New large photographic alteration discovered

[Ralph Cinque]

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-have-sent-this-out-to-some-of-oic.html

[Robert Harris]

Ralph Cinque wrote:
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-have-sent-this-out-to-some-of-oic.html
>

You're dead wrong, Ralph. The shape of Jackie's arm has been altered by
what appears to be the extended lens of an old-time camera which was very
close to the guy who snapped the photo. It altered the shape of her arm,
cutting off the lower part of it.

But this was indeed, her left arm. Some of the words in your blog
overlapped the photo, so that we can't see the fingers on Jackie's hand on
the other side of the window to her left. Looking at that, there is no
doubt at all about it.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-By5prPIY0CI/VOZgvQVRipI/AAAAAAAAX2o/hAOqSm-4FYk/s1600/Woman%2Band%2BGirl2.jpg


Admit it, Ralph - you WANT to see visual skullduggery in the photos and
films. But you will never be able to come to reliable conclusions, until
you do the impossible - you have to be objective.

If you can't do that, why don't you contract with a legitimate photo
analyst, preferably one who knows nothing about the JFK case, and let
that person evaluate your theories?



Robert Harris

[mainframetech]

On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 11:23:54 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-have-sent-this-out-to-some-of-oic.html

I don't think so. I see 2 arms on Jackie, and I see JFK's hand
appearing close and looking a bit like it might have been hers. But she
appears to be 2 armed.

Chris

[Ralph Cinque]

Now I know why they did it. It was for the cover of TIME magazine.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-profusely-want-to-thank-barry-ladd.html

[David Von Pein]

Unbelievable.

Ralph Cinque is the biggest "LN" asset to come along since the invention
of the Internet.

Thank you, Dr. Cinque.

[Jason Burke]

On 2/21/2015 5:59 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Now I know why they did it. It was for the cover of TIME magazine.
>
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-profusely-want-to-thank-barry-ladd.html
>

Uh, Ralph...
Did you JUST notice that this photo was on the cover of Time?
Are you serious?

[black...@aol.com]

Mods, please forgive me if I'm getting too close to a violation on this,
but it's a legit question.

What are we, the assassination research community, to do when really
irrational ideas emerge, when wildly irrational claims are made? Do we
answer them? Do we simply let them be, on the wrong notion of idea
equivalency, that all ideas are equal? Do we take some collective action
to try to help the claimant be less irrational? (double negative??)

DVP is right that it reflects very badly on the community. The less
sensible might even posit a deliberate provocation. What's even more
disturbing than the irrational idea the continued pattern of them, and the
aggressive defense against all efforts to challenge them.

I'll say this: It's certainly proof that alt.assassination.jfk is
basically open to all comers

[bpete1969]

On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 8:59:51 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Now I know why they did it. It was for the cover of TIME magazine.
>
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-profusely-want-to-thank-barry-ladd.html

Another feeble attempt...

http://bpete1969.blogspot.com/2015/02/ralph-cinque-dumbest-of-asses.html

[BOZ]

On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 8:59:51 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:

> Now I know why they did it. It was for the cover of TIME magazine.
>
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-profusely-want-to-thank-barry-ladd.html

Religious iconography? Saint John Kennedy the Divine?

[Mike]

Cinques ideas are really no more irrational that some of the LN ideas.
Cinque does not really believe the things he writes, he is showing by
satire how ridiculous are some of the LN ideas.

For instance, the idea that Jack Ruby killed Oswald to save Jackie from
having to go through a trial. That is just as preposterous an idea as
the one that Cinque is stating!

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/22/2015 2:09 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:
> Mods, please forgive me if I'm getting too close to a violation on this,
> but it's a legit question.
>
> What are we, the assassination research community, to do when really
> irrational ideas emerge, when wildly irrational claims are made? Do we
> answer them? Do we simply let them be, on the wrong notion of idea
> equivalency, that all ideas are equal? Do we take some collective action
> to try to help the claimant be less irrational? (double negative??)
>

Well, it doesn't matter how many times I correct you guys you still keep
posting ridiculous stuff.

> DVP is right that it reflects very badly on the community. The less

What community? You mean the CIA?

> sensible might even posit a deliberate provocation. What's even more
> disturbing than the irrational idea the continued pattern of them, and the
> aggressive defense against all efforts to challenge them.
>
> I'll say this: It's certainly proof that alt.assassination.jfk is
> basically open to all comers
>

No, you're thinking of the Nuthouse. This newsgroup is heavily censored
to protect the guilty.

[Ralph Cinque]

Robert, don't give me advice. I don't want it.

