I just did a recreation of the Jackson photo

[Ralph Cinque]

I just did a recreation of the Jackson photo which proves that the freak
hand we see on Oswald is bogus. My real hand doesn't look anything like
it, Try it yourself. All you need is a camera and a mirror. But, until
someone reproduces that image, this proves that it is bogus. It is an
altered image, a grotesquely altered image.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/i-mentioned-to-sparta-on-mcadams-forum.html

[Jason Burke]

You haven't recreated sh*t, Ralph.

Ever.

[Jason Burke]

On 7/27/2017 6:38 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:

Pretty creepy / crappy attempt at a 'stache, though, Ralph.

[David Von Pein]

All anyone has to do is put their left hand near the Jackson picture on
their computer screen and then start curling up their fingers to match the
position that Oswald has his fingers curled in the Jackson photo.

I just did it myself, and it was very easy for me to position my left hand
to perfectly match Oswald's left hand as we see it in the Bob Jackson
picture.

But in Ralph's "re-creation", Ralph has decided (for some reason) to not
BEND his fingers AT ALL. So, naturally, Ralph's hand and fingers aren't
going to look like Oswald's left hand in the Jackson photo. How *could*
they possibly match. Ralph's hand is perfectly straight, with no bent or
curled up fingers at all. Oswald's fingers are bent and curled. And why
Ralph thinks human fingers can't be bent and curled is anyone's guess.
~shrug~

[Betty Drew]

Cinque used his expertise as a Chiropractor to recreate the Jackson photo.
So are you saying he failed? I wonder what Amy says about this?

[Ralph Cinque]

Oh, is that so, Von Pein? That if I had only curled my fingers, they'd
have looked exactly the same? Well, I didn't because it was bad enough
that they suggested that Oswald slapped his arm to his chest after being
shot in the side. No abdominal gunshot victim has EVER done that, and
Oswald didn't do it. We can see in the films that he didn't do it. But, to
think that in addition, he would monkey with his fingers. Why would he?
The hand has a neutral position, and unless you deliberately do something
with it, it stays in that neutral position. So, why would he have done
that with his fingers?

But, just because of you, I am going to repeat the experiment, and this
time curl my fingers. And I'm going to post it. And, we'll see how well it
matches the Jackson photo. You're just another lip-flapper, Von Pein.
What? You don't own a camera? Stay tuned. Because this is coming at
you.

[David Von Pein]

RALPH CINQUE SAID:

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/response-to-david-von-pein.html


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I kind of figured I'd have to talk Ralph through this incredibly easy
"finger re-creation" thing. I knew he'd deny the obvious ease of
re-creating it.

In this additional re-creation of Ralph's.....

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lk9pSkhtays/WXzwFDznd6I/AAAAAAAA_i8/OdIouQDxcZUdCTvAHAF0ImmpiMv8a4tOQCLcBGAs/s2000/hands%2Bcompared%2Bcollage.jpg

....Ralph still isn't even *attempting* to position his fingers the same
as Oswald's. Ralph doesn't have his thumb pressed right up against his
curled/bent left index finger. If he were to place his thumb and index
finger in that configuration, he'd be able to re-create Oswald's hand
position too.

I just did another re-creation with my own left hand, and (again) when I
place my hand against my computer screen (right next to a picture of the
Jackson image), it's a spot-on perfect match---right down to my thumb
*overlapping* my left index finger, just like Oswald's. And it overlaps
because the index finger is bent while the thumb is pressed flush up
against that index finger. And my index finger doesn't need to be bent
very far either (just as Oswald's isn't curled very far either).

In short, the nature of Oswald's "finger pose" is a highly RE-CREATABLE
posture/pose. I know it can be easily re-created, because I just did it
myself (twice) today. So it's hardly the "impossible" posture that Ralph
Cinque seems to think it is.

Footnote ----

To my fellow LNers ----

Yes, I know you're all rolling your eyes and thinking the same
thing---i.e., why does DVP bother to respond to Cinque's silliness?

Well, that's a good (and valid point), I must admit. But occasionally I
find myself *wanting* to respond to a few of Ralph's "Everything Is Fake"
fantasies, for the simple reason that I want to add some more things to my
JFK Archives at my website. (Even "oddball" things.)

