09-03-2016, 12:54 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016, 01:27 AM by Albert Doyle.)
A more simple way to understand this is to take a long string and make Darnell's camera lens a firm anchor point. Now imagine you are able to enter the Darnell frame and walk around in it. If you take this long string and hold it taught after reaching the center point of Frazier (let's call the center point a pole that comes up through the center of his body) this is the distance from Darnell's lens to Frazier.
There is a curved arc that swings from left to right from the left edge of Darnell's frame to the right. Technically it would swing in a full 360 degree circle if walked all the way around, but we only have to deal with the segment in Darnell's frame. All points along this segment are all in the same perspective plane because they are all at the same distance from the lens, which in turn means they can be directly compared. I don't see why I'm having to explain this because this is basic science 101.
If we took our string that was stretched exactly to the center point of Frazier and walked it over to Prayer Man we would see that Prayer Man's center pole was no more than 12 inches further back from the lens in distance. What the doubters fail to realize is the photogrammetry science actually works with me and I am offering the better more technical evidence (while being patronized). The very same science these men are referring to involves geometric math that can quite readily determine the scale difference in perspective involving these measurements. You would find that, being generous, a 12 inch depth difference at that distance from Darnell's lens would account for a 1/2 inch perspective shift at the most, and that is probably stretching it. So even with your alleged claims of perspective skewing the numbers are still there to prove Prayer Man isn't Oswald because a 1/2 inch isn't enough to overturn the given height difference. It still refutes Prayer Man being Oswald because Prayer Man is still too short.
I think the doubters don't realize the ridiculousness of their claims and haven't done the true math they seem to be invoking but not doing any credible follow-through on. With the known dimensions of the portal, and Prayer Man being basically even with Frazier on the landing, the straight edge of the landing would take Prayer Man slightly further back from this arc curve. Really it would probably be more like 6 inches. I'm only saying 12 inches because I'm trying to show my numbers are good even when being generous. This is quite calculable because the 5 feet Prayer Man and Frazier are standing apart along with the 20 degree or so tangent off of the arc curve the landing edge represents are all measurable and governed by formulas. These formulas would also determine the maximum perspective differential for objects spaced at those distances. That's the irony of this whole thing because while being talked-down to it is actually me who has the better grasp of the photogrammetry involved. What this science proves is that there's no perspective shift between Frazier and Prayer Man that would disallow any direct height comparison between the two. They are close enough to the same distance plane from Darnell's lens to allow such a direct comparison without any perspective shift. You can plainly see Frazier is 6-7 inches taller than Prayer Man.
Side Note: Can't one of the orders to free all Kennedy evidence be used to sue NBC for release of the Darnell frame for examination? Can the ARRB order be invoked?
These cans are the same size
Depending on the Focal Length of the lens (and the distance to the subject since the higher focal length, the farther away the camera has to be from the subject to retain the same framing).. we can make the can in front seem almost twice as tall, while a zoomed lens does the opposite.
How far away from each other are the cans based on the 300mm image?
Different than the 24mm? of course.
That BS you are peddling about arcs on a circle and some relationship between these distances is very amusing Albert. It confirms you not only haven't the first clue related to photography but you'll make up anything you think will aid in your selling such tripe.
Quote:If we took our string that was stretched exactly to the center point of Frazier and walked it over to Prayer Man we would see that Prayer Man's center pole was no more than 12 inches further back from the lens in distance
...
You would find that, being generous, a 12 inch depth difference at that distance from Darnell's lens would account for a 1/2 inch perspective shift at the most, and that is probably stretching it
Unmitigated bullsh!t buddy. Fetzer and Cinque could use a man like you!
PM is only 12 inches (maybe even 6) further back that the Wesley? - didn't your fingers get all stinky pulling that out of your a$$?
You don't have the first clue about the distances that separated them just as you would tell me the can in the back is at varying distances from the front car - depending on which photo I showed you.
If I took the focal lengths off this image you'd be telling me the cans moved - brilliant!
It's okay to be wrong Albert. Okay to admit you are making a mistake and simply don't understand measurements and distance of a 3d representation on 2d space.
or you can keep on guessing and throwing things against the wall to see what sticks.
One gives you a slight bit of class and self respect - the other just keeps your hands and fingers stinky...
::
::evilpenguin::
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
*Credit Mr. Murphy (Sean) ................... *Credit the Warren Commission
Please note the wrongfully accused's right elbow as depicted in ace card assassination researcher Sean Murphy's still on the left. That said, now please turn your attention to that same pillar by viewing the accompanying image depicting the entrance landing from an inside perspective looking outward. Take your time as it's important that you clearly understand where Mr. Darnell (Jimmy) captures Mr. Oswald's right elbow.
Okay, when you are ready, let's now note the smallish landing (roughly three feet in width if that). Certainly not a lot of room to accommodate more than a few people comfortably. Now, given Mr. Frazier's own testimony where he shares that he was atop this landing standing w/Sarah Stanton, it's clear when we closely examine the outward perspective that he and she are nowhere near the pillar further out from their viewing area. So, given the higher elevation in Mr. Frazier's position it's not frivolous to think the reason he towers so much over his 5'9" counterpart is because of this very vantage point.
