|
|
 April 18, 2009, 01:16:36 AM
|
Group: Administrator
Super Member
Posts: 2085
|
I noticed this second car immediately on looking at Rick's latest gif in the JFK Bonus Materials thread. Given the unknown then and now variables, I am still not convinced that we are not seeing the car as I have illustrated in the other thread. I now see a second darker car near the first white colored car. The shadows coming from the car appear to be consistent with the direction of shadows cast on Nov 22nd 1963. I have made an illustration using the last frame from Rick's animation, which to me appears to show a second car. I'm reminded of the old saying..If it looks like a Duck, Walks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck, Flies like a Duck, then it probably is a Duck. In this case, we appear to have 2 Ducks, neither of them being lame. 
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 05:21:48 AM by Duncan MacRae »
|
-------------------------
An opinion based on something other than fact, is an opinion based on ignorance. As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 16, 2010, 06:28:20 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2131
|
Bill, If you'd really like to know the truth, the Nix film is far from high quality.
It is a known fact that the film he chose to load in his movie camera was
not ideal for the conditions he was filming under. I do not disagree with you
that there are things moving everywhere in these frames. But when you
step back, view the complexity of movements in this one small area over
the span of these 25 frames, the only thing which could do what we are
seeing can only be human in origin.
Rick
-------------------------
-------------------------
But peace does not rest in the charters and covenants alone. It lies in the hearts and minds of all people- John F. Kennedy
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 16, 2010, 07:26:34 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 7874
|
Rick, in red, I drew in what could be one of many branches in the tree. At the beginning of my red line (the right half), it is a known branch, as it is clearly seen in the Nix frame. The left half of my red line is simply a guess as to the outline of the branch as it extends away from the tree, ending with perhaps a tiny cluster of leaves. The leaves aren't even necessary, but they're a possibility. This branch does bounce in perfect unison with your "head", which leads me to believe that your "head" is simply the end of the branch, possibly even with a few leaves. The branch and the "head" move in the exact same directions at the exact same times, over and over again. This is what I see, anyway. 
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 16, 2010, 07:35:38 AM by Bill Brown »
|
-------------------------
"The TRUTH doesn't require anyone's belief." - Dale Myers
"The human mind craves a mystery more than it loves the truth." - Dan Rather
"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men." - John F. Kennedy
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 17, 2010, 12:17:59 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2131
|
Rick, in red, I drew in what could be one of many branches in the tree. At the beginning of my red line (the right half), it is a known branch, as it is clearly seen in the Nix frame. The left half of my red line is simply a guess as to the outline of the branch as it extends away from the tree, ending with perhaps a tiny cluster of leaves. The leaves aren't even necessary, but they're a possibility. This branch does bounce in perfect unison with your "head", which leads me to believe that your "head" is simply the end of the branch, possibly even with a few leaves. The branch and the "head" move in the exact same directions at the exact same times, over and over again. This is what I see, anyway. Bill, How can your magic tree branch perform what is seen below....in crops from Nix frames 091-093? How can your branch curl upwards....towards itself....then away from itself...and then form the nicely rounded "top" at the very end of its branch? The answer: It can't. Please also take very careful note of its color. Now compare that nicely curled up tip of your tree branch's color to that of the tree you say this originates from. Note the foliage and tree branch colors next to what is seen "behind the fence". There is no color match Bill. Note.....behind the fence. Does your tree branch bend over the top of the stockade fence so it can be seen here "behind the fence"? I think not. Because what we see here IS behind the fence Bill. Rick 
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 12:26:30 AM by Rick Needham »
|
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 17, 2010, 03:46:37 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2131
|
Bill. I already agreed with you that things are moving around a little in the film.
Why would I try to deny that fact? But, your branch theory is wrong, just as your
artifact theory is wrong. I'm sorry, but I do not know how to say it any other way.
And what is moving is moving behind the fence. And it is human.
