Question For Thompson
Joe Zircon
"white mass moving rearward over the trunk" of the limo, and suggested that,
"according to witness testimony, this may be impact debris from the
President's head."
Did you ever believe this to be true (that it could be impact debris), and
if so, do you still believe it to be true?
John McAdams
wrote:
I've always wondered where this came from, since the better versions
of the Nix film don't seem to show it.
Groden, in THE ASSASSINATION FILMS doesn't make this claim, at least
so far as I remember.
It would also be odd indeed if the Nix film showed something that the
Z-film -- shot from much closer and therefore showing much higher
resolution -- fails to show.
I think what we have here is an artifact.
.John
P.S. I do hope Tink answers this. Jerry seems to have driven him
away with some questions that, while just a bit inhospitable, really
did deserve answers.
--
Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Jaykhill
>Z-film -- shot from much closer and therefore showing much higher
>resolution -- fails to show.
******
Mr. Z used a much better quality camera with a sharper lens capable of
rendering better detail than the cheapo (Keystone?) used by Nix.
John in VA
Joe Zircon
news:3aa2de07...@news.primenet.com...
> On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 23:27:15 GMT, "Joe Zircon" <JoeZ1...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >You noted in Six Seconds in Dallas (page 99) that the Nix film shows a
> >"white mass moving rearward over the trunk" of the limo, and suggested
that,
> >"according to witness testimony, this may be impact debris from the
> >President's head."
> >
> >Did you ever believe this to be true (that it could be impact debris),
and
> >if so, do you still believe it to be true?
> >
> >
>
> I've always wondered where this came from, since the better versions
> of the Nix film don't seem to show it.
No, they do show it. I was just watching the Nix film the other night as it
was in FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER, and it shows the movement of the "white mass"
down the trunk. See below.
>
> Groden, in THE ASSASSINATION FILMS doesn't make this claim, at least
> so far as I remember.
>
> It would also be odd indeed if the Nix film showed something that the
> Z-film -- shot from much closer and therefore showing much higher
> resolution -- fails to show.
>
> I think what we have here is an artifact.
Actually, it's a reflection of the white retaining wall in the background.
As the trunk passes the white retaining wall, the "white mass" Thompson
suggested might be "impact debris" first appears, then disappears as the
trunk moves beyond the retaining wall.
Rewind the Nix film a little further back. Notice you can see the same
"white mass" on the *hood* of the limo, as it first passes the white
retaining wall on the knoll.
Curiously, by using a poor copy of the Nix film frames, and showing only a
cropped portion of the Nix film frames in question (and cropping *out* the
white retaining wall in the background), Thompson's book effectively
conceals the true answer from the reader (that the white mass is nothing but
a reflection). I've often wondered if that was intentional.
Perhaps Thompson would deign to answer this.
>
> .John
>
> P.S. I do hope Tink answers this. Jerry seems to have driven him
> away with some questions that, while just a bit inhospitable, really
> did deserve answers.
Yes, they do.
>
> --
> Kennedy Assassination Home Page
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
.htm