KOOKS BATTLING KOOKS (JAMES FETZER VS. JOSIAH THOMPSON)
David Von Pein
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15173
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15218
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15217
Watching two conspiracy-happy theorists throw mud on each other is
quite enjoyable to see at times, such as some of the recent battles
between Josiah Thompson and Jim Fetzer (linked above).
Thompson wins each round, but only because nobody in the world can
rival Dr. Fetzer in the "Kookiest Of The Conspiracy Kooks" category,
whether it be this year or any other year.
I particularly enjoyed the strained logic of Dr. Fetzer during one
portion of his persistent argument in favor of the Zapruder Film
having been altered, with Fetzer apparently thinking that during the
very brief 1.6-second interval when Jean Hill and Mary Moorman are
visible in Mr. Zapruder's home movie, ALL of the following things
should be seen in the Z-Film:
"I advance an 11-page study of Jean's [Hill] interview with Len
Osanic and thereby establish a convergence in her testimony with that
of Mary Moorman, which not only indicates they were in the street at
the same time but that, if the Zapruder [Film] were authentic, it
would show (a) Mary handing her photos to Jean, (b) Jean coating them
with fixative, (c) the limo moving to the left (toward them), (d) Mary
and Jean both stepping off the curb and into the street, (e) Jean
calling out, "Mr. President!" and all that, (f) Mary taking her
picture, (g) both stepping back onto the grass, (h) Mary getting down
and tugging at Jean's leg, but (h) [FETZER MEANT TO SAY "I" HERE,
BECAUSE I DON'T THINK "H" FOLLOWS "H"] Jean remaining upright, because
she didn't think they would shoot her, none of which is shown in the
film." -- James H. Fetzer; March 27, 2009
--------------
LOL time. Hilarious stuff there, Dr. Fetzer!
For those who want the exact statistics on this, here they are:
Assassination eyewitnesses Jean Hill and Mary Moorman first become
visible in Abraham Zapruder's home movie in frame #287, when the right
half of Hill's body comes into view:
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z287.jpg
The very last frame that shows any portion of either of the two women
is Z316, which is a frame that depicts a very small part of Moorman's
left arm:
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z316.jpg
This means that the two ladies are visible (either individually or
together) for a total of only 30 frames of the Zapruder Film
(inclusively; Z287 through Z316), which in "real time" equals 1.639
seconds.
But Jim Fetzer, incredibly, seems to think that an unaltered version
of the Zapruder movie should show ALL of the events he mentioned
above--even the post-assassination event of Moorman tugging on Hill's
coat or leg (as Mary encourages Jean to get down on the ground to
avoid the gunfire, which is an event that obviously did not occur
until Mr. Zapruder had panned his camera further to his right and well
out of the view of either of the two women).
Does Dr. Fetzer believe that the "real" and "unaltered" Zapruder Film
is focused on Jean and Mary for more than just 1.64 seconds? Fetzer
must certainly believe that is the case, because otherwise how could
ALL of his laundry list of Hill's and Moorman's actions have possibly
been captured in just 1.64 seconds by the CONSTANTLY-PANNING motion of
Mr. Zapruder's Bell & Howell camera?
There's only one truly accurate word to describe such nonsensical and
impossible beliefs on the part of James H. Fetzer --- Crazy!
lazu...@webtv.net
interesting new thought in 40 years-he believes the headshot comes from
the front, but can't imagine the ZFilm is fake(Z-337- the flap is done
very poorly and is in the wrong place, but hey don't let that bother you
damn near everything else in the case has been faked too)-if you can't
get there, you will never get anywhere, except repeating yourself year
after year and being trumped by the Mack's, Bugliosi's and Posners who
can rely on the findings of the HSCA or Warren Commission...Laz
timstter
It appears that *Laz* is mentally ill, judging by this addled
response. Perhaps he is going into some kind of psychological
meltdown...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
David Von Pein
I will agree with Ol' Laz in one respect --
If a kook is silly enough to believe that the fatal shot to JFK's head
came from the FRONT, then that same CTer pretty much has no choice but
to believe that the Z-Film is a fake (since the film certainly does
NOT support any kind of "Head Shot From The Front" scenario, even the
"2 Head Shots" theory).