Now, that is her right arm waving. There are multiple reasons why I know
that but the most obvious one is that it's her right hand. It is the
dorsal (back) side of her right hand, in which I have identified every
finger plus the big knuckle.


http://tinypic.com/r/2wf22l5/8

I don't know what kind of work you have done in your life, Robert, but I
take it you are not an Anatomist. I once taught Anatomy.

[Jason Burke]

Too bad the WC got it pretty much correct, eh, Mike?

[bigdog]

I agree. Jack Ruby's decision to kill Oswald was a spur of the moment act.
If he had planned to kill Oswald, he would have been in that garage much
earlier. As it was, it was just a fluke that he happened to get there just
before Oswald was led out. I guess we just got lucky on this one.

[black...@aol.com]

On Sunday, February 22, 2015 at 8:58:22 PM UTC-5, Mike wrote:

> Cinques ideas are really no more irrational that some of the LN ideas.
> Cinque does not really believe the things he writes, he is showing by
> satire how ridiculous are some of the LN ideas.

That's a bit of an overstatement.

>
> For instance, the idea that Jack Ruby killed Oswald to save Jackie from
> having to go through a trial. That is just as preposterous an idea as
> the one that Cinque is stating!

It IS a strange idea, but it wasn't proposed by some researcher. It was
proposed by Ruby himself. So it's a false equivalency.

[black...@aol.com]

On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 2:59:10 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Robert, don't give me advice. I don't want it.
>
> Now, that is her right arm waving. There are multiple reasons why I know
> that but the most obvious one is that it's her right hand. It is the
> dorsal (back) side of her right hand, in which I have identified every
> finger plus the big knuckle.

It's her left arm, ad the fingers are around the half-raised window.

> I don't know what kind of work you have done in your life, Robert, but I
> take it you are not an Anatomist. I once taught Anatomy.

I've had a little experience with anatomy, too... Seriously, you use that
as an excuse all the time, but your judgement on such matters is respected
by nobody. You decide on a conclusion, then you invent the evidence to get
there. And NEVER effectively.

[John McAdams]

On 22 Feb 2015 14:09:59 -0500, "black...@aol.com"

The problem comes when moderators have to decide what are "irrational
ideas."

Peter and I could run this newsgroup like a peer-reviewed scholarly
journal, sending each post to referees who would decide whether it's
sound, and a contribution to the literature on the assassination.

Frankly, we don't want to go to that much trouble. So it's up to the
readers of the group to decide who is rational, and who is not.

You may have noticed that, on other online forums, people are always
getting banned. We don't ban anybody here, although we reject some
posts.

I can think of some people who maybe *should* be banned. But then the
banning becomes an issue in itself, and further distracts from
discussion of the assassination. And the banning always seems to be
(to a large extent) arbitrary.

I would suggest (again) that you might want to get a real news client
(Agent, Thunderbird, or such) and simply killfile posters whose posts
you find to be a waste of time. You and I probably agree on who those
folks are.


.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Jason Burke]

Don't look under the bed, Tony.

[Mike]

It is not a false equivalency.

Jack Ruby killed Oswald.

Would a killer lie?

[Anthony Marsh]

I bought 2 storage drawers from Ikea to put under my bed to take care of
that. No room for anyone to hide.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/23/2015 3:45 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 2:59:10 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
>> Robert, don't give me advice. I don't want it.
>>
>> Now, that is her right arm waving. There are multiple reasons why I know
>> that but the most obvious one is that it's her right hand. It is the
>> dorsal (back) side of her right hand, in which I have identified every
>> finger plus the big knuckle.
>
> It's her left arm, ad the fingers are around the half-raised window.
>

Nellie's half-raised window? That's quite a stretch, even for you.
Again, show a better frame.
And don't believe anything that he says.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/23/2015 3:45 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:

It was suggested by his lawyer. He didn't think it up himself.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, he was. His elaborate plans for Sheba's safety show premeditation.
And he said that he tried to shoot Oswald on Friday night but there were
too many reporters in the way. But YOU don't count that as premeditation.
Why don't you apply the same standards to Oswald? Just claim that he had
left his rifle at work the week before and when he saw the President drive
by he decided on the spur of the moment to shoot him. Yeah, that's it!

[David Von Pein]

The picture below was taken just a few seconds before the other photo that
Ralph Cinque thinks has been faked. I wonder if Ralph will now say that
Jackie's left arm is *really* her right arm in this picture too....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KF4RjIefNzY/UoU5MvHNC_I/AAAAAAAAwuA/MWn2MzWdeOc/s1600/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--002.jpg

[black...@aol.com]

Maybe I have a streak of do-gooder in me. I remember feeling, a few years
back, that a certain controversial claimant might be losing her mind, and
that we were enabling that process to some degree. I would just hate to
see us allow a crazy to become even crazier.

