Those Front Steps

[Alan Ford]

For those new to this issue, here is the depth of the problem posed by the dark vertical strip down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film-------------



These are the steps a fair while after the shooting, when the sun is further west and hence there is more shadow from the western column than there had been at 12.30pm:



In short: that entranceway was bathed in direct sunlight at the time of the assassination!

Now--------try moving that shadow even closer to the west wall and then explaining the 'shadow' down Mr Lovelady in Wiegman as a natural phenomenon...

It simply cannot be done!

[Chris Davidson]

[Royell Storing]

For those new to this issue, here is the depth of the problem posed by the dark vertical strip down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film-------------



These are the steps a fair while after the shooting, when the sun is further west and hence there is more shadow from the western column than there had been at 12.30pm:



In short: that entranceway was bathed in direct sunlight at the time of the assassination!

Now--------try moving that shadow even closer to the west wall and then explaining the 'shadow' down Mr Lovelady in Wiegman as a natural phenomenon...

It simply cannot be done!

     The alleged "shadow" on Lovelady is Ridiculous. It looks like he has a Heavy Jet Black Overcoat draping over his shoulder.

[Alan Ford]

Mr Davidson, is this gif supposed to illustrate anything specific?

 

[Alan Ford]

     The alleged "shadow" on Lovelady is Ridiculous. It looks like he has a Heavy Jet Black Overcoat draping over his shoulder.

Indeed----and I tried to put one over that shoulder in order to avoid the conclusion that the frames had been messed with. Unfortunately it didn't work! (cf. Lovelady in Hughes as JFK is coming onto Elm Street)

It's telling that no one has thus far been able to offer a viable alternative explanation for that dark shadow-which-cannot-be-a-shadow...  Instead we've just had periodic nonsense about the west column & lintel shadows!

[Alan Ford]

Now!

The resistance to the evidence putting Mr Oswald right behind Mr Lovelady at the time of the shooting---------



---------will come from various quarters:

1. Lone Nutters (but who cares------these poor souls' capacity for motivated reasoning is already legendary!  )

2. CTs who consider the second floor lunchroom incident sacrosanct (they'd rather keep that fiction alive than allow Mr Oswald his legitimate alibi)

3. CTs for whom JFK assassination research is an addictive hobby (the last thing they want to see is closure on the issue of Mr Oswald's whereabouts 12.30pm... what would they do with their days?)

4. 'CTs' pretending to be CTs (usually pretty easy to spot!)

5. Harvey and Lee nuts (The Great Armstrong doesn't put either Oswald on the steps so we sure as heck ain't gonna!)

6. CTs who have been heavily invested in the Prayer Man claim (it would be very sad to see Prayer Man become the new Lunchroom Incident-----i.e. the sacrosanct X that closes good people off to alternative ideas. Especially as Mr Oswald's alibi in Wiegman would never have been established had it not been for the brilliant and indefatigable work of the Prayer Man people. E.g.! Mr Kamp's game-changing unearthing of the Hosty notes that confirmed that Mr Oswald did indeed claim to have gone outside for the P. parade after a visit to the second floor lunchroom for a coke).

 

[Zeon Mason]

Now!

The resistance to the evidence putting Mr Oswald right behind Mr Lovelady at the time of the shooting---------



---------will come from various quarters:

1. Lone Nutters (but who cares------these poor souls' capacity for motivated reasoning is already legendary!  )

2. CTs who consider the second floor lunchroom incident sacrosanct (they'd rather keep that fiction alive than allow Mr Oswald his legitimate alibi)

3. CTs for whom JFK assassination research is an addictive hobby (the last thing they want to see is closure on the issue of Mr Oswald's whereabouts 12.30pm... what would they do with their days?)

4. 'CTs' pretending to be CTs (usually pretty easy to spot!)

5. Harvey and Lee nuts (The Great Armstrong doesn't put either Oswald on the steps so we sure as heck ain't gonna!)

6. CTs who have been heavily invested in the Prayer Man claim (it would be very sad to see Prayer Man become the new Lunchroom Incident-----i.e. the sacrosanct X that closes good people off to alternative ideas. Especially as Mr Oswald's alibi in Wiegman would never have been established had it not been for the brilliant and indefatigable work of the Prayer Man people. E.g.! Mr Kamp's game-changing unearthing of the Hosty notes that confirmed that Mr Oswald did indeed claim to have gone outside for the P. parade after a visit to the second floor lunchroom for a coke).

 

So anyone who questions Alan Fords theory of the day, is one of the above?