"Most accurate map of Dealey Plaza"?
Steve Barber
I would like for Tony Marsh to reveal his source as to where he
obtained his "most accurate map of Dealey Plaza.
Thank you.
Steve Barber
Anthony Marsh
Drommer and Associates. Same place as Dale Myers. However, mine says
"Revised 6 March 1981." It was revised specifically because I informed
them of their errors. So, why do you not attack Dale Myers for using the
Drommer and Associates map? Gee, I wonder if the lurkers can figure out why?
eca...@comcast.net
Heavyweight Steve Barber!
Tony is this the same map
that gave BadgeMan a
possible shot?
Is it the same elevation map
has so far been unable to
bail you out on the Travis
Linn/pedestal question I asked
you? I'm still waiting for an
answer Anthony.. (I've done
better research on this one
than you have; ask and I shall
demonstrate.)
BTW, Chad asked you how
you knew I didn't even have a
DP map.. To date you have not
answered that one either..
Also Tony you still seem to
think that a sniper position
which I described as "dreadful"
but possible was really a viable
option. Coincidentally, that
particular position 9-12 west
of the SE corner of the picket
fence precise view was posted
in this elite NG yesterday. I'd
post the reference but I don't
have it at the moment. It's in
the Dan Rather film.. exactly
17 seconds after the beginning.
Ed Cage 1427Dec706
Steve Barber
Is that right, Tony?
Would you share with the lurkers, just what ''errors'' you ''pointed''
out to them?
Also...what exactly is it that makes you think that Dale Myers is
''using the 'wrong' Drommer and Assoc. map"?
Gerry Simone (O)
investigational study on Badgeman convincing and common-sensical (i.e.,
his disproof using re-enactments) which demonstrated a good grasp of
visual-perspective.
"Steve Barber" <sba...@i71.net> wrote in message
news:1165540701.7...@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
> Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> Steve Barber wrote:
>>> I would like for Tony Marsh to reveal his source as to where he
>>> obtained his "most accurate map of Dealey Plaza.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Steve Barber
>>>
>>>
>> Drommer and Associates. Same place as Dale Myers. However, mine says
>> "Revised 6 March 1981." It was revised specifically because I informed
>> them of their errors. So, why do you not attack Dale Myers for using the
>> Drommer and Associates map? Gee, I wonder if the lurkers can figure out why?
>
> Is that right, Tony?
>
> Would you share with the lurkers, just what ''errors'' you ''pointed''
> out to them?
>
The distance from the middle of Main Street to the face of the TSBD.
Some survey teams use measuring devices which have inherent inaccuracies
which only become noticeable over larger distances.
> Also...what exactly is it that makes you think that Dale Myers is
> ''using the 'wrong' Drommer and Assoc. map"?
>
>
Because he is using the original map and not the revised map.
Why don't I see you attacking Dale Myers the way you attack me?
Anthony Marsh
> A good subject by JFK
> Heavyweight Steve Barber!
>
> Tony is this the same map
> that gave BadgeMan a
> possible shot?
>
Yes, the elevations on that map indicate that the Badge Man position
would offer a shot that could hit Kennedy's head.
The same as Dale Myers's map.
> Is it the same elevation map
> has so far been unable to
> bail you out on the Travis
> Linn/pedestal question I asked
> you? I'm still waiting for an
> answer Anthony.. (I've done
> better research on this one
> than you have; ask and I shall
> demonstrate.)
>
I waited a long time for figures to come from you and gave up.
That's why I gave you the figures and noted that he most likely was
talking about Column B which is physically impossible.
> BTW, Chad asked you how
> you knew I didn't even have a
> DP map.. To date you have not
> answered that one either..
>
Your daily errors. Unable to cite the elevations.
> Also Tony you still seem to
> think that a sniper position
> which I described as "dreadful"
> but possible was really a viable
> option. Coincidentally, that
I never said anything like that. Possible does not mean practical.
> particular position 9-12 west
> of the SE corner of the picket
> fence precise view was posted
> in this elite NG yesterday. I'd
> post the reference but I don't
> have it at the moment. It's in
> the Dan Rather film.. exactly
> 17 seconds after the beginning.
>
You would believe anything that Dan Rather says?
What's the frequency?
Anthony Marsh
> Although I don't agree with Dale Myers on the SBT, I did find his
> investigational study on Badgeman convincing and common-sensical (i.e.,
> his disproof using re-enactments) which demonstrated a good grasp of
> visual-perspective.