* * * Added note from information obtained on the internet * * *
Orville Nix was an air conditioning engineer for the U.S. General Services Administration, located in the Terminal Annex building on the south side of Dealey Plaza. With his Keystone Auto-Zoom home movie camera in hand, he walked from his office to the northwest corner of Main and Houston streets. Nix unfortunately used Type A film, specifically designed for indoor use, but without the needed filter. As a result, his film appears darker and grainier than others made in Dealey Plaza that day.
From his location at the corner, Nix captured the presidential limousine as it made its way up Houston. He then quickly moved to the south curb of Main Street, approximately 60 feet west of Houston Street. Nix heard shots being fired as he filmed the motorcade again. "I thought [the shots] came from a fence between the Book Depository and the railroad track," he recalled in a 1966 interview.
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 06:32:40 AM by Rick Needham »
|
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 17, 2010, 11:07:56 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2131
|
Rick,
I pulled about 6 tubes loaded with over sized blowups.
Most of the prints are 30 x 40 from 3th generation images.
I will keep looking for your image. Man, I should aired these
tubes out, smells like crayons lmao
I will make a list of the blowups for you if interest.
Now, off to open a window.........
johnw
Thanks JohnW thumbs1xx Might I suggest pointing a fan at that open window? lmao lmao lmao Rick
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 17, 2010, 11:48:11 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1710
|
Bill. I already agreed with you that things are moving around a little in the film.
Why would I try to deny that fact? But, your branch theory is wrong, just as your
artifact theory is wrong. I'm sorry, but I do not know how to say it any other way.
And what is moving is moving behind the fence. And it is human.
Rick, not trying to pile on here but how can other spots in the film rise and fall in a synchronized fashion with your 'human' if it's really a person? That should tell you that, no matter how much your spot looks like a human head, it's just after-image or film artifact or whatever it's called. Can't you see the other spots rising and falling exactly as your 'human' does? I can spot places where there's identical motion, absolutely synchronized, with your 'human' figure.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 18, 2010, 12:11:23 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2131
|
Bill. I already agreed with you that things are moving around a little in the film.
Why would I try to deny that fact? But, your branch theory is wrong, just as your
artifact theory is wrong. I'm sorry, but I do not know how to say it any other way.
And what is moving is moving behind the fence. And it is human.
Rick, not trying to pile on here but how can other spots in the film rise and fall in a synchronized fashion with your 'human' if it's really a person? That should tell you that, no matter how much your spot looks like a human head, it's just after-image or film artifact or whatever it's called. Can't you see the other spots rising and falling exactly as your 'human' does? I can spot places where there's identical motion, absolutely synchronized, with your 'human' figure. Rick, not trying to pile on here but how can other spots in the film rise and fall in a synchronized fashion with your 'human' if it's really a person? Mark, Then please do show me where these spots are in the film that "rise and fall" in a "synchronized fashion" with my "human"........and look just like my human. Could you do that for me? Because if we use your logic, then there should be oodles of "humans" all along that fence line, right? Show me just one who both looks like....and who also displays the complexity of movements mine does, could you? I'll be waiting sleepy2 Rick
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 18, 2010, 12:12:36 AM by Rick Needham »
|
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
February 18, 2010, 12:19:08 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1710
|
Rick, You seem to be taking offense but none was intended. And you're wrong, my logic says that there are NO humans behind the fence, not 'oodles' of humans. The complexity of movement you see is merely the rise and fall of film grain artifacts. You are extrapolating them into a person. I'm saying that your logic is flawed, that you are clinging to the belief that your "spot" is a human in the face of logic. These are some of the spots in your frame where movement on the film is absolutely synchronized with your 'human.' 
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 18, 2010, 12:40:45 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1710
|
But it does not change my feelings on this. I hate to be the one to inform you, but there really were men behind the fence on the knoll.
Rick
Don't know why you would hate it but okay. And no worries, I didn't expect you to change your feelings.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
|
