Perception of Reality

[Andrew Mason]

We don't see the tree until the camera pans past the concrete pillar on the south side of the stairs. That corresponds to where JFK was at about z175.  After that, the oak tree begins to obscure the view of the street.  How can that be under the tree at z133? :


It is obscured by the tree about z133 but not indicated by the Dorman film because Dorman had her camera pointed well above the limo and JFK. You really need to understand that the window was two floors below the sniper's nest window and several windows west of the sniper's nest window. What that means is that (from Dorman's position) the tree obscured JFK earlier than it obscured the line of sight from the sniper's nest window. It is easy to visualize this just by using a straightedge with Roberdeau's map. And verifiable with a 3-D model. I believe that it was James Hackeroot that has verified this with his 3-D model also. The view from the sniper's nest became obscured in the neighborhood of z160.

Charles, you are providing a perfect example of confirmation bias!!  You are using a third-hand account of someone who claims to have interviewed Adams long after the events and, instead of trying to corroborate that statement with bodies of consistent, independent evidence, you are taking what she is purported to have said as absolute gospel and are trying to fit it to the conclusion that you have already made. 

Not only that, you are not looking critically at the physical evidence.  The tree is does not begin to block Adams' view of the street until after z160 and she said that the first shot was after that.  That puts the President down around the lamppost next to which Woodward was standing:



There is zero evidence of a shot at z133. None.  But more to the point, there are large independent bodies of witness evidence that conflict with it.  You just dismiss that evidence by saying that you treat witness evidence as the least reliable form of evidence.  But you ignore the fact that YOU are using the evidence of ONE WITNESS to  support the z133 phantom missed shot!

[Andrew Mason]

Woodward was talking about the first hand wave ("The car proceeded down Elm, and when it was about 40 yards from us, we heard the first noise." Note: Woodward may have meant feet, not yards). The car must still be approaching her group and not be out from her group or pass, as in the Z190s.

Jerry, she was talking about the last wave he made:  "As it turned out, we were almost certainly the last faces he noticed in the crowd."

Woodward's account (and the subsequent head-turn reactions of the Kennedys and Connallys) is compatible with hearing the first shot in the Z150s.

Talk about confirmation bias!!  Jerry, Woodward's account makes no sense if JFK had waved and smiled after the first shot, which is what you are saying.  Why is it that no one noticed that JFK smiled and waved for 3 seconds after the first shot (4 seconds according to Charles)?   Why is that?  Is it because witnesses were all mysteriously afflicted by the same inability to see and all were implanted with the same false memory that he didn't wave at all but slumped as if he was hit by it? 

[Charles Collins]

Charles, you are providing a perfect example of confirmation bias!!  You are using a third-hand account of someone who claims to have interviewed Adams long after the events and, instead of trying to corroborate that statement with bodies of consistent, independent evidence, you are taking what she is purported to have said as absolute gospel and are trying to fit it to the conclusion that you have already made. 

Not only that, you are not looking critically at the physical evidence.  The tree is does not begin to block Adams' view of the street until after z160 and she said that the first shot was after that.  That puts the President down around the lamppost next to which Woodward was standing:



There is zero evidence of a shot at z133. None.  But more to the point, there are large independent bodies of witness evidence that conflict with it.  You just dismiss that evidence by saying that you treat witness evidence as the least reliable form of evidence.  But you ignore the fact that YOU are using the evidence of ONE WITNESS to  support the z133 phantom missed shot!

  The tree is does not begin to block Adams' view of the street until after z160…

Use an accurate map that shows the layout from directly overhead. The Don Roberdeau map is one of these. That photo is not directly overhead, therefore the blue line doesn’t show the true angle.  Compare the angle from the sniper’s nest window to the tree to the angle from the Dorman window to the tree. Simple geometry shows that the difference in the angles means that Dorman would loose sight of JFK behind the tree well before the sniper does. Wake up, you are dreaming if you think otherwise. 

