JFK Assassination Forum

Photographic Film Video & Audio Discussion & Debate => Photographic Film Video & Audio Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Michael T. Griffith on June 15, 2020, 06:50:32 PM

Title: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 15, 2020, 06:50:32 PM
The Zapruder film contains several events that are physically impossible, which means the version we have has been altered. One example of physically impossible events is the movement of Charles Brehm's son.

In Z277 Brehm junior is standing behind his father. Then, from Z277-287, or in just over half a second, he bolts out from behind his father and comes to stand beside him, clapping his hands no less. In other words, in Z277 Brehm junior is standing behind his father, but, just ten frames later, he is standing calmly and steadily beside him and clapping his hands--all in a fraction over half a second. Ten frames of the Zapruder film, calculated at the assumed speed of 18.3 frames per second, equals .56 seconds (or 560 milliseconds).

Furthermore, a frame-by-frame analysis of the movement of Brehm's son in the Muchmore film shows that the son's movement takes nearly twice as long in the Muchmore film as it does in the Zapruder film.

I have done several experiments to try duplicate the movement of Brehm's soon in the required .56 seconds. I never came close. Try it yourself. It is impossible.

Numerous elements in the Zapruder film still refute the lone-gunman theory, which is why the film was suppressed for so long. Those who edited the film simply were not able to remove enough of the problematic elements to make the film fully compatible with a lone-gunman scenario.



Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Jerry Organ on June 15, 2020, 09:27:51 PM
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z250-z299/z279.jpg)  (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z250-z299/z280.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z250-z299/z283.jpg)  (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/mpi/z250-z299/z287.jpg)

(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_4~3.jpg)  (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_5.jpg)

As the car passed, Charles Brehm leaned to his left at the same moment the son stepped (or transferred weight onto his right leg) and leaned to his right. Both contributed to the gap between them.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 15, 2020, 11:19:13 PM
As the car passed, Charles Brehm leaned to his left at the same moment the son stepped (or transferred weight onto his right leg) and leaned to his right. Both contributed to the gap between them.

What are you looking at to come up with such a description? In the Zapruder film, at 277, Brehm's son is behind him. At 277, the area to Brehm's right is clearly visible, and there is no one there.

(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z277.jpg)

The son's movement first becomes visible at 278-280. By 283, he is about 2/3 the way to his ultimate position and the angle and position of his body to his dad's body begin to change markedly.

(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z283.jpg)

By 287, he is calmly standing behind his dad and clapping, as if he had casually moved to his dad's side. And Brehm's legs never change their location in this sequence. He shifts his weight a bit, but his legs never move horizontally.

(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z287.jpg)

Clearly, many frames of his movement from behind his dad to beside his dad are missing. 
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Jerry Organ on June 16, 2020, 01:04:47 AM
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0001.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Z273: Brehm leaning forward and to his right
  (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0004.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Z276: Boy running and now leaning backward to stop

(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0008.jpg)  (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0012.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Z284: Boy is now further away relative to father's right side in both films; Brehm's upper body straightening up

(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0015.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Z287: Boy leaning to his right, further increasing space between father and son
  (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/ZMN2_frame_0020.jpg)

People aren't stickpins stuck in the ground. Their bodies can pivot and rotate; go back-and-forth and side-to-side. Probably the person is not much aware of it.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 16, 2020, 01:38:06 AM
What's the problem?

(https://i.postimg.cc/26SgQV5B/Brehm-Zapruder.gif)

JohnM
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 16, 2020, 11:20:43 AM
People aren't stickpins stuck in the ground. Their bodies can pivot and rotate; go back-and-forth and side-to-side. Probably the person is not much aware of it.

This is an irrelevant observation. This has nothing to do with anyone's body pivoting or rotating. Brehm's legs never change their horizontal position, and the son moves from being behind him to being beside him at an impossible speed. You are simply ignoring the problem of how anyone could carry out the son's movements in 0.56 seconds, or barely over half a second. Try it. I've done several experiments with one of my sons, and he was never able to even come close to doing those movements in 0.56 seconds.

