How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?

[Dan O'meara]

Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton and they know it...

That's why Kamp hasn't mentioned it once since his return to the forum...

But being a dirty clique they still keep you banned...

It is not very honest of them...

'Ciphered Past' mocks and ridicules you but then denies you air-time at the threat of legal action to show your evidence...

Iler has posted a new rule...Garbage evidence that is used to destroy the research community's reputation is now encouraged and protected...Brilliant refutation of that evidence that leads to the discovery of our generation gets life banning on made-up non existent rules...Favoritism of punk researchers OK...Serious evidence argument never tolerated...

Yet this ugly business doesn't stop the apostate researcher Jim DiEugenio from taking it to Congress...

Yet you still swallow down Kamp's work as gospel.
Go figure.

[Brian Doyle]

This is a dirty research community...

Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue... 

[Royell Storing]

This is a dirty research community...

Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue...

    There were many plaid shirts floating around Dealey Plaza that day. We just had someone on another thread post a photo of people inside the railroad yard immediately after the assassination. There's a guy on the periphery of this photo wearing a plaid shirt very similar to the Lovelady shirt. Personally, I believe if you look at the "Gerda Dunckel Gif" of those 2 Guys walking down the Elm St Extension, the alleged Lovelady figure has a different hairline, (maybe haircut), around his (L) ear than Lovelady had. A physical characteristic carries far more weight than an ID based on a cheap plaid shirt.

[Dan O'meara]

This is a dirty research community...

Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue...

Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt..

I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.

Where can I find Larsen's analysis?

[Brian Doyle]

I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.

Where can I find Larsen's analysis?

Sandy deleted it about 7 years ago...

Surely there has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers that analysis...

Clique membership requires the members to pretend they don't remember it...

Sandy then doubled down by saying the woman's dress neckline in the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy of Darnell was a CIA forgery designed to conceal Oswald work shirt collar...They let Larsen get away with that and Iler is preventing any honest discussion of Sandy's pathetic move...

[Royell Storing]

Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt..

I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.

Where can I find Larsen's analysis?

       It's to the point now that anyone that does Not agree with you is producing a "fantasy".  That's tired and plain weak. You're better than this. I've seen it.