Five to One

[Herbert Blenner]

A comparison of heterodynes on the hum corrected tape of Channel-I
made by the FBI with the corresponding tones on the uncorrected Bowles
tape of the same channel reveals post correction tampering with these
acoustic records.

For details see the following link

http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm

[John Fiorentino]

Herbert:

And who do you think did the tampering and why?

John



"Herbert Blenner" <a1e...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:c8671bf2-0d2d-47d2...@u19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

[Herbert Blenner]

On Sep 13, 7:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Herbert:
>
> And who do you think did the tampering and why?
>
> John
>

> "Herbert Blenner" <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote in message

>
> news:c8671bf2-0d2d-47d2...@u19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >A comparison of heterodynes on the hum corrected tape of Channel-I
> > made by the FBI with the corresponding tones on the uncorrected Bowles
> > tape of the same channel reveals post correction tampering with these
> > acoustic records.
>
> > For details see the following link
>

> >http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm- Hide quoted text -
>

The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the
credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio
channel.

I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the alleged
shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the stuck open
microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the embarrassing
problem of explaining how official records were altered.

Herbert

[Anthony Marsh]

So now you have two alterations to the tape. Explain exactly who made
the alterations, when and how to the Dictabelt.

[charles wallace]

Herbert,

A retired DPD officer in the year 2000 who wished to remain anonymous
claimed a DPD sgt. and a DPD patrolman did the shooting. The DPD sgt was
the mastermind in killing JFK, he claimed. The sgt, he claimed arranged
with another DPD officer to jam the police radio transmissions at the
repeater during the motorcade. The jamming officer was told it would be a
practical joke on the chief. The jamming officer was supposed to get
reassigned from the area of the city he was presently assigned to and was
deathly afraid of if he did this.

Charles

http://community.webtv.net/ccwallace/CaseWideOpenAJFK

[Herbert Blenner]

On Sep 15, 10:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/14/2012 5:49 PM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 13, 7:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Herbert:
>
> >> And who do you think did the tampering and why?
>
> >> John
>
> >> "Herbert Blenner" <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:c8671bf2-0d2d-47d2...@u19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> A comparison of heterodynes on the hum corrected tape of Channel-I
> >>> made by the FBI with the corresponding tones on the uncorrected Bowles
> >>> tape of the same channel reveals post correction tampering with these
> >>> acoustic records.
>
> >>> For details see the following link
>

> >>>http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm-Hide quoted text -

>
> > The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the
> > credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
> > indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio
> > channel.
>
> > I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the alleged
> > shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the stuck open
> > microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the embarrassing
> > problem of explaining how official records were altered.
>
> > Herbert
>
> So now you have two alterations to the tape. Explain exactly who made

> the alterations, when and how to the Dictabelt.- Hide quoted text -
>

Perhaps you think that asking unanswerable questions score points but
rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
Franklin as bogus.

The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.

I suppose that someone who got stuck with the bogus fifty maybe inclined
to challenge the branding of the bill as counterfeit. Likewise someone who
placed their bets on the authenticity of the shots on the Dictabelt would
be motived to reject scientific proof of tampering with the acoustic
records.

Herbert

[Anthony Marsh]

I am merely pointing out that you are making up crap from your
imagination and you can't even explain how it could work and who could
do it or why.

> rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
> required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
> Franklin as bogus.
>

Just guessing is not good enough. You have to prove it.

> The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
> the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
> on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.
>

But in the case of counterfeiters they can explain how it is done and
prove it and often find the people who did it.
On the other hand you have nothing but your imagination.

[Herbert Blenner]

On Sep 16, 8:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/15/2012 9:29 PM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 10:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> On 9/14/2012 5:49 PM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
> >>> On Sep 13, 7:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Herbert:
>
> >>>> And who do you think did the tampering and why?
>
> >>>> John
>
> >>>> "Herbert Blenner" <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> >>>>news:c8671bf2-0d2d-47d2...@u19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>> A comparison of heterodynes on the hum corrected tape of Channel-I
> >>>>> made by the FBI with the corresponding tones on the uncorrected Bowles
> >>>>> tape of the same channel reveals post correction tampering with these
> >>>>> acoustic records.
>
> >>>>> For details see the following link
>

> >>>>>http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm-Hidequoted text -

>
> >>> The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the
> >>> credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
> >>> indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio
> >>> channel.
>
> >>> I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the alleged
> >>> shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the stuck open
> >>> microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the embarrassing
> >>> problem of explaining how official records were altered.
>
> >>> Herbert
>
> >> So now you have two alterations to the tape. Explain exactly who made
> >> the alterations, when and how to the Dictabelt.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Perhaps you think that asking unanswerable questions score points but
>
> I am merely pointing out that you are making up crap from your
> imagination and you can't even explain how it could work and who could
> do it or why.

