16-02-2018, 05:37 PM (This post was last modified: 16-02-2018, 06:48 PM by Alan Ford.)
Good afternoon! First, Soooo sorry to hear about the unfortunate tragic event/incident in the Florida high school. May all of the victims' families and friends find peace and comfort in the days ahead.
Today, just wanted to share a brief recap for clarification sake, placing the spectators where they were as oppose to where some people may wish for them to be ----->
Lest there be any doubt, here straight from someone in the know (she was actually there) ---->
To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stantonstanding next to me, but I am unsure as to the others." ---- TSBD Employee Pauline Sanders.
Where was that again, Mrs. Sanders -----> at the east end of the entrance
Who stood next to you over on the east end, Ma'am -----> I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me
One more time for clarification sake -----> at the east end of the entrance
Interestingly enough, It was ace card researcher Sean Murphy himself who said there would be nothing left for those in desperation mode to do, but try to convince others that the mystery man was a woman. How perceptive of Mr. Murphy. How would he have known that?
*Source for Mrs. Pauline Sanders' statement, an exemplary research website... 22November1963.org.uk
Culling more information from the exemplary website above, let's now focus upon the only six women standing on the stairs that afternoon, and then set our chief focus upon a statement Billy Nolan Lovelady shares about one of them ----->
*Avery Davis
*Ruth Dean
*Judith McCully
*Madie Reese
Pauline Sanders
Sarah Stanton
The four (4) asterisk women are so marked to remove them from consideration to be considered for the statement by Billy Nolan Lovelady that will follow. The remaining two women do not work upon either the 3rd or 4th floor of the building. They work on the second floor.
Excuse me for a few...Fido has to answer nature's call...this dog never bothers me until I'm right in the middle of something. be right back.
In that famous James Altgen (RIP) photograph of the front entrance, he captures the essence of activity in that area. With that in mind, let's take in Billy Lovelady's remark ----->
That lady shielding her eyes works here on the second floor...
Note the only woman sheilding her eyes. The upper image is a male. Even IF some in desperation mode want/need to make him a female too, the next photo will rule this individual out as the mystery man figure anyway. She is in light clothing. She also works on the second floor. She is short. She is heavy-set. She is MUCH closer to 41 (Sarah Stanton's age) than 55 (Pauline Sanders' age) in appearance too. This heavy-set woman shielding her eyes is also a great distance from the mystery man standing way behind her at a sharp angle. Even Lovelady is much closer to the mystery man than her ----->
Photo that includes Lovelady, the only lady shielding her eyes and the mystery man, standing in the shadows to your viewing center, about 8-10 feet away from Lovelady (who stands there middle right of the image near the female shielding her eyes) ----->
Credit Mr. Weigman (Dave)
In each of the respective angles, the only woman shielding her eyes is dressed in opposite coloured clothing than mystery man. She is nowhere near mystery man's position either. Simply put, Sarah Stanton and the mystery man are polar opposites.
To his credit, Ace card researcher Sean Murphy understood all of this immediately. He even knew--some researchers--amid desperation mode--would throw any and all the women they could at the mystery man's location. What a brilliant, keenly perceptive human being.
Alan Ford Wrote:Good afternoon! First, Soooo sorry to hear about the unfortunate tragic event/incident in the Florida high school. May all of the victims' families and friends find peace and comfort in the days ahead.
Today, just wanted to share a brief recap for clarification sake, placing the spectators where they were as oppose to where some people may wish for them to be ----->
Lest there be any doubt, here straight from someone in the know (she was actually there) ---->
To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stantonstanding next to me, but I am unsure as to the others." ---- TSBD Employee Pauline Sanders.
Where was that again, Mrs. Sanders -----> at the east end of the entrance
Who stood next to you over on the east end, Ma'am -----> I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me
One more time for clarification sake -----> at the east end of the entrance
Interestingly enough, It was ace card researcher Sean Murphy himself who said there would be nothing left for those in desperation mode to do, but try to convince others that the mystery man was a woman. How perceptive of Mr. Murphy. How would he have known that?