Thanks for the reasoned response and, yes, there are a couple of crazies
we would probably agree on.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/23/2015 2:59 PM, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Robert, don't give me advice. I don't want it.
>
> Now, that is her right arm waving. There are multiple reasons why I know
> that but the most obvious one is that it's her right hand. It is the
> dorsal (back) side of her right hand, in which I have identified every
> finger plus the big knuckle.
>
>
> http://tinypic.com/r/2wf22l5/8
>

Can't you make the quality even worse? You're not trying very hard for
an alterationist.

[Jason Burke]

But... but... that picture is faked too!

No short woman could have hair that curly.

And the folks in the back left behind JFK's head aren't even looking at
him. They must be photoshopped in there. Especially that guy who is
wearing Packers colors. That NEVER would have happened during football
season in Dallas in 1963.

What caused the airbag to explode in front of that fellow in the gray
shirt?

Why did they paste in ol' Abe Z? With a still camera. I bet that they
thought no one would notice.

And, oh dear. Let's not even get started on the woman in red facing the
camera. Why is her kid wearing a raincoat? How on earth is she holding him
with one arm? Geez, half a second later I'm sure his head hit the ground
and exploded like a watermelon.

[Ralph Cinque]

That's actually useful, DVP, because that is a valid image, and everything
is accounted for: her shoulder, her upper arm, and her forearm. But not so
with the disputed photo. I have done a detailed comparison. And once
again, I'm making you famous. But this time you did good. You helped
me.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/david-von-pein-offers-this-image-from.html

[tims...@gmail.com]

Yeah, we saw your "anatomy training" when you were trying to debunk the
FACT that Kennedy assumed a "Thorburn Position" after Oswald shot him the
first time, Cinque.

Suffice it to say that that was a HOPELESS effort, Cinque.

Still sticking by your claim that a "Thorburn Position" is ONLY found in
JFK literature, Cinque?

You shouldn't be...

Informative Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/23/2015 10:10 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:
> Maybe I have a streak of do-gooder in me. I remember feeling, a few years
> back, that a certain controversial claimant might be losing her mind, and
> that we were enabling that process to some degree. I would just hate to
> see us allow a crazy to become even crazier.
>

Claimant? In which court? Which case?
Didn't you already narrow it down by saying "her"? We don't have that
many hers here.

And of course you didn't take his advice and get a real news client. And
of course you didn't read or understand the tutorial I uploaded just for
you about how to killfile posters in the most popular news clients.

One final question:

How are you going to killfile someone who doesn't even post here any more?
What you need is a BS filter to ignore any message with the name Judyth,
But then certain trolls here will say Judyfki or some such nonsense to
bypass your filter.

[Anthony Marsh]

Don't you already know the alterationist game? No matter what you cite
they will claim it is a fake.

Maybe they'll even claim she had two right arms. Don't underestimate
their kookiness.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/23/2015 10:08 PM, David Von Pein wrote:

Nice photo. Can you tell us when and where it was taken? And what's up
with that black fez the woman is wearing? Is that some type of super
secret Masonic symbol? (for Pamela)

[David Von Pein]

You're something else, Ralph. I don't think we in these parts have ever
encountered an "EVERYTHING WAS FAKE" conspiracy theorist quite like you.
You're in a league of your own. So much so, you are playing ball with
yourself (and your extraordinary imagination).

Helpful Hint ---- The reason we can't see the upper part of Mrs. Kennedy's
left arm in the picture you think is a fake is simply due to the angle of
the photograph. And this fact is blatantly obvious to everybody else on
the planet--except Dr. Ralph Cinque.

We're looking at Jackie almost directly from the SIDE in that picture. So
why would you *expect* to see Jackie's upper arm from that angle?

As I have said in the past, Mr. McAdams and Mr. Fokes have the patience of
two saints to put up with some of the outlandish theories and garbage that
pass in front of them every day at this aaj forum. But Ralph can also be
thankful that those men also firmly believe in freedom of speech.

[black...@aol.com]

Ruby's claimed alibi is NOT equal to "some of the LN ideas." One comes
from a principal in the case, the others do not.

[black...@aol.com]

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 4:21:14 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

a whole bunch of pointless stuff.

Call Governor Baker. What are they putting in the water up your way, Tony?
Where are you: Brookline, Allston, Brighton, somewhere up there? Need a
new tinfoil hat?