>
Dale Myers is correct that Badge Man is only an optical illusion, but
that does not excuse his mischaracterizing the issue and getting the
details wrong.
Steve Barber
How do you "know" this, Tony? What is your source for making this
accusation?
eca...@comcast.net
a lot of things we don't know:
**********
(Please insert large grain of salt)
**********
1) Oswald's rifle JAMMED.
2) The grassy knoll shooter DID
take an insurance SHOT.
3) BadgeMan DID have a shot in
spite of what our EYES tell us
at DP.
And this one may
shock ya Steve.. drumroll.. . .
... . . . . . . .
4) Marsh KNOWS there actually
*WAS* a RECORDING DEVICE at
Dealey Plaza. (It was McLain's
mike after all sez Tony.)
It seems Anthony Marsh also
has inside information on the
methodology of Dale Myers
and his maps as well.. We
have much to learn I suppose..
Ed Cage 1706Dec906
Anthony Marsh
At the time he input his data, I was the only person who had the revised
map.
Steve Barber
Please, Tony. You are being very vague.
How do you know this? How do you know that: " At the time he input
his data, I was the only person who had the revised map." ?
What proof have you, of this?
Anthony Marsh
You seem to be having trouble understanding English. I was the only
person who had a copy of that map.
I did not give it to Dale Myers.
Anyway, you should not be concerned about the differences. The inherent
inaccuracy is only about 1%, perfectly acceptable to a WC defender.
Steve Barber
No, I'm not. You seem to be havingtrouble answering a simple
question.
I was the only
> person who had a copy of that map.
Prove it, Tony.
How do you know?
Exactly how do you know when it was that Dale obtained his copy of
the map?
Just answer the question, okay?
> I did not give it to Dale Myers.
No KIDDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Anyway, you should not be concerned about the differences.
No? You are the one who keeps bringing this up, Tony! For crying out
loud!
You are person who keeps saying that you have ''the most accurate map
of DP''!
All I want to know is, HOW DO YOU KNOW thatYOU are the "only person"
who has the ''most acucrate map of DP, exclusively"? You have offered
ZERO proof that no one else has the map...just your opinions about Dale
Myers.
I want you to tell us how you know that Dale doesnt have this map.
Would you please just answer the question?.
>The inherent inaccuracy is only about 1%, perfectly acceptable to a
WC defender.
Well, apparently it is aceptable you, also so, what is the beef?.
After all, you claim that you are ''using the most accurate map of
Dealey Plaza", to the exclusion of all others (without offering a shred
of evidence to support this claim, other than your saying so, which
doesn't add up to a hill of beans).
tomnln
"Steve Barber" <sba...@i71.net> wrote in message
news:1165878320.9...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
Again, you seem to be temporally challenged. I did not say that right
now I am the only one to have this map. I have given copies freely to
others and continue to do so no matter what you say.
I said that at the time Dale map is model, I was the only person who had
this revised map.
> I want you to tell us how you know that Dale doesnt have this map.
>
He may have it now. I did not give it to him. Maybe someone else to whom
I gave a copy passed it along to him. He did not have it when he
developed his model.
> Would you please just answer the question?.
>
>
I have, several times.
>
>
> >The inherent inaccuracy is only about 1%, perfectly acceptable to a
> WC defender.
>
> Well, apparently it is aceptable you, also so, what is the beef?.
No, of course it is not, which is why I corrected the HSCA. You should
have seen Robert Groden fall out of his seat when I showed it to him.
> After all, you claim that you are ''using the most accurate map of
> Dealey Plaza", to the exclusion of all others (without offering a shred
> of evidence to support this claim, other than your saying so, which
> doesn't add up to a hill of beans).
>
The map I started with is exactly the same as the one Dale Myers used
except that I then corrected it.
But I don't see you attacking Dale Myers. Why is that?
Steve Barber
Okay, Tony.
Allow me to put it into words that maybe you can understand.
Statement one( by you, above) in your most recent post, is completely
false.
Statement two ( by you, above) in your most recent post, is also
completely false.
The premise upon which you apparently base your claim is the idea that
only *you* had the corrected map and therefore only *you* could have been
a source for the revised map.
However, your premise is demonstratively false.
Isn't it true that the source of the map is Drommer & Associates? After
all, the corrected map was produced by them, regardless of who or what
prompted the corrections to be made, right? Fact: The map was revised by
Drommer & Associates, right?
