|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 18, 2012 14:06:47 GMT -4
Playdor, in all the time you spent writing those posts, you could have addressed the fact that a number of people have responded to your film 'anomalies'. Why do you consistently refuse to do so?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 18, 2012 4:13:26 GMT -4
Ongoing refusal to address the responses to your film anomalies noted yet again. Playdor, when people take time to respond to your posts it is polite to at least acknowledge the fact.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 17, 2012 17:47:19 GMT -4
Continued failure/refusal to address the explanations for the anomalies in the film noted yet again.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 17, 2012 4:41:19 GMT -4
Ongoing refusal to address the responses to the film 'anomalies' noted again.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 16, 2012 12:37:59 GMT -4
what changed that the stars could now be seen? You're really not paying attention, are you?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 16, 2012 7:36:23 GMT -4
Ongoing failure to address the explanations for the 'anomalies' in the film noted.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 15, 2012 10:31:12 GMT -4
It is interesting to me that what is demanded is official evidence, what IS it, basically anything approved by the WC? It is documents, and clear proof. Not anecdotes. Not unsupported claims by anyone, whoever they are. Not your own interpretation of film images that you clearly do not understand. And on that subject, how about addressing the two responses I gave to two of the 'anomalies' you posted regarding the film? I saw someone do it on a TV show regarding the assassination. I've seen people fire off three shots in quick succession from other manual relaoding rifles. The 'moving target' was moving almost directly away from him, so barely moving in terms of his aim. It wasn't like he was taking a shot at a car moving across his line of fire. Now you're just grasping at straws. What makes a President a harder target to hit than any other person? Name them. Only to people who don't understand physics and newton's laws. How many times must you be told that such effects have been duplicated. Not concluded in theory, but in practice. A bullet is designed to penetrate, not hurl the target back. Name them. Ah, so it's pure fantasy that they were doing their job as government officials. Well, with that you have clearly lost the plot. You now nothing about any of this stuff, do you? I believe we asked you that question first, and you have yet to answer it. How many times in this thread have you been given material that was NOT in the Warren Commission? You are simply ignoring everything that contradicts you. Even when you request it and it is duly given, you ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 21:04:47 GMT -4
Jason Thompson if you have done any honest research on JFK you know of all the professional and lay people who have come forward concerning the true nature of JFK wounds...they all lying or just some of them? how about this guy, announcing to the median how JFK was murdered. I haven't done that research. If you have you should be able to supply the references when asked for them. Why do you refuse to do so? And I mean proper references. Transcripts of testimonies, named individuals, documents and so on. Where are they?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 20:43:06 GMT -4
I did look, and I offered explanations for a couple of your 'anomalies'. Why don't you respond to that?
And continued evasion of your obligation to cite your references noted.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 20:06:33 GMT -4
how is the radiation held in the belts? or what force could hold it, is is by electrical charge or magnetic? Charged particles are influenced by magnetic fields, a fact that is exploited down here on Earth in many applications, not the least of which being, until relatively recently, television and other cathode ray monitors.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 20:03:15 GMT -4
once you know that JFK was shot in the temple from the front, the only possible shooters are in the front seat, greer or kellerman, and greer is turned when the shot hits JFK Provide the reference that Kennedy was shot from the front. You have repeatedly claimed such testimony exists yet have conspicuously failed to produce it.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 20:01:29 GMT -4
concerning the modification of the z-film i don't have the hows, i don't know film. We'll just add that to the ever growing list of things you don't know then. Cite them. Names, published analyses, details. Don't just handwave their existence. Plenty more people who know film say the modifications you suggest are in fact impossible on the film in the time available, so why do you disregard that? And I note your lack of response to the comments regarding some of your film frames.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 7:10:07 GMT -4
greer snaps his head forward in 3/18 of a second And that is anomalous why? Does it really take you a long time to snap your head around, especially in response to something like a gunshot sound?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 7:09:12 GMT -4
in one frame man goes from movement to still. Look at the rear light of the car. It is quite obvious that it is the camera that is moving in that first frame and not the men, since there is hardly any blur on the car (which definitely is moving) at all, whereas in the second the car is blurred but the men are not, suggesting the camera is not moving in the same way. When the frames include still and moving objects and in one frame the moving object is not showing motion blur but the static objects are, that clearly shows the camera is moving.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 13, 2012 4:14:50 GMT -4
Trapped subatomic particles from the solar wind snared by Earth's magnetic field.
And you could try Googling Dr van Allen.
|
|