Another physically impossible movement in the current Zapruder film is the head turn of the driver, William Greer, from Z315-321. Greer turns his head about 165 degrees in six frames, or in only 1/3rd of a second. Mike Pincher and Roy Schaeffer observe that Greer's head turn should create blurring in the film because the human eye can't remain focused when following such a rapid movement, but no blurring is seen:

"If the reader flashes his hand in front of his face in approximation of one-third of a second, it appears as a blur. The eyes are incapable of staying in full focus in following this action. If Greer's 165-degree movement in one-third of a second truly depicted real time, it would likewise appear as a blur. But blurring of this nature is not seen in the Zapruder film." (Assassination Science, p. 223)

Or, look at the astonishing speed at which Malcolm Summers moves his leg in Z353-356. In this sequence, we see Malcolm Summers diving to the ground. Summers is to the right of James Altgens. In Z353 Summers' left leg is extended most of the way out. But, in the very next frame, Z354, amazingly, the foreleg is bent markedly backward. Can anyone flex their foreleg to that degree so quickly, in 1/18th of a second? Then, in Z355 Summers' left leg is bent even farther backward. Can anyone move their foreleg that much in 1/9th of a second (from its position in Z353 to its position in Z355)? Then, in Z356, the left foot seems to be on the ground. Can anyone whip their left foreleg backward and then put their foot on the ground in the space of three frames, 1/6th of a second?
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 16, 2020, 11:27:38 AM
What's the problem?

Your GIF is showing the son's movements in slow motion. The problem is that in just 0.56 seconds, the son emerges from behind his dad to be standing beside him and clapping, which is an impossible movement in that amount of time. Get a kid close to Brehm's son's age, or get a teenager even, and do an experiment: See if the kid can carry out those same movements in just 0.56 seconds. Get a chair. Have the kid stand mostly behind the chair. Tell the kid to move from behind the chair to a position roughly beside the chair and to be clapping while he completes the last 0.10 seconds of the movements. I did this with one of my sons many times, and he was never able to even come close to duplicating Brehm's son's movements in 0.56 seconds.

Indeed, your GIF shows the problem. In slow motion, the son's movements should be much slower than they are in your GIF. In your GIF, the son's movements seem to occur at a natural speed precisely because the movements are much faster when the film is played at its regular speed.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Jerry Organ on June 16, 2020, 12:33:06 PM
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qB64sjleNYw/WGMqFkG690I/AAAAAAAAAaQ/8jtXjjfWtIIR3i_DnSuPDLCUOIIknhvQgCLcB/s640/Muchmore+2.gif)  (https://i.postimg.cc/26SgQV5B/Brehm-Zapruder.gif)

Looks like the boy is just taking a step. The same rate of speed that the boy travels is seen in both films.

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/b742c04bece9cd06575a11fbaffea1b4898648cb/0_377_3000_1801/master/3000.jpg?width=605&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=d5aac4eb6dfac19c8894b51d8a1fa9f8)  (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/smokinggun/z276.jpg)

Left: Muchmore frame (later than Z-frame to right); Right: Z276 appears to show boy's head and both legs on Brehm's right side.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 16, 2020, 07:02:36 PM
I think that perhaps the most compelling physical impossibility in the Zapruder film is the split-second slowing of the limousine in Z294-304. This event is noteworthy because it has been detected, measured, and discussed by scientists, including Dr. Luis Alvarez. From Z295-304, the limousine slows from 12 mph to 8 mph, a deceleration of about 0.37 g, in the space of barely half a second. Said Alvarez,

"The heavy car decelerated suddenly for about 0.5 sec. (10 frames), centered at about frame 299, reducing its speed from about 12 mph to about 8 mph" (American Journal of Physics, 44:9, September 1976, p. 825).

But Alvarez did not grasp, or chose to ignore, the implications of this rapid slowdown for the film's authenticity. Going from 12 mph to 8 mph in 10 frames would have produced a deceleration of about 0.37 g. As other scientists have noted, a deceleration of 0.37 g would toss things around, especially the occupants. Most cars do not decelerate more than 0.4 g. Yet, in the current Zapruder film, we see no visible effect on the occupants in the limo from the deceleration. The fact that JFK is not moved by this deceleration is particularly interesting because he no longer had voluntary muscle control and should have been thrown forward. Yet for many frames before and after this event, he appears to be quite immobile.