The following link shows that I derived the relationships between the
speeds of playing and recording upon the frequency and durations of
the heterodynes.

http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm

Appendix 1, “Scaling of Frequency and Time by Recording and Playing
Speeds,” proves that Anthony Marsh either made up the claim of “making
up crap from your imagination” or is too &*%$#@ to understand the
contents of the referenced appendix.

>
> > rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
> > required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
> > Franklin as bogus.
>
> Just guessing is not good enough. You have to prove it.

The link, Five to One, demonstrates that the heterodynes on tracks six
and seven behaved as predicted by my derivation whereas the
heterodynes on tracks one and five violated the relationships between
playing speeds, frequencies and durations.

Just claiming that I have proved nothing is not good enough, Marsh,
especially when I posted all my work and you have shown no work
whatsoever.

>
> > The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
> > the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
> > on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.
>
> But in the case of counterfeiters they can explain how it is done and
> prove it and often find the people who did it.
> On the other hand you have nothing but your imagination.

I stand on calculations confirmed by measurements and all you have is
a baseless charge of “making up your crap from your imagination."

Your crudeness underscores the poverty of your position.

Herbert

>
>
>
> > I suppose that someone who got stuck with the bogus fifty maybe inclined
> > to challenge the branding of the bill as counterfeit. Likewise someone who
> > placed their bets on the authenticity of the shots on the Dictabelt would
> > be motived to reject scientific proof of tampering with the acoustic
> > records.
>

> > Herbert- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Ben Holmes]

In article <50566ce0$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

And when the question *IS* answered (remember your question about who
cleaned the bullet fragments, when and where?) you tend to refuse to
respond.

Blenner is absolutely correct about your use of unanswerable questions...
all they *actually* do is ... well, this is a censored forum. Can't say it
here.

>> rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
>> required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
>> Franklin as bogus.
>>
>
>Just guessing is not good enough. You have to prove it.
>
>> The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
>> the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
>> on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.
>>
>
>But in the case of counterfeiters they can explain how it is done and
>prove it and often find the people who did it.
>On the other hand you have nothing but your imagination.
>
>> I suppose that someone who got stuck with the bogus fifty maybe inclined
>> to challenge the branding of the bill as counterfeit. Likewise someone who
>> placed their bets on the authenticity of the shots on the Dictabelt would
>> be motived to reject scientific proof of tampering with the acoustic
>> records.
>>
>> Herbert
>>
>>
>
>

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

[Anthony Marsh]

As always you won't give a direct answer because you can't show anyone
how bizarre your theory is. I am not asking you about your math. Just
how your theory works, who did what and how and why. But you keep
ducking the questions. That reveals to everyone that you are just making
up crap from your imagination.

> http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm
>
> Appendix 1, �Scaling of Frequency and Time by Recording and Playing
> Speeds,� proves that Anthony Marsh either made up the claim of �making
> up crap from your imagination� or is too &*%$#@ to understand the

> contents of the referenced appendix.
>

Where is your mystery studio? What is the name of it? Who are the people
who tampered with the tape. When? How? For what purpose?

>>
>>> rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
>>> required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
>>> Franklin as bogus.
>>
>> Just guessing is not good enough. You have to prove it.
>
> The link, Five to One, demonstrates that the heterodynes on tracks six
> and seven behaved as predicted by my derivation whereas the
> heterodynes on tracks one and five violated the relationships between
> playing speeds, frequencies and durations.
>
> Just claiming that I have proved nothing is not good enough, Marsh,
> especially when I posted all my work and you have shown no work
> whatsoever.
>

My article was the first challenge to the Ramsey Report. You, nothing.