And by adding these various theories and oddities, people can visit my
archives in future years and search for almost any sub-topic and find
*something* on that subject---even Dr. Cinque's ludicrous sub-topic of
"Jack Ruby Is Innocent Because James Bookhout Shot Oswald"....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Jack+Ruby+Is+Innocent+Because+James+Bookhout+Shot+Oswald

[Betty Drew]

Now that I have my reading glasses on I can see-- lousy recreation of
Jackson photo. Not even close. Maybe the fact that he tried to recreate
the picture in the bathroom. I suggest that Cinque go to the same
location as the picture he is trying to recreate.

[Jason Burke]

Is this Ralph dude serious?

[Ralph Cinque]

You are UNBELIEVABLE, David Von Pein. That you would have the nerve to
claim that if I had only pressed my thumb up to my index finger that all
would have correlated is unbefrickinlievable.

First, neither I nor anyone else can do that. NOBODY can get his thumb up
on the index finger like we see in the Jackson photo. That's an image of
two hands. But, when you only use one hand you can't do it. The thumb
won't go there. There are limits to the movements of the appendages.

But first, why won't you take a picture? Every smart phone is a camera.
Why won't you at least try to be scientific about it? Actually try to
reproduce it and show the result rather than just claim it? Do you really
think that lip-flapping alone is going to impress people? In a matter such
as this?

Now, I couldn't get my thumb on top of the index finger, where the nail is
exposed. That would require fracture or dislocation. But, if you can do
it, DO IT! Get out a God-damn camera and take a picture! Every smart phone
is a camera! I'm telling you it can't be done. If you want to dispute me,
you have to do it with a camera.

Now compare the shape of my wrist to the shape of his wrist.

Notice that I have a straight wrist, and he has a wrist like the border
between two states.

Now compare the length of my thumb to the length of his thumb. Mine
doesn't even reach the first interphalangeal joint. His goes way beyond
it. And look at the size of his thumb. It's way bigger than mine, but it's
also way bigger than Oswald's.


Now, look at the contour of each thumb. Mine looks normal with two digital
joints, then the knuckle, and then the first metacarpal bone. So, we're
seeing 3 straight bones and 2 joints in-between them. Normal. But, look at
the weird contour of his thumb. Did that get reproduced? Now, let's count
the knuckles.

I've got 5 knuckles and fingers, but he's only got 4.

So, even when I did everything possible to reproduce the position of the
hand in the Jackson photo, I still wound up showing that it is a freak
hand.

Now, listen up, Von Pein: If you have any inclination to claim that if I
had only done this or that, all would have worked out fine, you resist
that inclination. Don't give in to it. Instead, you take a camera out, and
you demonstrate it. It's time, David. It's long overdo. And you have no
excuse not to do it. I'm NOT interested in your lip-flapping. I am only
interested in what you can show. So, if you are going to refute me, you
will have to take out your camera. Good luck with that.

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/you-are-unbelievable-david-von-pein.html

[Anthony Marsh]

On 7/29/2017 9:28 PM, Betty Drew wrote:
> Cinque used his expertise as a Chiropractor to recreate the Jackson photo.
> So are you saying he failed? I wonder what Amy says about this?
>

WTF are you babbling about?

[bpete1969]

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 9:38:18 PM UTC-4, Ralph Cinque wrote:

So has several other people...

http://www.bpete1969.com/2017/07/i-used-to-think-he-was-paid-disinfo.html

[Jason Burke]

Sure thing. Let Ralph do that.
And then ol' Ralph will claim he won. Again.

[Jason Burke]

Ya know. One of the thangs they learnt us at Boston Tech is that when
you're proven wrong, ya look for another theory, Ralph.

Ya don't go on making yourself look like a total idiot asshole, Ralph.

Guess they didn't learn you that at bone-bendin' school, eh, Ralph?

[Jason Burke]

Who the hell would pay Ralph?

I still enjoy looking at the 19sep15 post from:

http://www.oswaldinthedoorway.com/

[Ralph Cinque]

Here is my response to bpete. His submission failed miserably at
validating the Jackson photo, which is a grotesque photographic
abomination.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/who-could-possibly-be-paying-me-to.html

bpete forgets that I ALWAYS get the last word. NEVER have I failed to
refute him.