I suspect that this split-second rapid slowdown is a remnant of the obvious, noticeable slowdown/stop that numerous witnesses described seeing. For various reasons, this event had to be removed from the film. Throughout the current film the limousine seems to move at a steady speed.  No stop or marked slowdown can be seen by viewing the film at normal speed, which of course is the speed at which the witnesses would have observed the limousine. Alvarez only detected the slowdown by making measurements based on a frame-by-frame analysis of the film. Until Alvarez discovered the split-second slowdown, nobody had noticed it. So surely this is not the slowdown event that the witnesses described.
 
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 16, 2020, 07:34:51 PM
Your GIF is showing the son's movements in slow motion. The problem is that in just 0.56 seconds, the son emerges from behind his dad to be standing beside him and clapping, which is an impossible movement in that amount of time. Get a kid close to Brehm's son's age, or get a teenager even, and do an experiment: See if the kid can carry out those same movements in just 0.56 seconds. Get a chair. Have the kid stand mostly behind the chair. Tell the kid to move from behind the chair to a position roughly beside the chair and to be clapping while he completes the last 0.10 seconds of the movements. I did this with one of my sons many times, and he was never able to even come close to duplicating Brehm's son's movements in 0.56 seconds.

Indeed, your GIF shows the problem. In slow motion, the son's movements should be much slower than they are in your GIF. In your GIF, the son's movements seem to occur at a natural speed precisely because the movements are much faster when the film is played at its regular speed.

Quote
Your GIF is showing the son's movements in slow motion.

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?

(https://i.postimg.cc/zv2ZBwL7/Brehm-Zaprudera.gif)

Quote
Get a kid close to Brehm's son's age, or get a teenager even, and do an experiment: See if the kid can carry out those same movements in just 0.56 seconds. Get a chair. Have the kid stand mostly behind the chair. Tell the kid to move from behind the chair to a position roughly beside the chair and to be clapping while he completes the last 0.10 seconds of the movements. I did this with one of my sons many times, and he was never able to even come close to duplicating Brehm's son's movements in 0.56 seconds.

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.

Quote
Indeed, your GIF shows the problem. In slow motion, the son's movements should be much slower than they are in your GIF. In your GIF, the son's movements seem to occur at a natural speed precisely because the movements are much faster when the film is played at its regular speed.

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
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 16, 2020, 08:03:30 PM
Numerous elements in the Zapruder film still refute the lone-gunman theory, which is why the film was suppressed for so long. Those who edited the film simply were not able to remove enough of the problematic elements to make the film fully compatible with a lone-gunman scenario.

The following week the most important frames(besides the headshot) were published in LIFE magazine and allowing for production and distribution, the amount of time to alter these frames all of which can be perfectly slotted back into the original, was only a few days, and is simply was not enough time but don't believe me go and ask any older SFX specialist and ask them exactly what could be done with 8mm film or any film for that matter and then ask if your ideas are actually plausible.
Another problem for you is that all the individual elements that you think were edited all have their own specific properties as in lighting, motion blur and angles and etc, and if you cut something out and stick it somewhere else then it's a guarantee that the moved object will be out of place with the surroundings.

(https://i.postimg.cc/SxchkMr0/Life-Magazine-November-29-1963-04.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/q70dRvbN/Life-Magazine-November-29-1963-05.jpg)

(https://i.postimg.cc/tCYr3GZ2/Zap-life.gif)

JohnM
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 16, 2020, 08:16:28 PM
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qB64sjleNYw/WGMqFkG690I/AAAAAAAAAaQ/8jtXjjfWtIIR3i_DnSuPDLCUOIIknhvQgCLcB/s640/Muchmore+2.gif)  (https://i.postimg.cc/26SgQV5B/Brehm-Zapruder.gif)

Looks like the boy is just taking a step. The same rate of speed that the boy travels is seen in both films.

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/b742c04bece9cd06575a11fbaffea1b4898648cb/0_377_3000_1801/master/3000.jpg?width=605&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=d5aac4eb6dfac19c8894b51d8a1fa9f8)  (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/smokinggun/z276.jpg)

Left: Muchmore frame (later than Z-frame to right); Right: Z276 appears to show boy's head and both legs on Brehm's right side.