Doesn't that mean that you could not possibly have been the only source
of the corrected map? In fact, doesn't that mean that Tony Marsh only had
a copy of the corrected map, and that Drommer & Associates held the
original corrected version?
Doesn't that mean that anyone contacting Drommer & Associates directly
could have obtained the"revised" map anytime after March 6, 1981?
What makes you think that no one (let alone Myers) contacted Drommer &
Associates over a 12 year period and obtained a copy of the revised map
directly from them?
You couldn't possibly know the answer to that question. Consequently,your
claims that Dale Myers did not have copy of the revised map when he began
his modeling project in 1993 is without foundation.
Anthony Marsh
Because Dale Myers claims on his web site that his measurements are
based on the HSCA map.
"Because the construction of Dealey Plaza was based on survey maps, a
high degree of accuracy was obtained, particularly in the creation of
Elm Street - a crucial feature in establishing any assassination
trajectory. The slope of the road, and its relationship to the Book
Depository were among the many details available in the 1978 Drommer &
Associates survey map. The Elm Street portion of the Dealey Plaza model
shows a better than 99.4% accuracy level."
NB: 1978, not 1981.
> What makes you think that no one (let alone Myers) contacted Drommer &
> Associates over a 12 year period and obtained a copy of the revised map
> directly from them?
>
Not what I said. Stick to Dale Myers. No one else knew to get the
revised map from Drommer and Associates. You didn't. He didn't.
> You couldn't possibly know the answer to that question. Consequently,your
> claims that Dale Myers did not have copy of the revised map when he began
> his modeling project in 1993 is without foundation.
>
Ask him.
eca...@comcast.net
"Ask him."
MARSH OFF
Great answer Tony.
That really ought to clear
the matter up for all of us..
(Mind if I use "Ask him",
"Straw Man" and "Nonsense"
when I realize I'm trapped as
Steve just trapped you?)
1) Now tell me how you know
I have been standing in the
wrong places at the DP/GK
and "guessing."
2) How did you find out that
I don't even have a map of DP?
(A rather bold statement..)
3) How did you find out
exactly how Chad
assembles/disassembles
his Mannlicher Carcano?
Ed Cage 2309Dec1306
Anthony Marsh
> MARSH ON:
> "Ask him."
> MARSH OFF
>
> Great answer Tony.
> That really ought to clear
> the matter up for all of us..
> (Mind if I use "Ask him",
> "Straw Man" and "Nonsense"
> when I realize I'm trapped as
> Steve just trapped you?)
>
No trap. I have asked Dale Myers several questions and he refuses to
answer them. But he should answer a fellow WC defender. Are you claiming
that Dale Myers would lie to Steve Barber of all people?
> 1) Now tell me how you know
> I have been standing in the
> wrong places at the DP/GK
> and "guessing."
>
Because just standing somewhere behind the fence does not duplicate the
proposed Badge Man position. You never give us any numbers.
> 2) How did you find out that
> I don't even have a map of DP?
> (A rather bold statement..)
>
I've given you five chances and you can never cite ANY elevations.
> 3) How did you find out
> exactly how Chad
> assembles/disassembles
> his Mannlicher Carcano?
>
What exactly did I say about the way Chad assembles/disassembles his
Mannlicher-Carcano?
twvaug...@yahoo.com
Tony,
I asked Dale about this.
Here is his reply:
MYERS QUOTE ON
"Fact is, the map I used is the revised "March 6, 1981" version which I
obtained directly from Drommer & Associates after telephoning them in late
1992 in preparation for constructing my models beginning in early 1993. I
obtaining blueprints of the TSBD at the same time."
The slope of the road is the crucial feature I used to build the model. I
believe the original July, 1978, map and its 1981 revision are identical
in this respect. There was no point in denoting the revision because the
revision added nothing new to the information I used.
The point that Marsh is attempting to deflect is that he made a mistake by
assuming something that was not true and for which he had no evidence to
base his conclusion.
Marsh has made and continues to make numerous assumptions about my
computer work without a single ounce of foundation to support his claims.
Anyone surprised?
I'll never understand why people like Marsh insist on proving their
ignorance again and again."
MYERS QUOTE OFF
Todd
eca...@comcast.net
= = = =
CHAD:
>> I also do not believe the MC was in two pieces. It
>>> is almost impossible to make a shot with a weapon that has been torn
>>> down. It is not zeroed in after the tear down.