[OHLeeRedux]

Confused again, eh Anthony? Nothing new there.

[InsideSparta]

I'll save DVP the trouble of having to create a photo of his hand that
duplicates the hand of Oswald seen in the Bob Jackson photo. Here's my
duplication, with my own hand, and it took me all of five minutes. Can we
now move on to more serious discussions, and stop all this nonsense talk?

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g107/SJSdude/Two%20hands.jpg

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

You've got more than five knuckles, ralph. You forgot to count your head.

[David Von Pein]

You can cut the theatrics, Ralph. You're not impressing anybody here. And
I'm not interested in jumping through hoops in order to photographically
debunk your outrageous theories (even if I owned a camera, which I don't).

I have repeatedly replicated Oswald's "finger" pose using my own left
hand. And I didn't have to break any bones or reconfigure my hand via
surgery in order to do so. If you don't believe me, fine. I don't care.

And I'm quite sure that even if I were to post a photo proving that I
easily duplicated LHO's fingers, you would still cry foul and claim that
my photo doesn't match Oswald's pose at all. (Is there any doubt that that
would happen?)

A final thought or two---

I think Ralph (deep down) probably knows that Oswald's finger posture can
easily be re-created by any human being who has a left hand with five
fingers on it. But Ralph won't admit his own failings (which are great in
number), so he puts up multiple photos of his own which he says are
"re-creations" of Oswald's finger pose, but (as I said twice previously)
Ralph hasn't come close to putting his fingers in the proper position at
all. And Ralph *HAS* to know this. And he also has to know that his left
hand is *easily* capable of being configured into the proper "Oswald
pose".

But he won't do it, because if he were to take a picture of his own hand
in the proper position, he would have to come back in here and admit he
was wrong. And when has Ralph C. Cinque *ever* been willing to accept a
defeat? I can't remember one such occasion. And, as all reasonable people
know, Ralph's defeats are, in actuality, too numerous to mention. In fact,
Ralph's batting .000 on the JFK case. He's Zero-for-Forever. Mario Mendoza
will be pleased. There's finally somebody under him now.

And Ralph also fails (as usual) to take into account the photographic
perspective and the angles shown in the Jackson picture. Oswald's left
hand is positioned in such a way so that from cameraman Bob Jackson's
point-of-view, one of Oswald's knuckles seems to be missing. But, of
course, it's not *really* missing. All of his knuckles are there, we just
can't see all of them clearly from the POV of the Jackson photograph. It's
all a matter of angle and perspective. I wonder why Ralph can't grasp that
simple concept? ~shrug~

[Betty Drew]

Let me get this straignt--so Dr. Cinque believes BPete1969 is a hitman?
Oh dear, oh dear ROFL

[Jason Burke]

Delusions of grandeur, Ralph.
Delusions of grandeur.

[Ralph Cinque]

That link doesn't work, Sparta. And what do you think is going to happen
when I see it? I'm going to do to it what I did to bpete's image. So, are
you sure it's the same? Are you checking everything? You can't say I
didn't warn you.

[Anthony Marsh]

So, McAdams allows you to say that to Ralph, but he won't allow me to
say that to you? Is that what he means by a level playing field?
He ties my hands behind my back while letting you beat me up and not be
able to defend myself.

[InsideSparta]

Corrected link...
https://ibb.co/e3tbUk

[Ralph Cinque]

You are just blathering, Von Pein. And, the hand in the Jackson photo
doesn't have 5 fingers. It has only 4. I marked them here:

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/who-could-possibly-be-paying-me-to.html

And your excuse is you don't have a camera? Do you have a smart phone? If
you do, you have a camera.

But, let's be honest: you wouldn't take a picture even if you had a
camera, now would you.

People have no trouble seeing what I see, David. Outside warped JFK-land,
it's an easy sell.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Let's all give ralph a hand here…... (sound of one hand clapping)

[OHLeeRedux]

Mooooommy! He has more cereal than me!

What a sad display, coming from a supposed adult.