Thanks Jerry, so not only did the evil conspirators alter Zapruder but they also altered every other film from virtually opposite angles and perspectives to perfectly match Zapruderm obviously by using some sort of advanced alien FBI technology, it's absolutely hilarious what these Kooks clever CT's think is possible.

JohnM
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 16, 2020, 08:51:16 PM

Another physically impossible movement in the current Zapruder film is the head turn of the driver, William Greer, from Z315-321. Greer turns his head about 165 degrees in six frames, or in only 1/3rd of a second. Mike Pincher and Roy Schaeffer observe that Greer's head turn should create blurring in the film because the human eye can't remain focused when following such a rapid movement, but no blurring is seen:


Geez it's a never ending list of "observations", when "observing" Greer's rapid head turn did you take into account that Zapruder was panning his camera in the same direction because any motion blur must take into account all relative movements and that includes Zapruder's camera.
The following GIF is focused on Greer and his whole upper torso was turned dramatically to the right and all he did was turn back towards the front.

(https://i.postimg.cc/cC4XrVwy/greer-head-turn-z314-z320a.gif)

In this stabilized GIF which includes more of the overall surroundings, gives a more accurate representation of the Limo slowdown.


JohnM
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 17, 2020, 12:03:48 PM
Looks like the boy is just taking a step. The same rate of speed that the boy travels is seen in both films. Left: Muchmore frame (later than Z-frame to right); Right: Z276 appears to show boy's head and both legs on Brehm's right side.

Your comments leave me scratching my head. Unless one's eyesight is severely degraded, no one can deny that the son's position in relation to Brehm changes markedly from Z277 to Z287. If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge that plainly visible fact, then there's no basis for rational, genuine discussion.

Your comments about the Muchmore film are likewise baffling. In the Muchmore film the son does not just take one step but takes several steps, and his movement seems to me to take noticeably longer than it does in the Zapruder film.

You still have not addressed the issue of how anyone could have carried out the son's movements in 0.56 seconds. Denying those plainly visible movements is not an answer. John Mytton's claim that there is nothing unusual or unnatural about the speed of the son's movements is almost as untenable, as if taking only 0.56 seconds to move from behind the father to beside the father and standing calmly and clapping at the end of the movement is not at all unusual. Basic common sense should tell anyone that the son's movements occur far too quickly to be believable.

How about if we turn to another indication of tampering in the Zapruder film: the fact that in the Zapruder film, Jackie goes only just beyond the middle point of the trunk before retreating, but that in the Nix film she clearly goes much farther out on the trunk. Z380 is the frame before Jackie begins to retreat from the trunk. She is barely halfway past the middle of the trunk, and only her right hand is just beyond the middle point--the rest of her body is clearly behind the middle point. Moreover, she is nowhere near Agent Hill--her right hand is at least a foot from Hill. In stark contrast, the Nix film shows Jackie much farther on the truck and very close to Agent Hill.

https://whowhatwhy.org/2018/07/12/jfk-assassination-film-proof-of-tampering/

Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 17, 2020, 01:33:02 PM

How about if we turn to another indication of tampering in the Zapruder film: the fact that in the Zapruder film, Jackie goes only just beyond the middle point of the trunk before retreating, but that in the Nix film she clearly goes much farther out on the trunk. Z380 is the frame before Jackie begins to retreat from the trunk. She is barely halfway past the middle of the trunk, and only her right hand is just beyond the middle point--the rest of her body is clearly behind the middle point. Moreover, she is nowhere near Agent Hill--her right hand is at least a foot from Hill. In stark contrast, the Nix film shows Jackie much farther on the truck and very close to Agent Hill.


It's a simple matter of perspective, Jackie is virtually centered on the rear trunk of the Limo and Hill is on the left rear of the Limo.

(https://i.postimg.cc/5yLmsx3d/zap-jackie-trunk.gif)

Here is the sight lines from Nix's and Zapruder's position.

(https://i.postimg.cc/v849bH5G/Dealey-Plaza.gif)

And finally these are the corresponding Zapruder and Nix frames and as can be seen we are looking over Hills shoulder from Nix's position which makes Jackie relatively close to Hill, but from Zapruder's  position we see the larger gap because Jackie is further to the right, close to the center of the trunk and Hill is at the rear left of the limo.

