible position with the exception of the alleged sniper's window. I have actually went into the middle of Elm Street to run test in between the light changes .... sometimes having traffic have to make a lane change to get around me because I didn't complete a task fast enough. I also took the time to shoot 360 degree panoramas so to have those views to work with upon my return home. I have taken several rides in the replica car while sitting in JFK's place while holding a video camera to my eye so to see what locations were visible and at what points - have you?

As far as a first shot(s) coming from the RR yard and passing through the road sign - I do not buy it for several reasons. One is that once a shot is fired from that loaction ... there were plenty of witnesses who would have their attention immediately drawn there. Gordon Arnold for instance never mentioned a shot coming from behind him until the President was at the kill spot. You are welcoome to go to Dealey Plaza and do as I did and report what you found ... I will look forward to hearing what ever information you bring back with you.

Bill Miller

Everyone is entitled to their opinion Bill. You are entitled, as am I, Lee, and Eugene. I may not be as "knowledgeable", but I am entitled to what I think. I dont need you to bust into a thread I started about this subject, and have you start trying to push people around. I respect what you have done, and what you know, with no disrespect intended. You dont see me busting into "anybodys", and I repeat "anybodys" thread, and disrespect them in any way, shape or form. I would expect the same professionalism from someone who has the "knowledge", and doesnt have to guess at "probables". Even if I had the knowledge, and experience, I surely wouldnt be boasting and bragging. I have a copy of the WC Report, [which to be honest, I havent read it completely] and I have been to Dealey Plaza and surrounding areas, and took lots and lots of pictures. That doesnt make me even close to being an expert. If you cant play nice, play somewhere else. After looking at the plat, it is very obvious, that "one" of the signs COULD have been hit from that angle, and it would also help explain the frontal hit for the throat shot. [if the plat is close to representing what did happen] Personally, it has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Gordon Arnold was even present that day, in that position, to give any statement, one way or another. Anyway, that is just MY opinion, and Im not trying to shove it down anyones throat.

FWIW-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites
After looking at the plat, it is very obvious, that "one" of the signs COULD have been hit from that angle, and it would also help explain the frontal hit for the throat shot. [if the plat is close to representing what did happen]Personally, it has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Gordon Arnold was even present that day, in that position, to give any statement, one way or another. Anyway, that is just MY opinion, and Im not trying to shove it down anyones throat.

FWIW-smitty

I would hope that my offering a little logic into the mix wouldn't intimidate anyone, if it does, then as it was said in 'The Search For Spock' ... the needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the one' ... at least in this case. If we are going to talk 'could haves', then a rifle shot from a deer hunter a mile away could have killed the President, but the probability doesn't hardly seem worth considering. And while it is true that nothing about this case is provable beyond a shadow of a doubt, Gordon Arnold told his family and friends about his experience the very day of the assassination. Gordon mentions several things about where he stood and what he did and witnessed during and after the shooting that later photographical evidence validated. And I supposed that Gordon could have merely knew the guy in the overseas cap and for some twist of fate he was able to take that man's identity by merely claiming he was the one above the knoll during the shooting, but the real soldier would have had to of told Gordon the sequence of events in detail for Gordon to have gotten it right. Even Gordon's hitting the ground was noticed by Senator Yarborough and when I accompanied Groden to the lab last year with his said 1st generation copy of the Nix film, the movement towards the north by the individual at the Arnold location supported what Yarborough claimed to have saw and what Gordon claimed to have done, but like you said .... it's not provable beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was Gordon. What is provable however, is that Gordon was able to give details from the onset that the photographical wasn't known to hold until decades later.

Now forgetting Gordon for a moment, I mentioned earlier how an early shot from the RR yard would surely have offered a very high risk of at least some witnesses on the south side of Elm Street having their attention drawn to the knoll, thus making the element of surprise non-existent for later shots to have come from the same area and to have gone unnoticed ... any thoughts on the probablility of that being a likelyhood?

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to post
Share on other sites
dgh: Now if you could get Groden to cough up something worthwhile, we might get someplace...

Oh but Groden did cough up something worthwhile when he reported that he had examined the alleged camera original Zapruder film and stated that the signs of it being a copy didn't exist. Even you have stated that its common knowledge that a first generation print would be slightly fuzzy even in the good frames, thus we have to give Robert credit for doing what you had never bothered to do.

Bill Miller

Link to post
Share on other sites
dgh: Now if you could get Groden to cough up something worthwhile, we might get someplace...

Oh but Groden did cough up something worthwhile when he reported that he had examined the alleged camera original Zapruder film and stated that the signs of it being a copy didn't exist. Even you have stated that its common knowledge that a first generation print would be slightly fuzzy even in the good frames, thus we have to give Robert credit for doing what you had never bothered to do.

Bill Miller

when one has access to a optical film printer anything, ANYTHING is possible including: fuzzy 1st generation "prints"; additional motion blur, etc....

When and where did Groden examine the the in-camera original Zapruder film?

Give credit to Groden for what? Acquiring film, prints, negatives, selling to the tabloids? Give me a clue....