*Source for Mrs. Pauline Sanders' statement, an exemplary research website... 22November1963.org.uk
Culling more information from the exemplary website above, let's now focus upon the only six women standing on the stairs that afternoon, and then set our chief focus upon a statement Billy Nolan Lovelady shares about one of them ----->
*Avery Davis
*Ruth Dean
*Judith McCully
*Madie Reese
Pauline Sanders
Sarah Stanton
The four (4) asterisk women are so marked to remove them from consideration to be considered for the statement by Billy Nolan Lovelady that will follow. The remaining two women do not work upon either the 3rd or 4th floor of the building. They work on the second floor.
Excuse me for a few...Fido has to answer nature's call...this dog never bothers me until I'm right in the middle of something. be right back.
In that famous James Altgen (RIP) photograph of the front entrance, he captures the essence of activity in that area. With that in mind, let's take in Billy Lovelady's remark ----->
That lady shielding her eyes works here on the second floor...
Note the only woman sheilding her eyes. The upper image is a male. Even IF some in desperation mode want/need to make him a female too, the next photo will rule this individual out as the mystery man figure anyway. She is in light clothing. She also works on the second floor. She is short. She is heavy-set. She is MUCH closer to 41 (Sarah Stanton's age) than 55 (Pauline Sanders' age) in appearance too. This heavy-set woman shielding her eyes is also a great distance from the mystery man standing way behind her at a sharp angle. Even Lovelady is much closer to the mystery man than her ----->
Photo that includes Lovelady, the only lady shielding her eyes and the mystery man, standing in the shadows to your viewing center, about 8-10 feet away from Lovelady (who stands there middle right of the image near the female shielding her eyes) ----->
Credit Mr. Weigman (Dave)
In each of the respective angles, the only woman shielding her eyes is dressed in opposite coloured clothing than mystery man. She is nowhere near mystery man's position either. Simply put, Sarah Stanton and the mystery man are polar opposites.
To his credit, Ace card researcher Sean Murphy understood all of this immediately. He even knew--some researchers--amid desperation mode--would throw any and all the women they could at the mystery man's location. What a brilliant, keenly perceptive human being.
*AF 99File @ 75%
Great post Alan. I wonder what Langley will have to say.
My response to a lengthy pm, trying to sway me that Buell Wesley Frazier's placement of Sarah Stanton (a few minutes after the gunsmoke clears) is more important than where she stood before.
My response ---->
Good afternoon. The timing element @ Mr. Frazier comes after the gunsmoke clears.
Mrs. Sanders' --on the contrary to your belief--is a MUCH better assessment of where Mrs. Stanton stood in relation to the mystery man figure, who--once again for good measure--is standing in the opposite corner of the entrance.
Polar opposite in fact of Sarah Stanton ---->
To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stantonstanding next to me, but I am unsure as to the others." ---- TSBD Employee Pauline Sanders.
Where was that again, Mrs. Sanders -----> at the east end of the entrance
Who stood next to you over on the east end, Ma'am -----> I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me
Where was that again for clarification sake -----> at the east end of the entrance
Last time, Mrs. Sanders, say again ----> at the east end of the entrance
That established. The mystery man figure stands at the west endof the entrance ---->
Alan Ford Wrote:Good afternoon! First, Soooo sorry to hear about the unfortunate tragic event/incident in the Florida high school. May all of the victims' families and friends find peace and comfort in the days ahead.
Today, just wanted to share a brief recap for clarification sake, placing the spectators where they were as oppose to where some people may wish for them to be ----->
Lest there be any doubt, here straight from someone in the know (she was actually there) ---->
To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stantonstanding next to me, but I am unsure as to the others." ---- TSBD Employee Pauline Sanders.
