Simple proof that the Zapruder film is 100% Authentic!

[Steve Barber]

You seem to be familiar with this kind of behavior. Why is that?

What "kind of behavior" would that be, Martin?   Why are you asking John Mytton such a question? You seem to get your kicks at taking comments that people post and using them as a vehicle for you to take cheap shots at people like John Mytton who has done some outstanding work with gif's, photos, and films, trying to help people be able to see things that aren't always easy to see due to camera movement and such.   Let me ask you.   Could you point me in the direction of something you've done in here that is considered outstand research/work?   I'd like to see it, seriously.   

 All I did was respond in kind to Mando that I was mistaken in saying what I said about the fragments removed from Gov. Connally's wrist.   .... made a comment about what I said in response to something he said.  My response was WRONG, I misspoke, and so I pointed out that I was wrong.  Here is the exchange which is on page 8, 8 comment from the top: 

 Re: Simple proof that the Zapruder film is 100% Authentic!
« Reply #77 on: April 12, 2022, 10:53:32 PM »
ReplyQuote
Quote from: Steve Barber on April 12, 2022, 04:40:38 PM
He's basing that on something that was disproved by yours truly.  The acoustics evidence was a lie perpetrated upon the American people by the scientsis that worked for the HSCA.  There are no gunshots on the Dictabelt recording whatsoever.  There is also no evidence of a gunshot to President Kennedy's head from the knoll.  Had there been, the left hemisphere and the skull damage would be apparent in the 3 home movie films that captured the fatal shot. And, as conspiracy theorist Robert B. Cutler said it best:  "There would have been absolutely nothing left of the skull had two shots struck the skull", and there is no evidence of any large skull fragments flying anywhere but forward, based on the three films, the x-ray or the autopsy pictures--not to mention the fact that the left hemisphere of the brain was intact.

.... posted this:

 Quote:  "You also believe (quote) "grains of lead that were recovered from Connally's wounds  were matched to that bullet" even though there is no valid scientific study that supports this conclusion.

Do you also believe in the Tooth Fairy?"  Quote Off.

 
 So, I responded to ...., saying this:  Quote :  " Sorry.  I misspoke.  At my age, the memory just isn't what it once was.  I hope this doesn't happen to you if you reach this age."
 
 Then, I think it was earlier today-- I saw where I didn't answer his question "Do you believe in the tooth fairy?, so, I clicked on wherever I was reading that from, and said the words "No, do you?  I've messed up somewhere, and I don't know how, but somehow, I messed up something.

  I honestly do remember what color his comment to me was when I responded to what he said--and I am not in this Forum enough to remember how everything works anymore.  (I think Duncan knows But I'm not certain) how little I'm here anymore compared to how I used to post comments several years ago).  What I cannot figure out is, where is my original comment of " " Sorry.  I misspoke.  At my age, the memory just isn't what it once was.  I hope this doesn't happen to you if you reach this age.".  It isn't here, and I posted it, but I do not see it anywhere except within the blue background response.  I'm confused, literally.   But the point is, I didn't initially say anything disrespectful to .... within my response to him.  Maybe Duncan can jump in here and help clear this up.  I'm at a loss, and I'm dreadfully sorry Duncan for this mess. 

 

[Steve Barber]

You've just not added the quote symbols when you responded.
It happens all the time.

Only a truly spineless f%ckwit would report such a thing.

 Thank you so much, Dan!!!!   Now I know what I did wrong.  Its a relief finding out I haven't lost my (failing) mind completely.

[Dan O'meara]

Thank you so much, Dan!!!!   Now I know what I did wrong.  Its a relief finding out I haven't lost my (failing) mind completely.

It's easily done.

[Steve Barber]

   

[John Iacoletti]

An innocent error of accidentally putting a reply inside the quote tags.  Nothing to get worked up about.

[John Mytton]

An innocent error of accidentally putting a reply inside the quote tags.  Nothing to get worked up about.

 

The fact that he really cared and was so passionate about unintentionally offending a fellow member really makes such an emotional difference around here, because Otto, Walt, ...., Weidmann, etc with their insults, angry replies and an unhealthy overreliance on acronyms stops this place being all warm and cozy. LOL LMFAO ROFL YAWN!

JohnM

[Allan Fritzke]

I have to go with Jerry Freeman post on the roses!

Assume Zapruder frames at 18fps and shot at Z313.    The car is moving forward at 10 mph.  No visible sign of this brain matter until Z321 and Z314 and then it hangs in  the roses for about 4 frames and remains almost stationary with roses.  Total time is somewhere near 1/2 a second and there is no visible fragment flying through the air from JFK's head to that position.  The frame next to Z314 shows no evidence of  a trajectory. Either it was travelling awfully fast and gone within a frame or.....

Coincidentally, you see a group of roses and camera shake in this region.  Certainly looks like part of the group of roses to me.   When you see JFK raise his arm, his leg also flew up, pushing the roses up.  Visibly arm comes up and I am inferring so does the leg before it goes limp.

In fact when you look at the sequence from Z320 to Z323, the "aberration" appears to be growing "up" and not falling down.  (Analysis from the Lightbox Frames).   Then it falls back down between Z324 and Z326 and then Z327 becomes a black hole on the door frame! It  bleeds into the car body frame!   Pretty hard not to see the anomaly appearing as it progressively was getting larger before it shrank below view.   Of course their are cuts on the film as well in these frames.

 It is pretty hard to follow your trajectory path as you see Point A and Point B and absolutely nothing in between!    There should be evidence in the primary frames in between of it flying through the air even if it was a saucer and be caught by light. Unfortunately none of this can be seen in the film to back up your argument.  Not saying it isn't possible if certain frames were doctored.  Oops.  I forget.  No doctoring of Zapruder film!!!   Tore a few times and just badly scratched up with vertical angled lines.  Thats another debate (next post!)

[Allan Fritzke]

Doctoring of the Zapruder Film.  Here is a prime example. If they can do this here, where else can they do it and make it ingeniously blend in?  Note the flag and the waterspot just above it that turns to a fleshy color.  Was this a film spice, a license plate splice or cutting or an obscurement or movement of people in the scene? Maybe the feet in the scene should have been at the waterspot and match their shadow?





Maybe they were just obscuring the license plate numbers so you couldn't trace them!  Those definitely look like cut lines on Z225.  Again, the background figures are hideous.  They appear to be clapping.  Well that could be, but they are also in the right place to make a presidential interception when JFK is right behind the sign and the first shot comes in.  It would work great having everyone's attention fixed on Cuban and the umbrella man on the other side of the road!   To make matters worse, those figures don't appear to be following the car with their gaze and the figure at the front quickly puts his hand directly behind his back.  Must have had an itchy spot!    Not sure what these characters were doing and who they were.  Garry Unger's picks up some black in those frames.  Anything cut or modified?  Thanks to Garry Unger's Pictures!  The others don't show the shadows!  The stance doesn't match the body position either!







It would be interesting to see a gif zoomed on these characters!