Now, though some are reluctant to put away their measuring tapes, their phantom handbags, purses, lipstick, girdles and what have you, at some point we as a community have to take this developing breakthrough seriously enough to start asking more important questions:
Why was the wrongfully accused's airtight alibi hidden from public view/consumption for decades?
Why is he the only person unaccounted for in Warren Commission Exhibit 1381?
Why is the only individual unaccounted for actually station "out front" in the position he places himself?
Phantom wigs, girdles, lipstick, etc. worn by a masquerading Prayer Man wannabe only serves as distortions and distractions from addressing these questions. For a comprehensive, objective analysis of Prayer Man void of distortions & distractions venture here ----> reopenkennedycase.org/prayer-man-faq
09-03-2016, 06:29 PM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016, 06:50 PM by Albert Doyle.)
David Josephs Wrote:Unmitigated bullsh!t buddy. Fetzer and Cinque could use a man like you!
David,
I have already given technical information to show why your over-simplified entries aren't valid and you have ignored it each time I posted it. If you read my post I gave examples that qualify the placement of Prayer Man. The most important being the sun striking the hand in the Wiegman glowing hand shot. It is funny how when analysts post weeks-long theories on cameras and coffee cups there is no such technical protest. They are allowed to endlessly post on non-existent objects creating a whole mystery world existence and history for these Oswald-associated objects when the truth is the glowing object is Prayer Man's hand glancing the sun/shadow plane. A sharp eye will see the glowing object just so happens to be oblong like a hand. If you want to offer technical protest do it where it is deserved with these claims over non-existing Oswald-associated objects. They don't exist. Any analyst who practices the true level of scrutiny you proclaim would observe that Prayer Man's hand could only glow in a position that is up at the forward edge of the landing by sun plane. This is not "eyeballing" as you said because the sun plane is a fixed entity that only exists at the front of the landing. It is independent of visual observation because it exists with independent scientific certainty. I have mentioned this several times and you have ignored it.
May I remind you that Fetzer and Cinque are proponents of imaginary Oswald's in the portal.
David Josephs Wrote:PM is only 12 inches (maybe even 6) further back that the Wesley? - didn't your fingers get all stinky pulling that out of your a$$?
I wonder if I would get away with this vulgarity if it came from my side?
I also noticed that you repeatedly ignored that Robin Unger analyzed his Prayer Man frames after seeing members of MacRae's forum question Prayer Man's location on the landing. He commented, after seeing my entries, that he too thought the forensic landmarks like the brickwork placed Prayer Man forward in the landing. I see you have ignored that each time I posted it.
David Josephs Wrote:You don't have the first clue about the distances that separated them just as you would tell me the can in the back is at varying distances from the front car - depending on which photo I showed you.
You're doing it again David. Drew and Trotter already called you on this and you ignored them. You are skipping my abstract arguments of forensic evidence and going right to your totally-unrelated photo science examples. In doing that you are ignoring my qualifiers that deal specifically with the evidence within the portal photos we are talking about. You have ignored those qualifiers each and every time I posted them only to reference non-related other photos.
David Josephs Wrote:If I took the focal lengths off this image you'd be telling me the cans moved - brilliant!
The trouble with your can imagery is it doesn't answer the forensic particulars I pointed-out in Darnell and Wiegman that Unger agreed with. You see the glowing hand from the sun plane cannot be perspective tweaked. Once you have the sun illuminating Prayer Man's hand in a place that can only be at the front of the landing that forensic evidence cannot be disregarded using irrelevant examples of focal point shifting from lenses. Just like the brickwork Unger pointed-out as landmarking Prayer Man's position forward in the landing. The flaw in your overly-general examples here David is that they ignore the locked-in internal qualifiers I posted several times and you ignored each and every time only to return with scientific irrelevancies (and vulgarities). You see those things are immune too your self-serving focal length perspective shifts and serve as trumping qualifiers and photo forensic evidence of location. They are also things that exist in the photos in question and not in other photos that have no relation to what we're talking about.
David Josephs Wrote:It's okay to be wrong Albert. Okay to admit you are making a mistake and simply don't understand measurements and distance of a 3d representation on 2d space.
David,
I have posted several times that both MacRae and Unger have posted film clips at MacRae's site that show beyond a doubt that Prayer Man is at the front of the landing. The reason this is superior evidence is because the slight movement Prayer Man makes in those clips is enough to create depth perception that makes Prayer Man's location at the front of the landing visible. I'm disappointed that someone like you who claims a superior level of analysis skill would just flagrantly ignore this proof of Prayer Man's position and refer to inferior evidence and overly-general still shots of focal length perspective skewing. If you read your entries you are trying to claim a very vague and overly-general disqualifying of all photo evidence due to others not comprehending "3d objects in 2d space". But, frankly, it looks to me that you are desperately trying to use that to ignore all of the evidence I have been posting that refutes it. I would say proof of this is your refusal to recognize it and how it overcomes your overly-general claim. In short, your posting images of cans doesn't validly answer the many points of photo forensic evidence seen in Darnell that prove what I'm saying. Your can photos don't overcome this evidence.