Where was that again, Mrs. Sanders -----> at the east end of the entrance
Who stood next to you over on the east end, Ma'am -----> I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me
One more time for clarification sake -----> at the east end of the entrance
Interestingly enough, It was ace card researcher Sean Murphy himself who said there would be nothing left for those in desperation mode to do, but try to convince others that the mystery man was a woman. How perceptive of Mr. Murphy. How would he have known that?
*Source for Mrs. Pauline Sanders' statement, an exemplary research website... 22November1963.org.uk
Culling more information from the exemplary website above, let's now focus upon the only six women standing on the stairs that afternoon, and then set our chief focus upon a statement Billy Nolan Lovelady shares about one of them ----->
*Avery Davis
*Ruth Dean
*Judith McCully
*Madie Reese
Pauline Sanders
Sarah Stanton
The four (4) asterisk women are so marked to remove them from consideration to be considered for the statement by Billy Nolan Lovelady that will follow. The remaining two women do not work upon either the 3rd or 4th floor of the building. They work on the second floor.
Excuse me for a few...Fido has to answer nature's call...this dog never bothers me until I'm right in the middle of something. be right back.
In that famous James Altgen (RIP) photograph of the front entrance, he captures the essence of activity in that area. With that in mind, let's take in Billy Lovelady's remark ----->
That lady shielding her eyes works here on the second floor...
Note the only woman sheilding her eyes. The upper image is a male. Even IF some in desperation mode want/need to make him a female too, the next photo will rule this individual out as the mystery man figure anyway. She is in light clothing. She also works on the second floor. She is short. She is heavy-set. She is MUCH closer to 41 (Sarah Stanton's age) than 55 (Pauline Sanders' age) in appearance too. This heavy-set woman shielding her eyes is also a great distance from the mystery man standing way behind her at a sharp angle. Even Lovelady is much closer to the mystery man than her ----->
Photo that includes Lovelady, the only lady shielding her eyes and the mystery man, standing in the shadows to your viewing center, about 8-10 feet away from Lovelady (who stands there middle right of the image near the female shielding her eyes) ----->
Credit Mr. Weigman (Dave)
In each of the respective angles, the only woman shielding her eyes is dressed in opposite coloured clothing than mystery man. She is nowhere near mystery man's position either. Simply put, Sarah Stanton and the mystery man are polar opposites.
To his credit, Ace card researcher Sean Murphy understood all of this immediately. He even knew--some researchers--amid desperation mode--would throw any and all the women they could at the mystery man's location. What a brilliant, keenly perceptive human being.
*AF 99File @ 75%
Great post Alan. I wonder what Langley will have to say.
Thank YOU, Mr. Mitcham
IF they had even an ounce of your classy demeanor, Mr. M., the Agency would simply come clean and fall back on their get out of jail card...we had to do it for national security reasons blah, blah, blah...
Good to see you. Best to you & yours for a safe, healthy & healthy new years. Cheers!
17-02-2018, 12:21 AM (This post was last modified: 17-02-2018, 07:45 AM by David Josephs.)
One of the arguments for PM=Oswald is that it looks so much like him, not only that there are some tell-tale ways Oswald stood...
What is being argued is that within an area .26 x .26 mm which encompasses what is being put forth as a 5'2" woman... we see LARGE buttons that at most 2" across... each button is then 2"/62." = 3.2% of the size of the woman in that portion of the frame....
Not only are they not evenly spaced as buttons would be, I'd ask Richard et al to offer us a coat from the 60's with 4" diameter buttons as a normal person's head is about 9" tall.
[FONT=&](NOTE: Normal film does not have this high a resolution which is usually about 75pixels/mm becomes 150pixels/mm and this assumes that the frame can be scanned at that resolution)
[/FONT] [FONT=&]150 pixels x 150 pixels is 22,500 pixels per square millimeter.
1 frame of 8mm is 4.5 x 3.3 mm or 14.85 sq mm
[/FONT] [FONT=&]22,500 x 14.85 = 334,490 pixels within the ENTIRE FRAME
PM is but 3% of that frame....
