|
|
 November 03, 2010, 07:34:49 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 747
|
Along with Duncan's excellent video showing Kennedy clearly reacting to a shot just before he goes behind the sign around the 195-207 mark: <![CDATA[As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
<a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=login">Login</a>]]> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the HSCA said he was, around 190. He testified that to the Warren Commision that he squeezed the button on his camera as a startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot. Here is that photo:  The HSCA decided it was taken at Zapruder frame 202:  This in itself blows the SBT out of the water, making all the silliness about the trajectories irrelevent.
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 07:42:18 PM by Barry Howarth »
|
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 03, 2010, 08:11:24 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Some researchers use the "blurring" of the extant Z-film to show when the shots were actually fired and heard too! There is blurring before he go to the sign which means a shot from the SN could not have hoped to hit him since the tree was still in the way.
By "blurring" I mean each time Zapruder heard a shot he flinched and this caused the film to blur and move a little.
Mr. LIEBELER - Well, there are many different theories about that. One thing I would like you to do now--we have a series-- a little book here that is Commission Exhibit No. 885 and it consists of a number of frames from motion pictures and I want to show you certain numbers of them which are important to our work and ask you if those look like they were taken from your film and if in fact you could recognize it as you look through this book that these are individual frame-by-frame pictures of the pictures that you took.
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, they are frame by frame and they weren't very clear, for the simple reason that on the telephoto lens it's good to take stills--when you move did you ever have binoculars and every time you move everything is exaggerated in the move that's one reason why they are kind of blurred--the movement. Now, you want me to identify whether these are my pictures?
-------------------------
-------------------------
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
"Benavides- Saw Oswald kill Tippit, picked him out of a lineup." - Brian "Doesn't Know His Rear From His Back" Walker
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 05, 2010, 02:19:55 AM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 462
|
If your theory is correct, it is interesting in Willis 5 that the umbrella dude and DCM provide a perfect lane free of civilians for the throat shot.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 03:35:11 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1168
|
> Willis No 5, the best evidence against the SBT?
> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best
> evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the
> HSCA said he was, around 190.
> He testified that to the Warren Commission that
> he squeezed the button on his camera as a
> startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot.
> Here is that photo:
Then why isn't the Altgens photograph at z255 the best evidence of a shot within a second before z255. Altgens thought his picture was taken within a second of the first shot, between z237 and z255.
Somebody has to be wrong. Either Willis was wrong or Altgens was wrong. Or maybe both were wrong.
A strong theme amount eyewitnesses, is their own importance. If someone reports their picture was within two seconds of the first shot, there is a good chance they were not within four seconds, and almost no chance they were actually within one second. If someone report being 40 feet away when a shot was fired, there is a good chance they were over 80 feet away and a very poor chance they were actually within 20 feet.
You can't use either Willis nor Altgens to establish when the first shot was fired. It's just too easy for people to convince themselves that their picture occurred right during a critical moment, like right when the firth shot was fired.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 03:54:05 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1299
Profile In Courage
|
> Willis No 5, the best evidence against the SBT?
> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best
> evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the
> HSCA said he was, around 190.
> He testified that to the Warren Commission that
> he squeezed the button on his camera as a
> startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot.
> Here is that photo:
Then why isn't the Altgens photograph at z255 the best evidence of a shot within a second before z255. Altgens thought his picture was taken within a second of the first shot, between z237 and z255.
Somebody has to be wrong. Either Willis was wrong or Altgens was wrong. Or maybe both were wrong.
A strong theme amount eyewitnesses, is their own importance. If someone reports their picture was within two seconds of the first shot, there is a good chance they were not within four seconds, and almost no chance they were actually within one second. If someone report being 40 feet away when a shot was fired, there is a good chance they were over 80 feet away and a very poor chance they were actually within 20 feet.
You can't use either Willis nor Altgens to establish when the first shot was fired. It's just too easy for people to convince themselves that their picture occurred right during a critical moment, like right when the firth shot was fired.
So right, so sensible. The witnesses were not using stopwatches. Why do people place so much emphasis on eye-witness (and ear-witness) testimony? I'm not talking about "yes" or "no" stuff. Yes, that's the man who did it. No, that's not the man who did it (etc).Instead - durations of time, dimensions, colors, features. All these things are bound to be less than "totally accurate" estimates. Despite that, critics attribute absolute precision to "selected" witnesses. Then they insist that others who do not fit the CT standpoint must be idiots or willing to lie to please the authorities. Why this illogical "inconsistent" reasoning?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 05:17:25 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 3791
Well, somebody did it.
|
The pictures tell the story not the picture takers. There is nothing in Altgens or Willis that refutes the SBT, nothing at all. Anyone that is willing to rely on the testimony of someone that thinks they can nail down the time of the picture to the time of the gunshot on sound memory is nto seriously trying to solve this thing, they are just looking for anything that supports their view. Willis doesn't know when he snapped the pic, he doesn't know if it was within 100 milliseconds or 5 seconds, he just doesn't know. And there is nothing in Duncan's clip that suggests that JFK was hit before he went behind the sign, nothing at all.
-------------------------
-------------------------
LN; So how did it happen then ?
CT; I don't know, I only know that it didn't happen the way the evidence says.
LN; We should not use evidence in this case ?
CT; Correct.
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 06:20:56 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2201
|
Along with Duncan's excellent video showing Kennedy clearly reacting to a shot just before he goes behind the sign around the 195-207 mark: <![CDATA[As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
<a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=login">Login</a>]]> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the HSCA said he was, around 190. He testified that to the Warren Commision that he squeezed the button on his camera as a startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot. Here is that photo: The HSCA decided it was taken at Zapruder frame 202: This in itself blows the SBT out of the water, making all the silliness about the trajectories irrelevent. You need a photograph of Phil Willis that shows his position when he clicked the shutter on his camera to dispute a later single bullet event. Sorry, but you are nowhere near the goalpost. Herbert
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 08:43:20 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 747
|
Along with Duncan's excellent video showing Kennedy clearly reacting to a shot just before he goes behind the sign around the 195-207 mark: <![CDATA[As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
<a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=login">Login</a>]]> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the HSCA said he was, around 190. He testified that to the Warren Commision that he squeezed the button on his camera as a startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot. Here is that photo: The HSCA decided it was taken at Zapruder frame 202: This in itself blows the SBT out of the water, making all the silliness about the trajectories irrelevent. You need a photograph of Phil Willis that shows his position when he clicked the shutter on his camera to dispute a later single bullet event. Sorry, but you are nowhere near the goalpost. Herbert Zapruder frame 202 shows Phil Willis taking the photo, did you miss that?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 06, 2010, 09:07:02 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2201
|
Along with Duncan's excellent video showing Kennedy clearly reacting to a shot just before he goes behind the sign around the 195-207 mark: <![CDATA[As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
<a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=login">Login</a>]]> Phil Willis' photo No 5 has to be the best evidence that Kennedy is really hit where the HSCA said he was, around 190. He testified that to the Warren Commision that he squeezed the button on his camera as a startle reflex to the sound of a gunshot. Here is that photo: The HSCA decided it was taken at Zapruder frame 202: This in itself blows the SBT out of the water, making all the silliness about the trajectories irrelevent. You need a photograph of Phil Willis that shows his position when he clicked the shutter on his camera to dispute a later single bullet event. Sorry, but you are nowhere near the goalpost. Herbert Zapruder frame 202 shows Phil Willis taking the photo, did you miss that? You showed us Zapruder frame 202 and missed outlining Willis as you outlined Zapruder on the Willis photograph. Now do you get it. Herbert
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 07, 2010, 12:09:26 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 747
|
Wiilis has only one shot of the limo on Elm? That's strange.He has a few of the limo on Houston.In Willis 3,the limo is between County Records and the Cop building. He had to outrun his daughter to be included in the Zaptoon frames.Maybe they used the cars in Willis 3 to come up with Willis 5.
Oh please, are you claiming zapruder fakery? I can maybe accept some frames were removed, but actual sfx fakery is just insane fantasy.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
|