Link to post
Share on other sites
when one has access to a optical film printer anything, ANYTHING is possible including: fuzzy 1st generation "prints"; additional motion blur, etc....
That is not what you have said, David. Do I need to go back and cite your remarks once again? And while you wish to dance some more - would like to now go on record as saying that you can take a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd generation copy print and make it look as though it was the in-camera original and have it be undetectable?
When and where did Groden examine the the in-camera original Zapruder film?

He told me that he did it at the National Archives.

Give credit to Groden for what? Acquiring film, prints, negatives, selling to the tabloids? Give me a clue....

You can start by him not trolling JFK forums like you do. You can also credit him for getting to the point about how to tell if a film is an original or a copy - you pissed around for the longest time before admitting to what Groden had been saying all along. You can also credit him for actually getting off his ass and making an appointment to examine the alleged camera original ... something you harped about for years and never bothered doing yourself.

And by the way, when are you going to tell us about that forensic testing you'd have done to the Zapruder film .... imagine the film is in front of you - tell us what you would do at that point?

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to post
Share on other sites
My experience has been that 'Not being as knowledgeable' and the 'probable" altering of the film' are two statements that seem to go hand in hand.

Bill Miller

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and:

1. The Adjusted Position

2. The Alteration of Survey Data

3. The multiple run-through's during the re-enactment

4. The multiple filming of the re-enactment from different angles and elevations

5. The jacked up rifle/filming position in the sixth floor window

And, until such time as you have studied the WC and: STOP THERE! ;)

Any knowledgeable person who has read the WC - I assume you mean Warren Commission here - knows that it is full of

inaccuracies,halftruths and downright lies and would be better referred to as the Warren Omission.

If you are basing your 'research' on the dubious tissue-of-lies WC then I am afraid that you are not going to convince me or

any more knowledgeable persons of the veracity of your 'research'. IMO a copy of the the WC

deserves to be consigned to every WC across America and perhaps only there the WC may

serve a more useful purpose and, who knows, maybe even get to the bottom of the issue.

EBC

The WC (Warren Commission as most are aware) happens to contain significant information which:

1. Is factual.

2. Is often a half-truth.

3. Is often a complete misrepresentation of the facts.

Therefore, And, until such time as you have studied the WC and

Thereafter separated each and every item for it's validity, or lack thereof, then most likely you will continue to fail to understand much as regards the events of the actual assassination or the complete obfuscation and misrepresentation of these simple facts by the WC/aka Warren Commission/aka Specter & Company.

Lastly, rest assured that I could care less in regards to attempting to convince someone, especially someone who has not taken the full time to research the COMPLETE Warren Commission "of the veracity of your 'research".

Not unlike most items associated with the actual assassination, it is neither difficult to understand the actual event, nor is it difficult to recognize and understand how the WC/Warren Commission/Specter & Company managed to send a lot of persons chasing their own tail down in the rabbit holes of Wonderland.

And, "until such time as you have studied the WC", then in all liklihood, you will continue to chase your own tail, or the "tale" of multiple assassins and body snatchers as posed by those others who either did not study the WC, or else did not understand what they purportedly studied.

Which of course merely continues to add to my limited insight into the human species and exactly what they can be lead to believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The WC (Warren Commission as most are aware) happens to contain significant information which:

1. Is factual.

2. Is often a half-truth.

3. Is often a complete misrepresentation of the facts.

Therefore, And, until such time as you have studied the WC and

Thereafter separated each and every item for it's validity, or lack thereof, then most likely you will continue to fail to understand much as regards the events of the actual assassination or the complete obfuscation and misrepresentation of these simple facts by the WC/aka Warren Commission/aka Specter & Company.

Lastly, rest assured that I could care less in regards to attempting to convince someone, especially someone who has not taken the full time to research the COMPLETE Warren Commission "of the veracity of your 'research".

Not unlike most items associated with the actual assassination, it is neither difficult to understand the actual event, nor is it difficult to recognize and understand how the WC/Warren Commission/Specter & Company managed to send a lot of persons chasing their own tail down in the rabbit holes of Wonderland.

And, "until such time as you have studied the WC", then in all liklihood, you will continue to chase your own tail, or the "tale" of multiple assassins and body snatchers as posed by those others who either did not study the WC, or else did not understand what they purportedly studied.

Which of course merely continues to add to my limited insight into the human species and exactly what they can be lead to believe.

Tom, I certainly agree with your three points listed in your previous post. I do however, don't put much stock in someone's book review who hasn't actually read what they are criticizing and I do not mean just the report. I recall a woman saying to several of us sitting around the campfire last fall that the book "The Da Vinci Code" convinced her that the Bible was erroneous, so I asked her if she had ever read the Bible and she said, "No". We all rolled our eyes and she looked like a complete idiot to everyone of us, including two who were there that do not believe in the concept of God. I have read the witnesses statements given under oath and I did notice that Specter did his best to move off the topic of the avulsion mentioned by the witnesses and I feel that it is obvious why he did this. He did however have great interest in wanting to know about a little hole that he could not get anyone to say they saw, but asked for no specifics concerning the large hole in the occipital bone. I knew as an investigator that one would need to look at all the data possible to make a fair judgment as to where the truth lies. Can I assume that you have also done the same?

Bill Miller

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...