David Josephs Wrote:or you can keep on guessing and throwing things against the wall to see what sticks.
One gives you a slight bit of class and self respect - the other just keeps your hands and fingers stinky...
::
::evilpenguin::
What you haven't answered here is that, contrary to your saying I was the only one seeing this, many others, including ROKC and Unger, have emphatically posted that Prayer Man is at the front of the landing. You are just ignoring this while trying to lower the conversation to epithet-filled ridicule. Meanwhile you have totally ignored my examples of the internal forensic indicators of the brickwork and aluminum frame orienting Prayer Man forward (agreed to by Unger); the two film clips that show Prayer Man forward in the landing; and the sun glow on Prayer Man's hand and forearm that could only occur at the front of the landing.
Your position is simply a dismissive one that makes the claim that any photo evidence can't be analyzed because of focal length skewing. However you are dishonestly using that to ignore valid photo forensic evidence that refutes it. I think smart people will see your total refusal to even recognize or address the forensic qualifiers I listed bespeaks a consciousness of their validity.
There's a basic point your entries fall short of. That is, once we reasonably prove Prayer Man is at the front the landing (which we have) that there's no excuse to not directly compare the obvious height difference between Frazier and Prayer Man. I don't know why you are struggling against that because it is a good argument. Sorry David but if you compare our entries there is some very valid science you are ignoring. My observations about the geometric math in the portal are valid and deserve a more respectful, serious response. You blow them off by simply ridiculing them as "Fetzering", but if you gave them the serious attention they deserve you would find they are valid and do prove what I'm saying. I have to protest that you are being allowed to ignore (and even ridicule) valid science. A simple overhead chart showing those planes and distances would make it clear. Credible analysts would go for this evidence and what it shows instead of dismissive ridicule.
Once you establish Prayer Man is even with Frazier at the front of the landing the geometric math of the portal dimensions and distance plane from Darnell's lens does prove that a direct height comparison between Frazier and Prayer Man can be made. It is very obvious that Frazier is 6-7 inches taller than Prayer Man, therefore disqualifying him as Oswald within the evidence we already have.
You have ignored my Fratini evidence that proves beyond a doubt that Prayer Man is on the landing with Frazier.
Pictures of cans and ridicule does not answer this.
PS: I agree with your gif that shows somebody being shoved from behind.
There's nothing "even" about where Mr. Frazier stood in his more elevated vantage point depicted in the left photo as oppose to the pillar noticeably forward of his position where Prayer Man rests his right elbow
An innocent man was framed. Chief Justice Earl Warren slipped us a hint, intimating more telling details could be released someday, but not during his day at the height of the Cold War due to "national security". "lone" doesn't equate into "national".
Visiting "Guests", please remember some people would rather go so far as to claim the figure you see is anything or anyone but the actual honest to goodness truth. 50+ years in denial has been long enough.
Q & A relative to Prayer Man one click away folks ----> reopenkennedycase.org/prayer-man-faq void of distortions & distractions.
The distance from the landing steps to the doorway appears to be no more than 3 feet, looking at the picture from the lobby. So, to me it appears that PP can't be far from the steps, and not much farther inward than BWF. The camera angle may slightly distort the relative heights of PP and BWF, but I would think it is a minimal distortion.
As for PrayerPerson, I have yet to see convincing proof that the person pictured is a male. And, what appears to be possibly a left arm may not be that, as possibly it is a purse. Also, I am having trouble determining the direction PP's head is facing, as seen in the still/picture.
Regarding BWF, I have to wonder, as I wander, if maybe he is sitting on, or leaning on a handrail that appears to be in the center of the porch/landing stairway. That being said, I do believe there is a measurable height difference between PP and the taller looking BWF.
And then there is LHO, and the question of his whereabouts at 12:30pm CST on 11/22/'63, as well as presented evidence that indicates the possibility that he was a shooter during the assassination of JFK. But, even if it could be proved he was on the 6th floor of the TSBD during the shooting, to me the presented evidence is well short of proof that he was a shooter.
While I do not wish to continue participation in this discussion, and hopefully avoid any argument as well, I am amazed it continues. I do believe, as do others much smarter than I, that this issue is long ago settled. And, IMO not at all pertinent to current understanding. In any event, JMO, FWIW.
With all due respect Alan, that's a bunch of horse puckey. If Frazier's height is "too big" because PP is behind him (the way the guys is the foreground of the picnic photo are "too big" compared to Oswald), how is it possible for PP to be on a lower step than Frazier?
Thank you, Mr. Trotter, for your concise and well reasoned post.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
:
:::face.palm::