[Charles Collins]

Charles, you are providing a perfect example of confirmation bias!!  You are using a third-hand account of someone who claims to have interviewed Adams long after the events and, instead of trying to corroborate that statement with bodies of consistent, independent evidence, you are taking what she is purported to have said as absolute gospel and are trying to fit it to the conclusion that you have already made. 

Not only that, you are not looking critically at the physical evidence.  The tree is does not begin to block Adams' view of the street until after z160 and she said that the first shot was after that.  That puts the President down around the lamppost next to which Woodward was standing:



There is zero evidence of a shot at z133. None.  But more to the point, there are large independent bodies of witness evidence that conflict with it.  You just dismiss that evidence by saying that you treat witness evidence as the least reliable form of evidence.  But you ignore the fact that YOU are using the evidence of ONE WITNESS to  support the z133 phantom missed shot!

  The tree is does not begin to block Adams' view of the street until after z160…

Use an accurate map that shows the layout from directly overhead. The Don Roberdeau map is one of these. That photo is not directly overhead, therefore the blue line doesn’t show the true angle.  Compare the angle from the sniper’s nest window to the tree to the angle from the Dorman window to the tree. Simple geometry shows that the difference in the angles means that Dorman would loose sight of JFK behind the tree well before the sniper does. Wake up, you are dreaming if you think otherwise. 

Here is a crop of Roberdeau's map showing the relevant area. The red lines that I added indicate the line of sight from the sniper's nest. The blue lines that I added indicate the line of sight from the Dorman window. You also need to consider that the tree (like most trees) gets larger near the lower limbs. Dorman's window is about 20 feet lower than the sniper's nest window, therefore the wider lower limbs affect the Dorman view more than they do the sniper's nest view.



Now, if you still think that Dorman's view wasn't blocked until after z160, I give up. You are completely blind to the truth.

[Andrew Mason]

Here is a crop of Roberdeau's map showing the relevant area. The red lines that I added indicate the line of sight from the sniper's nest. The blue lines that I added indicate the line of sight from the Dorman window. You also need to consider that the tree (like most trees) gets larger near the lower limbs. Dorman's window is about 20 feet lower than the sniper's nest window, therefore the wider lower limbs affect the Dorman view more than they do the sniper's nest view.



Now, if you still think that Dorman's view wasn't blocked until after z160, I give up. You are completely blind to the truth.

I noticed how the photos all show perfectly circular trees....  And you put Adams looking out the 6th window when the evidence indicates she was primarily looking out the 5th window.  If you were trying to avoid confirmation bias you would put her at the 5th window.....

[Charles Collins]

I noticed how the photos all show perfectly circular trees....  And you put Adams looking out the 6th window when the evidence indicates she was primarily looking out the 5th window.  If you were trying to avoid confirmation bias you would put her at the 5th window.....

I drew the lines from where Roberdeau shows her position. Moving it over a few feet to where you think it belongs isn’t going to change it enough to make much difference. The trees draw on Roberdeau’s map and our 3-D models are not exact replicas of the one in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. But they are close approximations. I think it is close enough for me to conclude that Adams had to be describing the wave that is shown near the end of the Towner film segment and ending at the start of the Zapruder film segment.

[Dan O'meara]

I gave up trying to find it here. But I do remember posting it in another thread. Anyway here is some substantiation for you:

A link to the download page of Dale Myers’ website:

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/report_download.html

Either of the PDF files will get you the complete report. Look in the appendix III section for the timeline synchronization of the various films.

Here is a photo showing that the Hughes, Towner, and Dorman films all suddenly stopped about the same time. Tina Towner said she stopped filming on purpose and very shortly thereafter the shot rang out. Her film is the first of the three to stop, then the other two do shortly thereafter.

Substantiation??
Myers reports a letter sent from Hughes to his parents:
"About 5 seconds after I quit taking the pictures we heard the shots..."
How can Hughes be reacting to a shot when the shots didn't start until about 5 seconds after he quit filming??
Towner reports she stopped filming on purpose and the Dorman film stops for 49 frames!! How is that a reflex reaction to hearing a shot?
Could your substantiation be any weaker?