Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 34 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 301045 times)

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 262
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #260 on: June 15, 2018, 07:20:57 PM »
I am not "united" with Duncan...If he holds Lone Nutter views I separate myself from them

Factoid Man DiEugenio knows nothing about the JFK assassination. He thinks the driver shot JFK.





Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #261 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: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #262 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?

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #263 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 Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #264 on: June 15, 2018, 09:13:52 PM »
This is over guys...In this video Buell Frazier clearly describes "Standing in the shadows up on the 'landing' " (Buell calls it a space) after Calvery ran up shouting...He says that he and Sarah were standing in the shadows talking about what Calvery had said...Prayer Man is in the shadows and Frazier is seen facing and talking to "him"...
...

He also describes going down to the first step before this crying woman came by, anyway let's not focus on that, he also said they were both standing in the shadows, so let's assume his memory is that good after all this time(which I actually cannot do), then the unidentified person to his left could be her and since they are much closer to each other...

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #265 on: June 15, 2018, 09:31:13 PM »

In his cheap defamation of me Jim ignores that my e-mail that was posted by Hargrove possessed a serious new witnessing of Oswald being seen by Stanton drinking a Coke by the lunch room...

LOL!

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #266 on: June 15, 2018, 09:32:31 PM »
I don't understand. What I asked you was, where and when did Stanton say she saw Oswald?

Actually, Mr Pollard, I do not know where she was nor when she reportedly made the comment. ???

If you need additional information about said subject, I refer you to your own post/reply from June 9, 2018, where you quoted Mr Doyle, and appeared to dispute the report of said comment.
::)

In any event, I see no need for additional space for said subject, therefor our discussion of this issue is now complete. >:(
« Last Edit: April 24, 2019, 07:44:19 PM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #267 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

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #268 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?

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 523
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #269 on: June 15, 2018, 09:56:24 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

Duly noted, Mr Nickerson. I think I understand some reasoning for "opposing statements", but it requires more study. In any event, I repeat, the comment was primarily due to my reading a comment referring to SarahStanton as a liar.

Having a statement, and an "opposing reported comment" indicates a possible error, not worthy of referring to a now deceased person as a liar.

 

Mobile View