Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 254752 times)

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #110 on: May 04, 2018, 02:31:15 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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).
Barry, well before I posted and/or expressed any conclusion regarding PrayerPerson, I developed said conclusion. And, by studying research as well as locating occupant information, then locating and viewing statements, affidavits, and sworn testimony, is how I was able to reach my conclusion. But, as stated, I make no claim to be the first to conclude PrayerPerson to be PrayerWoman. The film/still offers some, but very little identification information. However, I base my conclusion on PrayerPerson being in the corner of the quite small area, and with a slight to their right head turn and basically in line with the camera facial features. But again, my conclusion is 90% testimony based.

As for the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter, DPD Officer ML Baker is approaching the entrance and PrayerPerson is still there. So, since it is my conclusion that PrayerPerson is actually PrayerWoman, I see no reason to consider the possibility of the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter involving PrayerPerson. But, the polite conversation is appreciated.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #110 on: May 04, 2018, 02:31:15 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 5590
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #111 on: May 04, 2018, 10:08:10 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Brian, you are posting far too many links to the Education Forum. It needs to stop now.
You need to find a solution for your inability to stream your own images or referenced images to this website.
I'm sure you have the financial means to get this very simple low cost problem fixed.
Member's should not need to go elsewhere to view every image that you reference.


Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #112 on: May 06, 2018, 04:59:45 PM »
Stancak is right back to his pseudo-science again...He realizes his previous computer graphics were bogus because of the overly long leg he made on Prayer Man so he's trying to get around it...Stancak presents a very scientifically loose 7 1/2 inch block designed to represent the length of Oswald's head...He then crudely places 7 1/2 of these roughly-sized blocks over Oswald body and claims it represents an accurate measurement of Oswald's body size...Stancak then goes to Darnell and re-creates this crude measuring device over Prayer Man's body saying it is an equivalent...He then claims this proves Prayer Man's foot is on the step...

As I mentioned before, Stancak is using a type of brainwashing technique where he repeatedly places images of Oswald or references to Oswald's height in to the Darnell frame...This completely scientifically invalid method is a crude type of conditioning device that fools the brain into believing Prayer Man is 5 foot 9 and is therefore Oswald...What Stancak doesn't tell you in this latest offering is that he has no visible evidence that Prayer Man's feet go below the landing in Darnell since you can't see them...Stancak is trying to say that a simple body ratio of Prayer Man's head extrapolated to the rest of his body proves by body proportions that Prayer Man's foot reaches the step...

The flaw in what Stancak presents is that it assumes Prayer Man is Oswald and therefore all figures in the Prayer Man position must conform to the height ratio he has established using Oswald's head in comparison to the rest of his body as the standard...What is wrong with this is the head/body proportion ratio for Oswald does not apply to everyone...A person like Sarah Stanton could be shorter and stockier and still have a 7 1/2 inch head size...In other words, Stancak once again offers a totally uncredible scientific claim that is easily refuted and claims it finally solves the issue...Transposing Oswald's head to body length ratio on to others is not a valid scientific method...As I said before, the only head to body size ratio science that can be used for Prayer Man is Prayer Man's as seen in Darnell (Though as it turns out Sarah Stanton's could also be used since it is her)...

Stancak makes more serious scientific mistakes in his latest offering...His head size lines that he overlays on the portal are not placed according to accurate scientific perspective dimensions...Look at Stancak's blue dotted measuring lines...They are not accurately shown...There are two perspective planes in the Darnell shot...One is that which conforms to the axis of Darnell's camera lens...The other is that which conforms to the front wall of the Depository...Stancak has drawn his lines according to the camera lens perspective that is seen in the frame of the photo...Stancak's lines conform to this square frame...However any portrayal of linear measurements in the portal must also conform to the perspective of the front wall of the building...You can see this mistake by measuring the distance of Stancak's dotted line from the top of each decorative column on either side of the portal...If this line were drawn accurately, according to the correct perspective, the distance from the line to the top of the column would be equal on both columns...Stancak has entered more easily refuted Rube Goldberg hack science that blows up at a glance and no one points it out to him...To see what the proper perspective plane is for the portal look at the top frame of the window and how it conforms to this angled perspective...The lines Stancak draws should do the same thing...

