Technical Hurdles Suggest Extensive Z-Film Alteration Highly Unlikely

[David Josephs]

Tracy, Magda and Jan- post 59. Thank you. Says it all.
Sadly it went right by the fistfighters who posted next.
The two Davids, in color.
I cannot even read this stuff.
Please re-read post 59, twice.

Losing one great voice was more than enough for me.

DPF is not a place to see who can yell the loudest.

And it's not just you two, but that's another story...

I am sad to see what is happening here.

Dawn

You're right Dawn...

No one here should be expected to present anything to support what they post - however inaccurate it may be.

We should all just nod and proclaim, "well done!" ??



I'd ask that you re-read this - https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...#post75151 post #9

it ends with:

Jeff I greatly appreciate your involvement in the conversation yet I sincerely suggest you dig around a little and get some of the facts straight before making such definitive statements. I've been at this for two decades, have a photographic memory and gigs and gigs of reference material on flash drives at my ready.

I thoroughly enjoy any and all respectful discussion and am willing to consider most any theory offered with some level of authenticated support…

Cheers
DJ

the response was to reiterate his beliefs about the film speed - again without reason... and offers:

Might the CIA's reluctance to admit interest in the Z-film have anything to do with the report the NPIC presented on Nov 25 which stated there were at least two shooters?

If you are aware of this two-shooter conclusion from the NPIC on the 25, care to share it with us? This is purely irresponsible... the man goes on for a page more or two, explaining how the camera could not switch from slow to normal, and how the spring mechanism accounts for the Greer Head movement among other anomalies....

Fair enough Jeff and thank you for your answer...

(snip)

Your experience and knowledge would be helpful if you would simply bring something concrete.

I've gone back and read thru my conversation with Jeff... and in each case it was respectful and questioning.... to PLEASE support the words with something tangible, as a film expert...
yet as you read thru the rest of the thread and then after I finally asked that he start a thread elsewhere as we were not getting anywhere... he would not offer anything.

A few posts back I finally addressed the first of the NEW thread's, this thread's posts.
I've used color, bold & italics to differentiate between "speakers" for many years... I am sorry it is hard for some to follow. the Quote on and off process may be better so I will try not to confuse the issue with color... from a certainPOV I guess it could appear like "raising one's voice" yet I always thought CAPS were for that...

The subject hits close to home... I've learned a great deal here about the Zfilm and have continued discussions that have led me to this point in my education.

Jeff - it appeared to me very early - did not want to have a discussion but wanted to disrupt the discussion we were having with ideas and concepts that had nothing to do with what we were talking about.
Contrary theories that COULD have explained some of the anomolies - if they were developed, presented and discussed... even the most cursory examination of them revealed how flawed they are...

I dont claim the 48fps theory is correct - it's a theory. The SPRING causing what we see on the film was offered as an unwavering conclusion... no other possibilities - and when addressed we were not given a single reason to trust in either the theory or the man presenting it.

I'm with Charles, and David on this one... people shouldn't expect to come onto this forum and be able to SAY ANYTHING and not expect discussion and questioning of thought process, motives, qualifications or whatever a member might be interested in knowing to help construct and defend the idea presented...

We gave this person plenty of time and respect... what we got were cointelpro techniques for disrupting a forum...

and surprise, surprise - they worked.


9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logicalargument is offered,
avoid discussing issues except with denials they have anycredibility,
make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, havelogic,
or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.