Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 529029 times)

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #96 on: June 14, 2018, 08:42:24 PM »
Advertisement
I seem to recall, as seen elsewhere, that someone aka AS, has a computerized TSBD Entrance/Landing area, with mannequins "inserted" in positions, apparently according to his analysis for "placement"(?).

And then, as evidence, he "refers to his own analysis" as proof of where entrance area occupants were standing?

The reason it's good is because we are too limited by the photographic evidence to understand clearly who stood where, in which position and/or step. I like it, it's an interesting project and seems useful.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #96 on: June 14, 2018, 08:42:24 PM »


Offline Michael Walton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 443
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #97 on: June 14, 2018, 10:52:56 PM »
As I said before, the EF is going downhill and fast.  And I said that *before* I got banned there, so my saying that is not hindsight. It's one vast echo chamber of crazy theories and "atta boys."

In actuality, it may just be reverting back to its original mission of being a place where paid authors can shill their books to mere mortals like me. Of course, there are some good authors there like Jim DiEugenio, who focuses mainly on Kennedy's foreign policy and civil rights histories, among other things.

But scam artists like Lifton are also there. I'm pretty sure Lifton is the scammer who got me banned there when I xxxx him off about his upcoming scam theory.

Vince the Secret Service "Expert" is another one that comes to mind. How much of an "expert" do you have to be about the Secret Service? What a xxxxing joke.

All of the folks who provided good honest rebuttals to the crazies over there have either been banned or have left.


Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #98 on: June 15, 2018, 01:43:26 AM »
The reason it's good is because we are too limited by the photographic evidence to understand clearly who stood where, in which position and/or step. I like it, it's an interesting project and seems useful.

Then how does he know where to place his mannequins? How does he identify the images represented by his mannequins?

The PrayerPersonImage has never appeared to me to resemble LeeHarveyOswald. And, additional evidence is needed to correctly identify said image.

Recently, additional evidence has been presented that strongly indicates PrayerPersonImage to be SarahStanton, but no evidence indicates PPI to be LHO.

Believe what you wish, but "looks like", along with claims of eyewitnesses being "liars" is not evidence.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 02:23:11 AM by Larry Trotter »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #98 on: June 15, 2018, 01:43:26 AM »


Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #99 on: June 15, 2018, 08:42:18 PM »
Then how does he know where to place his mannequins? How does he identify the images represented by his mannequins?

Take any model, then move figures around on it until they match all known evidence. In this case, you can then work out which step each subject was on, which is practically impossible for most laymen from the images alone.
How does he identify each individual? Take a guess.

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #100 on: June 15, 2018, 08:50:09 PM »
The comment about what SarahStanton reportedly said was actually a reference to her being labeled a liar.

I don't understand. What I asked you was, where and when did Stanton say she saw Oswald?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #100 on: June 15, 2018, 08:50:09 PM »


Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #101 on: June 15, 2018, 09:01:25 PM »
I have no desire, or intent, to promote, or embrace any false assertion(s) as evidence as to the identity of PrayerPersonImage.

Promotion of a VirtualEntrancePortal at the TexasSchoolBookDepository, along with VirtualOccupants of the VirtualStairs/Landing, is a promoter's perception, not reality. And, said perception appears to promote a viewpoint, without regard for for authentic persons, nor accurate placement.

Unfortunately, there also appears to be ImageInsertions "added" to a photo/film still, that is not seen in other versions. So, I suppose the question is,at least for me, are the ImageInsertions based on VirtualImages? Or, are the VirtualImages based on ImageInsertions?


Although some references made here, the VirtualImages and ImageInsertions appear to be promoted on another forum(s), for the most part.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #102 on: June 15, 2018, 09:38:14 PM »

"I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time or at any time during that day". -- Sarah Stanton, 3/18/64

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62312&relPageId=20

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #102 on: June 15, 2018, 09:38:14 PM »


Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #103 on: June 15, 2018, 09:44:33 PM »
I have no desire, or intent, to promote, or embrace any false assertion(s) as evidence as to the identity of PrayerPersonImage.

Promotion of a VirtualEntrancePortal at the TexasSchoolBookDepository, along with VirtualOccupants of the VirtualStairs/Landing, is a promoter's perception, not reality. And, said perception appears to promote a viewpoint, without regard for for authentic persons, nor accurate placement.

Unfortunately, there also appears to be ImageInsertions "added" to a photo/film still, that is not seen in other versions. So, I suppose the question is,at least for me, are the ImageInsertions based on VirtualImages? Or, are the VirtualImages based on ImageInsertions?.

Are you aware that you are promoting it just by referring to it?
It's his interpretaion of the evidence and even though it matches it in almost every way, I doubt anyone is confusing it with reality but your concern is noted.
If you are referring to the "small figure" on the east in Darnell, which I couldn't see in the moving footage then yes, that is one insertion based on his interpretation, now what other insertion have you noticed yourself?