Yes, I am quite familiar with Chris' work. He lives here in San Diego and we have spoken several times about the specifics of his project.
I very much hope that an independent, irrefutable PROOF can be found to substantiate the eyewitness accounts that the extant Zappy film is a fraud.
Having said that, I do think that Chris is onto something important.
David Josephs Wrote:Thanks Greg... I still keep your chilling description of what you saw in a word doc nearby.....
Not sure if you've followed any of the MATH threads Chris Davidson and I have had... I believe we found the 30-40 feet that makes up the descrepency in the "data" and it has to do with that turn onto Elm where the FBI decides that Towner is running at a speed much higher than the 16fps her camera SHOULD have taken images at... and with the "STOP".
Turns out if one simply moves the measuring point from Myer's FRONT of the LIMO to JFK IN THE LIMO we can gain or lose about 15-16 feet from a fixed measuring point (station C)
Then, by changing 16fps (1/3 of slo-mo) to 18.3 you pick up about 30 frames over the sequence... or another 1-2 seconds = 30 feet of movement, again based on where the fixed measuring point is.
2-3 mph is virtually a stop. That's regular walking speed... for a car it's crawling along.
The only way Hill reaches the limo in basically 4 steps is if the limo/QM are traveling at less than 5 mph.
Without the "0183" on the extant film at the archives - it cannot be proven to be the one developed as the Camera Original...
There is simply too much blank film
DJ
It could havehappened this way---consider this: the extant film (that is, the assassination movie, not theZapruder family scenes present on the two Secret Service copies) in the NationalArchives (not counting leader) consists of a strip of film 8 feet, 10 incheslong (of which only 6 feet, 3 inches contains the imagery ofthe assassination film, and 2 feet, 7 inches is black, unexposed film with no image showing); then there isa physical splice; then there is asegment of black film containing no imagery that is 19 feet, 3 inches long; then there isanother physical splice; then there is another segment of black film containing noimagery which is 5 feet, 8 inches long.
Summarizing,after the first splice at the end ofthe assassination segment, there are a total of just over 24 feet of black film with no imageshowing. If the camera-original film had actually been shot at 48 frames persecond---three times normal speed--- thenconceivably it would have required approximately three times the length of filmin the present assassination segment (i.e., 3 x 6 feet = 18 feet). Currently,there is more than 18 feet of black film that is not contiguous with theassassination movie---that is, there is actually 24 feet of black film that hasnot been shot, butthe problem is, it is not physically connected to the assassination film.
The rhetoricalquestion becomes, how do we know the actual, camera-original Zapruder film wasn'tshot at 48 frames per second, and then edited down to normal speed during the alterationprocess by removing two thirds of the frames when the new film was created in anoptical printer? The answer is, we don't know that---there is room for subterfugehere---because the black, unexposed film on the reel of the extant Zapruder film has beenattached with a splice.
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
When the President's automobile was very close to him and he could see the President's face very well, the President was seated, but was leaning forward when he stiffened perceptibly at the same instant what appeared to be a rifle shot sounded. According to BREHM, the President seemed do to stiffen and come to a pause when another shot sounded and the President appeared to be badly hit in the head. BREHM said when the President was hit by the second shot, he could notice the President's hair fly up, and then roll over to his side, as Mrs. KENNEDY was apparently pulling him in that direction. BREHM said that a third shot followed and that all three shots were relatively close together. BREHM stated that he was in military service and he has had experience with bolt-action rifles, and he expressed the opinion that the three shots were fired just about as quickly as an individual can maneuver a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.
Your figures as I understand them allow appropriate editing to remove a suspicious event at the turn, a virtual stopping and dismount, and other head movement and wound phenomena deemed fatal to the official explanation:
Assassination imagery:
75 inches
Black film segments:
31 inches
231 inches
68 inches
Total black film:
330 inches
Had the 18.3 fps been projected at 48 fps, 75 inches would be 197 inches
Brugioni said Hawkeyeworks had the capability to do almost anything; McMahon that he'd seen eight shots from three directions. In The Kennedy Tapes we see NPIC processing U-2 film of Cuba's Soviet MRBM/IRBM sites amounting to a strip twenty feet wide and a hundred miles long--it would seem NPIC could exert enormous resources on such a tiny piece of celluloid as 8 or 16 millimeters by a few feet.
The Palamara 59 witness collation is in spite of the determined effort by FBI and others to suppress any testimony outlying the received dogma.