The only alternative left to people like Thompson is to totally
misrepresent what the Z-Film is depicting.
aeffects
<snipthe troll's lunacy>
no advertising shithead
aaronhi...@yahoo.com
With DP and the TSBD in the background. Photos taken only a short
time before the motorcade arrived. The Z film shows them wearing
white shoes. DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows
nothing about the Scientific Method. The whole story of how Moorman
had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in
Fetzer's 3rd book.
Aaron Hirshberg
David Von Pein
>>> "DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows nothing about the Scientific Method." <<<
LOL.
>>> "The whole story of how Moorman had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in Fetzer's 3rd book [OF PURE FANTASY, "THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX"; AKA: "THE GULLIBLE CONSPIRACY KOOKS WILL BUY ANYTHING, SO LET'S PRETEND THE ZAPRUDER FILM HAS BEEN WHOLLY FABRICATED"]." <<<
LOL. (Oh, my weak bladder.)
Maybe Aaron (who apparently is the "King Of The Scientific Method")
can explain how Jean Hill and Mary Moorman could have done all the
things that Kook Fetzer thinks they should be seen doing in an
"unaltered" version of the Z-Film (even though the two women are only
in the film for 1.64 seconds).
Any ideas on that idiotic idea that Fetzer has spawned, Aaron "King Of
Logical Thinking" Hirshberg?
drummist1965
Then what are you doing here,Healy?
curtjester1
Now, one could argue Zapruder's film was authentic if all the shoes in
the film were white. Well, I think it's a slam dunk that it's not.
CJ
drummist1965
It does? You are not looking closely enough at the Z film. A
couple of frames, Z 303, Z 305, showing the feet of Moorman, reveals
her black shoes.
drummist1965
I might add that the Muchmore film shows Hill and Moorman both
standing on the grass during the frames prior to the head shot. I
suppose you believe that this film is also fake.
tomnln
"drummist1965" <elpdr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:92d8a7dc-519c-45e9...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
aeffects
that the little gnat steve-o-reno pulling his er, beating his tom-tom?
aeffects
<snip the nutter-troll lunacy>
no advertising shithead
Sam McClung
more prevalent with shiny black surfaces, like shoes
black automobiles exhibit the same
<aaronhi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a73b3777-d4b0-47aa...@e20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
Sam McClung
same characteristics
"Sam McClung" <mcc...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:hi8p7...@news6.newsguy.com...
John McAdams
Oh, my.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman1.htm
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
lazu...@webtv.net
painted onto the film post 313 2. blackening the back of the head in key
frames 3. removing any bone, brain matter exiting from the rear of JFK's
head...so, all this stuff with changed positions, different color shoes
is esoteric, and plays in the non-alterationists agenda...Laz
garyb
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:43:14 -0800 (PST), "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
>
> <aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Two of Moorman's Polaroids show Moorman and Hill wearing black shoes.
> >With DP and the TSBD in the background. Photos taken only a short
> >time before the motorcade arrived. The Z film shows them wearing
> >white shoes. DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows
> >nothing about the Scientific Method. The whole story of how Moorman
> >had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in
> >Fetzer's 3rd book.
>
> Oh, my.
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman1.htm
>
> .John
>
> --
> The Kennedy Assassination Home Pagehttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I remember this white shoe/black shoe thing from Rich dela Rosa's
forum. It was clearly debunked by clearer photos but somehow Fetzer
and Jack White seem to keep bringing it up.
aeffects
your qualifications re debunking it are shithead? step up troll!
drummist1965
What are your "qualifications", Healy? As I point out in another
post, Moorman's left foot reveals a shoe, in Z 303 and Z 305.
aeffects
best get over to the Ed Forum, shithead.....they (Z-film purists) need
help.... lest you continue to beat your irrelevant pu... er, tom-
tom.... hurry now!
drummist1965
Answer the question, Healy. What are your "qualifications"?
tomnln
"drummist1965" <elpdr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e8e2bd31-fb04-4daf...@q16g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
aeffects
think LIGHTWAVE shithead... back to beating your pu....er snare
drum...
drummist1965
What does this have to do with Moorman's shoe, as revealed
in the Z film?
Barb Junkkarinen
McAdams) wrote:
>On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:43:14 -0800 (PST), "aaronhi...@yahoo.com"
><aaronhi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Two of Moorman's Polaroids show Moorman and Hill wearing black shoes.