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9f9RZWD/zapnix-jackie-hill.jpg)

JohnM
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Chris Davidson on June 17, 2020, 07:58:58 PM
If you use the assumption that Nix/Z have the same basic frame rate, then stabilize both films, it's much easier to decipher common actions among both films within the same frame/s.
For instance, there should be a confirmation of Jackie's elbow moving downward toward the trunk lid in Z as there is in Nix at Z411.
If confirmed, then you have to ask yourself how Jackie is able to slide back down into her seat in 6 zframes which is less than one third of a second.
She also has to contend with JFK's head/body encroaching/falling back into her sitting space after she had pushed his upper body/head out of the way to move out onto the trunk lid in the first place.
The comparison frame span would have Clint holding her elbow from z405 to where it moves downward at z411.
In that six frame span, he is only able to drop her arm/elbow down to where we see it in z411.
As luck??? would have it, that's where that segment of Nix ends.
(https://s7.gifyu.com/images/ZNix.gif)
 
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael T. Griffith on June 17, 2020, 08:35:54 PM
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.

Well, I can't make you see what you don't want to see. As many other scholars have noted, the movement of the limo is problematic, and the limo's movement does not alter the fact that in 0.56 seconds Brehm's son goes from being mostly behind him to being beside him and calmly clapping. 

Btw exactly what do you think they were trying to hide by doing the alteration as you describe?

The speeding up of the son's movements was a byproduct of the editing, not the reason for it.

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.

Uh, well, we can't even get to that point because you won't admit that the son's movements are the least bit problematic.

And just on a point of logic and critical thinking, why do I have to prove what I see but you don't have to prove what you see? You see nothing unnatural about the speed of the son's movements, but, apparently, you feel no obligation to cite any evidence that those movements can be carried out in the allotted time.

I've mentioned the several experiments that I did with my son and the times they produced. I didn't record them, but I have discussed their results. Why don't you do some experiments and see if you can get a kid of about Brehm's son's age to perform those movements in 0.56 seconds?

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!

"Speculation of what you think you see"?  If you want to talk about credibility, you might start by making logical, credible statements. 

Again, I can't make you see what you don't want to see. When you won't admit something that the film clearly shows because you can't explain it, it is hard to have a genuine discussion. The same goes for casually indiscernible but documented movements in the film.

The marked, split-second slowing of the limousine has been documented by Luis Alvarez, who was hardly a conspiracy theorist. It doesn't take advanced math skills to understand that a 3-4-mph reduction in barely half a second would produce quite a jolt to the occupants, but we see no indication of this among them.

Here's another problem: the split-second substantial forward movement of Kennedy's head and right shoulder in Z312-313. With regard to these frames, Itek noted, "the President's head is subjected to a large acceleration forward." Itek calculated that Kennedy's head is knocked forward 2.3 inches and his right shoulder about 1.1 inches from Z312-313. This is 1/18th of a second. But, amazingly, by Z314 the head is suddenly moving backward. Are you going to tell me that you see no problem with these violent split-second opposite-direction movements? Neuro spasms and "jet effects" won't cut it, since, for one thing, such phenomena cannot produce changes in direction that quickly.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Thomas Graves on June 18, 2020, 03:06:57 AM
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?

(https://i.postimg.cc/zv2ZBwL7/Brehm-Zaprudera.gif)

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

Donations to the Forum can be made via Paypal using the links below.

   
   

with the likes of John Butler (unless, of course, he IS John Butler).

--  MWT  ;)

Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on June 18, 2020, 08:03:19 AM
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
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Bill Chapman on June 20, 2020, 12:17:24 AM
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!
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael Walton on June 30, 2020, 02:01:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on July 02, 2020, 03:57:18 PM
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
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Michael Walton on July 04, 2020, 02:30:14 PM
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?
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: Steve Barber on July 04, 2020, 05:23:23 PM
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?
Title: Re: Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film
Post by: John Mytton on July 05, 2020, 08:02:33 AM
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?

Quote
Things were far, far different in 1963 than they are now, and stuff like this was far too graphic to show on TV.

 Thumb1:

JohnM