+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened (/thread-14350.html)
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Jim DiEugenio - 19-01-2017
To say the leaf, the Davidson image is problematic in more ways that one.
But Doyle hops from one stone to another.
According to Kathy Becket, you were not banned from EF at at the time you said you were. But you say now you are.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 19-01-2017
No it isn't. It clearly shows a woman's face that Davidson's metadata proves was part of the original Wiegman image. That's why the challengers could not show anything wrong with it because it proved that all Davidson did was place the Wiegman Film into photoshop with some contrast and brightness adjustments that brought the face into visibility. As his metadata proved all it did was bring out an image that was already there. This is the science and the challengers haven't answered it.
Gordon put me on moderation shortly after I out-argued Stancak and he couldn't respond to my last post to him. That post is still on the board and Stancak hasn't managed an answer to it for over a month now. I have further photo evidence that reinforces my other evidence but Gordon won't let me post it even though he said he was moderating for "educational content". He's obviously moderating for the Murphy-ites in order to protect a false sense of legitimacy for the theory and protect them from someone Gordon is aware can end the issue. It's quite dishonest.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 22-01-2017
Sandy Larsen doesn't realize the alleged veer away from the front steps by Baker in I believe it is Wiegman might be caused by lens distortion on the outer part of Wiegman's lens. If you look at the head of the man in front of Baker it shrinks down to 1/4 width showing this effect. The same effect that is shrinking that man's head may be causing Baker to appear as if he is veering from the steps when in reality he isn't. Both Gloria Calvery and Pauline Sanders said Baker ran right up the steps.
It is pretty clear to me that Jim isn't familiar with the Davidson evidence and just takes the word of a certain group.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Jim DiEugenio - 23-01-2017
Albert, c'mon, then everything would be distorted.
Bart already dealt with this.
You keep on bringing things up here on this forum that have been contested to death elsewhere. Then you drop all the counter arguments.
Bart is redoing his whole essay with new information and it will be done he says in about three weeks.
I look forward to it. My only problem with Bart's work on this topic is that I wish he someone to help him format stylistically. Then his arguments would be even more pungent.
But IMO, and in the view of many others, he had done some really good work on this issue.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 23-01-2017
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Albert, c'mon, then everything would be distorted.
Bart already dealt with this.
You keep on bringing things up here on this forum that have been contested to death elsewhere. Then you drop all the counter arguments.
Bart is redoing his whole essay with new information and it will be done he says in about three weeks.
I look forward to it. My only problem with Bart's work on this topic is that I wish he someone to help him format stylistically. Then his arguments would be even more pungent.
But IMO, and in the view of many others, he had done some really good work on this issue.
Jim, Bart Kamp is not a serious source. You show seriously bad judgment referencing him. He doesn't post here because he knows he won't survive a fair playing field where Gordon doesn't protect him.
If you go to the Wiegman Film that Sandy Larsen is saying "conclusively" shows Baker veering at the last moment you'll see proof of that lens distortion if you look at the man directly in front of Baker. His head narrows down to about 1/4 width as he moves to the outside of the lens. Larsen is so desperate to confirm the anti-lunchroom encounter theory that he is not considering easily-explained reasons for what he is seeing.
I refuse to believe that Pauline Sanders and Gloria Calvery were approached by spooky men in cloaks and forced to say they saw Baker run right up the steps and into the building. Plus there are no (zero) witnesses for Baker not going right into the building, even though his story is a main part of the official account. ROKC solves this lack of witnessing with the men in black again. It's my honest opinion that both the Baker front step and no lunch-room encounter theories are both complete crap that the JFK research community has been dragged in to by ROKC and is a total waste of time.
Meanwhile, while Gordon has restricted me from posting for reasons he refuses to explain Andrej Stancak is not being asked why he didn't make a cartoon image for ****** *** in his "Overlay" graphic? Jim, Andrej DID make a cartoon image for ****** *** in that graphic. When he did he saw right away it proved what I was saying so he omitted it. Nobody is calling Stancak on that and I am being prevented from doing so for reasons Gordon refuses to explain. That's not very honest...
Davidson is highly praised and has a well-accepted good reputation for input on the Education Forum - except​ when it comes to his Wiegman enhancement that he proved the legitimacy of with his metadata that everybody is ignoring...