>>With DP and the TSBD in the background. Photos taken only a short
>>time before the motorcade arrived. The Z film shows them wearing
>>white shoes. DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows
>>nothing about the Scientific Method. The whole story of how Moorman
>>had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in
>>Fetzer's 3rd book.
>>
>
>Oh, my.
>
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman1.htm
>
>.John
Here's the link to the "Moorman-in-the-Street?" article Tink, myself,
Craig Lamson, Bill Miller put together last March.
The issue of Moorman being in the street is clearly dead.
http://www.jfklancer.com/moorman_essay.html
I believe you were going to add this to your site at the time, John.
Feel free to do so now, if you'd like.
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
Same with several other of the "proofs" that have been soundly
debunked.
Barb :-)
>
aeffects
wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:09:31 GMT, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John
>
>
>
> McAdams) wrote:
> >On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:43:14 -0800 (PST), "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
> ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Two of Moorman's Polaroids show Moorman and Hill wearing black shoes.
> >>With DP and the TSBD in the background. Photos taken only a short
> >>time before the motorcade arrived. The Z film shows them wearing
> >>white shoes. DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows
> >>nothing about the Scientific Method. The whole story of how Moorman
> >>had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in
> >>Fetzer's 3rd book.
>
> >Oh, my.
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman1.htm
>
> >.John
>
> Here's the link to the "Moorman-in-the-Street?" article Tink, myself,
> Craig Lamson, Bill Miller put together last March.
>
> The issue of Moorman being in the street is clearly dead.
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/moorman_essay.html
>
> I believe you were going to add this to your site at the time, John.
> Feel free to do so now, if you'd like.
>
> Barb :-)
oh Bab's.... Emelda Marcos? The nutter-trolls are in full flight....
Bab's in her hi-top tennies leading the pack... Carry on, hon!
curtjester1
wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:09:31 GMT, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John
>
>
>
>
>
> McAdams) wrote:
> >On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 06:43:14 -0800 (PST), "aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com"
> ><aaronhirshb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Two of Moorman's Polaroids show Moorman and Hill wearing black shoes.
> >>With DP and the TSBD in the background. Photos taken only a short
> >>time before the motorcade arrived. The Z film shows them wearing
> >>white shoes. DVP is the master of the logical fallacy, and knows
> >>nothing about the Scientific Method. The whole story of how Moorman
> >>had to be standing in the street to take her picture is explained in
> >>Fetzer's 3rd book.
>
> >Oh, my.
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman1.htm
>
> >.John
>
> Here's the link to the "Moorman-in-the-Street?" article Tink, myself,
> Craig Lamson, Bill Miller put together last March.
>
> The issue of Moorman being in the street is clearly dead.
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/moorman_essay.html
>
> I believe you were going to add this to your site at the time, John.
> Feel free to do so now, if you'd like.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I thought this was about the color of their shoes? How can we have an
authentic film when it's knowlingly the wrong color of shoe color when
other shoes remain 'ok' while their shoes are completely opposite in color
of what they knowlingly wore that day (black shoes)??!!
Anyway it will be intersting to see Fetzer. Costella and the likes being
given time to answer. It took Thompson so long to finally give one.
http://www.jfkresearch.com/Moorman/ Jan, 2009
CJ
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Jan 11, 1:47=A0pm, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:09:31 GMT, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John
>>
>>
>> Here's the link to the "Moorman-in-the-Street?" article Tink, myself,
>> Craig Lamson, Bill Miller put together last March.
>>
>> The issue of Moorman being in the street is clearly dead.
>>
>> http://www.jfklancer.com/moorman_essay.html
>>
>> I believe you were going to add this to your site at the time, John.
>> Feel free to do so now, if you'd like.
>>
Sorry I've taken so long, Barb. I know it's been months. I'll try to
find some time in the next week or two.
Barb Junkkarinen
No prob, John. I more than a bit behind on some things I am supposed
to be doing too.
Barb :-)
Sam McClung
> black can reflect sunlight and look white
http://images2.chictopia.com/photos/cosima/9101142183/9101142183_400.jpg
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4014877/2/istockphoto_4014877-black-shoes.jpg
blur the light enough generations away from the original and the light
overwhelms = white shoes
sam
expert at interpreting onscreen imagery since way over a dozen years ago