[/FONT] [FONT=&]334,490 * .03 = 10,023 pixels = a 62.5" person with realistic 2" buttons.
A single button then is 3.2% of the this entire area (It's actually much less since there is more info in that section than just the person)
[/FONT] [FONT=&]So a single button is 3.2% * 10,023 = 320 sq pixels... or almost 18 pixels in diameter.
Even if they were 4" buttons taking up 6.4%; 640 sq pixels = 25.3 pixels in diameter
Here is an enlargement of one of the "buttons" with single pixels as the scale....
The artifacts pointed to are over 2x as big as buttons SHOULD be... (see comparison to head size)
These "buttons" are 40 pixels a side or 1600 pixels square....
These artifacts of the image - if buttons - are well over 4" in diameter, each. If that person is 62" tall....[/FONT]
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
"Youth is easily deceived because it is quick to hope." - Aristotle
David,
You are taking this PrayerMan argument all around the mulberry bush in an effort to avoid attempting a height analysis.
The height argument is the primary argument opposing the Oswald-is-PrayerMan conclusion. It is readily seen in Darnell, before any photogrammetry, that PrayerMan is a full head shorter than Wesley Frazier. What my own photogrammetry does is provide a number that gives us a better idea of how much shorter.
There are no focal length or image plane issues. They are roughly the same distance from Darnell's camera, which was a standard news camera, i.e. there are no fish-lens/funhouse-mirror distortions.
I excelled at mechanical drawing in high school- helped piece together a scale model for the architects' new construction- and also tapped into my art-class experiences with perspective drawings. I have shown all my work on my PM photogrammetry and my numerical value of 5' 2 1/2" should be very close to what careful computer-graphics expertise would give you.
But you shy away from attempting your own photogrammetry, unable to escape the thought police of the Murphyite mob. And it will be doubly-embarrassing for you, the photogrammetry know-it-all, when I soon display a Darnell digital film scan for the delight of the multitudes.
After my Death of the Lunchroom Hoax essay makes the height argument, I explain- in the paragraph at the bottom of p. 7- that there are ancillary photo-arguments supporting the contention (as suggested by the height) that PrayerMan is actually a woman. These are the button situation and the Davidson enhancement.
Look at my lovely Wiegman portrait- in sepia!!- of the creature in Davidson's enhancement. I am confident that a digital film scan will give us an even more splendid rendition of this creature's face. My guess- a very educated one!!- is that it is as lovely as the face of Karen HIcks. David, can you not entreat Mr. Chris Davidson- reach through his thick skull with some impressive photo-lingo- to get him to share with us the photo-specs of how he arrived at this creature, and how we might better size her up?
I won't be sharing my treasured photo of Karen Hicks, not without instructions on how to post pictures at this Deep Politics website. She shall remain in a secret locket in my heart. You will never get to imagine the dappled freshness of her enchanted bewilderment when a hardened nylon flechette whizzed past the whorl of her left ear, heading straight for the center of President Kennedy's throat.
*****************************
You make a systemic error with your pixel argument. The buttons (or fasteners, or what-have-you) are features inherent to Darnell's analog film, drawn out by a reasonable amount of contrast enhancement. Your digital pixel calculations are not applicable to the analog button size, and do not even begin to address their vertical symmetry.
Even a single digital pixel is but an approximation, a la Fourier transforms, of how an analog wave would appear in box-like & cropped discrete digital terms. And the smaller the area measured, the correspondingly bigger margin of error.
But let's imagine, for argument's sake, that your pixellation contentions are correct. This Button Lady appearance is only of secondary importance in the PrayerMan-is-a-woman argument. It matters nothing to the PrayerMan-is-a-woman argument if my buttons argument is incorrect. You seem to be too lost in your own hubris to even try & do a single photogrammetry measurement of PrayerMan's height.