The Hollywood professionals consulted in Twyman and elsewhere stipulate the observed bubble gum wound is painted on while techniques were in use at the time to accomplish the alterations speculated.
As for discrepancies in versions viewed by the selected researchers, if there were such, I posit as an extension of the sowing of cognitive dissonance corollary to the Langleyan muddling such was performed to created dissonance, to prevent consensus.
And now for something completely different: What of the yellow stripes on the South curb of Elm? One might think of timing marks on a flywheel visible through a hole in the bell housing illuminated by a timing light.
(Don't anyone suggest a tow-away zone--now, a Blow-Away Zone, yes.)
It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine if the films that each of us saw were the same or different. They were certainly different from the extant version, but from each other's version, I do not know
for certain.
David is correct in that the possibility of the films being the same yet yielding disparate recollection from the various viewers might be explained by differences in individual experiences, predilection, focus,
etc. -- However, it is still worth noting that many elements that impeach the authenticity of the extant version are present or missing (as the case may be) from ALL of the reports of the "private" film(s).
For instance, the turn onto Elm is present in each report of the "private" film(s), but missing from the extant film. The COMPLETE STOP is present in each report of the private film(s) yet missing in the
extant, etc.
Charles, I did speak to Milicent at length upon discovering that she reported seeing another film. It's interesting to note that when I first recounted my experience (during a phone conversation with Jack White)
I was unaware that anyone else had ever reportedly seen a different film. When Jack suggested that I "go public" with it, I hesitated...but eventually posted it on our forum. When I became aware that a few
others had reported seeing a similar film, I decided to contact them. So, I did a typical, "separate the suspects/witnesses" from each other in order to check the story for consistency. In other words, since
I was not very familiar with Mili back then I did not offer my account so as to avoid influencing her recollection. Of course, Jack was aware of Mili's account when we had spoken, but he didn't let on as to what
she had reportedly seen. After speaking with her--and later with Scott Myers--the similarities led me to believe that we had "perhaps" seen the same film, but not necessarily. However, I found her to be
extremely credible. Like me, she was NOT glad that she had seen this film. The same holds true for Rich. These days I spend a lot of time avoiding its discussion. It seems to be divisive amongst good, honest
researchers.
Greg - thank you for this, and your other related posts.
As someone with a television production background, taking account of all the information offered in this thread and especially Doug Horne's fine article, here is some informed speculation.
Even allowing for the fact that covert science is typically a decade and a paradigm shift ahead of public domain science, I consider it unilikely that an entirely fictional event, something which did not occur in real life, was inserted into the Zapruder footage. I don't believe we're dealing with actors on a set, who could perform multiple alternate actions in multiple takes. In addition, even with C21st Hollywood science, the insertion of artifice can usually be detected by skilled professional eyes.
To my eye, the one clear insertion of artifice in Time Life Zapruder is the "red blob", and this is a (deliberately?) crude effort to:
i) obscure the true nature of the head wound;
ii) complicate understanding of the direction from which the shots came;
iii) create trauma;
iv) ?
If this is correct, then at the fundamental level what we are likely dealing with is the filming of a real event, the assasination by gunfire of JFK, and several cut down versions of the camera original, the master rushes.
The camera original, as captured at the correct speed in Hawkeyeworks, quite possibly shows certain real life events, such as the turn onto Elm and the stopping of the limo, which could not be allowed to survive and come to public attention in the Time Life Zapruder.
The other films, as seen by Greg, Milicent, Rich DellaRosa, Reymond and others, are quite possibly simply different cut downs of the camera original. Ie with different parts of the master rushes cut out.
This speculative hypothesis permits for several versions of the film to exist. If even slightly different cut downs were shown to serious JFK researchers independently, then each researcher would report variations in this miraculous new "Zapruder".
One could call it the Sowing of Conflict.
Even a Strategy of Tension.
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War." Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon
"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta." The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
A.J. Blocker Wrote:I have never seen this close up of President Kennedy's suit jacket before...only WC photos 393 which show no close up detail as this image does...
LIPSEY:
Alright, as I remember them there was one bullet that went in the back of the
head that exited and blew away part of his face. And that was sort of high up,
not high up but like this little crown on the back of your head right there,
three or four inches above your neck (DJ: EOP). And then the other one entered at more of
less the top of the neck, the other one entered more of less at the bottom of
the neck.
LIPSEY: Yeah, the right side. If you looked at him straight. If you looked at him from the left you couldn't see anything. If you looked at him from the right side it was just physically part of it blown away.
Q: So that would be right here?
LIPSEY: Yeah, behind the eye and everything.
