Author Topic: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration  (Read 18277 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Robin Unger

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4952
    • Robin Unger's  JFK Assassination Research Gallery
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #56 on: March 24, 2014, 04:07:14 PM »
Zoomed Version



Offline Anthony Marsh

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13807
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2014, 01:17:28 AM »
You cite ONE witness. I said MANY witnesses. Yes, SOME witnesses knew instantly that they were shots.

Offline Thurman Lee Storing

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1320
    • In Search of Veritas: The Kennedy Assassination into the Fifth Decade and Beyond
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2014, 05:05:24 AM »
Thanks for posting the gif images, Robin. Exceptional work.  :thumbs1xx:

Offline Bob Mady

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3149
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2014, 10:53:51 PM »
You had three statements Anthony, I responded to your first, that indeed witnesses fell to the ground at the sound of the first shot from a high powered rifle and if you look at film and photograph evidence you will determine that this occurs at Z-313. Remember 115 witnesses heard 3 shots from a high powered rifle. In order to understand the assassination you must understand that there are 3 shots reported by most witnesses, produced by a high powered rifle, it is undeniable since witnesses blocks from DP corroborated hearing them.
The problem we all have had is understanding that there was another shot, that was heard by just a few people in specific locations, that heard a small popping noise or 'firecracker' type sound.  So witnesses are telling us that there were 4 shots, the WC?R and media twisted this into three shots total, this is THE lie.

173 out of 201 witnesses reported hearing only shots from a high powered rifle
11 more reported multiple 'backfires' 'firecrackers' or heard the 4 shots clearly.


I did not say everyone fell to the ground, no one near the TSBD fell to the ground...

Look at these people, they fell to the ground following the first shot from a high powered rifle, per MOORMAN, HILL, SUMMERS and HUDSON they also specifically claim the shot was the head shot per limo location, this was the first shot they heard, but not the last.
 
But why bother with what the witnesses claimed if you already know everything...right?



« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:20:34 PM
by Bob Mady
»

Offline Gayle Nix Jackson

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • Orville Nix:  The Missing JFK Assassination Film
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #60 on: March 30, 2014, 02:51:34 AM »
Hi Calli,

Bumping your topic...I want to know more about what you see!

Hugs,

Gayle

Offline Peter Johns

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #61 on: April 18, 2014, 02:06:16 PM »
Interesting thread, that reminded me of something I wrote up a month or so ago:

Secret Service agent Clint Hill quickly ran forward from the follow up car, just before the head shot at Z-313. He mounted the limousine then fell back, but managed to hold onto the rear bar (designed for agents standing on the rear running board). He recalled that if he let go and fell to the ground, he would have been run over by the follow-up car. Then followed a famous superhuman dash to get back on the limo. People have commented on his speed in other threads, but for me... well it just looked sped up. Referencing AntdavisonNZ's panoramic Nix footage...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

...  and Blenner's frames, Hill's footfalls occur at the following Zapruder frames:



348 lands back on ground after first attempt to mount limo
349 left foot forward, right leg back
*350 left leg planted, moving right leg forward*
351 legs passing
352 legs together right slightly forward?
353 right leg forward
*354 right foot planted, left leg back*
355 right foot down, left leg back
356 legs together
357 left foot moving forward right foot leaving ground
*358 left leg planted right leg back*
359 left leg planted right leg moving forward
360 legs together
361 left leg back right leg moving forward (obscured)
*362 right leg planted, left leg back*
363 legs together
364 left leg back right leg obscured
365 left leg back right leg obscured
366 left leg back leaving ground right leg obscured
367 right leg on car left leg rising
368 right leg on car left leg rising
369 right leg on car left leg rising
370 right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
371 right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
372 obscured
373 obscured
374  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
375  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
376  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
377  right leg on car left foot on ground ground (hopping?)
378  right leg on car left leg raising
379  right leg on car left leg raising
380  both feet on car

I might have the left and right legs mixed up as it's hard to tell which is which, but that doesn't change the number of footfalls. He manages a footfall every four frames. If Nix's camera was running at an average of 18.5 frames per second, that's about one frame every 0.054 seconds. This means Hill was completing a leg swing every 0.21 seconds.

In 1998 Harvard biology student Deborah Sternlight decided to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login. Long story short, it's a human limitation - we can only swing our legs so fast...

Quote
"To Sternlight's amazement, whether people ran fast or slow, or whether they ran uphill or downhill, everyone had approximately the same swing time at top speed. Those running 14 miles an hour and those running 27 miles an hour both took between 0.37 and 0.40 second to swing one leg in front of the other."
Harvard Gazette April 30, 1998

It would seem that Hill's leg swing rate is physically impossible for a human. This seems to leave a few possibilities. Either the version is missing frames, Nix's film rate was about 9fps (it wasn't), he isn't human (pretty sure he is), or frames have been cut from the Nix film in this sequence.

If correct, Hill's fancy footwork didn't finish until at least Z362, suggesting that the limousine ambled for at least 2.5 seconds afterward the main head shot.