>
>>
>>> The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
>>> the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
>>> on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.
>>
>> But in the case of counterfeiters they can explain how it is done and
>> prove it and often find the people who did it.
>> On the other hand you have nothing but your imagination.
>
> I stand on calculations confirmed by measurements and all you have is

> a baseless charge of �making up your crap from your imagination."
>

This is not about your data. This is about your theory. You could
provide accurate data about solar flares and then claim that it is being
caused by aliens to attack us. Two separate things.

> Your crudeness underscores the poverty of your position.
>

Go crying to McAdams.

[Ben Holmes]

In article <50574caf$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

I do believe that you are *absolutely correct*, Tony. When you keep
ducking the questions, you are revealing to everyone that you are "just

making up crap from your imagination".




>> http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm
>>

>> Appendix 1, ?Scaling of Frequency and Time by Recording and Playing
>> Speeds,? proves that Anthony Marsh either made up the claim of ?making
>> up crap from your imagination? or is too &*%$#@ to understand the

>> contents of the referenced appendix.
>>
>
>Where is your mystery studio? What is the name of it? Who are the people
>who tampered with the tape. When? How? For what purpose?
>
>>>
>>>> rational people understand that identification of counterfeiters is not
>>>> required to recognize a fifty-dollar bill bearing the portrait of Benjamin
>>>> Franklin as bogus.
>>>
>>> Just guessing is not good enough. You have to prove it.
>>
>> The link, Five to One, demonstrates that the heterodynes on tracks six
>> and seven behaved as predicted by my derivation whereas the
>> heterodynes on tracks one and five violated the relationships between
>> playing speeds, frequencies and durations.
>>
>> Just claiming that I have proved nothing is not good enough, Marsh,
>> especially when I posted all my work and you have shown no work
>> whatsoever.
>>
>
>My article was the first challenge to the Ramsey Report. You, nothing.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> The situation with the heterodynes on tracks one and five is similar to
>>>> the bogus fifty. In this case the matching frequencies of the heterodynes
>>>> on tapes played at measurably different rates expose the alterations.
>>>
>>> But in the case of counterfeiters they can explain how it is done and
>>> prove it and often find the people who did it.
>>> On the other hand you have nothing but your imagination.
>>
>> I stand on calculations confirmed by measurements and all you have is

>> a baseless charge of ?making up your crap from your imagination."

>>
>
>This is not about your data. This is about your theory. You could
>provide accurate data about solar flares and then claim that it is being
>caused by aliens to attack us. Two separate things.
>
>> Your crudeness underscores the poverty of your position.
>>
>
>Go crying to McAdams.
>
>> Herbert
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I suppose that someone who got stuck with the bogus fifty maybe inclined
>>>> to challenge the branding of the bill as counterfeit. Likewise someone who
>>>> placed their bets on the authenticity of the shots on the Dictabelt would
>>>> be motived to reject scientific proof of tampering with the acoustic
>>>> records.
>>>
>>>> Herbert- Hide quoted text -
>>>

[Herbert Blenner]

On Sep 17, 10:31 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 9/17/2012 9:59 AM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 16, 8:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> On 9/15/2012 9:29 PM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
> >>> On Sep 15, 10:21 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>> On 9/14/2012 5:49 PM, Herbert Blenner wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Sep 13, 7:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Herbert:
>
> >>>>>> And who do you think did the tampering and why?
>
> >>>>>> John
>
> >>>>>> "Herbert Blenner" <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> >>>>>>news:c8671bf2-0d2d-47d2...@u19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>>>>> A comparison of heterodynes on the hum corrected tape of Channel-I
> >>>>>>> made by the FBI with the corresponding tones on the uncorrected Bowles
> >>>>>>> tape of the same channel reveals post correction tampering with these
> >>>>>>> acoustic records.
>
> >>>>>>> For details see the following link
>

> >>>>>>>http://hdblenner.com/fivetoone.htm-Hidequotedtext -

John F. Asked why do I think they did the tampering and I replied.

“The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the

credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio
channel.”

“I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the
alleged shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the
stuck open microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the
embarrassing problem of explaining how official records were

altered.”

The contents of the Bowles tapes tell us how they were altered without
specifying who, where or when the changes were made. Now do you get it
or do you still think that signal analysis can answer everything
question that can raise?

