Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 254802 times)

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #100 on: May 02, 2018, 02:03:54 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 You're not answering what I wrote...I'm not sure if you aren't doing that deliberately...I didn't mention Lovelady...I was talking about Prayer Man and how the sun/shade line you showed in Murray proved Prayer Man would be lit by that same sun you see in Murray if he was on the steps with shoulders squared...

Try answering what I wrote next time...

I didn't reply to your response exactly because that Murray image does not show where PM was or the shadowline, it's not even close, I saw no point in it.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #100 on: May 02, 2018, 02:03:54 AM »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #101 on: May 02, 2018, 02:13:26 AM »
Barry:  The Murray image shows where the shadow was in relation to Prayer Man in Wiegman which was not too long before...It is valid to use for comparison since the sun is still well in to the west portion of the steps and could not  be less that what was there during Darnell...

Your response is not valid because we can compare where Prayer Man was in Wiegman to the Murray image since we can see Prayer Man's position in Wiegman...Plus Stancak has Prayer Man on the step so we know where Stancak is suggesting Prayer Man is...If you then follow what I wrote, placing Prayer Man's body over the step like his body would do if his weight were put on the lower leg and squaring his shoulders would bring Prayer Man's left side in to the sun you see in Murray...I think you know this and are playing dumb...

I have provided enough information to prove this...

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #102 on: May 02, 2018, 02:39:21 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No...That 5 foot 3 figure is something that Gilbride and Stancak determined from their analyses...I disagree and say the images make Prayer Man about 5 foot 5 or 6 inches if both feet are on the landing...I sent inquiries to the Texas Bureau Of Public Safety and even tried a famous Texan private detective to try to get records of Sarah Stanton's height and came up with a bust...I will bet my monkey's uncle that Stanton will prove to be 5 foot 5 or 6 in height...


I have already proven that Stancak has provided very accurate measuring sticks that precisely measure Prayer Man's height to be 5 foot 9 inches - the same as Oswald...You don't seem to grasp what I have proven...Since Stancak has measured a very precise 5 foot 9 for Prayer Man and publicly admitted he has added an extra 2 inches to the leg that he needs to subtract, that means he has disproven Prayer Man being on the step...It means he can't make Prayer Man's leg reach the step without adding an extra 2 inches that isn't there...You haven't adequately responded to what I have already proven...

According to Duncan on page one, five foot three is also the height John Mytton calculated. You've proven that Stanack has measured PM precisely to be 5'9 in his drawing you mean? Anyway it stacks up in reality~ 5'3 on landing is equal to around  5'9 on the step just because he cannot draw it correctly doesn't make it false, it's just a cartoon remember?
No I don't get all of it, you seem to believe he's involved in trickery, I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt since he is clearly no pro, how did you get five six?
Some of us have to cut through part of what you write Brian, not everyone is interested in what goes on elsewhere among you know who.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #102 on: May 02, 2018, 02:39:21 AM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #103 on: May 02, 2018, 02:53:23 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Barry:  The Murray image shows where the shadow was in relation to Prayer Man in Wiegman which was not too long before...It is valid to use for comparison since the sun is still well in to the west portion of the steps and could not  be less that what was there during Darnell...

Your response is not valid because we can compare where Prayer Man was in Wiegman to the Murray image since we can see Prayer Man's position in Wiegman...Plus Stancak has Prayer Man on the step so we know where Stancak is suggesting Prayer Man is...If you then follow what I wrote, placing Prayer Man's body over the step like his body would do if his weight were put on the lower leg and squaring his shoulders would bring Prayer Man's left side in to the sun you see in Murray...I think you know this and are playing dumb...

I have provided enough information to prove this...

Why would I play dumb with you, for PM's sake?  No, not even for Devil's advocate, not worth it. I just cannot see how any part of a man in PM's filmed position would be seen in that Murray image whether on the step or landing, he would be completely hidden. You need more feedback I think, I'll leave it for other opinions.

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #104 on: May 02, 2018, 05:06:14 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Simply, the Darnell frames we have available now were not there before 2013. You can see it evolving in  the thread on EF, it went from "it couldn't be him could it?" to "it has to be him" . Not sure but I think Murphy was still "new" to the research scene, so only took him ten(if that) years? Still not sure what point you are making though, I just found something new the other day. What is your point?