>> The scope does not need to be separated from the rifle. The trigger
>> housing, breech and barrel all come off in one piece, while the stock
>> becomes the other main piece. Unless, something weird happened with the
>> scope, it should've been just fine. I did this with my Carcano with
>> identical scope and put it in an identical bag. I later put it back
>> together and shot it. No problem.
>> Chad
MARSH
> Correct. No problem. Except that you couldn't hit the target at 100 feet.
> High and to the right. High and to the right. High and to the right.
CHAD:
Remind me again when you were with me when I was shooting that reassembled
Carcano?
Chad
= = = = =
Now Tony let's see if you can tell
reciprocate for me:
1) Why and how you think the
round exiting Kennedy's neck
FLEW OVER THE WINDSHIELD?
2) Why and how you seem to
think you "know" that those of us
who have been to DP/GK need
to give you numbers after we have
SEEN with our own EYES the
views behind DP/GK? If you ever
come to Dallas call me at
972-596-4363 (Listed) and I shall
treat ya to lunch then school ya
on why Detectives prefer on site
eyeball investigations as opposed
to elevation maps.
Ed Cage 1844Dec1406
Anthony Marsh
Thanks.
eca...@comcast.net
and knowledgeable source
(Dale Myers)
A+ for twvaughan
Ed
Anthony Marsh
Already answered. After I answer it again why don't you long on next week
with another alias and ask that same question a few dozen more times? To
waste my time. The angles.
> 2) Why and how you seem to
> think you "know" that those of us
> who have been to DP/GK need
> to give you numbers after we have
> SEEN with our own EYES the
> views behind DP/GK? If you ever
Because just standing around does not duplicate what the originators of
the theory claim.
> come to Dallas call me at
> 972-596-4363 (Listed) and I shall
> treat ya to lunch then school ya
> on why Detectives prefer on site
> eyeball investigations as opposed
> to elevation maps.
>
A real forensic pathologist like Dr. Henry Lee recreates the conditions
as precisely as possible.
Steve Barber
That's it? "Thanks"? Take a look back at what we accomplished on
this thread, Tony.
Chad Zimmerman
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Lu6dnYhO3p5njh_Y...@comcast.com...
LOL!
That's like telling the officer that just gave you a ticket 'Thanks'.
Chad
>
Anthony Marsh
I like the way you WC defenders argue out of both sides of your mouths at
the same time. Anything to attack me. First you claim that I never admit
that I am wrong and never accept anything that a WC defender says. Then
when I do, you attack me for doing so. Next you'll attack me for being
honest in this message. It never ends with you guys and your canned
attacks.
Anthony Marsh
I asked Dale Myers and he wouldn't tell the truth. I suggested that YOU
ask him because you are a WC defender. You refused. Todd did and got the
information I never could. Thanks again, Todd.
Steve Barber
I just wrote to Dale about whatyou just stated. He had this to say
about this most recent post, to me:
[QUOTE ON]
I never "refused" to answer Tony Marsh; I simply don't respond to his
posts. For that matter, I don't post at all on those newsgroups. It's a
collosal waste of time.
IMO, Marsh doesn't have anything of value to offer; his accusations about
my work are false in every way; and his assumptions (as I recently showed)
about my work are equally false.
[QUOTE OFF]
Steve
Anthony Marsh
Interesting. Dale Myers now claims that his work is based on the Map
version which was revised in March 6, 1981. I was the person who was
responsible for the corrections to the HSCA and caused the revision to
happen. Then Dale Myers has the nerve to say that I don't have anything
of value to offer. He relies on the Zapruder film, yet I was the first
person to prove that it is authentic.
> [QUOTE OFF]
>
> Steve
Thanks for confirming what I have said several times. That Dale Myers
refuses to answer my questions.
>
>
Steve Barber
From Dale Myers:
[QUOTE ON]
Marsh loves to twist facts to suit his own ends. I never said that my work
was "based" on the revised Drommer & Associates map, which Marsh claims to
have been responsible for. That is his twisted interpretation. What I
posted on my website [http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/models.htm], as
anyone who can read knows, is:
"The principle resource utilized in the creation of the model was a survey
map prepared by Drommer & Associates for the 1978 House Select Committee
on Assassinations."
You'll note that I said the Drommer & Associates map was the "principle
source" - not the only source. The key feature that was obtained from the
Drommer & Associates map was the slope of Elm Street as determined by the
D&A surveyors. The accuracy of that slope was checked against another map,
not mentioned on the website.