Herbert

[Anthony Marsh]

> �The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the

> credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
> indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio

> channel.�
>

So now you think that the conspirators intentionally jammed the radio
channel? Which one? Why not both? Kooky.
And then they altered the tape to cover up evidence of their jamming?
But the tape shows live recording on channel one so what were they
covering up?

> �I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the

> alleged shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the
> stuck open microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the
> embarrassing problem of explaining how official records were

> altered.�
>

So now you have a third layer with someone else adding real shots fired
in Dealey Plaza? For what purpose? To mislead the public into thinking
that 4 shots were fired in Dealey Plaza?
Every time someone asks you a question about your theory you need to
make it more complex.

> The contents of the Bowles tapes tell us how they were altered without
> specifying who, where or when the changes were made. Now do you get it
> or do you still think that signal analysis can answer everything
> question that can raise?
>

I don't get your illogic. You are talking garbage.

> Herbert
>
>

[Herbert Blenner]

> > “The purpose of the easily recognized alterations was to diminish the

> > credibility of the loud interference on the Dictabelt which had an
> > indelible electronic signature of an intentional jamming of the radio

> > channel.”

>
> So now you think that the conspirators intentionally jammed the radio
> channel? Which one? Why not both? Kooky.
> And then they altered the tape to cover up evidence of their jamming?
> But the tape shows live recording on channel one so what were they
> covering up?

Get off your high horse, mister, and show us your work that identifies the
source of the loud interference on the Bowles tape of the Dictabelt. Did
you cross correlate the interference with engine sounds? I doubt that you
know the meaning of my last question.

By contrast, I systematically studied the spectra of the loud interference
and characterized the source as a wideband frequency modulation of audio.
This result coupled with the long term spectra changes identified the
source as a jammer that used one multivibrator to simultaneously amplitude
and frequency modulate another multivibrator. These circuits generated the
wideband frequency modulated audio whose dense spectrum could not be
filtered.

>
> > “I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the

> > alleged shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the
> > stuck open microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the
> > embarrassing problem of explaining how official records were

> > altered.”

>
> So now you have a third layer with someone else adding real shots fired
> in Dealey Plaza? For what purpose? To mislead the public into thinking
> that 4 shots were fired in Dealey Plaza?
> Every time someone asks you a question about your theory you need to
> make it more complex.

I am not surprised that you ignore the highly confused discussion by BBN
on the effect of playing speed upon frequency and time as well as the
convoluted explanation of AGC and heterodynes by the Watson Research
Center. Candidly, I believe these topics ideas are over your head so I
elaborate for the benefit of readers.

Playing a wave file at half speed illustrates the error made by BBN.

http://hdblenner.com/thump_files/gotmailhalfspeed.wav

The half speed playing lowered the pitch of the voice and extended its
duration. So correcting these distortions requires multiplying the
frequency by two and multiplying the duration by one half, the reciprocal
of two. Now that is simple enough for even Anthony Marsh to understand.

However, BBN in their effort to cover the error made by those who added
real shots the acoustic record was compelled to adjust for playing speed
error by multiplying frequency and time by the same correction factor. I
quote the report by BBN.

Source: BB&N - 8HSCA, 110

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0057b.htm

“The tape-recording system was found to be about 5% slow, when the
time annotations were measured with a stopwatch (see Fig. 9).
Therefore, the apparent pitch of the tone would have a frequency of
(1.05) (420) = 441 Hz.”

Source: BB&N - 8HSCA, 75

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0040a.htm

“The time span between the onset of the first impulse pattern and the
onset of the fourth impulse pattern on the Channel 1 tape is 7.9 sec.
When corrected for the fact that the tape recorder was running about
5% too slowly, the real time span is 8.3 sec. ”

So there you have the proof that BBN attempted corrections by
multiplying frequency and time by the same 1.05-factor.

As for the Watson Research Center they described operation of an AM
receiver in order to explain the behavior of AGC and heterodynes on
the Bowles tape of the Dictabelt. I quote them.