You did say you never gave it much credit, " never not refuted it" that shows a clear bias does it not? I took you at your word is all.
Do you have any evidence that discounts the idea that PM could get to the lunchroom before Baker did in less than a minute?
It is not a question of bias, Mr Pollard. After careful study, I reached a conclusion, and since I never concluded "agreement", therefor "never not refuted it" applies. Quite simple actually. Also, since I have reached a conclusion that there is no "PM", I see no need for any evidence about any "PM" activity.

Thanks for the conversation, but I stand by my stated conclusion, and if you wish to express disagreement, that is fine. But, admittedly, I am not sure of your conclusions about said subject matter. However, it appears as though you agree with the LeeHarveyOswald as PrayerManTheory, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter is a HoaxTheory. And that sir, is your privilege. But, without sufficient reliable provable evidence, I see no indication of changing my stated conclusions.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2019, 06:48:46 PM by Larry Trotter »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #104 on: May 02, 2018, 05:06:14 AM »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Prayer Woman
« Reply #105 on: May 02, 2018, 04:18:52 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
According to Duncan on page one, five foot three is also the height John Mytton calculated. You've proven that Stanack has measured PM precisely to be 5'9 in his drawing you mean? Anyway it stacks up in reality~ 5'3 on landing is equal to around  5'9 on the step just because he cannot draw it correctly doesn't make it false, it's just a cartoon remember?
No I don't get all of it, you seem to believe he's involved in trickery, I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt since he is clearly no pro, how did you get five six?
Some of us have to cut through part of what you write Brian, not everyone is interested in what goes on elsewhere among you know who.
Nope, you still haven't answered what I wrote...

If you look at my reply #2 on page 1 of this thread you will see Stancak's graphic of just Prayer Man and Frazier isolated in the Darnell image...As I have already instructed you, please observe the graded measuring sticks Stancak has inserted in to the graphic...I assume these are scaled metering devices gotten from the options in the computer modeling program Stancak used for the image...

If you observe the measuring stick for Prayer Man it starts at the step and goes to the top of his head...You can't fudge this like you are doing Barry and the measuring stick makes it very clear that Stancak has precisely established an exact height for Prayer Man of 5 foot 9 inches, which just so happens to be the exact height for Lee Harvey Oswald...Your answers mull around and make general statements but they never quite get around to answering the precise evidence I am showing here...That seems to be a universal condition for the Prayer Man people who seem to suddenly develop a weird type of research comprehension syndrome when you point out irrefutable debunking evidence...

So if you look at the measuring stick in my reply #2 on page 1 there is no doubt it locks in a very precise 5 foot 9 for Prayer Man...So we now consider that Stancak has admitted his leg for Prayer Man is out of scale and too long by at least 2 inches...My point remains unanswered by yourself...Where then is Stancak going to get the extra 2.5 inches in reduction he plans to do sometime in the future? Hopefully he won't take over a year to do this with Gordon's blessing like he did for this graphic...

The reason I post what is going on elsewhere is because the Murphy cult has hijacked the two main research forums...Instead of answering the credible science I am posting here they allow the offenders to violate their own site rules and the ethics of honest debate by targeting you with personal defamation instead of answering your evidence...Both the Education Forum and Deep Politics have been hijacked by the Murphy gang and posting the correct evidence on Prayer Man that proves he is too short to be Oswald will get you banned with the offenders having the last cowardly and untrue word on you after you can't defend yourself...On a site where a new rule has been established of no fighting or personal attacks the administrator of the board then comes in and violates his own directive while ignoring my refuting evidence that has been linked to his board...

I have literally pointed-out that Stancak's Prayer Man on the step has a leg that Stancak admitted was 47% of his body length...Stancak has also posted an image of his computer graphic mannequin for Prayer Man juxtaposed with Oswald with both feet flat on the ground with a leg that is 40% of his body length...Barry you seem to be very forgiving of Stancak but in the real science world this substantial discrepancy is fatal to research credibility and a rogue violation of the science Mr Stancak pretends...Stancak is obviously just pulling this stuff out of thin air and is a fraud who is just creating what he wishes to see and tweaking his images...Not a single one of the members on the Education Forum noticed this or ever bothered recognizing it or its affect on the issue even after I pointed it out...The Education Forum moderators do not mind such radical failures in accuracy...Post the correct Prayer Man evidence and they will ride your back on every stitch even when your evidence is sound...

Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...She and Frazier are standing with both feet on the landing and when directly compared in height shows that Stanton is about 5 foot 5 or 6 when measured in relation to the 6 foot 1/2 inch Frazier...
« Last Edit: May 02, 2018, 05:30:34 PM by Brian Doyle »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Prayer Woman
« Reply #106 on: May 03, 2018, 06:57:12 PM »
On the Education Forum because Gordon has announced my banning the usual suspects are now assembling in the Prayer Man thread and enjoying their victory by censorship...Those who correctly challenged the Murphy Prayer Man theory are now unable to post and the playing field is now skewed in favor of Stancak and the Murphy theorists by means of filtering the opponents...

David Josephs presented an interesting graphic that shows the shadow line in Darnell and pretty much confirms my placement of the sun/shade border...Because Josephs and Stancak are in league that Oswald is Prayer Man, neither notices that Josephs' confirmation of my shadow line proves that Stancak's shadow line in his overhead graphic is off by as much as a foot...Stancak continues on presenting his overhead graphic as legitimate and accurate and the moderation that demands very strict adherence to "requirements" at the threat of banning continues to not notice this fatal flaw in Stancak's graphic that misrepresents a major component of the forensic details in Darnell...After all, people who ignore huge scientific errors that constitute disqualifying failure at a scientific level are not "argumentative" so therefore they compliment each other for their friendly tolerance...

David Josephs had detoured the topic in to one of his classic potpourri's of mixed up irrelevancies that drag the thread away from the on-point evidence...Stancak is courting him because then both of them, with the assistance of Gordon's moderation, can avoid answering how Stancak's 3 inch error over the length of Prayer Man's leg refutes his own thesis and proves Prayer Man could not have had a leg on the step...You have to remember David Josephs was over at the Deep Politics board saying he demanded precise methodology in claims...When you show him that methodology he then acts like a school boy on a school play yard moving the goal posts as the bullies decide how the softball game will be run...Low and behold after Gordon's restriction of the opposition Stancak seems to have developed amnesia over his 3 inch error on the length of Prayer Man's leg...The Prayer Man supporters all come in DiEugenio-style and compliment Stancak on his impressive work...

Stancak fails to disclose that the placement of Prayer Man forward in the landing due to the sunlight being on his hand was a forensic concept that was entirely developed by myself...Stancak is now adopting it and pushing it in the evidence without honestly crediting me for it...

Stancak continues to ignore, with the Education Forum moderation's assistance, that any computer graphic done for the Wiegman image will refute his foot on the step claim...If Stancak shows a cartoon for Prayer Man with his shoulders squared to the landing and his body centered over the step, as it would be if his weight went to the foot on the step, then his mannequin would pull in to the sunlight Stancak shows in his own graphic...He would refute himself once again...The Education Forum moderation sided with Stancak on this saying people were putting an unfair burden on him to create these difficult graphics...However, if the EF moderation were paying competent attention to what was being argued here it would realize this evidence could be seen in the current overhead graphic Stancak has shown for Darnell...Like the 3 inch too long leg, Stancak has refuted himself here once again and none of the thread-dominating pro Murphy posters even notice...
   
Over on Deep Politics David Josephs is trying to force a court room standard because he is trying to restrict the obvious nuances in the evidence that all point towards the lunch room encounter being real...David is a real cheater because he is pretending he is demanding that legal standard in order to sharpen the evidence when it is obvious that he is doing it to exclude evidence he knows is true...David is free to post here...He won't do it because he knows he'll lose hard...David is avoiding answering what a voice stress analysis test would do for Baker's testimony...DiEugenio too...What a dishonest gang of boys...
« Last Edit: May 04, 2018, 05:48:21 AM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Prayer Woman
« Reply #106 on: May 03, 2018, 06:57:12 PM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #107 on: May 04, 2018, 04:50:26 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It is not a question of bias, Mr Pollard. After careful study, I reached a conclusion, and since I never concluded "agreement", therefor "never not refuted it" applies. Quite simple actually. Also, since I have reached a conclusion that there is no "PM", I see no need for any evidence about any "PM" activity.