[gkno...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 8:38:18 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> I just did a recreation of the Jackson photo which proves that the freak
> hand we see on Oswald is bogus. My real hand doesn't look anything like
> it, Try it yourself. All you need is a camera and a mirror. But, until
> someone reproduces that image, this proves that it is bogus. It is an
> altered image, a grotesquely altered image.
>
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/i-mentioned-to-sparta-on-mcadams-forum.html

If you want to recreate the Jackson photo you need to take it with a
bullet penetrating your heart. Have a look at Oswald's face. His body is
reacting to something like a bullet in his heart.

So, if you want to recreate the Jackson photo you need to get a friend to
shoot you in the heart while someone else is taking the photo. But I warn
you, you can only do this once!

[David Von Pein]

Allow me to repeat what I said yesterday.....

[Anthony Marsh]

You're making him famous. Knock it off.

[Jason Burke]

Do you enjoy having your hands tied behind your back, Anthony Anthony?

[Jason Burke]

Oh, crap. The dude on the left only has four fingers!

[Ralph Cinque]

You blew it, Sparta. Big time. You just proved the anomalies in the photo.
Note: I did try to warn you that you would fail miserably, and that's what
you did. Now, I'm going to make you famous for it.

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/08/alright-its-showtime.html

[Ralph Cinque]

Von Pein: That is incredible. Incredible for being utterly ludicrous.
There is absolutely no basis to assume that, from Bob Jackson's
perspective, that one of Oswald's knuckles would be missing. And what is
the default? That is: to make such a claim, wouldn't you have to first
prove that it's possible? And I mean by taking a picture in which someone
known to have 5 knuckles appears to have 4? Bob Jackson was in front of
Oswald, and there is no reason, according to the laws of physics, why all
Oswald's knuckles would not be visible to Jackson.

And here's something else: My whole pursuit is based on the accusation (my
accusation) that the Jackson photo is NOT a legitimate photo, that it
contains altered elements- grossly, crudely, and conspiculously altered
elements. That's what is being evaluated. That is what is on trial. The
photo is on trial. Now, if you want to try to defend it, you can, but you
can't do it by just assuming that it's legit. You can't make the thing
being questioned a presumption in your argument.

The Jackson photo only shows 4 knuckles on Oswald, and the burden is on
you to demonstrate that that is legit, that it is some kind of optical
illusion. I maintain that it is NOT an optical illusion, that it is due to
photographic fraud. And I have supported my argument by using, not only
images I have taken, but images that two other people have taken, both
adversaries of mine, which display 5 knuckles. You are entirely free to
support your argument of optical illusion by creating one in which 5
knuckles appear as 4. But to just declare it? To just assume it? You think
you can get away with that with me?

And whether you allow it or not, I'll repeat what I said yesterday:
lip-flapping won't cut it this time. You have to get a camera out.

The fact is that from Bob Jackson's perspective, there is no reason why 5
knuckles would not have been captured. What is the basis for doubting
that?

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/08/david-von-pein-aug-1-5-hours-ago-show.html

[Anthony Marsh]

Jack Ruby had his finger bitten off in a fight.

https://books.google.com/books?id=H7pFAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA440&lpg=PA440&dq=jack+ruby+finger+bit+off+in+a+fight.&source=bl&ots=q0lbLc4PCz&sig=HfgwAQRDg3YjVgyrJQn2ihO8sF8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZmMWN6bjVAhXDTSYKHWU1CdMQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

In 1951, after his guitarist, Willis Dickerson, told Ruby to "go to
hell," Ruby knocked Dickerson to the ground, then pinned him to a wall and
kicked him in the groin. During the scuffle, Dickerson bit Ruby's finger
so badly that the top half of Ruby's left index finger was amputated.

[Anthony Marsh]

He's channelling Jack White! (inside joke)

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/1/2017 11:46 PM, gkno...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 8:38:18 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>> I just did a recreation of the Jackson photo which proves that the freak
>> hand we see on Oswald is bogus. My real hand doesn't look anything like
>> it, Try it yourself. All you need is a camera and a mirror. But, until
>> someone reproduces that image, this proves that it is bogus. It is an
>> altered image, a grotesquely altered image.
>>
>> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/07/i-mentioned-to-sparta-on-mcadams-forum.html
>
>
> If you want to recreate the Jackson photo you need to take it with a
> bullet penetrating your heart. Have a look at Oswald's face. His body is
> reacting to something like a bullet in his heart.
>

Why the heart? Oswald wasn't shot in the heart.

