Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 1230029 times)

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #329 on: June 29, 2018, 02:38:10 PM »
Very well said, Ray!

As MrAlanFord has expressed his approval and agreement with MrRayMitcham's comments as posted regarding a statement made by me, maybe he can provide a quote, the full statement quote, and explain what it is that he is referring to.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2019, 03:20:23 AM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 994
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #330 on: June 29, 2018, 02:40:38 PM »
Quote by Larry Trotter. ( Reply #812 on: June 28, 2018, 06:32:13 PM)
"I agree that the azimuth calculations are trivial, but there is a lot of indicative reliance on sunlight shadow calculations relative to the TSBD Bldg Elm St entrance portal and/or the occupants at about 12:01pm/01:00pm CST (12:01/13:00) on 11/22/'63.
Bump for Mr Trotter.

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #331 on: June 29, 2018, 02:43:01 PM »
It appears to me that the sunlight angles are important to someone wishing to qualify mannequin placement on a virtual landing/stairway portal. But, azimuth calculations are trivial to most of us that study the reliable provable evidence indicative of said portal occupants as the area was filmed. To state Stancek has "the shadows exactly right in his creations", can only be a conclusion, nothing more. I certainly question his "insertions" of images, especially those not seen otherwise, and as well his "to scale measurements".
And, I do not recall ever stating that sunlight origin calculations had no bearing on shadow length and/or shadow angle. What I have not seen is, any calculations allowing for the angle of the TSBD Building and/or entrance portal.
Most important though, when you say that if I can't see something you state, you can't be bothered anymore, and "It's like casting pearls before swine", tell me, exactly what are you saying? Are you indicating something negative about my character?

Bumped for MrRayMitcham to review.

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #332 on: June 29, 2018, 03:13:36 PM »
I believe that it is Lovelady's arm in the photo, not some unknown down person down the street.

It seems  this is confirmed by bucket filling the shirt that he is wearing in yellow, which shows that it is exactly the same colour. You may have to enlarge to see the detail.



Depends on the Tolerance setting and where on the image one clicks!

« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 03:20:12 PM by Alan Ford »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #333 on: June 29, 2018, 03:21:40 PM »
In Reply to MrRayMitcham:

I offered an opinion during a posted conversation with another poster about "relative" provable evidence. I stand by my post. You sir, did not quote the complete statement, but more importantly, the quote you offered does not address your posted comments. The posted comments by you, that I requested quoting, indicating things I had said. The complete quote, of the complete statement, that you attributed to me.
As stated, I stand by my posted opinion, as it relates to the post/conversation I was replying to.

While at it, maybe you can also explain your meaning as stated in another post, as I had asked in reply, since, to me it appears "insulting".
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 03:24:39 PM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 994
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #334 on: June 29, 2018, 03:35:13 PM »
In Reply to MrRayMitcham:

I offered an opinion during a posted conversation with another poster about "relative" provable evidence. I stand by my post. You sir, did not quote the complete statement, but more importantly, the quote you offered does not address your posted comments. The posted comments by you, that I requested quoting, indicating things I had said. The complete quote, of the complete statement, that you attributed to me.
As stated, I stand by my posted opinion, as it relates to the post/conversation I was replying to.

While at it, maybe you can also explain your meaning as stated in another post, as I had asked in reply, since, to me it appears "insulting".
More garrulous rubbish by Mr Trotter. You agreed that the azimuth of the sun was trivial. You say that Stancek used a software program which mistook the depository as being straight North/South and East/West orientation. Where did you get that information from? Or is just your guess? Funny that he got the angle of the sun correct in his presentation i.e. that @ 12.30 pm. the left column would cast a shadow of 18˚ onto the steps of the TSBD. Or do you dispute that as well? If so show your calculations.

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #335 on: June 29, 2018, 03:38:46 PM »
This thread

To All Concerned, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE

No more warnings.....Do not insult fellow members...No more warnings.

Instant Non Negotiable 7 days ban to the next person who posts a personal insult towards a fellow member of this Forum.

Suggesting that a fellow member is a Troll is considered by Admin to be a personal insult.....Be Warned.