Another mistake Stancak makes is he draws dotted lines that are supposed to represent the width of the top step...He doesn't notice he has drawn a line over the aluminum window frame at its base...

If you notice Stancak prefers blurry images for his quack presentations...There are much more clearer versions available but Stancak doesn't use them because they will show the flaws in what he is presenting more clearly...

When you point-out that Stancak has drawn a bent leg over what more clearer versions of Darnell show is a radiator no one passes that on to Stancak and it goes unanswered...Those clearer versions of Darnell also show a width on Prayer Man that is well wider than Oswald's narrow waist...

Stancak has not adjusted his previous computer graphic Prayer Man and his 3 inch too long leg because there is no way to adjust it and it proves Prayer Man can't be on the step...

Meanwhile back in the real world of valid science if Stancak had drawn accurate measurement lines they would show that Prayer Man's head comes up just above Frazier's chin...If Stancak applied his science to this measurement it would prove that Prayer Man is 5 foot 5 1/2 inches if his feet are both on the landing...If Prayer Man was 5 foot 5 1/2 and was on the step that would mean if he rose to the landing he would be 6 foot tall and also prove to not be Oswald...   
« Last Edit: May 06, 2018, 05:22:48 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #112 on: May 06, 2018, 04:59:45 PM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #113 on: May 07, 2018, 10:55:49 PM »
I really do not want to discuss "other forums", but I have noticed what appears to be "clever versions" of film stills/pictures of the TSBD Elm St entrance landing/doorway area as the motorcade passes that seem to contain "add-on" images for occupants. So, if researching the issue, maybe any "new views" should be compared to older versions for clarification, including comparison of "newer" images of PrayerPerson to older versions as well.

 I especially am unable to understand how any mannequin representing the PrayerPersonImage can be placed on a lower step, with one foot on the landing, as there appears to be no evidence to support such stance.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 10:58:07 PM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 244
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #114 on: May 08, 2018, 11:59:53 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Stancak has not adjusted his previous computer graphic Prayer Man and his 3 inch too long leg because there is no way to adjust it and it proves Prayer Man can't be on the step...

On their false assumption that the figure is male:

I see that they are trying to analyse the person's inseam.

The inseam is the area from the Crotch to the botton of the Ankle.

Any alleged inseam is invisible in all images, and is completely incalculable because of variations in the Human length of leg anatomy, irrespective of a person's height, and variations in Shoe/ Boot heel size worn and styles of Pants worn/ Trousers worn/ Overalls worn etc.

Any top of any alleged inseam worn could be tight to the crotch or many uncalculable inches away from the crotch, depending on the degree of bagginess or non bagginess of the material worn.

These logical potential variations leave any alleged inseam measurement totally incalculable. This is just common sense and not Rocket Science.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #114 on: May 08, 2018, 11:59:53 AM »

Online Matthew Finch

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #115 on: May 08, 2018, 03:45:50 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why are the moderation policies of some other site any of our concern?

I recall this being his Modus Operandi on the previous iteration of this forum. Enlightening us hourly (or more frequently) on discussions being had on other forums. I'm still unsure of what, if any, interest this is supposed to hold for any of us here.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #116 on: May 08, 2018, 04:34:24 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
On their false assumption that the figure is male:

I see that they are trying to analyse the person's inseam.

The inseam is the area from the Crotch to the bottom of the Ankle.

Any alleged inseam is invisible in all images, and is completely incalculable because of variations in the Human length of leg anatomy, irrespective of a person's height, and variations in Shoe/ Boot heel size worn and styles of Pants worn/ Trousers worn/ Overalls worn etc.

