Magda Hassan Wrote:I can see several differences in the maps. Perhaps Don and you used the same source for your respective maps? I don't know. If I was making a map of Dealy Plaza from scratch it would likely turn out very similar to yours and Don's as there is only so much variation that can happen with a fixed scale drawing. But the variation is there between your two maps. To accuse some one of theft is a serious matter Anthony. Especially some one as well respected and loved and whose integrity has never been questioned as Don.
Yes, do you have trouble reading?
I said there are differences. He STARTED with my map
and then he added his own details. You don't seem to understand what I am saying. I did not say that his map is the SAME as mine. I said he STARTED with MY map and then added things.
Don't make up a false version of my claim.
Just deal with the claim I actually made.
He STARTED by stealing my map and then added his own details.
Another claim you made, in post #10, is that "[Don] has added a lot of speculative crap as if they are facts."
When asked to give specifics you replied, in post #12, "I can't summarize all his speculations in one quick message."
Well you've had many weeks to back up your claim yet you have failed to do so. In fact you haven't even tried to back up your claim.
You need to give specifics when you make such a charge on this forum. This is your opportunity to do so.
Myra
If you reread that original message from me you can see that I said that I can not list everything in one message.
But you persist in being abusive, so let's play your little game. Here is one error. On his map he shows Zapruder a couple of feet IN FRONT of Sitzman on the pedestal. The Moorman photo shows that Sitman was right next to Zapruder, to his left and slightly behind him. Why? Because he had vertigo and asked her to hold onto him.
Ok, now your turn. I just mentioned only one thing and you've wasted 10 minutes of my time. Now you reply that my original message said there were several errors and I have mentioned only one, so I owe you more. Then I'll reply with ANOTHER. And then you reply that TWO is not several and I owe you more. So I then reply with ANOTHER. So let's play your little game and let me know when I am up to 100 items. Is that enough for you?
Or do you want 1,000? Maybe 1,000,000?
Print out both maps, preferably on clear acetate and lay one over the other. You will see that they match perfectly in almost all places except where he has added his own details. Note especially the distance from Main Street to the TSBD. No one else knew at the time the correct distance. I was the only one to figure it out.
Note especially the two tool sheds behind the pergola shelter. Note the street lights and traffic lines. Note the steps up to the pergola. I was the one who had to figure out pixel by pixel how to change straight lines into curves. You'll also notice that he corrected my curve of Elm Street. Since he was using an IBM whereas my Commodore 64 program did not make curves.
Even some of his staunchest defenders have admitted that he started with my map.
He has never admitted it. He has never credited me.
That's called stealing research. Like most people he probably found my map floating somewhere on the Internet and didn't realize where it came from. That why I corrected an incorrect post by someone else to set the record straight.
Anthony,
I don't need printers or acetate to see that the 1990 map you say is yours (which is clearly labeled "Free to Copy" by the way) is a simple diagram of a physical location. Whereas Don's document presents a massive amount of detail in a concise format. Your document does not resemble Don's document in terms of appearance or usefulness.
Anthony Marsh Wrote:If you reread that original message from me you can see that I said that I can not list everything in one message.
But you persist in being abusive, so let's play your little game. Here is one error. On his map he shows Zapruder a couple of feet IN FRONT of Sitzman on the pedestal. The Moorman photo shows that Sitman was right next to Zapruder, to his left and slightly behind him. Why? Because he had vertigo and asked her to hold onto him.
Ok, now your turn. I just mentioned only one thing and you've wasted 10 minutes of my time. Now you reply that my original message said there were several errors and I have mentioned only one, so I owe you more. Then I'll reply with ANOTHER. And then you reply that TWO is not several and I owe you more. So I then reply with ANOTHER. So let's play your little game and let me know when I am up to 100 items. Is that enough for you?
Or do you want 1,000? Maybe 1,000,000?
I want a lot.