Q: Behind the eye? Was it all hair region or was it part of the actual face?
LIPSEY: To the best of my recollection it was part of the hair region and part of the face region.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4054[/ATTACH]
Right or wrong about the hole... I am still at a loss for how so many described his face blown away at Bethesda... while the photos contradict the xrays....
It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine if the films that each of us saw were the same or different. They were certainly different from the extant version, but from each other's version, I do not know
for certain.
David is correct in that the possibility of the films being the same yet yielding disparate recollection from the various viewers might be explained by differences in individual experiences, predilection, focus,
etc. -- However, it is still worth noting that many elements that impeach the authenticity of the extant version are present or missing (as the case may be) from ALL of the reports of the "private" film(s).
For instance, the turn onto Elm is present in each report of the "private" film(s), but missing from the extant film. The COMPLETE STOP is present in each report of the private film(s) yet missing in the
extant, etc.
Charles, I did speak to Milicent at length upon discovering that she reported seeing another film. It's interesting to note that when I first recounted my experience (during a phone conversation with Jack White)
I was unaware that anyone else had ever reportedly seen a different film. When Jack suggested that I "go public" with it, I hesitated...but eventually posted it on our forum. When I became aware that a few
others had reported seeing a similar film, I decided to contact them. So, I did a typical, "separate the suspects/witnesses" from each other in order to check the story for consistency. In other words, since
I was not very familiar with Mili back then I did not offer my account so as to avoid influencing her recollection. Of course, Jack was aware of Mili's account when we had spoken, but he didn't let on as to what
she had reportedly seen. After speaking with her--and later with Scott Myers--the similarities led me to believe that we had "perhaps" seen the same film, but not necessarily. However, I found her to be
extremely credible. Like me, she was NOT glad that she had seen this film. The same holds true for Rich. These days I spend a lot of time avoiding its discussion. It seems to be divisive amongst good, honest
researchers.
Greg - thank you for this, and your other related posts.
As someone with a television production background, taking account of all the information offered in this thread and especially Doug Horne's fine article, here is some informed speculation.
Even allowing for the fact that covert science is typically a decade and a paradigm shift ahead of public domain science, I consider it unilikely that an entirely fictional event, something which did not occur in real life, was inserted into the Zapruder footage. I don't believe we're dealing with actors on a set, who could perform multiple alternate actions in multiple takes. In addition, even with C21st Hollywood science, the insertion of artifice can usually be detected by skilled professional eyes.
To my eye, the one clear insertion of artifice in Time Life Zapruder is the "red blob", and this is a (deliberately?) crude effort to:
i) obscure the true nature of the head wound;
ii) complicate understanding of the direction from which the shots came;
iii) create trauma;
iv) ?
If this is correct, then at the fundamental level what we are likely dealing with is the filming of a real event, the assasination by gunfire of JFK, and several cut down versions of the camera original, the master rushes.
The camera original, as captured at the correct speed in Hawkeyeworks, quite possibly shows certain real life events, such as the turn onto Elm and the stopping of the limo, which could not be allowed to survive and come to public attention in the Time Life Zapruder.
The other films, as seen by Greg, Milicent, Rich DellaRosa, Reymond and others, are quite possibly simply different cut downs of the camera original. Ie with different parts of the master rushes cut out.
This speculative hypothesis permits for several versions of the film to exist. If even slightly different cut downs were shown to serious JFK researchers independently, then each researcher would report variations in this miraculous new "Zapruder".
One could call it the Sowing of Conflict.
Even a Strategy of Tension.
I'm entirely with Jan on this; his observations mirror (pun intended) my own.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine if the films that each of us saw were the same or different. They were certainly different from the extant version, but from each other's version, I do not know
for certain.
David is correct in that the possibility of the films being the same yet yielding disparate recollection from the various viewers might be explained by differences in individual experiences, predilection, focus,
etc. -- However, it is still worth noting that many elements that impeach the authenticity of the extant version are present or missing (as the case may be) from ALL of the reports of the "private" film(s).
For instance, the turn onto Elm is present in each report of the "private" film(s), but missing from the extant film. The COMPLETE STOP is present in each report of the private film(s) yet missing in the
extant, etc.