Any top of any alleged inseam worn could be tight to the crotch or many uncalculable inches away from the crotch, depending on the degree of bagginess or non bagginess of the material worn.

These logical potential variations leave any alleged inseam measurement totally incalculable. This is just common sense and not Rocket Science.
That's what I wrote in my previous post...The Prayer Man people have now eliminated anyone who questions their easily refuted claims...Stancak said he was going to do an adjustment of his 3 inch too long leg and come back and show it again...He never did because, as I said before, his background computer graphic is too precise and any adjustment he made to his Prayer Man mannequin would have to subtract from some other part of the mannequin and therefore make Prayer Man visibly too short to match what is seen in Darnell...That's why Stancak never adjusted his mannequin to compensate for his overly long leg...It was because he couldn't and he realized he had refuted himself...

Like you say above, what Stancak is doing is a kind of brainwashing technique where all references to Prayer Man are now shown as being Oswald...The mannequin is made to fit Oswald exactly and all height references are referred to as being 5 foot 9 or Oswald's height...Other researchers don't remind Andrej that he has no evidence that Prayer Man is Oswald and he gets away with ignoring the Davidson enhancement that clearly shows the face of a woman who is holding a purse (see page 1)...Even Davidson himself joins the technical discussion while forgetting to tell Stancak that his enhancement clearly shows the face of a woman who cannot be Oswald...

In any case, as I mentioned before, if you can see the crotch and foot you can assume that there must be leg in between so this length is what to go by since it can't be less than what you see, since there has to be a leg and foot to make it reach that far no matter how long the inseam...

The reason Stancak is using his 7 1/2 inch head size blocks in his latest offering is because he cannot go back to his graded measuring stick computer graphic...The reason he isn't going back to his Prayer Man mannequin images and adjusting the leg is because those images have precise measuring sticks included in the graphic...Like I said before, and Stancak completely ignored, if Stancak tries to reduce Prayer Man's leg in that graphic he is either going to make Prayer Man too short, according to those graded measuring sticks, or he is going to distort his body somewhere else... Stancak's measuring sticks keep him honest...And since Stancak's purposes aren't honest he's not going to expose himself to anything that forces him to deal objectively or with scientific accuracy...The others assist him with that because they want Prayer Man to be Oswald no matter what the objective science or evidence shows... 

If Stancak were more scientifically accurate he would note that Prayer Man comes up to just above Frazier's chin...Since Frazier is 6 foot 1/2 inch in height, if Frazier's head were 7 1/2 inches that would make Prayer Man 5 foot 5...If Stancak is claiming Prayer Man is standing on a step that is 7 inches down from the landing, a 5 foot 5 Prayer Man , if brought up to the landing, would then be 6 foot tall...Since Oswald was 5 foot 9 that would also exclude Prayer Man from being Oswald...Stancak knows this which is why he lies and says Prayer Man comes up to Frazier's shoulder and mis-draws his measuring lines...

Stancak is presenting seriously flawed evidence...There's a huge double standard out there because if I tried to pass that malarkey off as science I would be deservedly shredded in quick order...The bias of the playing field here is extreme to the point of discrediting the entire JFK research community...
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 05:05:27 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #116 on: May 08, 2018, 04:34:24 PM »

Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Full Member
  • ***

  • This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!
  • Posts: 177
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #117 on: May 09, 2018, 03:04:45 PM »
It was a dude taking pictures with a camera, in my humble opinion.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #117 on: May 09, 2018, 03:04:45 PM »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
Prayer Woman
« Reply #118 on: May 09, 2018, 05:08:49 PM »
Not possible because of the Davidson enhancement...I tried to get Davidson back in to the issue but he said that squabbling over the identity of the person was not something he wanted to do...Not a very professional approach to research or responsibility towards what he discovered in my opinion...In my opinion Davidson doesn't want to get involved in the politics that follow...No serious photo analyzer could look at the Davidson enhancement and come away thinking it was anything else but a woman...You can see the Davidson enhancement at the end of the first post in this thread on page 1...In response to my request Davidson said that he would make one comment on the matter...That he thought the face he uncovered was that of a woman...