As in "[Don] has added a lot of speculative crap as if they are facts."
Since you made the claim that there was "a lot" of speculative crap presented as facts, then you should be the one to quantify "a lot."
However, I will stipulate that "a lot" must be more than one.
Print out both maps, preferably on clear acetate and lay one over the other. You will see that they match perfectly in almost all places except where he has added his own details. Note especially the distance from Main Street to the TSBD. No one else knew at the time the correct distance. I was the only one to figure it out.
Note especially the two tool sheds behind the pergola shelter. Note the street lights and traffic lines. Note the steps up to the pergola. I was the one who had to figure out pixel by pixel how to change straight lines into curves. You'll also notice that he corrected my curve of Elm Street. Since he was using an IBM whereas my Commodore 64 program did not make curves.
Even some of his staunchest defenders have admitted that he started with my map.
He has never admitted it. He has never credited me.
That's called stealing research. Like most people he probably found my map floating somewhere on the Internet and didn't realize where it came from. That why I corrected an incorrect post by someone else to set the record straight.
Anthony,
I don't need printers or acetate to see that the 1990 map you say is yours (which is clearly labeled "Free to Copy" by the way) is a simple diagram of a physical location. Whereas Don's document presents a massive amount of detail in a concise format. Your document does not resemble Don's document in terms of appearance or usefulness.
Myra
So you refuse to look at my documentation of my claim!
Then don't keep saying that I did not prove my claim!
Are you really that DENSE??
I did not say print out my map and his to compare the commentary. My map does not have any commentary.
Compare the drawing of the map.
Are you physically unable to do it? You don't have a computer program to do it? You don't own a printer?
As I said 5 times before already, Roberdeau merely STARTED with my basic plat (maybe you don't know what plat means?) and then added his own details.
Comparing the details of my drawing to his proves that.
You can see what is EXACTLY the same and what he changed.
Wanna try again with lame excuses? You can point out that his map is in color whereas my map is only in black and white. That will prove that his map is not the same as my map. Everyone will be impressed with your powers of logic. But I never said that his map is the same as mine. Or that my map is a document with commentary.
I said that he added a lot of speculative text.
If you believe that his speculative text is accurate you are not a serious researcher.
We all know that you, Anthony, could have done something as wonderful as Don's map if you were able to use something better than a Commodore 64 and had actually done it. I do not believe for one second that Don 'stole' your map any more than any of the other map makers posted here 'stole' your map but assuming for a moment that some one did use your simple map, the one that has noted on it 'Free to Copy', as the starting point for their own amazing and detailed creation why not take that as a great compliment and be glad that it has been used to greater understanding of the crime committed there? It just seems like so much jealsousy or something on your part. Tell me Anthony, what map did you use to make your map? Or did you draw it solely from your own memory while sitting at the Commodore 64?
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
AM: Again that is taken from my correction of the HSCA map. Notice at the bottom where it says Revised 6 March 1981. That was as a result of my finding an error in the original HSCA map. You can tell that someone just copied my copy by the very faint horizontal line which was the result of where it was folded when it was mailed to me. I was the first person to have this map and have shared it with other researchers.
No, again that it the water department map which the FBI/WC used to plot camera angles.
Did all these people steal your map too?
AM: As usual after you have already lost the argument you reframe the question to try to salvage something.
I don't care how many people also made maps or how inaccurate they are. Several people have used my correction of the HSCA map, such as Max Holland, without crediting me for it, but I have no made a big issue of it. The ONLY reason I make an issue out of Roberdeau stealing my map is because I was the first to hand drawn a map of Dealey Plaza on the computer and it took a lot of work, then Roberdeau simply steals my map and adds to it and certain people falsely claim he created it first and accuse me of lying when I point out that the basic plat came from me. Had certain people just been honest and admitted that fact there would be no problems. But certain people think they must defend their buddies at all costs and attack rival researchers. The old Divide and Conquer technique.