.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Tom Scully - 24-01-2017
Albert Doyle Wrote:..........
Jim, Bart Kamp is not a serious source. You show seriously bad judgment referencing him. He doesn't post here because he knows he won't survive a fair playing field where Gordon doesn't protect him.
If you go to the Wiegman Film that Sandy Larsen is saying "conclusively" shows Baker veering at the last moment you'll see proof of that lens distortion if you look at the man directly in front of Baker. His head narrows down to about 1/4 width as he moves to the outside of the lens. Larsen is so desperate to confirm the anti-lunchroom encounter theory that he is not considering easily-explained reasons for what he is seeing.
I refuse to believe that Pauline Sanders and Gloria Calvery were approached by spooky men in cloaks and forced to say they saw Baker run right up the steps and into the building. Plus there are no (zero) witnesses for Baker not going right into the building, even though his story is a main part of the official account. ROKC solves this lack of witnessing with the men in black again. It's my honest opinion that both the Baker front step and no lunch-room encounter theories are both complete crap that the JFK research community has been dragged in to by ROKC and is a total waste of time.
Meanwhile, while Gordon has restricted me from posting for reasons he refuses to explain Andrej Stancak is not being asked why he didn't make a cartoon image for ****** *** in his "Overlay" graphic? Jim, Andrej DID make a cartoon image for ****** *** in that graphic. When he did he saw right away it proved what I was saying so he omitted it. Nobody is calling Stancak on that and I am being prevented from doing so for reasons Gordon refuses to explain. That's not very honest...
Davidson is highly praised and has a well-accepted good reputation for input on the Education Forum - except​ when it comes to his Wiegman enhancement that he proved the legitimacy of with his metadata that everybody is ignoring...
.
Expensive pictures, Jim. When I raised the problem of the sock puppet impersonating his deceased father on this forum while simultaneously posting under his own name on the Ed Forum, I remind you that you responded with....
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Excuse me, but may I kindly remind us all that this was supposed to be about Mr. Doyle's observations and, I hope, his pictures of Dealey Plaza.
It would be nice if he would post some of those photos since I think it is an endlessly interesting venue to point out certain things. ....
Now you are being lectured about shortcomings of your own discernment and even more absurdly, on "honesty" by the very same self styled indignant arbiter of "truth," the pontificating sock puppet, "Albert".
All it takes for this absurd abuse to continue is for you and other good people to act as if it is not happening.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 24-01-2017
I raised an issue about there being possible lens distortion in Wiegman that could have possibly caused the illusion of Baker veering off before the steps. That is the topic here and I wish Tom would stop disrupting the threads.
It is kind of obvious to me that Tom realizes I made good points in my last post.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - LR Trotter - 24-01-2017
But wait, there is testimony/statements from eyewitnesses, as well as DPD Officer Marrion Baker himself, that after dismounting his motorcycle, he ran across the driveway/Elm St extension to the TSBD and entered the building, and said statements/testimony has been around over 53 years. But, due to the camera being mobile and moving away from the TSBD entrance, Officer Baker is not seen actually entering the building on the film. But wait, he is also not seen on film stopping and standing around outside, nor is he seen on film going elsewhere and/or to another building. So, I tend to wonder, as I wander, if any conclusive evidence exists that Officer Baker actually did not enter the building about 90 to 120 seconds after the JFK assassination and JBC wounding shots were fired. There is conclusive evidence that he did enter the TSBD building, through the Elm St entrance, at about 90 to 120 seconds after the DealeyPlaza shooting that occurred at about 12:30pm CST, 11/22/'63.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 24-01-2017
If you trace this great controversy over Baker it originates from Prudhomme trying to reinforce Murphy. Like you say Larry, if Baker varied from the official story by going up to the corner there would have been some witness for it. ROKC and Kamp solve this by attributing it to spooks who discouraged witnessing. Calvery said Baker went right up the steps in front of her. The community has been hijacked by the pro-Murphy evidence cookers...
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 25-01-2017
FYI: Jim is over on the Education Forum praising Bart Kamp's soon to be released lunchroom encounter work.
Jim ignores that a voice stress analysis could be done on Baker and Truly in the video of their recounting the event.