Whatever the reason for the frame deletions (perhaps just embarrassment that the limo had become a sitting duck?), it could mean that at least half of the Nix frames from this sequence are missing...?

Offline Gayle Nix Jackson

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • Orville Nix:  The Missing JFK Assassination Film
Re: The Nix Film : Proof Of Alteration
« Reply #62 on: April 19, 2014, 09:14:26 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Interesting thread, that reminded me of something I wrote up a month or so ago:

Secret Service agent Clint Hill quickly ran forward from the follow up car, just before the head shot at Z-313. He mounted the limousine then fell back, but managed to hold onto the rear bar (designed for agents standing on the rear running board). He recalled that if he let go and fell to the ground, he would have been run over by the follow-up car. Then followed a famous superhuman dash to get back on the limo. People have commented on his speed in other threads, but for me... well it just looked sped up. Referencing AntdavisonNZ's panoramic Nix footage...

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

...  and Blenner's frames, Hill's footfalls occur at the following Zapruder frames:



348 lands back on ground after first attempt to mount limo
349 left foot forward, right leg back
*350 left leg planted, moving right leg forward*
351 legs passing
352 legs together right slightly forward?
353 right leg forward
*354 right foot planted, left leg back*
355 right foot down, left leg back
356 legs together
357 left foot moving forward right foot leaving ground
*358 left leg planted right leg back*
359 left leg planted right leg moving forward
360 legs together
361 left leg back right leg moving forward (obscured)
*362 right leg planted, left leg back*
363 legs together
364 left leg back right leg obscured
365 left leg back right leg obscured
366 left leg back leaving ground right leg obscured
367 right leg on car left leg rising
368 right leg on car left leg rising
369 right leg on car left leg rising
370 right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
371 right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
372 obscured
373 obscured
374  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
375  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
376  right leg on car left leg dragging close to ground (hopping?)
377  right leg on car left foot on ground ground (hopping?)
378  right leg on car left leg raising
379  right leg on car left leg raising
380  both feet on car

I might have the left and right legs mixed up as it's hard to tell which is which, but that doesn't change the number of footfalls. He manages a footfall every four frames. If Nix's camera was running at an average of 18.5 frames per second, that's about one frame every 0.054 seconds. This means Hill was completing a leg swing every 0.21 seconds.

In 1998 Harvard biology student Deborah Sternlight decided to You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login. Long story short, it's a human limitation - we can only swing our legs so fast...

Quote
"To Sternlight's amazement, whether people ran fast or slow, or whether they ran uphill or downhill, everyone had approximately the same swing time at top speed. Those running 14 miles an hour and those running 27 miles an hour both took between 0.37 and 0.40 second to swing one leg in front of the other."
Harvard Gazette April 30, 1998

It would seem that Hill's leg swing rate is physically impossible for a human. This seems to leave a few possibilities. Either the version is missing frames, Nix's film rate was about 9fps (it wasn't), he isn't human (pretty sure he is), or frames have been cut from the Nix film in this sequence.

If correct, Hill's fancy footwork didn't finish until at least Z362, suggesting that the limousine ambled for at least 2.5 seconds afterward the main head shot.

Whatever the reason for the frame deletions (perhaps just embarrassment that the limo had become a sitting duck?), it could mean that at least half of the Nix frames from this sequence are missing...?

Many people believe that Peter,

And thanks for this great post!  My grandfather felt the film was 'different'....though he never said or knew what was different.  I know many, many people who believe the film has since been destroyed...around  the early 70's.  The problem I have always had with the altering of the films, is that I don't see HOW a camera original could be altered...copies?  yes indeed. But an original 8mm alteration would be evident to even me!  (and I'm no expert)

 But here's the thing...in the spring of 64, the FBI, SS, CIA and all the other alphabet agencies did a recreation of the assassination and they used all the cameras that were used that day....the real cameras!  I seriously believe that's why my grandfather's camera was sent back damaged.  The Zapruder camera wasn't....none of the others were...but my grandfather's was.  The point is, no, the recreations wouldn't show the event, but they would have hallmarks:  scenes between the sprockets, ghosting, etc....in other words, you could compare the original to the test films to ensure it was real.

Jones Harris always tells me the Nix film was "nothing more than a survey film" during that time as it was used extensively to determine positions and angles.  No one was paying attention to what the Nix film could show except him...and later, many others (thanks Rick, Martin, Chris, Calli, Robin, Duncan and Herbert)

 Now, the only problem I have with the argument I stated above  is that all these cameras were spring wound.  I don't know how on earth ANY official could duplicate the tightness to which Zap, my grandfather or Ms. Muchmore wound their cameras.  If they weren't wound tightly, the films would take pictures at a different speed. I know for a fact that my grandfather was worried about winding his too tight, because he broke the camera he had before by doing just that....so that's my caveat to the people who believe in alteration.

Without an original film, or a VERIFIED first generation copy, it would be easy to pull the wool over all our eyes.

Gayle