> So, if you want to recreate the Jackson photo you need to get a friend to
> shoot you in the heart while someone else is taking the photo. But I warn
> you, you can only do this once!
>

If you're going to do a recreation at least get the anatomy correct.

[InsideSparta]

Well Ralph, here's a snap shot taken from a frame of a moving news film
from when Oswald was shot and it is aligned with the flash from Bob
Jackson's camera. Lo and behold, Oswald left hand looks exactly like it
does in Bob Jackson's photo. That of course means one of two things,
either those sneaky conspirators would have had to have doctored both the
Bob Jackson photo and this news film (going to the trouble of manipulating
the hand in both images), or your theory that Bob Jackson's photo was
altered is a load of crap.

https://ibb.co/nMkK0Q

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Finger food ?

[Ralph Cinque]

Sparta: No, no, no, no, no. I know all about that. I know where it's from.
It's from the international newsreel. It occurs at the 41 second mark
right here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ukl7rPnYz4

But, it's NOT in the rolling film. Nothing follows it. The film doesn't
continue after it. It is just a still image that was tacked onto the
moving film.

Sparta, it's not in the film; it's not part of the film; it's just more
fakery. They attempted to make it look like it was part of the film, but
it's not.

Now listen, Sparta: For it to be part of the film, it has to occur IN THE
FILM, which means there is film before it, there is film after it, and it
occurs in process in the film. If you think it's legit, then you show me
the film in which I can see it not as a still, not as a "snap shot" as you
put it, but as an active element within the film. There is no reason why
that shouldn't exist if it's real. But, it doesn't exist because it isn't
real.

It goes from this at the 41 second mark:

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/08/insidesparta-306-pm-40-minutes-ago-show.html

to this, also at the 41 second mark:

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/08/insidesparta-306-pm-40-minutes-ago-show.html

And then nothing. It's followed by nothing, as though the film ended right
there. Let's see it intact. Let's see it within the moving film. Let's see
it in motion; with moving film before and moving film after. But, we
can't see it within the moving film because it doesn't occur within the
moving film. It is a still frame that was tacked onto the moving film.

Sparta, you keep trying; you keep thinking that you have something; you
keep thinking that you have me cornered. You are NEVER going to have me
cornered because I am right and you are wrong. The whole thing was a ruse,
a farce. The Jackson photo is a monstrosity, an abomination. And it can't
be duplicated by anybody.

[Anthony Marsh]

Or how about chopping off the hand and transplanting it on the other guy?

>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/3/2017 4:05 PM, Betty Drew wrote:
> This was not a 'freak or grotesque' hand but a mangled hand. No wonder
> nobody was able to duplicate the picture exactly. Making a big deal out of
> nothing is ridiculous.
>


Ralph mangled his hand? I didn't know chiropractic was so dangerous.
Did he get it stuck in one of those fold-up treatment tables?

[InsideSparta]

Thanks for allowing me to totally prove my point, and also prove you to be
wrong again. If one reviews the newsreel link that you provided, you can
watch the film run from the 0.38 second mark, until the freeze frame at
0.42, which proves the image is from still frame of a moving picture. And
further, if you lay the freeze frame image next to the Bob Jackson photo,
you can easily see that the two images are from slightly different angles,
because the newsreel camera was a few feet to Jackson's left.

https://ibb.co/dQQ8Wa

The side by side comparison also shows that the Oswald's left hand is an
exact match between the two images, which proves there was no manipulation
of Jackson's photo; (not that there has ever been any doubt from sane
people).

Another Cinque theory has bitten the dust.

