HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 23, 2012, 01:09:26 AM
News:

Pages: 1 [2]
Running Scared  (Read 1277 times)
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


                                                       
Recently, I have discussed numerically consecutive frames of the Zapruder film that show considerable movements of arms without the expected motion blurs. I attributed these discrepancies to tampering with the film.

The defenders of the Zapruder film responded in an unexpected manner. Instead of hearing far-fetched excuses for the contents of the film, they launched shrill attacks that escalated into obnoxious tirades. These tactics show that the defenders of the film fear an understanding motion blurs.

I warn the shrills that the following rewording my earlier arguments may cause motion sickness. 

Z-224 shows a spectator on the north peristyle with his arm raised sixty degrees from the apparent position of that arm on Z-223. These frames portend that the arm rotated through an angle of sixty degrees in one-eighteenth of a second without producing the expected motion blur.



By contrast the clapping hands of a spectator on the north infield grass that moved a few inches as opposed to a couple of feet show motion blurs on Z-223 and Z-224.

The absence of motion blurs of the arm on Z-223 and Z-224 required that the arm accelerated after exposure of Z-223, reached a maximum angular speed and decelerated to near rest prior to exposure of Z-224. I contend that these motions in the 1/36 second between exposures are humanly impossible and constitute proof of tampering with the Zapruder film.

Similar problems arise from the positions of Toni Foster's arm on numerically consecutive frames.



Z-317 shows the forearm of Toni Foster resting horizontally across her mid section while Z-318 shows the arm with practically the same shape and size as on Z-317 yet rotated by approximately thirty degrees. The absence of a motion blur demanded that the forearm accelerated from rotational rest, reached a maximum angular speed then decelerated to rotational rest during the 1/36 second interval between the two exposures. These humanly impossible motions expose the images of Toni Foster on Z-317 and Z-318 as not chronologically ordered.




-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The first is set at .06 sec between frames, which should equate to approx 18FPS.

The second has a longer gap to show the amount of motion between succeeding frames.

Just examples for anyone interested.

chris







Chris, thats revealing!

Thanks a lot mate. :)

best

Martin


-------------------------

-------------------------
Firework As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

God bless Emmett Till:
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Insipired by the Movie "Invictus" and Nelson Mandela.
What a poem!

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hey Craig, I'm curious...

Have you ever ran into any claim of photo/video fakery that held up to scrutiny?

I'm guessing not, so I'll ask another question...

Have you ever seen any photo/video evidence that supported conspiracy in another, more indirect fashion?  For example, evidence that objects were manipulated from one photo to another.  Or that photos supposedly taken in succession were actually some time apart.  Something like that.

Thanks
Look at Chris' video. This film displays frames three and nine some time apart although they were the same frame taken at the same time.

I raise issue to show that those who claim to have never seen a motion problem on the Zapruder film would not recognize one when it clearly exists.

Herbert


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1374


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Look at Chris' video. This film displays frames three and nine some time apart although they were the same frame taken at the same time.

I raise issue to show that those who claim to have never seen a motion problem on the Zapruder film would not recognize one when it clearly exists.

Herbert


Hey LOOKIE...herbie's back and STILL unable to answer the simple questions put to him.  I raise this issue to show that some alterationists don't know their butt from a motion blur.   Since you are so slow on the uptake herbie, that means YOU!

Have a GREAT day...LMAO!


-------------------------
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 07:01:14 PM by Craig Lamson »

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 623


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hey Craig, I'm curious...

Have you ever ran into any claim of photo/video fakery that held up to scrutiny?

I'm guessing not, so I'll ask another question...

Have you ever seen any photo/video evidence that supported conspiracy in another, more indirect fashion?  For example, evidence that objects were manipulated from one photo to another.  Or that photos supposedly taken in succession were actually some time apart.  Something like that.

Thanks
Look at Chris' video. This film displays frames three and nine some time apart although they were the same frame taken at the same time.

I raise issue to show that those who claim to have never seen a motion problem on the Zapruder film would not recognize one when it clearly exists.

Herbert


Hi Herbert,

Frames 3 and 9 are somewhat different.

The motion may look the exact same when viewed at a faster rate, but layered over one another is a different story.

I didn't provide the original footage to fool anyone, it is to use for comparison purposes if applicable.

chris





-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hey Craig, I'm curious...

Have you ever ran into any claim of photo/video fakery that held up to scrutiny?

I'm guessing not, so I'll ask another question...

Have you ever seen any photo/video evidence that supported conspiracy in another, more indirect fashion?  For example, evidence that objects were manipulated from one photo to another.  Or that photos supposedly taken in succession were actually some time apart.  Something like that.

Thanks
Look at Chris' video. This film displays frames three and nine some time apart although they were the same frame taken at the same time.

I raise issue to show that those who claim to have never seen a motion problem on the Zapruder film would not recognize one when it clearly exists.

Herbert


Hi Herbert,

Frames 3 and 9 are somewhat different.

The motion may look the exact same when viewed at a faster rate, but layered over one another is a different story.

I didn't provide the original footage to fool anyone, it is to use for comparison purposes if applicable.

chris




I did not intend to imply an attempt to fool us. Instead, I noticed that the frames immediately surrounding the frames showing the stronger motion blurs have an apparent periodicity of six frames.



Knowing your inclination to use graphical bells and whistles, I wrongly concluded that you repeated the same sequence of frames.

Under magnification, I can now detect the small difference between frames three and nine.

Herbert


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1374


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Under magnification, I can now detect the small difference between frames three and nine.

Herbert

It took magnification for you to see the differences?  No wonder your photo analysis is so poor...you can't SEE!


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Gallery

JFKForum.com

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines