Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Moderator Sandy Larsen
#21
You're just repeating the same questions over and over Alan...

It is well known in photography that certain cameras and film types will present light-colored objects as being dark in shade...The camera adjusts to the bright part of the subject field and therefore the contrast is skewed in the shade parts of the subject field, as seen in the Depository front entrance with its bright sun vs dark shade...We have already debated this and you ignored it every time I posted it (like trolls do)...You won't find any blond hair showing up in the dark/shade parts of Darnell because his camera and film is registering light-colored hair as dark, as seen with Stanton...

You practice a deceptive form of analysis Alan where you always stay on the offensive and must be asking the questions lest it becomes too clear that you are the one who has failed to answer the points...Because you make a bogus argument that white must appear white in shade with Darnell's equipment you avoid answering the fact that we can see Prayer Man pivot towards Frazier from Wiegman to Darnell...In Wiegman Prayer Man is facing forward towards the motorcade and in Darnell Prayer Man has turned towards Frazier...This pivot is the exact turn Frazier described Stanton as making at that exact time when she turned to tell him what Calvery had shouted...

Because you make a technically invalid argument that white must appear white you relieve yourself of having to answer the FACT that Altgens 6 shows everything to Frazier's left in clear detail...Therefore for your false claim, and misquoting of witnesses, that Stanton is to Frazier's left is provably false because if Stanton were to Frazier's left we would clearly see her in Altgens...But we don't...Even worse, if we go to Wiegman Z256 we can see the exact same scene in Altgens 6 taken at the exact same time from a 90 degree angle and Stanton is clearly not to Frazier's left...Every time I post this definitive proof you ignore it and repeat your same idiotic points...Altgens 6 and Wiegman Z256 prove that Stanton is not to Frazier's left...Every time I post this you ignore it and repeat your same trolling points... 

Your idiotic points above do not make Lovelady's locating of Stanton to the far right of the entranceway go away...Nor does it make Prayer Man being in that exact spot in the Hughes Film go away...

A while ago your trolling doppleganger "Alan Ford" posted the sharp Darnell frame, that clearly showed a female dress neckline on Prayer Man, on the Education Forum...The forum did its best to ignore that obvious proof...If we could post that image here you would see that Stanton's dress neckline was seen on Prayer Man in that Darnell frame...No one is trying to clean up Owens to see if we can match that neckline with Stanton but it doesn't matter because several converging instances of evidence already proved Stanton was Prayer Man...

The above should be enough for any credible researcher to realize Prayer Man has been proven to be Stanton so anyone who is ignoring it in contempt in order to offer already-refuted regressive arguments should be moderated...
Reply
#22
(16-04-2024, 11:36 PM)Brian Doyle Wrote: You're just repeating the same questions over and over Alan...

On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, you are refusing to answer the questions, because if you dare the quicksand around you will continue to envelop you as your self-serving narrative void of facts continues to spiral downward out of control. You cannot say Sarah Stanton is in a dark dress and then later of your own choosing now put her in a white blouse (it's one or the other, Mr. Doyle, make up your mind sir) 

It is well known in photography that certain cameras and film types will present light-colored objects as being dark in shade...The camera adjusts to the bright part of the subject field and therefore the contrast is skewed in the shade parts of the subject field, as seen in the Depository front entrance with its bright sun vs dark shade...We have already debated this and you ignored it every time I posted it (like trolls do)...You won't find any blond hair showing up in the dark/shade parts of Darnell because his camera and film is registering light-colored hair as dark, as seen with Stanton...

Oh, dear and let those of us reading along guess that that same effect plays a role in her considerable weight/girth and well pronounced forearms as well...You are only kidding yourself, Mr. Doyle, her hair colour is different from Prayer Man's and her physique is triple the size of Prayer Man. And. according to you she can be in a dark-hued dress with a hemline, then akin to the exploits of the "magic-bullet" can suddenly change her attire at will to fit your false assumptions. Are you taking yourself seriously, Mr. Doyle? 

You practice a deceptive form of analysis Alan where you always stay on the offensive and must be asking the questions lest it becomes too clear that you are the one who has failed to answer the points...Because you make a bogus argument that white must appear white in shade with Darnell's equipment you avoid answering the fact that we can see Prayer Man pivot towards Frazier from Wiegman to Darnell...In Wiegman Prayer Man is facing forward towards the motorcade and in Darnell Prayer Man has turned towards Frazier...This pivot is the exact turn Frazier described Stanton as making at that exact time when she turned to tell him what Calvery had shouted...

Wrong. A-G-A-i-N.

Your false narrative would be better served if you chose to have Mr. Frazier (Buell Wesley) turn to his left, where there is a rather large female figure dressed in white 3x the size of Prayer Man. The only person on Mr. Frazier's right is the male Prayer Man figure. 


Because you make a technically invalid argument that white must appear white you relieve yourself of having to answer the FACT that Altgens 6 shows everything to Frazier's left in clear detail...Therefore for your false claim, and misquoting of witnesses, that Stanton is to Frazier's left is provably false because if Stanton were to Frazier's left we would clearly see her in Altgens...But we don't...Even worse, if we go to Wiegman Z256 we can see the exact same scene in Altgens 6 taken at the exact same time from a 90 degree angle and Stanton is clearly not to Frazier's left...Every time I post this definitive proof you ignore it and repeat your same idiotic points...Altgens 6 and Wiegman Z256 prove that Stanton is not to Frazier's left...Every time I post this you ignore it and repeat your same trolling points... 

Look for her in Weigman (Robert) and Darnell (Jimmy) if you dare...because there is a rather heavy-set woman there to Mr. Frazier's left. The only person to Mr. Frazier's right is the male Prayer Man figure. Moreover, Both Mrs. Stanton and the woman she was standing next to, Mrs. Sanders, shared that they stood together on the East side of the TSBD entrance steps.  Together is defined as in close proximity with one another, not alone over on the opposite side of the entrance steps where the male Prayer Man is positioned. 

Your idiotic points above do not make Lovelady's locating of Stanton to the far right of the entranceway go away...Nor does it make Prayer Man being in that exact spot in the Hughes Film go away...

Wrong A-G-A-I-N, Mr. Doyle. 
You are confusing the actual evidence to merit your own "evidence"...in this case when Mr. Lovelady would look over his shoulder while finishing off his lunch right there on the steps, yes, of course, Mrs. Stanton was on his right (you keep shooting yourself in the foot, Mr. Doyle). 

Mr. BALL. You ate your lunch on the steps?
Mr. LOVELADY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Who was with you?
Mr. LOVELADY. Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton.


A while ago your trolling doppleganger "Alan Ford" posted the sharp Darnell frame, that clearly showed a female dress neckline on Prayer Man, on the Education Forum...The forum did its best to ignore that obvious proof...If we could post that image here you would see that Stanton's dress neckline was seen on Prayer Man in that Darnell frame...No one is trying to clean up Owens to see if we can match that neckline with Stanton but it doesn't matter because several converging instances of evidence already proved Stanton was Prayer Man...
The above should be enough for any credible researcher to realize Prayer Man has been proven to be Stanton so anyone who is ignoring it in contempt in order to offer already-refuted regressive arguments should be moderated...

Oh, dear...

On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, the Education Forum akin to the fine leadership here on this forum doesn't jump to conclusions every time someone shares "new" information in this case. Unlike you, the leadership here and over at the forum you mentioned care to fully examine everything in a fair/objective manner before drawing false clumsy conclusions about a woman 3x the size of Prayer Man opting to change her sex right there on the TSBD steps to become a MUCH smaller male figure now on steroids. 

For the most part, Mr. Ford, and I have been cordial in our exchanges and I will continue to be.  Save for our  mutually agreed upon differences in who we think the male Prayer Man figure is. I respect his right to present his case, but as for me I am convinced the male Prayer Man figure is just who Mr. Murphy (Sean) and quite a few other exemplary researchers say He is. 

"It's Him" -- Sean Murphy, November , 2013 
Reply
#23
It' comes with no great surprise that the only individual unaccounted for in *Commission Exhibit 1381* still remains -- after all these years since Mr. Murphy (Sean's exemplary research) is still the Prayer Man figure. There's a reason for that...

"It's Him" -- Sean Murphy, November , 2013

It's him indeed. Sean, cheers! mate Smile

Self-reminder: Should Mr. Doyle weigh in again about how his candidate for Prayer Man is Mrs. Stanton (Sarah) remind him of the following exchange between me and Mrs. Stanton's loved one to keep him honest about her genuine appearance rather than his self-serving narrative about how she steals the identity of a MUCH smaller male figure w/much darker hair colour, etc...

> On Jun 12, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Alan Ford <a1anford@aol.com> wrote:
> 
> Good afternoon, Xxxxxxx, trust your weekend was relaxing and time well spent with your loved ones. Nothing new here
on my end, but I would like to ask you several questions, which by all means you are at liberty not to answer if you
care not to. 

X Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx@xxxxx.comHide
To Alan Ford a1anford@aol.com
 X Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx (xxxxxxx@xxxxx.com)To:you Details
image123.png (9.7 MB)
My grandmother in the 40’s
Sent from my iPhone
…about your questions...her hair was white possibly premature gray short and curly 
x xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx (Xxxxxxxxx@Xxxxxx.com)To:you Details
image125.jpeg (230 KB)
5’4 to 5’6 very heavyset just like the picture I sent from the 60s in a park with her son... you can also tell her hair was
light by then...Her weight then and up until the time she passed is why there are very few photos of her...she did not
like taking them.
Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 13, 2018, at 7:23 PM, Alan Ford <a1anford@aol.com> wrote:
> 
> Aww...you must be very proud of her, Xxxxxxx, She looks so kind and unassuming. Makes me recall fond memories of my own Mum.
Cannot thank you enough for your kindness, patience and generous nature, Xxxxxxx, it is appreciated. In fairness
to you, I feel like I owe you at least an explanation about my inquiry into your paternal-grandmother's physical
appearance in the early 1960's. Two men who worked in her same office building described her as short and heavy-
set on the very day President Kennedy was assassinated. I just wanted to get confirmation of this, thus my question
to you about how would you best describe her in the early 1960's. Appreciate your timely response, thank you!
Fido is nudging his wet nose on the screen, signaling he wants to go out to answer nature's call. Trust all is well with you & yours this evening. Thanks
so very MUCH for your time, Xxxxxxx, Semper Fi.
> 
> Alan

*Update (Thursday, April 25, 2024) @ 11:12AM EST
With due credit to this exemplary website, I will be using their member "Away Status" feature before signing out today ---->

Away Information
Away Status:
I'm Away I'm Here
Away Reason:
Return Date:

So, please be mindful in my absence of anyone else using my name prior to my designated return (09/12/2024). Not sure how that happened over on Mr. MacRae's site, nevertheless, I trust it won't happen here. I will be using the time away to continue tweaking and fine tuning some of my images of Prayer Man with a friend who worked at the former Kodak camera facility in Rochester, NY and an acquaintance down in Northern Virginia as well. I will share that content in its preliminary form in a new post before taking leave today, and hope to return this Fall with further enhanced images. Best wishes to all for a safe, healthy and wonderful Summer ahead.
Reply
#24
[Image: 0?ui=2&ik=fadd1b2090&attid=0.2&permmsgid..._lvfdsl2e1]
PM photo enhancement (A) Will continue to tweak, refine and further enhance as much as possible this Summer
 
[Image: 0?ui=2&ik=fadd1b2090&attid=0.1&permmsgid..._lvfds8640]
Prayer Man photo enhancement (B) Will continue to tweak, refine and further enhance this Summer.

Over to my profile to record my "Away" status and date of return this Fall (Thursday, September 12, 2024)

Away Status:
I'm Away I'm Here
Away Reason:
Spring & Summer hiatus back in the Fall
Return Date: 12 September 2024
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why Mark Knight Should Never Be Allowed To Be A Moderator Brian Doyle 1 398 18-07-2023, 04:08 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Would someone give this info to Sandy Larson at the Ed Forum please! Scott Kaiser 40 29,576 17-12-2016, 02:20 AM
Last Post: Scott Kaiser

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)