Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film

[Thomas Graves]

You miss the point of the exercise, compare the distance travelled by the relatively slow moving Limo to the minuscule movement of Brehms kid. Anyway to make you happy I modified the Gif to play out at regular speed and in all cases all movements are completely harmonious. Btw exactly what do you think they were trying to hide by doing the alteration as you describe?



Yawn, Michael it's up to you to prove your own claim, I'm frankly a bit tired of you amateur noobs saying "I see something, now you prove me wrong" how about you film your kid in the exact same circumstances and let's analyse that.

Here we go again, more speculation of what you think you see, claims are a dime a dozen around here, either back up your claims with photographic/video proof or don't but it's your credibility at risk not mine!

JohnM

Excellent rebuttals, all, John.

Paranoiac, Deep-State-believing amateur sleuths dabbling in "photo analysis" wear me out, too.

Mike would probably feel more at home at the so-called EF with the likes of John Butler (unless, of course, he IS John Butler).

--  MWT 

[John Mytton]

Excellent rebuttals, all, John.

Paranoiac, Deep-State-believing amateur sleuths dabbling in "photo analysis" wear me out, too.

Mike would probably feel more at home at the so-called The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon, the vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true. with the likes of John Butler (unless, of course, he IS John Butler).

--  MWT 

Thanks Thomas, I've been doing this for a long time and it's just nonsense claim after nonsense claim and these latest supposed anomalies from Griffith of action x not being able to be completed in time y are just absurd, yet every time I prove each and every one of my re-futations with graphic after graphic it's just ignored for another problem that he thinks he sees, there is no way to argue with these people mostly because they lack the expertise to analyse images/videos and thus cannot illustrate their alternative ideas as a response, so until they're blue in the face they just keep repeating the same unsubstantiated claims. -sigh-

JohnM

[Bill Chapman]

Thanks Thomas, I've been doing this for a long time and it's just nonsense claim after nonsense claim and these latest supposed anomalies from Griffith of action x not being able to be completed in time y are just absurd, yet every time I prove each and every one of my re-futations with graphic after graphic it's just ignored for another problem that he thinks he sees, there is no way to argue with these people mostly because they lack the expertise to analyse images/videos and thus cannot illustrate their alternative ideas as a response, so until they're blue in the face they just keep repeating the same unsubstantiated claims. -sigh-

JohnM

What are you talking about? These guys are almost genuises!

[Michael Walton]

To Michael Griffith,

You may want to read the Zavada report. In it, it was shown that the original Z film was not altered in any way. Despite what other researchers think, it would have been technically impossible to alter a home movie that was 8mm in size.

http://www.jfk-info.com/moot1.htm

----

You may want to view this synced video of Z and Nix:

You have to ask yourself how it'd be possible to alter one film and then have to alter the other film to make them match. It'd be impossible to do technically.

----

Here's a film produced by the SS in 1964:

So if the film was altered, why wouldn't they include the altered film in this government film they made? Except for the Z film being in B/W it looks exactly like the film we have all seen today. Skip to about 11:38.

[John Mytton]

To Michael Griffith,

You may want to read the Zavada report. In it, it was shown that the original Z film was not altered in any way. Despite what other researchers think, it would have been technically impossible to alter a home movie that was 8mm in size.

http://www.jfk-info.com/moot1.htm

----

You may want to view this synced video of Z and Nix:

You have to ask yourself how it'd be possible to alter one film and then have to alter the other film to make them match. It'd be impossible to do technically.

----

Here's a film produced by the SS in 1964:

So if the film was altered, why wouldn't they include the altered film in this government film they made? Except for the Z film being in B/W it looks exactly like the film we have all seen today. Skip to about 11:38.

Yep, not one Zapruder frame has been altered in any way, wysiwyg.

JohnM

[Michael Walton]

Yes, John, yes. What the film *actually* shows is highly suspicious. But, yes, the film itself was not altered, which is why it was kept away from public viewing for 12 long years. Put another way, I often wonder what would have happened if the film had been shown to the public that very day. Do you ever wonder why it didn't happen, John?

[Steve Barber]

Yes, John, yes. What the film *actually* shows is highly suspicious. But, yes, the film itself was not altered, which is why it was kept away from public viewing for 12 long years. Put another way, I often wonder what would have happened if the film had been shown to the public that very day. Do you ever wonder why it didn't happen, John?

 I know why it wasn't shown that day.  Because of the graphic nature of the film.   Besides, the contract Zapruder made with Life Magazine, stipulated that it not be made public.    Things were far, far different in 1963 than they are now, and stuff like this was far too graphic to show on TV.  Over the years, people became desensitized to such violence, so now it's not a big deal. It just shows how decadent society has become.   And i see nothing "suspicious" about what the film "actually shows".  May I ask what you expect it to show?