Thanks for the conversation, but I stand by my stated conclusion, and if you wish to express disagreement, that is fine. But, admittedly, I am not sure of your conclusions about said subject matter. However, it appears as though you agree with the LeeHarveyOswald as PrayerMan Theory, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter is a Hoax Theory. And that sir, is your privilege. But, without sufficient reliable provable evidence, I see no indication of changing my stated conclusions.


Larry, make no mistake your input is most welcome, here's my position. I'm sure it's a man, that he's standing close to the southern edge of the landing, perhaps on the step (but I'd like to see that proven), seems to be drinking from something in Weigman, from the Darnell frames it looks enough like LHO to make me wonder too but I've never claimed it's him, in fact I found someone in the Cook film outside the TSBD that matches up nicely enough. So hardly a disciple but dispite all the argument against the very idea I still wonder because I believe it is actually possible for him to be somewhere other than the SN.
One of the major things against it beiing LHO is the fact that no observation in the entire photographic research history of this case seems, to me at least, to stand up today, so the odds are very slim but I'd still like put a little money on it being good.

You did say that the Lunchroom encounter was part of the reason why you doubted it, I then asked you if this person could get there before Baker and you said you won't even consider it but you already have, just not carefully enough. Even if the frames he is last seen are around 35secs post Z313 that still gives him 45-50secs to get up there and that's assuming that the 90secs is accuarate which yes I do not take that seriously, like the pigeons.., or Jackson, Brennan, Jarman and Co, Holland, Bowers etc, etc(actually from that group Baker and Bowers are probably the best but completely accurate? No chance).
« Last Edit: May 04, 2018, 04:54:22 AM by Barry Pollard »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #107 on: May 04, 2018, 04:50:26 AM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #108 on: May 04, 2018, 05:40:17 AM »
Brian, thanks for your last response, I've no clue about drawing figures and realistic ratios, tbh I bailed on that class hated it and I haven't paid much attention many observations on that part of this but I took in some and I'm with you in essence because I've said it doesn't look correct to me either(for me it's that bent leg from Darnell), okay I just looked it up, one good hit on the net with feedback says 47% is a good average, so are you saying that Oswalds was closer to 40%?  Also why can't he drop 2" off the leg and add it to the body?Because of Oswald's own known leg/body ratio?

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #109 on: May 04, 2018, 06:16:38 AM »
Because it would violate the body proportions as you say... The torso you see in the image with the overly long leg is correctly proportioned...I hope you understand that the very fact alone that we are talking about Stancak adjusting the mannequins to make them fit shows how he is winging it and making it up as he goes along and that is why he is using cartoon graphics in the first place because he can make them do what he wants...Stancak cheats...There are clearer versions of Darnell...I've seen them...The reason he uses this less clear one is because the clearer one shows that there's no bent leg there...In the clearest shots you can see the radiator in the spot where Stancak's bent leg would be proving beyond a doubt that his one step down theory is impossible...These are not honest or honorable researchers we are dealing with here...Stancak has already seen this which is why he offers to pose a mannequin with both feet on the landing...

Stancak shows a flat-footed mannequin standing next to a photo of Oswald...The leg length on that mannequin is approximately 43% of Prayer Man's body so Stancak varies from 47% to 43% and no one notices...That variation is fatal when attempting computer graphics that are supposed to show differences of less than an inch...It means he is adjusting to fit wherever he can force it to look like Oswald:

       
Barry: Do you understand that the image Stancak shows in the above link where he shows that Oswald's leg was 43% of his body length (as shown in the photo of Oswald) proves that there is no scientific possibility to adjust the leg on Stancak's mannequin in the foot on the step graphic? Do you understand that once Stancak proves that Oswald's leg was 43% of his body length (as he proved with his photo of Oswald) that there is no possibility of making any adjustments to his mannequin with a foot on the step because at that point he has exceeded the parameters that would make it possible for Oswald's foot to reach the step?

Prayer Man is not 5 foot 2 in the Darnell image...Prayer Man is slightly above Frazier's chin which would make him 5 foot 5... This is important because if a 5 foot 5 Prayer Man theoretically had a foot on the step then when he rose to the landing he would be about 6 foot high and equal with Frazier - which would also disqualify him from being Oswald...   
         
« Last Edit: May 04, 2018, 05:14:11 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #109 on: May 04, 2018, 06:16:38 AM »

 

Mobile View