When Duncan first enlarged the Davidson enhancement I posted it to the Deep Politics board and every single ROKC member who saw it agreed it looked like a woman...Realizing they were in trouble they then lied and said it was a photo quirk that just so happened to look that way by accident...What liars...They just don't want to admit their theory is bogus and aren't afraid to mis-lead the world and JFK research community with a debunked theory...

The only reason people said it was a camera was because of the glowing object...Even Stancak admits that object is Prayer Man's right hand glowing in sun...I am the discoverer of that and Stancak never once credited me for it...Duncan's further enhanced images in that first post show what is clearly an open purse or pocketbook that Sarah Stanton is looking down in to...That's why her hands and arms are in the "praying" position...I have very little respect for JFK commenters who skip all the germane evidence that shows Frazier was talking to Sarah at the instant of the Darnell frame in order to make one liner snipes against the obvious...

I didn't take Sandy Larsen seriously when he and Graves said Gloria Calvery was the lady on the steps in Darnell...Since Larsen thought Prayer Man was Oswald I didn't really take his posts seriously...After I spoke to Calvery's son by phone I learned that indeed that was his mother on the steps in Darnell...Once you understand that you then realize Calvery had already finished her run to the steps shouting the president had been shot and therefore Frazier was well in to his reacting to that shouting and turning to Sarah to see what Calvery had said...

The JFK research community has decided to trade its credibility for the Prayer Man issue...We have a photo of Sarah Stanton's face from the Wiegman frame...We have rock solid circumstantial evidence in Calvery, as well as Frazier's admission that he was speaking to Sarah..And we have a clearly wide waist and pudgy cheeks seen on Prayer Man that conforms to "heavy-set" Sarah and varies from the thin Oswald...This evidence is deliberately ignored by the Prayer Man cult in order to have Andrej Stancak once-remove the evidence to computer graphics where he can divorce the original images enough from their reality source to massage them over to images of Oswald...We are forced to watch Stancak ignore already established proof so he can psychologically impose repeated images of Oswald or Oswald's height in to the portal scene in order to reinforce the idea that Prayer Man is Oswald...Never mind that for the the last few years of trying every time Stancak comes up with a newer better model it still flops and refutes his case...This repeated failure is given preferential treatment and those who post the correct evidence are ushered off the board with false moderation claims and their evidence is ignored...

It's time to break up the presumptuous clique... It has done enough damage already to credible research and those skilled members who present it...And even worse it has thrust to the forefront people who should obviously never be allowed near the inner sanctum of credible JFK assassination research...These people know Prayer Man is Stanton...They are just maintaining the cult and its forced impunity for preferred members who don't have to respond to intelligent evidence...
« Last Edit: May 09, 2018, 05:16:05 PM by Brian Doyle »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • PrayerWoman it is to see..PrayerMan is not to be..
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #119 on: May 09, 2018, 08:10:15 PM »
Hey Brian, although I do not dispute the "facial enhancement of PrayerWoman" attributed to ChrisDavidson, I am still not able to "embrace" said enhancement. That said, based on my "interpretation of what I do see", added to other image viewing, along with multiple eyewitness statements/testimony, I have concluded that the image most likely represents SarahDeanStanton, but could represent PaulineRebmanSanders.

I have seen no evidence to indicate any male to be in the place of the PrayerPersonImage. And, with an exception for "opinion", I have not seen or read anything to indicate any "dude taking pictures with a camera". To me, the "object in hand" is most likely a cup containing a beverage being consumed during lunchtime. Additionally, the eyewitness testimony indicates that LeeHarveyOswald was not on the landing during filming from the motorcade.

And, that is where I am today, as I was yesterday, and most likely to be tomorrow. Again, I make no claim to be the first to reach said conclusions, but I am confident that I will not be the last.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #119 on: May 09, 2018, 08:10:15 PM »

 

Mobile View