Charles, I did speak to Milicent at length upon discovering that she reported seeing another film. It's interesting to note that when I first recounted my experience (during a phone conversation with Jack White)
I was unaware that anyone else had ever reportedly seen a different film. When Jack suggested that I "go public" with it, I hesitated...but eventually posted it on our forum. When I became aware that a few
others had reported seeing a similar film, I decided to contact them. So, I did a typical, "separate the suspects/witnesses" from each other in order to check the story for consistency. In other words, since
I was not very familiar with Mili back then I did not offer my account so as to avoid influencing her recollection. Of course, Jack was aware of Mili's account when we had spoken, but he didn't let on as to what
she had reportedly seen. After speaking with her--and later with Scott Myers--the similarities led me to believe that we had "perhaps" seen the same film, but not necessarily. However, I found her to be
extremely credible. Like me, she was NOT glad that she had seen this film. The same holds true for Rich. These days I spend a lot of time avoiding its discussion. It seems to be divisive amongst good, honest
researchers.
Greg - thank you for this, and your other related posts.
As someone with a television production background, taking account of all the information offered in this thread and especially Doug Horne's fine article, here is some informed speculation.
Even allowing for the fact that covert science is typically a decade and a paradigm shift ahead of public domain science, I consider it unilikely that an entirely fictional event, something which did not occur in real life, was inserted into the Zapruder footage. I don't believe we're dealing with actors on a set, who could perform multiple alternate actions in multiple takes. In addition, even with C21st Hollywood science, the insertion of artifice can usually be detected by skilled professional eyes.
To my eye, the one clear insertion of artifice in Time Life Zapruder is the "red blob", and this is a (deliberately?) crude effort to:
i) obscure the true nature of the head wound;
ii) complicate understanding of the direction from which the shots came;
iii) create trauma;
iv) ?
If this is correct, then at the fundamental level what we are likely dealing with is the filming of a real event, the assasination by gunfire of JFK, and several cut down versions of the camera original, the master rushes.
The camera original, as captured at the correct speed in Hawkeyeworks, quite possibly shows certain real life events, such as the turn onto Elm and the stopping of the limo, which could not be allowed to survive and come to public attention in the Time Life Zapruder.
The other films, as seen by Greg, Milicent, Rich DellaRosa, Reymond and others, are quite possibly simply different cut downs of the camera original. Ie with different parts of the master rushes cut out.
This speculative hypothesis permits for several versions of the film to exist. If even slightly different cut downs were shown to serious JFK researchers independently, then each researcher would report variations in this miraculous new "Zapruder".
One could call it the Sowing of Conflict.
Even a Strategy of Tension.
Hey there Jan... always great to hear from an expert in a field... thanks.
For any of this to work, the FINAL VERSION had to be one continuous version of the altered film on filmstock of the period.
Any "cutdown" reassembled version would have the telltale skips in the Intersprocket area... especially if a 1-2 second, 30 frame "event" was removed. and be easily seen as an altered version...
but then again the Original is an altered version...
The original spool of film has 25 feet of exposable film
The film at the archive has 6'3" of assassiantion, plus 2'7" of blank... THEN IS SPLICED to 19'3" of blank film then SPLICE then 5'8" of blank film.
33'9" of total FILM from a 25 foot roll - all but 6'3" is BLANK...
PLUS, within this 6 feet of film the perforated "0183" was not seen "but should have been present at the end of the remaining blank - unexposed balance of side two"... Zavada
Perforated Number: The Zapruder 8mm film was identified during processing with a number 0183 perforated vertically within the 8mm width as a part of company practice for customer identification a control system to match the processing request or order to the film. The perforation would typically be located at the core of the returned 8mm reel, thus placing it following the scene exposed last the customer tails end of side two. Also note that as the laboratory receives the film, this location is at the outside end of the camera spool, immediately following the integral camera thread-up leader that will be removed prior to processing.
My narrow focus of interest on this relates to what I've termed the "doppelganger gambit" in the JFK assassination -- among other deep political operations.
Whose interests are served by promoting the existence of two -- or more -- Z-films?
For starters.
Charlie
Exactly.
Phil: Mili gave me some detail last time were were in Lancaster PA visiting my daughter. But several of us were out to dinner and I did not pay a lot of attention. After seeing this thread I called her Thursday to get better detail and she promised to send it to me, but apparently does not want it on a forum...so..The jist however was that in the film she saw there were way more shots. Including headshots. Some from behind pushing him forward almost into Jackie's lap.
And it may all be interesting to some but I find it a diversion, one of those "my theory is better than your theory" distraction. We know his head was blown off by the front headshot. We know from Hargis' testimony that he was covered with brain matter, we know that the Governor does not react to the single bullet, etc. So regardless of tampering or more films we have ample proof of conspiracy.