[Ralph Cinque]

Oh, David. You are going to rue the day that you put up those photos from
TIME magazine because it is all over for them now. They have been caught
red-handed, and I can't imagine what you, McAdams, or anyone else is going
to say to deny this. Maybe Anthony Marsh will think of something, but you
know how that goes.

Anyway, read it and weep:

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/lots-of-distortion-in-that-hand.html

[David Von Pein]

Turtle Creek.

One more here....
http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/2013/11/kennedy-gallery-360.html

[OZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 7:06:57 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

Is that Cosimo de' Medici wearing the Masonic symbol?

[Ralph Cinque]

David, two of them are legit, but the one they put on the cover is
fraudulent. How could her waving arm be covering the hand of the man who
is in front of the photographer?


http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-fingers-consist-of-three-bones.html

[David Von Pein]

RALPH CINQUE SAID:

Oh, David. You are going to rue the day that you put up those photos from

TIME magazine, because it is all over for them now. They have been caught

red-handed, and I can't imagine what you, McAdams, or anyone else is going
to say to deny this. Maybe Anthony Marsh will think of something, but you
know how that goes.

Anyway, read it and weep:

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/lots-of-distortion-in-that-hand.html

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I'm weeping alright, Ralph. But not for the reason you think. My cheeks,
as usual, are soaked with tears of hilarity after reading your "Fakery"
posts. And I know I'm not the only person here with moist cheeks.

And now I see Ralph has "found" additional fakery in the TIME photos.
(Gee, what a surprise, huh?)

And just to help Ralph out, I'm going to give him one more thing to chew
on. Let's see if he runs into the CT Endzone and spikes his ball after
seeing this one. Why does this woman in the yellow circle seemingly have
no thumb on her right hand? Another hunk of "fakery" by TIME Magazine,
Ralph?....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-D9Om8Tt_ZeY/VO1VAJwOejI/AAAAAAABDzw/vF2YllBftlM/s1600/More-Fakery-For-Cinque.jpg

[cmikes]

So your claim is that Oswald committed suicide by Ruby? After all, if
Oswald hadn't requested to change his shirt Ruby would have been too late
because Oswald would have already been transferred.

And if that's the case, how did "they" let Oswald know to request to
change his shirt because Ruby had to stop and Western Union some money to
one of his employees before killing Oswald?

[Ace Kefford]

Nano-spies!

[Mike]

No. Ruby's claim is preposterous from the start and only gets more
preposterous as events unfold.

He begged for a lie detector test only to have that lie detector test
show that he was lying about two very important things...

He lied when he answered "No" to the question "Did he know Oswald"

He lied when he answered "No" to the question "Did he help Oswald with
the assassination"

The LN view of Ruby is just as distorted(and funny) as some of the
photographic interpretations that Ralph comes up with. They are both
completely ridiculous.

[Anthony Marsh]

Thanks. I am still not sure what this made up controversy is about.
I thought it was about the 3rd photo:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UIwAXXJyQwQ/UoU5MlETO_I/AAAAAAAAwuE/O2-kC41R0UI/s1600/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--003.jpg

Is this a closed contest or can anyone play?
I'd like to suggest that the pink arm is fake and being held up by
JKF's hand. What do I win?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/24/2015 9:50 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 4:21:14 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> a whole bunch of pointless stuff.
>
> Call Governor Baker. What are they putting in the water up your way, Tony?

Cyanide.

> Where are you: Brookline, Allston, Brighton, somewhere up there? Need a
> new tinfoil hat?
>

I don't drink the municipal water. I buy bottled water.
You know the old POE.

[Anthony Marsh]

It is an apt analogy because both came from professional liars. Ruby did
not think it up. His lawyer did, a professional liar.

[Anthony Marsh]

Oh, I see. So you think the kooks should be censored. If you were in
charge no one would be allowed to disagree with the WC.

[black...@aol.com]

Jesus H. Christ. Do you know how light refracts when an object is OUT OF
FOCUS??

[stlo...@gmail.com]

You'd rather hang over here with Sinkay ? Come back Shane !

[Ralph Cinque]

She's got one. I circled it for you.

http://tinypic.com/r/21m4ysm/8

[David Von Pein]

The best thing we can use this photo for is to once again demonstrate the
"bunched up" nature of JFK's jacket....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UIwAXXJyQwQ/UoU5MlETO_I/AAAAAAAAwuE/O2-kC41R0UI/s1600/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--003.jpg

[Anthony Marsh]

You don't know that. You accept convenient lies.

