+- 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: Sean Murphy's research deserves more (/thread-11857.html)
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 16-09-2015
Scarf Woman is basically in a mirror opposite position as Prayer Man. So if the white scarf shows up strongly in one photo it would do so in the other.
Even better, if you look closely at Duncan's shot of Scarf Woman her scarf covers much more of her face and neck on the right side. Something that would stand out like a sore thumb on Prayer Man.
Duncan is being a silly boy.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - David Josephs - 16-09-2015
While I have appreciated Duncan's photogrphic skill... I have to think that this time the image simply does not have enought data to determine these things without squinting, turning the head to one side and believing.
I did quite a lot of work during the discussions with Sean and others about "PM"...
As the following shows... the data is not there to show things like "buttons" let alone buttons that grow to 10 times their size.
Nothing to suggest a scarf, nothing to suggest "her" coat would ride up past her elbows.. and nothing from a normal view without enlargening it that suggests a long coat.
What I find as interesting is the location of Lovelady as the motorcade turns the corner... do we still feel he is well over to the east for Altgens and is standing in front of PM in Hughes... or is that PM?
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 16-09-2015
It appears that Thomas Graves (whom I consider annoying) has posted an image that shows the buttons and shows what appears to be wavy long hair on Prayer Man. (If that is an undoctored photo)
As poorly as Duncan's claim is made I consider this to be very serious evidence that Prayer Man is indeed a woman and therefore not Oswald.
It is my opinion that assassination researchers are showing very poor judgment in not realizing that Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't be right in the wide open and not be seen.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 17-09-2015
Graves (as much as I hate agreeing with a person I consider a troll) is correct and the black color of that blob behind Prayer Man's neck is only associated with hair tones in the photo. If you look at the photo, the black blob can only be hair because it is the only thing with that precise color tone. Since it is behind the neck that means it is wavy long hair. And since wavy long hair cannot possibly be associated with Oswald that excludes him as Prayer Man.
This is basic photo analysis.
Ignoring it only comes at the cost of the researchers who do so.
This is what I meant by there are a lot of people who really want to put Oswald on the front steps. You can see the evidence they ignore in order to make their arguments work. - Which, again, is not a sound research practice and comes at the expense of those who do it. It's disheartening to see some very good minds fall in to petty group think and wishful thinking.
I can't believe main researchers would actually allow Greg Parker to straight-facedly try to correct Carolyn Arnold and say her memory was wrong. Typical of deniers, Parker then quotes the FBI report time of 12:15 even though Mrs Arnold was on record as saying to Golz that she actually told FBI 12:25. And no assassination researcher says anything. At that point those researchers are aiding in the destruction of their own credibility. Parker is simply a crude hack trying to bend things his way.
.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Duncan MacRae - 17-09-2015
While it is possible that I am wrong about Scarf Lady being the mystery person, I am 100% confident that the mystery figure known as Prayer Man is in fact a woman, probably holding a purse in front of her in a classic female pose.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 17-09-2015
Women are likely to 'posture' their arms in front of them in a feminine position.
This would explain the 'prayer' position.
But the hair cinches it really. The black tone is clearly hair and it stretches in a wavy fashion behind the neck. Can't possibly be Oswald (which common sense would have told you anyway).
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Tom Scully - 18-09-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Women are likely to 'posture' their arms in front of them in a feminine position.
This would explain the 'prayer' position.
But the hair cinches it really. The black tone is clearly hair and it stretches in a wavy fashion behind the neck. Can't possibly be Oswald (which common sense would have told you anyway).
"Clearly" ?
Pardon me, I do not have young Ostmen's "sense" and I cannot make out either of you.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 18-09-2015
Prayer Man has arms uncrossed and in the prayer position. You can tell this because Wiegman clearly shows Prayer Man with uncrossed arms with hands held up in the prayer position. This makes it much more likely they are in the same position in the animated clip with Prayer Man facing Frazier.
The animated film makes it look like you can see dark pants, which means Prayer Man is wearing a shirt that isn't tucked in. Not sure.
Prayer Man appears to have wavy hair down to the neck. If so it is a woman.
Crossing your arms with your left elbow upward is uncomfortable and not a normal position.
.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Albert Doyle - 18-09-2015
If Oswald told Eddie Piper he was going up to eat in the 2nd floor lunch-room then he was probably sitting there eating like Carolyn Arnold indicated. If this was 12:15, as Parker suggests, then is it likely he ate his lunch dry, went down to the 1st floor, and then came back up for a Coke?
Parker, in his desperation to connect the dots in his favor, misses something very obvious and very important. If Carolyn Arnold did indeed mistake her 12:25 departure time from the Depository with her alleged 12:15 sighting of Oswald, why would she leave the Depository for good at 12:25? That's 5 minutes before the assassination and would, therefore, be leaving work without cause 5 minutes before the assumed cause Mr Parker is citing. This is not too bright detective work on Mr Parker's behalf, which is why he's uncredible. Incompetent, really. A goof who bombastically pretends sophistication while taking out a shotgun and blasting his own foot off. It's clear that Mr Parker is an ass who is used to getting away with murder on his ROKC troll site. However he wandered too far from his credulous sanctuary this time.
Meanwhile more credible/competent researchers will note that 12:25 conforms to leaving the 2nd floor office around 12:24. 12:25 also precisely conforms to Mrs Arnold seeing Oswald at 12:24 in the lunch-room on the way out, which would have her leaving the building around 12:25 and not returning. If Mr Parker had any speck of credibility and wasn't so desperate to string bullshit denial together he might have noticed the fatal gaffe he was making. He might have noticed that Mrs Arnold could not have left the 2nd floor office at 12:15 and then finally left the building for good at 12:25 - taking 10 minutes to cover a distance that took 1, 5 minutes before the motorcade even arrived.
To cinch this cascade of evidence falling in to place, this correct rendering of the chronology also makes Mrs Arnold's statement that she actually said 12:25 and FBI altered it to 12:15 literally correct. It means she isn't confusing anything and her protest was accurate. Mr Parker, however, ignores all this and calls FBI's criminal alteration "corroboration".
Finally, Mrs Arnold told Golz she did not see Oswald on the 1st floor. Parker, of course, ignores this and corrects her.
I thank Greg for his warm greeting from the Education Forum and wish him well at his ROKC assassination correction conference.
.
Sean Murphy's research deserves more - Bob Prudhomme - 18-09-2015
Dunce has recruited a disciple!!
