25-05-2023, 04:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 25-05-2023, 04:20 PM by Brian Doyle.)
I have to self-bust here...I looked over Stancak's claim that Wiegman started his camera after Altgens snapped his shot and I found it might possibly have merit...I'm not sure because it is very close according to the cars in the motorcade, but because I am honest, and objectively admit evidence, there is the possibility that Stancak is correct and Altgens was snapped a second before Wiegman started filming...However it makes no difference and Stancak is still ignoring the already-proven evidence that Tiny Face is Pauline Sanders and Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...Stancak is a real fraud and he couches his intentional deception in bombastic pseudo-analysis...It makes no difference because even if Stancak is correct and Wiegman started his camera as late as 2 seconds after Altgens snapped his photo Lovelady, Shelley, Molina, and Maddie Reese are all still in the exact same positions as they were in Altgens and did not move...Stancak is claiming that Sarah Stanton was Tiny Face and moved behind Shelley in that two seconds even though no one else moved...The reason it took me so long to analyze Stancak's claim is because he is so full of it on everything else that I didn't bother up to now...It makes no difference and Stancak is still trying to get away with saying the Tiny Face, that obviously belongs to Pauline Sanders, is Sarah Stanton...
This link shows the progress of the motorcade and it can be compared to the very start of the Wiegman Film where the Dignitary Car with Earl Cabell can be seen pulling in to Elm St...If you look at Altgens 6 you can see Lyndon Johnson's car and his Secret Service escort on Elm St...Altgens is either simultaneous to Wiegman starting filming or 1 or 2 seconds prior:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/animation.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xR0WBPo8I&t=6s
So to save a lot of words, Stancak is taking Pauline Sanders, as seen as Tiny Face in between Lovelady & Shelley, and claiming she is Sarah Stanton...When you tell Stancak that Frazier and Lovelady clearly placed Stanton on the far right of the portal at the time of the Prayer Man photography he goes in to his poor confused innocent researcher routine where he asks you to go out and build your own blog with all the footnotes and references so he can understand...Trust me, Stancak is versed enough in the evidence to already be familiar with these references...He is just dishonestly trying to make you start from scratch on everything in order to wear you down as a gas-lighting technique...He does this because he knows the clique will let him get away with it and not call him out on it...See it yourself in Stancak's totally disingenuous reply below:
" Brian: I am afraid you are totally confused about everything you write about the topic. Please post the frame from Wiegman film you think matches Algens6 scene so that I could check. Alternatively, please post the link to the copy of Wiegman film you watched and the exact millisecond of the frame you think is a match. As per Carl Jones, it is not only his head he turned to redirect his gaze from roughly the direction of the Records building to roughly the direction of Tripple Underpass, it is his whole body that turned 90 degrees. Turning head could be accomplished in less than half a second, however, turning his body from the position he assumed in Altgens6 to the one in Wiegman would take about 2 seconds.
The partial face, you seem to agree exists in Altgens6, is not at a homologous location in Wiegman film; let me guess – could it be that the owner of that face moved back during the period elapsing between Altgens6 and onset of Wiegman film? You burned all bridges to the Education Forum by your vicious attacks on moderators (some of them are not even moderators any longer) and other Forum members and this is not tolerable in public space but you seem not knowing it. I respect your views, even if your views are confused, and am responding concretely and constructively. I am sure you can learn doing it too, and you may see a change in the attitudes to your posts and your person in the future.