Many other sources of information were used in the creation of the model.
Here's what I posted on the website:
"More than 500 personal photographs and measurements, gathered during
multiple trips to Dallas, Texas, were utilized in the construction and
placement of all fixed structures -- including the Records, Criminal
Court, and Dal-Tex Buildings. Contemporary photographs were studied in
order to ensure that the model matched Dealey Plaza circa 1963. Contours
of the surrounding earthscape were plotted using a grid of markers, which
were physically placed in Dealey Plaza and photographed from multiple
angles. These photographs were then imported into software which extracted
three-dimensional data from the images to create a dimensional model of
the landscape."
The resulting three-dimensional model was checked against the Zapruder
film itself by aligning the model with the film frame-by-frame. The model
was found to be an accurate representation of the location photographed by
Zapruder.
Marsh, who initially pulled assumptions about my work out of thin air -
assumptions that are demonstratively false, and charged that my work was
fraudulent - charges that are without foundation; now seems to be taking
credit for my work.
Marsh writes: "...Myers now claims that his work is based on the Map
version which was revised in March 6, 1981. I was the person who was
responsible for the corrections to the HSCA and caused the revision to
happen..."
You'll note that Marsh doesn't say what specific mistake Drommer &
Associates made which they later revised - was it a significant mistake
relevant to the shooting on Elm Street? Or some minor detail that had
nothing to do with the shooting and hence nothing to do with the work I
did based on the feature I used (i.e., the slope of Elm Street)?
Marsh doesn't say because he knows the answer as well as I do.
More important, why is Marsh now seemingly taking credit for my work when
he has consistently charged that my work is a fraud? How does that work?
How does Marsh's correction to a map I used for part of my work falsify
that work?
Finally, Marsh writes: "...[Myers] relies on the Zapruder film, yet I was
the first person to prove that it is authentic..."
What a joke. A few goofy conspiracy theorists postulate that the Z-film is
fake and Marsh rushes in to save the day. LOL! Come on, now. Anyone with
half a brain knew the "fake Z-film" allegations were and are a lot of
hogwash. Anyone remotely familiar with the record knows the Zapruder film
is authentic. I certainly didn't need Marsh or anyone else to "prove" that
to me. What's Marsh going to "prove" next? That the Earth is round?
Please!
You can see, Steve, why I don't bother to post on those newsgroups. The
intelligent questions are too few and far between. And in order to get to
them, I'd have to wade through miles of horse-dung being spewed by the
likes of people like Marsh. Consequently, I don't bother to defend every
cock-and-bull allegation he or anyone else makes about my work. They don't
know what they're talking about. I'm confident that anyone interested in
the truth about it all will figure that out in time.
Unfortunately, Marsh is under the delusion that since I don't respond to
his idiotic allegations, his charges must be correct. Now he claims my
work is based upon his "valuable" contributions. What can anyone say about
such nonsense? And yes, I stand by my earlier assessment that Marsh has
nothing of value to offer. If that doesn't seem evident by now, I can't
help you.
Feel free to post this if you like. Happy Holidays!
Dale
[QUOTE OFF]
Anthony Marsh
Every time that Steve quotes Dale Myers it confirms things that I have
been saying for years.
> Marsh loves to twist facts to suit his own ends. I never said that my work
> was "based" on the revised Drommer & Associates map, which Marsh claims to
> have been responsible for. That is his twisted interpretation. What I
> posted on my website [http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/models.htm], as
> anyone who can read knows, is:
>
I never said all his work. His map of Dealey Plaza is based on the HSCA
map, as he cites on his Web site.
"Because the construction of Dealey Plaza was based on survey maps, a high
degree of accuracy was obtained, particularly in the creation of Elm
Street - a crucial feature in establishing any assassination trajectory.
The slope of the road, and its relationship to the Book Depository were
among the many details available in the 1978 Drommer & Associates survey
map. The Elm Street portion of the Dealey Plaza model shows a better than
99.4% accuracy level."
> "The principle resource utilized in the creation of the model was a survey
> map prepared by Drommer & Associates for the 1978 House Select Committee
> on Assassinations."
>
> You'll note that I said the Drommer & Associates map was the "principle
> source" - not the only source. The key feature that was obtained from the
> Drommer & Associates map was the slope of Elm Street as determined by the
> D&A surveyors. The accuracy of that slope was checked against another map,
> not mentioned on the website.
