Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 19 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 246028 times)

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2444
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #70 on: April 19, 2018, 10:11:51 PM »
Hey Larry:   Good thing Peter Lemkin has all those practicers of the Deep Politics "ethos" over there on DPF and got rid of the troublemakers like myself (who happen to post correct evidence that disproved Lauren and Jim D)...Trust me, this isn't about somebody suffering wicked injustices for posting the truth against an ignorant, hypocritical majority while following the posted site rules...No...It is an obsessed member who refuses to understand the greater principles Jim, Peter, and Lauren embody...


You have to understand that posting sophisticated evidence that disproves 95% of the community on a major controversial issue is something that Peter and his sensibilities can't tolerate and it isn't just Peter banning somebody because he posts evidence that Peter's too stupid to understand...Dawn too...

The one thing it definitely isn't is power-abusing site authorities abusing their moderator power to not admit they were wrong...That is the one thing we know it couldn't be...
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 10:41:43 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #70 on: April 19, 2018, 10:11:51 PM »

Online Anthony Clayden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2018, 11:07:54 PM »
Larry,

Please identify which of the TSBD female employees you think it is?
If you take out the absent staff, the people in groups on the 3rd and 4th floors, people who said they were elsewhere, people in large groups away from TSBD who testified to beign together and the people we can see in the photos with PM, the list gets very small....

My guess would be Geneva Hine ducked out the front.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2444
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #72 on: April 20, 2018, 01:13:08 AM »
Anthony:

Any chance, since Frazier said he was talking to "Sarah" when Calvery ran up, and the Couch/Darnell film shows Calvery at the foot of the steps, that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #72 on: April 20, 2018, 01:13:08 AM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #73 on: April 20, 2018, 03:46:36 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hey Larry:   Good thing Peter Lemkin has all those practicers of the Deep Politics "ethos" over there on DPF and got rid of the troublemakers like myself (who happen to post correct evidence that disproved Lauren and Jim D)...Trust me, this isn't about somebody suffering wicked injustices for posting the truth against an ignorant, hypocritical majority while following the posted site rules...No...It is an obsessed member who refuses to understand the greater principles Jim, Peter, and Lauren embody...


You have to understand that posting sophisticated evidence that disproves 95% of the community on a major controversial issue is something that Peter and his sensibilities can't tolerate and it isn't just Peter banning somebody because he posts evidence that Peter's too stupid to understand...Dawn too...

The one thing it definitely isn't is power-abusing site authorities abusing their moderator power to not admit they were wrong...That is the one thing we know it couldn't be...

Well Brian, I certainly have difficulty trying to reconcile a stated agenda with actual DPF moderating practices. Case in point, the PrayerPerson discussion, that was relegated to the DPF BearPitForum, but yet when certain posters steered the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter thread into the PrayerPerson debate, it appeared as though moderation did not apply. But, enough about DPF, except I am still "concerned" as to why my access was blocked. Not banned, or put on moderation, as no rule violation warranted any action. So, after switching to another computer/IPA I was then able to access at will. But, after "signing on", and posting once or twice, all of a sudden that computer/IPA was knocked off-line, and site access ability was again lost. So, still investigating that situation. But, as stated, no need for tying up threads discussing another forum, and if need be, we can seek a seperate discussion venue.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2444
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #74 on: April 20, 2018, 05:44:03 PM »
Larry:

The Prayer Man issue on the Deep Politics forum is not about the truth of the shadowy figure's identity...The issue is whether certain members, because they have a moderator, founding member, or administrator avatar, can shirk their own rules and the purpose of their website and operate outside their own posted sites rules as infallible members...

Lemkin is especially pathetic because he turned against me and made up non-existent rules in order to justify my banning...Lemkin said I was violating the Deep Political "ethos" the board was based on...What a pathetic liar...He obviously did that because he knew there was no site rule I had violated and needed to come up with a reason...The board rules very specifically state that a valid reason is needed to ban a long term member...Any intelligent person who watched the debate would see that the real reason was I had successfully shown that the moderators had mismanaged the board and not followed their own rules...The board is supposed to run by a very formal and intelligent set of democratic site rules...Dawn's reaction to this lynching? "I don't give a rat's ass"...There you see the true face of DPF and its dirty clique...