Channel-I AGC
Most radio receivers have an AGC circuit at IF stage to maintain a
steady IF signal level at the detector or discriminator. If there is
a sudden increase in the RF signal (such as caused by switching on a
strong carrier). AGC acts rapidly to reduce the IF amplifier gain to
bring down the signal within acceptable limits. On the other hand if
there is sudden decrease (such as caused by switching off a strong
carrier) in the RF signal level, AGC acts more slowly to restore the
IF amplifier gain. This is a typical characteristics [sic] of an AGC
circuit: fast attenuation and slow recovery.

Channel-I Heterodynes
On Channel-I spectra, several narrow-band high-energy tones are
intermittently present for short durations. These tones are not on
Channel II. Also at the end of each tone. there is evident a sharp
drop in total Channel-I energy. This indicates some kind of AGC
(Automatic Gain Control) action.

These narrow-band tones are called heterodynes. They were generated
when another transmitter came on the radio channel, while the
transmitter with the stuck-open mike was transmitting. The
difference in their carrier frequencies resulted in the heterodynes.
If the second carrier is strong it should also activate the AGC action
in the IF (Intermediate Frequency) stage of the radio receiver.

The AGC action also affects the audio output level because of the drop
in overall gain of the system. Therefore, when a heterodyne begins, we
should expect a sudden drop in the recorded level of the signal picked
up by the stuck-open mike. And after the heterodyne ends, we should
expect a slow recovery in the audio signal to its original level. This
phenomenon is indeed observed in Channel-I spectra.

End of quotation.

The errors in the quoted paragraphs could fill a web page.

>
> > The contents of the Bowles tapes tell us how they were altered without
> > specifying who, where or when the changes were made. Now do you get it
> > or do you still think that signal analysis can answer everything
> > question that can raise?
>
> I don't get your illogic. You are talking garbage.
>
>

Smart people say dumb things when they have something to hide.
Personnel of BBN and the Watson Research Center were not exceptions to
this rule.

BBN found that the grassy knoll shot on the Bowles tape required the
wrong correction factor. So instead of declaring the Bowles tape a
counterfeit they pretended that the same 1.05-factor corrected by
frequency and time.

The Watson Research Center had similar and more readily recognized
problems with the heterodynes. My link, Five to One, scores a change
in playing speed that does not change the frequency and duration of
the same heterodynes. On a more technical point, the narrow band
characters of the heterodynes were inconsistent with generation from
at least one frequency modulated radio signal.

So both sides of the acoustic debate made their contributions toward
hiding the alterations of the acoustic records.

Herbert

[Anthony Marsh]

BBN did that and they stand by it. The interference is caused by a
mobile unit having its radio stuck on.

> By contrast, I systematically studied the spectra of the loud interference
> and characterized the source as a wideband frequency modulation of audio.

Nonsense.

> This result coupled with the long term spectra changes identified the
> source as a jammer that used one multivibrator to simultaneously amplitude
> and frequency modulate another multivibrator. These circuits generated the
> wideband frequency modulated audio whose dense spectrum could not be
> filtered.

Garbage. There is no such thing as a jammer on the DPD channel.

>
>>
>>> “I suspect that unknown persons made these alterations before the
>>> alleged shots were added to the acoustic record and the story of the
>>> stuck open microphone was invented. This amended approach bypassed the
>>> embarrassing problem of explaining how official records were

>>> altered.”
>>
>> So now you have a third layer with someone else adding real shots fired
>> in Dealey Plaza? For what purpose? To mislead the public into thinking
>> that 4 shots were fired in Dealey Plaza?
>> Every time someone asks you a question about your theory you need to
>> make it more complex.
>
> I am not surprised that you ignore the highly confused discussion by BBN
> on the effect of playing speed upon frequency and time as well as the
> convoluted explanation of AGC and heterodynes by the Watson Research
> Center. Candidly, I believe these topics ideas are over your head so I
> elaborate for the benefit of readers.
>
> Playing a wave file at half speed illustrates the error made by BBN.
>
> http://hdblenner.com/thump_files/gotmailhalfspeed.wav
>
> The half speed playing lowered the pitch of the voice and extended its
> duration. So correcting these distortions requires multiplying the
> frequency by two and multiplying the duration by one half, the reciprocal
> of two. Now that is simple enough for even Anthony Marsh to understand.
>
> However, BBN in their effort to cover the error made by those who added
> real shots the acoustic record was compelled to adjust for playing speed
> error by multiplying frequency and time by the same correction factor. I
> quote the report by BBN.
>

No one added real shots. And your real shots would have to be recorded
live in Dealey Plaza during the shooting.