>
> Many other sources of information were used in the creation of the model.
> Here's what I posted on the website:
>
Of course, because the HSCA map did not show all the details.
> "More than 500 personal photographs and measurements, gathered during
> multiple trips to Dallas, Texas, were utilized in the construction and
> placement of all fixed structures -- including the Records, Criminal
> Court, and Dal-Tex Buildings. Contemporary photographs were studied in
> order to ensure that the model matched Dealey Plaza circa 1963. Contours
> of the surrounding earthscape were plotted using a grid of markers, which
> were physically placed in Dealey Plaza and photographed from multiple
> angles. These photographs were then imported into software which extracted
> three-dimensional data from the images to create a dimensional model of
> the landscape."
>
I did not complain about that aspect.
> The resulting three-dimensional model was checked against the Zapruder
> film itself by aligning the model with the film frame-by-frame. The model
> was found to be an accurate representation of the location photographed by
> Zapruder.
>
Wrong.
> Marsh, who initially pulled assumptions about my work out of thin air -
> assumptions that are demonstratively false, and charged that my work was
> fraudulent - charges that are without foundation; now seems to be taking
> credit for my work.
>
I got my information directly from the Dale Myers web site.
> Marsh writes: "...Myers now claims that his work is based on the Map
> version which was revised in March 6, 1981. I was the person who was
> responsible for the corrections to the HSCA and caused the revision to
> happen..."
>
> You'll note that Marsh doesn't say what specific mistake Drommer &
> Associates made which they later revised - was it a significant mistake
> relevant to the shooting on Elm Street? Or some minor detail that had
> nothing to do with the shooting and hence nothing to do with the work I
> did based on the feature I used (i.e., the slope of Elm Street)?
>
It doesn't matter if I call it significant or not, because we know
beforehand that Dale Myers will call a 1% error not significant, while
claiming 99.4% accuracy for his recreation.
> Marsh doesn't say because he knows the answer as well as I do.
>
Dale Myers dare not answer my question because he knows the answer that
I know.
> More important, why is Marsh now seemingly taking credit for my work when
> he has consistently charged that my work is a fraud? How does that work?
> How does Marsh's correction to a map I used for part of my work falsify
> that work?
>
I never said that all his work is a fraud. I have praised his work on
the Tippit shooting many times. It is his misrepresentations on behalf
of the WC defender position which are troubling.
> Finally, Marsh writes: "...[Myers] relies on the Zapruder film, yet I was
> the first person to prove that it is authentic..."
>
> What a joke. A few goofy conspiracy theorists postulate that the Z-film is
> fake and Marsh rushes in to save the day. LOL! Come on, now. Anyone with
> half a brain knew the "fake Z-film" allegations were and are a lot of
> hogwash. Anyone remotely familiar with the record knows the Zapruder film
> is authentic. I certainly didn't need Marsh or anyone else to "prove" that
> to me. What's Marsh going to "prove" next? That the Earth is round?
> Please!
>
Excuse me? Then why was Zavada hired?
> You can see, Steve, why I don't bother to post on those newsgroups. The
> intelligent questions are too few and far between. And in order to get to
> them, I'd have to wade through miles of horse-dung being spewed by the
> likes of people like Marsh. Consequently, I don't bother to defend every
> cock-and-bull allegation he or anyone else makes about my work. They don't
> know what they're talking about. I'm confident that anyone interested in
> the truth about it all will figure that out in time.
>
The reason is because you'd be called out for your lies. Like the claim
that Connally was three inches lower than Kennedy or six inches inboard.
Or that the bullet hit above Kennedy's shoulders.
> Unfortunately, Marsh is under the delusion that since I don't respond to
> his idiotic allegations, his charges must be correct. Now he claims my
> work is based upon his "valuable" contributions. What can anyone say about
> such nonsense? And yes, I stand by my earlier assessment that Marsh has
> nothing of value to offer. If that doesn't seem evident by now, I can't
> help you.
>
> Feel free to post this if you like. Happy Holidays!
>
> Dale
>
> [QUOTE OFF]
>
Hiding behind skirts.
>
Chad Zimmerman
Oh, I'm very sorry about that. I must've had you confused with some other
Tony Marsh,
the one that argues the mundane incessantly, accuses other male posters of
having boyfriends,
etc....;-)
>First you claim that I never admit that I am wrong and never accept
>anything that a WC defender says.