[Ralph Cinque]

Oswald's hand was not mangled, Marsh. And, the hand in the Jackson photo
is not his. And not it's not anybody's. It's not a hand. It is two hands,
clasped together. It was constructed that way.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

No, it got stuck in that strange device he calls "The Fister", located
down in his gym/dungeoun

[Betty Drew]

Yes, maybe he mangled his hand doing the reenactment of the Jackson photo.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Clasped together Ralph ?? you mean, like they were when Lovelady was
standing in the doorway ? Was billy "clasping" his hands? No !!! It's
Cinque's pareidolia at work again. Epic fail, Ralph. E-

[Ralph Cinque]

You're amazing, Spara, and I mean for saying things that are blatantly not
true. The hand in Jackson and the hand in the frozen newsreel are NOT the
same. In Jackson, the thumb is overlapping the index finger. In the frozen
newsreel, the thumb is parallel with the index finger. And first, thumbs
aren't supposed to be parallel with index fingers. Thumbs are "opposed" to
index fingers. And second, the thumb is much shorter than index fingers.
So, what we have in that frozen frame is ridiculous- just as ridiculous as
the Jackson photo- but in a different way. You should look at it again.

[Anthony Marsh]

Now you're confusing us. I thought you were talking about Ruby missing a
finger. Now you say that Oswald's hands were clasped together? Well,
wasn't that because he was wearing handcuffs?
Or are you saying he was born that way?

[InsideSparta]

An incredibly desperate reply from even you Ralph. Once again, you've been
proven wrong, and you actually have the gall to try and say the hands in
both images aren't the same? Delusional and pathetic. Even Amy stopped
coming around to provide support for your "theory". Put a fork in it, it's
done.

[Anthony Marsh]

Maybe he had a hand transplant.

[Ralph Cinque]

See if you can see the difference now, Sparta. It's pretty black and
white.

https://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2017/08/can-you-or-can-you-not-see-that-in.html

[InsideSparta]

So, I'm looking at the two photo blow-ups of the hand, and they both
appear to be nearly identical. The only (slight) difference between the is
the angle from which each of them was taken. Other than that, I see
consistency between the two images. I see nothing, and I mean nothing,
that would indicate either of them had been tampered with in any manner.
I'd also be willing to bet that any experts in detecting photographic
manipulation would see exactly what I see. I'd also be willing to bet that
the vast majority of contributors to this site would say your totally out
to lunch on this one.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Yes, Ralph, I'm with you and your 'Wizard'. Denis needs to take that
image down. He needs to take it down now, or you might start writing
about Lovelady in the Doorway again, or some such thing.

[Ralph Cinque]

Sparta, in one the thumb is pressed to the index finger. In the other, the
thumb is alongside the index finger, running parallel to it, like railroad
tracks, except a lot closer.

So, that's a big difference. And on what basis are you claiming a
difference in angle? What are you seeing that is telling you that? You
can't attribute the difference in the arrangement of the thumb and index
finger to the angle. Either the thumb was pressed to the index finger or
it wasn't.

And I'll take your bet that experts, trained in photo manipulation, would
see exactly what you see. So, shall I find one? How much do you want to
make it for?

And how many contributors are there to this site? My InfoWars presentation
on Bookhout and Ruby has garnered 404 Likes and only 38 Dislikes. And
those Dislikes were probably mostly people from here.

In the real world, as opposed to this world, people see what I see.

But, you've challenged me to a bet, and I accept. So, let's set it up.

[Betty Drew]

Out to Lunch

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/9/2017 10:25 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Sparta, in one the thumb is pressed to the index finger. In the other, the
> thumb is alongside the index finger, running parallel to it, like railroad
> tracks, except a lot closer.
>
> So, that's a big difference. And on what basis are you claiming a
> difference in angle? What are you seeing that is telling you that? You
> can't attribute the difference in the arrangement of the thumb and index
> finger to the angle. Either the thumb was pressed to the index finger or
> it wasn't.
>
> And I'll take your bet that experts, trained in photo manipulation, would
> see exactly what you see. So, shall I find one? How much do you want to
> make it for?
>
> And how many contributors are there to this site? My InfoWars presentation
> on Bookhout and Ruby has garnered 404 Likes and only 38 Dislikes. And
> those Dislikes were probably mostly people from here.
>

InfoWars? What a joke. Uneducated rightwing nuts.

> In the real world, as opposed to this world, people see what I see.
>

No. Only you see what you see.

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

I just did a recreation of the Cinque embalming