>
> And if that's the case, how did "they" let Oswald know to request to
> change his shirt because Ruby had to stop and Western Union some money to
> one of his employees before killing Oswald?
>

Silly. Ruby was there in plenty of time. They told him when they were
going to move Oswald. Why didn't they do it in the middle of the night?

[Anthony Marsh]

Wasn't it Time Magazine who faked the photo of OJ to make him look
blacker?

But you're ok with that because he IS black.

>
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-D9Om8Tt_ZeY/VO1VAJwOejI/AAAAAAABDzw/vF2YllBftlM/s1600/More-Fakery-For-Cinque.jpg
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/24/2015 9:49 PM, black...@aol.com wrote:

It didn't come from Ruby. It came from his lawyer, a professional liar.
That's why it's an apt comparison.

[David Von Pein]

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at 7:57:27 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> She's got one. I circled it for you.
>
> http://tinypic.com/r/21m4ysm/8

But I'd be willing to bet the ranch that if it had been YOU, Ralph Cinque,
to "discover" the thumbless lady FIRST, you'd be racing to your computer
to type more posts about more fakery in the photo.

Does anyone here have *any* doubt about that? I sure don't.

But since *I* found the lady without the thumb, naturally Ralph SEES the
thumb. But I sure don't. (And the reason is, of course, the blurriness of
the person in the image, which can distort all kinds of things in
photographs.)

[Anthony Marsh]

Is that what they call a cover-up?

[David Von Pein]

Ralph Cinque Funnies.....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-905.html

[Anthony Marsh]

Was he shot then? Is this news?

> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UIwAXXJyQwQ/UoU5MlETO_I/AAAAAAAAwuE/O2-kC41R0UI/s1600/JFK-Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63--003.jpg
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Who the Hell is Sinkay? And who is Shane?

[Anthony Marsh]

Hey guys, that's not her thumb. That's her derringer disguised to look
like a thumb. Let's start another Lambchop thread.

[OZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]

http://hoaxes.org/photo_database/image/darkened_mug_shot

DO YOU THINK TIME MAGAZINE PLANTED OJ'S BLOODY GLOVE?

[OZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]

THIS PICTURE WAS INSPIRED BY Pollice VersO by Jean-Léon Gérôme.

[Ralph Cinque]

In that case, you'd lose the ranch. Why would I make a stink about a
thumblesss lady if I can see that she has a thumb? Look: I don't have a
problem with her thumb. I have a lot of problems with the girl sitting
next to her. I've got a sea of problems about her. But I don't have a
problem with the lady. So, what are we talking about her for? Is there a
point to it?

And you are deluded if you think that that image shows JFK's jacket
bunched up. Let's see you demonstrate that one, and I mean more than just
flapping your lips.

[Bud]

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 9:50:45 PM UTC-5, Ralph Cinque wrote:
> Oh, David. You are going to rue the day that you put up those photos from

> TIME magazine because it is all over for them now. They have been caught

> red-handed, and I can't imagine what you, McAdams, or anyone else is going
> to say to deny this. Maybe Anthony Marsh will think of something, but you
> know how that goes.
>
> Anyway, read it and weep:
>
> http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2015/02/lots-of-distortion-in-that-hand.html

Why do you think that hand belongs to that guy?

[Anthony Marsh]

No, I think YOU planted OJ's bloody glove.

[Jason Burke]

Geez.

[OZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]

Who took the photo? Larry Flynt?

[Mark OBLAZNEY]

Who are we talking to?

[OZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ]

Yes, I did. I also have a pair size 12 Bruno Magli shoes.

[Robert Harris]

In article <453b858d-c230-4b7c...@googlegroups.com>,
Ralph Cinque <buda...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Robert, don't give me advice. I don't want it.

I'm sorry you are so offended that I suggested that you be objective. I
am not surprised however. The nutters around here are no less biased
than you are.

>
> Now, that is her right arm waving. There are multiple reasons why I know
> that but the most obvious one is that it's her right hand. It is the
> dorsal (back) side of her right hand, in which I have identified every
> finger plus the big knuckle.
>
>
> http://tinypic.com/r/2wf22l5/8
>
> I don't know what kind of work you have done in your life, Robert, but I
> take it you are not an Anatomist. I once taught Anatomy.

Ralph, your own photo proves you are wrong.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-By5prPIY0CI/VOZgvQVRipI/AAAAAAAAX2o/hAOqSm-4FYk
/s1600/Woman%2Band%2BGirl2.jpg



Robert Harris

[LANCE O MEADOWS]

Ralph is an animatron?