One final point on peer-reviewing process. It starts with a researcher or group of researchers submit their article describing their research to a journal which has peer-reviewing capacity (editors, administrators, anonymous expert reviewers). Thus, the first step in this process is to have an article, a piece of work which describes the problem, how the problem was solved, and the results. If reviewers find the work sound, they may recommend the article for publication, if not, the article is rejected. Very often one or multiple revisions of original article are required before an article is accepted. I went through this process about 200 times as a submitting author or a reviewer. In JFKA community, there is no peer-reviewing body. Education Forum is a debate forum in which members exchange their views but there is no real peer reviewing – no contribution would be removed (rejected) because the findings or views are unlikely to be true, which cannot happen in a peer-review journal. As it is a platform for debates, members do just this – comment on anything they like and skip the rest which they are not interested in. However, manners that disrupt the flow of debate are banned: trolling, calling names, attributing evil motives to people who hold opposing views, ridiculing people, or bringing topics unrelated to the Forum objectives. It is not difficult to follow such rules. Also, the threads often become less attractive as the time flows and stop posting in the thred because the thread has exhausted itself; I find it all right and I do not try to bump “my” topics if I do not have anything new and worthy of mentioning. I hope this helps. "
Stancak dips heavily in to the "Vicious attacks against others" well because he is so bankrupt on the evidence...What he is saying is not at all true and the record on the forum shows I did not commit those offenses and was booted before my evidence could be discussed...If Stancak was honest he was part of those who attacked me and protested to James Gordon...Stancak posted in that Education Forum thread "I don't see why you are even allowed to post here" and helped get me banned...What Stancak is saying above is self-servingly false...There is a good enough Peer Review on the Education Forum to resolve this matter...I take exception to Stancak's patronizing explanation of Peer Review above because it would be proven to be false by simply going to the Education Forum and getting the skilled members to exert that Peer Review with credible moderation guiding it...Stancak speaks from the dishonest safety of colluding members holding back their research...Even the discoverer of Sarah Stanton's face on Prayer Man, Chris Davidson, held back and refused to follow-through on his own discovery for political reasons...Because of this my evidence has been intentionally ignored and those with the ability to seriously enhance the evidence have neutralized it with intentional starvation...Credible moderation means the moderators keep people honest and make them admit and follow-through on correct evidence...Not the opposite, as is occurring...Stancak invests heavily in straw men over posting style (manners) but anyone can see he does so in order to avoid discussing the evidence...Just the fact he is answering me on his blog shows that his accusations of intolerable posting style are false and he is just using them as an excuse...It is entirely obvious that Stancak only posts on his blog and does not come over to any fair playing field sites because he knows his material will not survive credible Peer Review scrutiny...Which brings us to Tiny Face and Stancak's claim that it is a mysteriously-vanishing Sarah Stanton...I am publicly challenging Stancak to a debate on his claim on the Education Forum where I got banned for posting the correct evidence that Prayer Man was Sarah Stanton...I am doing so sincerely and asking him to please stop making those false accusations against me that I am some kind of justly-banned rogue who can't post acceptably...I want Stancak to finally make his claim on a forum where he will be held accountable to Peer Review and be forced to acknowledge that Darnell shows Pauline Sanders exactly in the position that Tiny Face is in when you credibly acknowledge the compression distortion caused by Altgens' telephoto lens...Also, because of my banning the Prayer Man people were not forced to walk-through a Peer Review of Chris Davidson's discovery of Stanton's face on Prayer Man in Wiegman...Credible moderators would be able to see a person being unfairly defamed for the purpose of denying his correct evidence and hold those doing it accountable...Stancak is playing dumb and instead of answering my points of evidence directly he feigns confusion and asks me to go create an entire blog so he can understand what I'm getting at...Stancak is pretending that he is incapable of going to the Education Forum and simply looking up Morissette's recent thread where Davidson showed Stanton was Prayer Man's height...You can also see Prayer Man has the exact same dress sleeve as Stanton in that newly discovered Owens Film evidence...
Sure Andrej...It's my attitude that is the problem here and not my evidence that you are conspicuously avoiding in public...Stancak's false accusations are proven to by insincere by simply asking him why my discovery of the most important witness in 45 years is being ignored?...Is it because of manners Andrej?...
This link shows the progress of the motorcade and it can be compared to the very start of the Wiegman Film where the Dignitary Car with Earl Cabell can be seen pulling in to Elm St...If you look at Altgens 6 you can see Lyndon Johnson's car and his Secret Service escort on Elm St...Altgens is either simultaneous to Wiegman starting filming or 1 or 2 seconds prior:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/animation.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xR0WBPo8I&t=6s
So to save a lot of words, Stancak is taking Pauline Sanders, as seen as Tiny Face in between Lovelady & Shelley, and claiming she is Sarah Stanton...When you tell Stancak that Frazier and Lovelady clearly placed Stanton on the far right of the portal at the time of the Prayer Man photography he goes in to his poor confused innocent researcher routine where he asks you to go out and build your own blog with all the footnotes and references so he can understand...Trust me, Stancak is versed enough in the evidence to already be familiar with these references...He is just dishonestly trying to make you start from scratch on everything in order to wear you down as a gas-lighting technique...He does this because he knows the clique will let him get away with it and not call him out on it...See it yourself in Stancak's totally disingenuous reply below:
" Brian: I am afraid you are totally confused about everything you write about the topic. Please post the frame from Wiegman film you think matches Algens6 scene so that I could check. Alternatively, please post the link to the copy of Wiegman film you watched and the exact millisecond of the frame you think is a match. As per Carl Jones, it is not only his head he turned to redirect his gaze from roughly the direction of the Records building to roughly the direction of Tripple Underpass, it is his whole body that turned 90 degrees. Turning head could be accomplished in less than half a second, however, turning his body from the position he assumed in Altgens6 to the one in Wiegman would take about 2 seconds.