This is unfortunate, because I have a private project in mind for you I think you would enjoy very much. That is employing your photography skills to enhance the James Powell section at the end of my Inside Job essay, overlaying Linda Zambanini's high-school picture, etc. She is one of the few saving graces from ROKC.
I haven't spent 20 minutes there since I resigned 4 years ago. But someone has been telling lies about my "junk science" photogrammetry, and I have a pretty good idea who that is.
150 pixel per mm IS the digital equivalent of the analog image crystals' resolution.
The frame was still only 3.5 by 4.4 mm.... you tell me how many pixels a 4" button would take up, if there were such things, me how many PM takes up.... if my math or assumptions of resolution are incorrect, I'd need to fix it....
We don't assume infinite resolution for analog... after that it's just math...
2 buttons are the size of the head of this person... within .25 of a button....
Even a 5' woman has an 8" head.... 4" buttons Richard?
The scale shows a 5' depth, not 4'....
The distance between them.... justify 1.5' as it appears one is by the wall while the other at the handrail by the center of an opening larger than 10'.
Justify the easy easy stuff first please... if your 1.5' is wrong, how does that affect the photographic plane... and the distances which allow non computerized photogrammetry in the first place.
Please know that I am not discounting your qualifications... just these conclusions and the manner in which you arrived at them... I'm glad you have unseen treasures squirreled away for your own use and knowledge, cause that's what we're all about here...
I'll look at Powell. As for Hicks...
the button looks like a photo at the top of this frame... it will pop up and offer you a Computer and URL button... Use the computer button, navigate to your photo and hit upload photo... when done, double click the small thumbnail and click large...
D/
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
RG: And it will be doubly-embarrassing for you, the photogrammetry know-it-all, when I soon display a Darnell digital film scan for the delight of the multitudes.
DiEugenio: "And from what generation is this scan?"
From the best generation I am granted access to- at least the 2nd, probably the 1st, and possibly even the original.
Josephs: ...the button looks like a photo at the top of this frame... it will pop up and offer you a Computer and URL button... use the computer button, navigate to your photo and hit upload photo... when done, double click the small thumbnail and click large."
Thank you. Please explain, for dummies like me, more about this button that looks like a photo at the top of this frame. Frame? Thread page? Button? i.e. what "button" and where?
I'm still satisfied with the text of that James Powell section. The Towner photo and the 12:39 Jim Murray photo could be vastly improved. Also, Linda Zamanini's high-school photo confirms that my April 2010 hunch was correct- it would be nice to show a photo-comparison with the Altgens 5 spectator.
With military intelligence complicity verified, that pretty much seals the doom on the Joint Chiefs giving their blessing to the execution of the President. Think Maxwell Taylor- and betrayal- he was described in A Bright Shining Lie as arriving in Saigon as a Roman proconsul, when in 1964 he became South Vietnam's new ambassador.
What broke the camel's back for the Joint Chiefs was learning, via Central Intelligence, that Kennedy had been feeding Krushchev his daily intelligence briefs via Missile-Crisis back-channel Georgi Bolshakov. Jones Harris, a maverick among 1st-generation researchers, told me this in 2011 and his source was "a high-placed Washington insider." Kennedy, of course, had narrowly averted thermonuclear horror and was looking to minimize those perilous misjudgments that could unleash those furies, which were not entirely in his hands.
****************************
Our analog/digital pixels dispute does not address the fact that PrayerMan is a full head shorter than Frazier in the Darnell crop. Nonetheless, you should send me a personal message if you are interested in improving James Powell into a co-credited separate article.
One thing the Germans, with their brilliant Prussian technocracy, vastly underestimated was the dauntlessness of their Russian adversary. That national character trait stems, not just from their brown bear, but from their other national animal- the Siberian tiger, the apex predator of Asia for thousands of years. Winter-hardened Cossacks, and babushkas- tigers disguised as stupid commonfolk- helped protect Holy Russia from the Conqueror, in one of the epic battles civilization has known.