When did I say that? You wouldn't be taking liberties with what was actually
said of you, would
you?
>Then when I do, you attack me for doing so.
Probably because I have seen you wrong many times and entertain weeks of
long discussion over
those mundane topics without any resolve from you. In another thread, you
are having a hard time
agreeing with me that JFK was hit at C7-T1. You go to excessive lengths to
avoid any mental defeat
at the hands of someone that has the belief that Ozzie acted alone. You call
them all WC defenders
in habit, hoping to reduce their credibility with a label.
You do remember the pathetic debate that you started over 'a chiropractic'
vs. 'a chiropractor', right?
You reap what you sow, Tony.
>Next you'll attack me for being honest in this message. It never ends with
>you guys and your canned attacks.
One might say the same to you and your tactics.
Chad
>
Chad Zimmerman
He never said that either. Reread it, Tony.
Really? Care to expand on that?
>
>> Marsh, who initially pulled assumptions about my work out of thin air -
>> assumptions that are demonstratively false, and charged that my work was
>> fraudulent - charges that are without foundation; now seems to be taking
>> credit for my work.
>>
>
> I got my information directly from the Dale Myers web site.
>
>> Marsh writes: "...Myers now claims that his work is based on the Map
>> version which was revised in March 6, 1981. I was the person who was
>> responsible for the corrections to the HSCA and caused the revision to
>> happen..."
>>
>> You'll note that Marsh doesn't say what specific mistake Drommer &
>> Associates made which they later revised - was it a significant mistake
>> relevant to the shooting on Elm Street? Or some minor detail that had
>> nothing to do with the shooting and hence nothing to do with the work I
>> did based on the feature I used (i.e., the slope of Elm Street)?
>>
>
> It doesn't matter if I call it significant or not, because we know
> beforehand that Dale Myers will call a 1% error not significant, while
> claiming 99.4% accuracy for his recreation.
Depends on where the 1% error is. If it is in the height of the curb on
the opposite side of the street, it probably doesn't matter.
Make your gripes material, Tony.
>
>> Marsh doesn't say because he knows the answer as well as I do.
>>
>
> Dale Myers dare not answer my question because he knows the answer that I
> know.
Great, both of you know what the other knows and neither one wants to say
anything.
>
>> More important, why is Marsh now seemingly taking credit for my work when
>> he has consistently charged that my work is a fraud? How does that work?
>> How does Marsh's correction to a map I used for part of my work falsify
>> that work?
>>
>
> I never said that all his work is a fraud. I have praised his work on the
> Tippit shooting many times.
Blah. He's not talking about the Tippit stuff.
>It is his misrepresentations on behalf of the WC defender position which
>are troubling.
Of course. Anything that troubles your position has to be troubling, thus
you have to call it misrepresentations in order to save your own theory.
>
>> Finally, Marsh writes: "...[Myers] relies on the Zapruder film, yet I was
>> the first person to prove that it is authentic..."
>>
>> What a joke. A few goofy conspiracy theorists postulate that the Z-film
>> is fake and Marsh rushes in to save the day. LOL! Come on, now. Anyone
>> with half a brain knew the "fake Z-film" allegations were and are a lot
>> of hogwash. Anyone remotely familiar with the record knows the Zapruder
>> film is authentic. I certainly didn't need Marsh or anyone else to
>> "prove" that to me. What's Marsh going to "prove" next? That the Earth is
>> round? Please!
>>
>
> Excuse me? Then why was Zavada hired?
Because of the moronic CT claims over the years that it was fake, that's
why. I imagine you already know that.
>
>> You can see, Steve, why I don't bother to post on those newsgroups. The
>> intelligent questions are too few and far between. And in order to get to
>> them, I'd have to wade through miles of horse-dung being spewed by the
>> likes of people like Marsh. Consequently, I don't bother to defend every
>> cock-and-bull allegation he or anyone else makes about my work. They
>> don't know what they're talking about. I'm confident that anyone
>> interested in the truth about it all will figure that out in time.
>>
>
> The reason is because you'd be called out for your lies. Like the claim
> that Connally was three inches lower than Kennedy or six inches inboard.
> Or that the bullet hit above Kennedy's shoulders.
His shoulders could be placed near his hips and it wouldn't matter, so
long as the entry is at the cervicothoracic junction.
And would you show us why his dimensions are wrong for the placement of
JFK and JBC?
Chad