> Source: BB&N - 8HSCA, 110
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0057b.htm
>
> “The tape-recording system was found to be about 5% slow, when the
> time annotations were measured with a stopwatch (see Fig. 9).
> Therefore, the apparent pitch of the tone would have a frequency of
> (1.05) (420) = 441 Hz.”
>
> Source: BB&N - 8HSCA, 75
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0040a.htm
>
> “The time span between the onset of the first impulse pattern and the
> onset of the fourth impulse pattern on the Channel 1 tape is 7.9 sec.
> When corrected for the fact that the tape recorder was running about
> 5% too slowly, the real time span is 8.3 sec. ”
>
> So there you have the proof that BBN attempted corrections by
> multiplying frequency and time by the same 1.05-factor.
>

Yeah, so what? Don Thomas also uses the 1.05 correction factor. I do
not. I used 1.043 because that was found to be the best match for the
grassy knoll by Weiss and Aschkenazy.

> As for the Watson Research Center they described operation of an AM
> receiver in order to explain the behavior of AGC and heterodynes on
> the Bowles tape of the Dictabelt. I quote them.
>

Not impressed.

> Channel-I AGC
> Most radio receivers have an AGC circuit at IF stage to maintain a
> steady IF signal level at the detector or discriminator. If there is
> a sudden increase in the RF signal (such as caused by switching on a
> strong carrier). AGC acts rapidly to reduce the IF amplifier gain to
> bring down the signal within acceptable limits. On the other hand if
> there is sudden decrease (such as caused by switching off a strong
> carrier) in the RF signal level, AGC acts more slowly to restore the
> IF amplifier gain. This is a typical characteristics [sic] of an AGC
> circuit: fast attenuation and slow recovery.
>
> Channel-I Heterodynes
> On Channel-I spectra, several narrow-band high-energy tones are
> intermittently present for short durations. These tones are not on
> Channel II. Also at the end of each tone. there is evident a sharp
> drop in total Channel-I energy. This indicates some kind of AGC
> (Automatic Gain Control) action.
>

Yeah, so what?

> These narrow-band tones are called heterodynes. They were generated
> when another transmitter came on the radio channel, while the
> transmitter with the stuck-open mike was transmitting. The
> difference in their carrier frequencies resulted in the heterodynes.
> If the second carrier is strong it should also activate the AGC action
> in the IF (Intermediate Frequency) stage of the radio receiver.
>
> The AGC action also affects the audio output level because of the drop
> in overall gain of the system. Therefore, when a heterodyne begins, we
> should expect a sudden drop in the recorded level of the signal picked
> up by the stuck-open mike. And after the heterodyne ends, we should
> expect a slow recovery in the audio signal to its original level. This
> phenomenon is indeed observed in Channel-I spectra.
>
> End of quotation.
>
> The errors in the quoted paragraphs could fill a web page.
>

So now you're going to criticize the Ramsey panel. Fine with me.

>>
>>> The contents of the Bowles tapes tell us how they were altered without
>>> specifying who, where or when the changes were made. Now do you get it
>>> or do you still think that signal analysis can answer everything
>>> question that can raise?
>>
>> I don't get your illogic. You are talking garbage.
>>
>>
>
> Smart people say dumb things when they have something to hide.
> Personnel of BBN and the Watson Research Center were not exceptions to
> this rule.

They were not buddies. They were opponents.

>
> BBN found that the grassy knoll shot on the Bowles tape required the
> wrong correction factor. So instead of declaring the Bowles tape a
> counterfeit they pretended that the same 1.05-factor corrected by
> frequency and time.
>

W&A, not BBN.
English please.

[John Reagor King]

In article
<c860c339-111c-40ed...@u15g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,

Herbert Blenner <a1e...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Playing a wave file at half speed illustrates the error made by BBN.
>
> http://hdblenner.com/thump_files/gotmailhalfspeed.wav
>
> The half speed playing lowered the pitch of the voice and extended its
> duration. So correcting these distortions requires multiplying the
> frequency by two and multiplying the duration by one half, the reciprocal
> of two. Now that is simple enough for even Anthony Marsh to understand.

I think it is quite easy to understand.