David Josephs Wrote:One of the arguments for PM=Oswald is that it looks so much like him, not only that there are some tell-tale ways Oswald stood...
What is being argued is that within an area .26 x .26 mm which encompasses what is being put forth as a 5'2" woman... we see LARGE buttons that at most 2" across... each button is then 2"/62." = 3.2% of the size of the woman in that portion of the frame....
Not only are they not evenly spaced as buttons would be, I'd ask Richard et al to offer us a coat from the 60's with 4" diameter buttons as a normal person's head is about 9" tall.
[FONT=&](NOTE: Normal film does not have this high a resolution which is usually about 75pixels/mm becomes 150pixels/mm and this assumes that the frame can be scanned at that resolution)
[/FONT] [FONT=&]150 pixels x 150 pixels is 22,500 pixels per square millimeter.
1 frame of 8mm is 4.5 x 3.3 mm or 14.85 sq mm
[/FONT] [FONT=&]22,500 x 14.85 = 334,490 pixels within the ENTIRE FRAME
PM is but 3% of that frame....
[/FONT] [FONT=&]334,490 * .03 = 10,023 pixels = a 62.5" person with realistic 2" buttons.
A single button then is 3.2% of the this entire area (It's actually much less since there is more info in that section than just the person)
[/FONT] [FONT=&]So a single button is 3.2% * 10,023 = 320 sq pixels... or almost 18 pixels in diameter.
Even if they were 4" buttons taking up 6.4%; 640 sq pixels = 25.3 pixels in diameter
Here is an enlargement of one of the "buttons" with single pixels as the scale....
The artifacts pointed to are over 2x as big as buttons SHOULD be... (see comparison to head size)
These "buttons" are 40 pixels a side or 1600 pixels square....
These artifacts of the image - if buttons - are well over 4" in diameter, each. If that person is 62" tall....[/FONT]
A brilliant assessment there, Mr. Josephs, and certainly more than a few points to ponder as well. William Ockham, the namesake of Occam's Razor, would be proud indeed.
Occam's Razor--as you know sir-- is a problem solving principle that hones in on selecting--between a multitude of options--the only one that makes the fewest assumptions. Again, well done.
Sidebar: In more than a few references/instances made by key figures in this case (Billy Nolan Lovelady, Buell Wesley Frazier, Mrs. Pauline Sanders', etc), the option of forcing Sarah Stanton into mystery-man's position has too many hurdles to overcome ---->
1*her physical description (read either Frazier's or Lovelady's personal accounts). Frazier leaves little doubt when he speaks of the only "Sarah" on the entrance landing that afternoon ---->
FRAZIER: Ok, I know some of the girls thatworked in the uh offices above and they stepped out into the sunlight with methere and I know the big heavy set woman she was right there. -- page six Frazier's statements to HSCA investigators.
2*photographic evidence--multiple sources from different angles-- of her in white/light clothing as compared to mystery-man's much darker outfit (see Altgen's Six @ the only female Billy Lovelady describes as shading/shielding her eyes from the Sun; and, also No. 4's account below).
3*And, of course, Mrs. Sanders' placement of her right next to her in the polar opposite of the entrance as compared to mystery-man's position.
4*Camera man Mr. Darnell (Jimmy) actually snaps a photo rendering Sarah 'shading her eyes" Stanton; Billy Nolan Lovelady; and, the mystery-man all in the same photo frame/image.
The principle of Occam's Razor wouldn't stand for all of the gross assumptions that are required to overcome the forcing of Mrs. Stanton waaaaay over into mystery man's position ----->
insert image here, after walking Fido, who once again--right in the middle of something--just happens to have to answer nature's call...What am I going to do w/you lil' buddy? brb
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=9384&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=9384&stc=1)
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=9385&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=9385&stc=1)
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=9387&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=9387&stc=1)
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=9388&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=9388&stc=1)
