Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sean Murphy- wrong again!!!
#11
Richard Gilbride Wrote:Situated at the front- and not in the corner- means we get a near one-to-one correspondence between the heights of PrayerMan and Wesley Frazier in the Darnell film. They are nearly equidistant from the camera, and only a 1% or so correction needs to be made for perspective.



Yet if you go to the Education Forum you cannot respond to Gordon-approved Rube Goldberg pro-ROKC 'expert' Sandy Larsen who settles this complex geometry by simply pointing to the portal ceiling and saying "look at the visible perspective shifting on the ceiling". Larsen did not complain about my brute banning from the Education Forum because he, like Stancak, directly benefits from his idle-minded psuedo-analyses not being challenged on that board through my flagrant removal. Meanwhile a more credible look at the perspective properties of the portal would realize perspective exists in a complex parabolic relationship to lens level where the ceiling possesses one scale and the heads of Prayer Man and Frazier a completely different one. This flies right over the head of moderator Gordon who should never be allowed anywhere near moderation of this level of science. Perhaps Gordon would be more at home at a table manners website more suited to his skill level, however he shouldn't be let near academic discourse of this degree of contention. He's a flagrant ROKC shill pretending to be a credible moderator. A playing field the majority don't mind because it spares them the egotistical discomfort of admitting they were wrong.


Drew Phipps' trigonometry puts the perspective shift at no more than 1/12th of an inch, which is more like .1%.
#12
Quote:Gordon who should never be allowed anywhere near moderation of this level of science. Perhaps Gordon would be more at home at a table manners website more suited to his skill level, however he shouldn't be let near academic discourse of this degree of contention.


This may be true, but... Even after I read your post, I'm scratching my head wondering if you're speaking English asking myself... WTF? LOL....
#13
3) The 1964 filmed interview and 1986 filmed testimony contain no tangible indication that a monstrous lie about the lunchroom incident is being put forth, nor is there any indication that Baker was excessively anxious when being questioned by Bugliosi.

You do realize it was just a film don'tcha? Like my interviews, which makes my job hard to separate truth from fiction, and the only way to do that is to find as much material that will corroborate as much information as possible to back any interview. BTW... I did that too, and as I find my corroborations with other individuals, they have no idea the questions I'm asking them is to see if their information is in relation to the material I'm seeking. I want to know if their stories they're giving me is true, everything must fall in line, fall in place before I can reject it. Like the information some researcher said about Frank Sturgis and the S.F. Chronicle, this is a perfect example, the information was at John Simkim's page, some researcher who calls himself "The Realist" injects this information, and it was or is still found at some site owned by Tom Flaco, now if no one knew any better, you'd swear they're telling the truth right? That's why it's important to fact check with FOIA documents too, although, documents can be wrong, the moral of my story is, the more people saying the same thing, and if there's documents backing up their information, then it's pretty hard to discredit it right?
#14
Please move the PM posts of Doyle to the Bears Den and the self centered, self promoting posts of Kaiser to the thread about his father? Richard could not even post his three intro posts, despite his polite request, before Kaiser
commenced with his predictable self promotion. Either Doyle's "White Whale" will be confined to one place here...and he is constantly testing the boundaries, or all other forum readers will continue to be subjected to his obsession. :

Richard Gilbride Wrote:...........

My next 2 posts, immediately following, are scathing critiques of this fantasist, which are long overdue. With the PrayerMan boondoggle he pulls off a trifecta of self-will run riot.

Please allow me to post them and finish introducing this topic, before responding
.


Scott Kaiser Wrote:.......
Holy shit! And, others say to me if I don't have the photos it never happened, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. LMAO! Boy! Is my publisher and I going to have so much fun selling more than a million copies, and I don't have to do anything other than tell the truth.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.
#15
Tom Scully Wrote:Please move the PM posts of Doyle to the Bears Den and the self centered, self promoting posts of Kaiser to the thread about his father? Richard could not even post his three intro posts, despite his polite request, before Kaiser
commenced with his predictable self promotion. Either Doyle's "White Whale" will be confined to one place here...and he is constantly testing the boundaries, or all other forum readers will continue to be subjected to his obsession. :

Richard Gilbride Wrote:...........

My next 2 posts, immediately following, are scathing critiques of this fantasist, which are long overdue. With the PrayerMan boondoggle he pulls off a trifecta of self-will run riot.

Please allow me to post them and finish introducing this topic, before responding
.


Scott Kaiser Wrote:.......
Holy shit! And, others say to me if I don't have the photos it never happened, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. LMAO! Boy! Is my publisher and I going to have so much fun selling more than a million copies, and I don't have to do anything other than tell the truth.

And, please move Tom's post to the thread titled "Dumb and Dumber."
#16
Quote:Richard could not even post his three intro posts, despite his polite request, before Kaiser

Aw, did I hurt someones feelings Tom? Ask me if I care? Truthfully, the truth sucks, want to know why? It hurts.


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Sniper's Nest Corner boxes in the 6th floor Museum are wrong David Josephs 28 17,122 15-03-2016, 08:47 PM
Last Post: Drew Phipps
  "People just don't Care About the JFK Assassination" WRONG. Nathaniel Heidenheimer 4 4,982 23-11-2015, 07:31 PM
Last Post: Alan Ford
  Sean Murphy's research deserves more Ivan De Mey 509 129,049 04-11-2015, 09:22 PM
Last Post: Alan Ford
  Is there something wrong with the MFF site? David Josephs 6 5,088 30-10-2015, 06:52 PM
Last Post: David Josephs
  What's wrong with this picture? Drew Phipps 5 4,354 05-03-2015, 11:50 PM
Last Post: David Josephs
  Why Palmer McBride was Wrong Greg R Parker 0 2,554 10-04-2014, 12:34 AM
Last Post: Greg R Parker
  TSBD Rifle Wrong Length, Alleged Shipment Unverified Nick Rose 16 9,079 18-01-2014, 07:53 PM
Last Post: Albert Doyle
  See anything wrong with this picture? Greg Burnham 5 4,089 24-08-2012, 05:33 PM
Last Post: Keith Millea
  Kennedy, Reagan, Loved for All the Wrong Reasons: Robert Dallek - Businessweek Bernice Moore 1 2,573 30-11-2011, 04:52 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)