Lauren is a liar too...He pre-empted my banning by saying I was not being banned for my Prayer Man evidence...Any reading of the involved threads will see that my banning was solely based on the Prayer Man issue and Lauren is lying...It goes to show what a shallow-minded character he is that he would ban a person with much more intelligent talent than himself on the dishonest and unintelligent basis of "repeated behavior"...Again, any reading of the involved threads would see that 'repeated behavior' was my insisting that Lauren obey his own site rules as moderator in regard to the Prayer Man issue...Lauren spent over 2 years abusing his moderator power in order to not have to admit he was wrong on the Prayer Man issue and had abused the member who proved the correct evidence as his own rule #14 encourages...If you examine Lauren's moderation he never references the site rules like he is required to do...Lauren is a liar and his input was an exercise in avoiding the evidence each time it was brought up for over 2 years (because he knew he was wrong but didn't want to admit it)...Magda put a real ******* in charge of the forum and she is at fault...Magda, of course, agreed with Lauren that Prayer Man was Oswald 2 years ago shortly before my 3 month vacation from the site... Both Peter and Lauren complained about my "obsession" with the topic...Both of them being too stupid and dishonest to realize their failure to admit the correct evidence and obey their own site rules was the source of the problem...Magda allows Lauren to run the board like his own personal website...She is the one to blame...This issue was 100% based on Magda and Lauren abusing their site power in order not to admit they were both wrong on Prayer Man and therefore were running their site backwards according to their own rules...They all avoided the site rules in my banning because they knew they came in in my favor...

Any intelligent person will see that the problem arises from the fact Lauren isn't smart enough to evaluate evidence...He uses Jim DiEugenio as a guide to technical evidence and doesn't want to be exposed as being incompetent...Lauren got his meanest when members pointed out the rules he was violating...Magda allowed Lauren to delete and lock threads where members cited the rules and asked Lauren to obey them as those same rules require...Lauren was allowed to convert an issue where he was clearly in the wrong and abusing his moderator power way beyond its intended purpose to the victims being wrong and his never having to answer for his wrongdoing...He moderated the board backwards and against the rules...He managed to exploit the conflict of interest of the phony insider members and their need to not admit they were not up to snuff in living up to their own rules...The Prayer Man issue was converted to Lauren struggling not to expose his incompetency and abusing his moderator power...That's a complete destruction of the site's credibility and purpose but those insider phonies don't care as long as they are in charge...Dirty Jim D is very happy with this and congratulates the moderators for their dirty lynching after staying out of the discussion that proved he was wrong...Jim is now infallible thanks to Lauren and doesn't have to answer for his deliberate promotion of bad evidence and contemptuous violation of the DPF rules...

The DPF board isn't about credible discussion of evidence and determining the true facts of the JFK assassination...It is about serving the avatar-bearing members of DPF and their rank contempt for their own rules as overseen by one major dumb-ass and bully known as Lauren Johnson...The board is mis-labeled...It should be called the Jim DiEugenio fan club...Lauren doesn't know what he is doing and he shouldn't be moderator...Lauren moderates by serving Jim D and the other avatar-bearers and therefore has a permanent job...He's a low-intellect social media-type and popularity mugwump who is unfit for research oversight...Truth be damned...   
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 07:33:46 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #74 on: April 20, 2018, 05:44:03 PM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #75 on: April 24, 2018, 09:54:32 PM »
As time flies, with all said and done
Be not surprised, should she be the one




Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 236
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #76 on: April 27, 2018, 01:47:14 PM »
Below: I've cropped, enlarged & enhanced the crucial area of Chris Davidson's animated Gif.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #76 on: April 27, 2018, 01:47:14 PM »

Offline Denis Morissette

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #77 on: April 27, 2018, 04:00:27 PM »
Impressive!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Below: I've cropped, enlarged & enhanced the crucial area of Chris Davidson's animated Gif.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #77 on: April 27, 2018, 04:00:27 PM »

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 236
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #78 on: April 27, 2018, 05:58:09 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thanks Duncan but your image from two years ago was sharper...

I can only work with what Chris made available in his original Gif.

I've sharpened the frames a little more and added a little bit of color to them.

The detail simply isn't there to enhance any further without degradation taking place.


Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2444
Prayer Woman
« Reply #79 on: April 28, 2018, 10:12:24 PM »
    Stancak responded to Graves on the Education Forum:


           
Quote
" I can have a look at the leg length problem in my next version of any work which will include Prayer Man.  People differ in the height of their inseam and my model appears to have the inseam high. I paid some attention to it, but in order to measure inseam height, one needs to measure besides the body length also the length of the inner leg from the sole of the foot to the perineum. This cannot be achieved from Lee Harvey Oswald photographs in which he wears loose pants, and in no case from Darnell still because it is blurred and does not show full legs. The leg-to-body ration varies from 45% to 50% in the population, and my model has a proportion which goes to the higher end of the range.