The partial face, you seem to agree exists in Altgens6, is not at a homologous location in Wiegman film; let me guess – could it be that the owner of that face moved back during the period elapsing between Altgens6 and onset of Wiegman film? You burned all bridges to the Education Forum by your vicious attacks on moderators (some of them are not even moderators any longer) and other Forum members and this is not tolerable in public space but you seem not knowing it. I respect your views, even if your views are confused, and am responding concretely and constructively. I am sure you can learn doing it too, and you may see a change in the attitudes to your posts and your person in the future.
One final point on peer-reviewing process. It starts with a researcher or group of researchers submit their article describing their research to a journal which has peer-reviewing capacity (editors, administrators, anonymous expert reviewers). Thus, the first step in this process is to have an article, a piece of work which describes the problem, how the problem was solved, and the results. If reviewers find the work sound, they may recommend the article for publication, if not, the article is rejected. Very often one or multiple revisions of original article are required before an article is accepted. I went through this process about 200 times as a submitting author or a reviewer. In JFKA community, there is no peer-reviewing body. Education Forum is a debate forum in which members exchange their views but there is no real peer reviewing – no contribution would be removed (rejected) because the findings or views are unlikely to be true, which cannot happen in a peer-review journal. As it is a platform for debates, members do just this – comment on anything they like and skip the rest which they are not interested in. However, manners that disrupt the flow of debate are banned: trolling, calling names, attributing evil motives to people who hold opposing views, ridiculing people, or bringing topics unrelated to the Forum objectives. It is not difficult to follow such rules. Also, the threads often become less attractive as the time flows and stop posting in the thred because the thread has exhausted itself; I find it all right and I do not try to bump “my” topics if I do not have anything new and worthy of mentioning. I hope this helps. "
Stancak dips heavily in to the "Vicious attacks against others" well because he is so bankrupt on the evidence...What he is saying is not at all true and the record on the forum shows I did not commit those offenses and was booted before my evidence could be discussed...If Stancak was honest he was part of those who attacked me and protested to James Gordon...Stancak posted in that Education Forum thread "I don't see why you are even allowed to post here" and helped get me banned...What Stancak is saying above is self-servingly false...There is a good enough Peer Review on the Education Forum to resolve this matter...I take exception to Stancak's patronizing explanation of Peer Review above because it would be proven to be false by simply going to the Education Forum and getting the skilled members to exert that Peer Review with credible moderation guiding it...Stancak speaks from the dishonest safety of colluding members holding back their research...Even the discoverer of Sarah Stanton's face on Prayer Man, Chris Davidson, held back and refused to follow-through on his own discovery for political reasons...Because of this my evidence has been intentionally ignored and those with the ability to seriously enhance the evidence have neutralized it with intentional starvation...Credible moderation means the moderators keep people honest and make them admit and follow-through on correct evidence...Not the opposite, as is occurring...Stancak invests heavily in straw men over posting style (manners) but anyone can see he does so in order to avoid discussing the evidence...Just the fact he is answering me on his blog shows that his accusations of intolerable posting style are false and he is just using them as an excuse...It is entirely obvious that Stancak only posts on his blog and does not come over to any fair playing field sites because he knows his material will not survive credible Peer Review scrutiny...Which brings us to Tiny Face and Stancak's claim that it is a mysteriously-vanishing Sarah Stanton...I am publicly challenging Stancak to a debate on his claim on the Education Forum where I got banned for posting the correct evidence that Prayer Man was Sarah Stanton...I am doing so sincerely and asking him to please stop making those false accusations against me that I am some kind of justly-banned rogue who can't post acceptably...I want Stancak to finally make his claim on a forum where he will be held accountable to Peer Review and be forced to acknowledge that Darnell shows Pauline Sanders exactly in the position that Tiny Face is in when you credibly acknowledge the compression distortion caused by Altgens' telephoto lens...Also, because of my banning the Prayer Man people were not forced to walk-through a Peer Review of Chris Davidson's discovery of Stanton's face on Prayer Man in Wiegman...Credible moderators would be able to see a person being unfairly defamed for the purpose of denying his correct evidence and hold those doing it accountable...Stancak is playing dumb and instead of answering my points of evidence directly he feigns confusion and asks me to go create an entire blog so he can understand what I'm getting at...Stancak is pretending that he is incapable of going to the Education Forum and simply looking up Morissette's recent thread where Davidson showed Stanton was Prayer Man's height...You can also see Prayer Man has the exact same dress sleeve as Stanton in that newly discovered Owens Film evidence...
Sure Andrej...It's my attitude that is the problem here and not my evidence that you are conspicuously avoiding in public...Stancak's false accusations are proven to by insincere by simply asking him why my discovery of the most important witness in 45 years is being ignored?...Is it because of manners Andrej?...