The exact posture of Prayer Man's legs is uncertain just because they cannot be seen reliably in any of the frames. So, I had to design a leg posture myself, and actually I have suggested two leg postures, one in 2016 and one more recently. I certainly can test another leg posture which may possibly appeal better to you. The Darnell model included 15 human figures and I spent time mostly with the new figures. "


This ruminating run-round of Stancak's is typical...He mouths the photo science terms of the issue but doesn't answer the point that is being made...What Stancak fails to answer is the fact his excessive inseam that is 2.5 inches longer than Frazier's has to contain a leg that is far beyond the parameters for tolerable variation...Stancak once again gets away with a non-answer that doesn't address the technical point that is being made...He fails to answer a provable fatal flaw in his model that dismisses his claim and by default proves ours...

What Stancak doesn't seem to realize is he has presented modeling tool measuring sticks with his figures...He has metered very precise height measurements for Frazier and Prayer Man at the tops of their heads that lock them in to the known heights for Oswald and Frazier...Stancak does not address that the step is a known 7 inches in height and when combined with the shown head height for Prayer Man must establish a very precise height for his Prayer Man figure...Plus we already know Oswald's general body proportions from photographs...

What Stancak is not answering here is the image on page 1 of that thread with the measuring stick metered heights for Frazier and Prayer Man doesn't provide any more wiggle room for reducing Prayer Man's height in order to adjust for the overly long inseam...Like I said in another post...Stancak's graphics are actually very precise in certain areas...Because of that Stancak has trapped himself with his own precision and locked himself into highly restricted boundaries of evidence that he can't get out of as easily as he pretends...

What Stancak is getting around answering in the above response is that Prayer Man's leg is too long in his graphic, not just his inseam...Stancak correctly points out that the real measure is not the inseam but the physical body length from the perineum to the heel...But after pointing out the correct forensic methodology he then ignores the fact that it is impossible for a leg to reach from Prayer Man's crotch, as shown in his graphic, to the heel of his foot planted on the step without being at least the length required to do that...

This is the science Graves was getting at but not articulating quite clearly enough...Stancak is still at the same impasse and after offering a ruminating voicing of the scientific problem involved he never quite gets around to answering the serious issue with his evidence...This has nothing to do with photos of Oswald showing his legs...Instead it has everything to do with Stancak's own height illustrations with correct height measurements assigned to both Frazier and Prayer Man...We may not have photos of Oswald to compare but we do have a very precise measurement of Prayer Man's height at 5 foot 9 as Stancak shows in his image...The question then stands if this measurement is very accurate (which it is), and Prayer Man's leg is 2.5 inches too long, then where is Stancak going to get his height reduction from?

If he reduces Prayer Man's leg by the necessary 2.5 inches he is going to have to lift Prayer Man's foot off the step by 2.5 inches and have it floating in the air...Andrej has made the mistake of being too accurate in his computer graphics and therefore trapping himself within his own scientific constraints...He has no wiggle room at the top of Prayer Man's head because his measuring meter shows a very precise 5 foot 9 inches for Prayer Man (Oswald's height)...And he can't use the differences in Oswald's claimed height because he will be going beneath the lower 5 foot 9 height...And he can't use Oswald's 5 foot 11 height because he has locked himself into Frazier's correct 6 foot 1/2 inch height and can't violate the height difference that is visible in Darnell...

In December 2016 I called Andrej out on the Education Forum and challenged him to post a computer graphic of Prayer Man with a foot on the step...I knew he wouldn't be able to make it work...I was banned without explanation when I made that challenge...I have been claiming for many years that Prayer Man would have to have grotesquely long legs to have a foot on the step...You can go back and read posts from over 3 years ago of me saying this...Stancak took 14 months but he finally put out his graphic of the Darnell frame...Let's get down to it...What is happening here is Andrej created computer graphics science that was accurate enough to prove what I was saying and refute Stancak's foot on the step claim...The only credible scientific conclusion that can be made from this is Stancak can't get a correctly-proportioned Prayer Man's leg to reach the step...He has refuted himself and proven my case...And, as his above reply shows, he has failed to credibly account for it when challenged...     

No one on the Education Forum asks Stancak where he is going to get those extra 2.5 inches from? And now Graves has lost the ability to ask...
« Last Edit: April 28, 2018, 10:30:58 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Prayer Woman
« Reply #79 on: April 28, 2018, 10:12:24 PM »

 

Mobile View