Geometry anyone?

[Walt]

This is a link to the Altgen's that Ralph posted.

http://tinypic.com/r/28slm9w/7

Whose got a compass? Referring to the flag on the right front fender
of the Lincoln. I'd like to know the angle from the tip of that flag
pole shadow up to the tip of the flagpole that is casting that shadow.

[Walt]

I copied and enlarged the Altgen's photo shown in the link that Ralph
posted. Using a cheap compass that was made in Jakarta Idonesia.
(Since Jakata is in in the southern hemisphere my compass may be
upside down:) But anyway when I measured the angle from the tip of the
fag's shadow on the pavement up to the tip of the flag I found that
the angle is 20 degrees. Is that the correct angle?

[Herbert Blenner]

The tip of the flag pole shadow and the tip of the flagpole are two
points that give a line, not an angle.

Herbert

[Walt]

Clever.....Most folks would understand that there is an ANGLE involved
where that imaginary vertical line meets the surface of the
street .....or where the imaginary line intersects the tip of the axis
of the flag pole.

[Herbert Blenner]

The angle between the shadow of the pole and an imaginary vertical is
closer to seventy than to twenty degrees.

Herbert

[Walt]

Thanks Herbert ..... I hope someone else will weigh in .... with a
little more accurate measurement. A guesstimate is fine for some
things....... but in this case, I'd like a more precise measurement.

[Robert Harris]

Walt, I know you aren't going to believe me, but I went through this a
long time ago, re: Chaney, the motorcycle cop to the left of the of
limousine. It looks like he is alongside the the President, and is
looking at him. So, the apparent problem was, why don't we see him at
255 in the Zapruder film?

But when you align him and objects on the limo, with things behind them
- the TSBD door, lamp post, etc, you find that this is an illusion and
Chaney is actually, well behind the limo and alongside the security car.

What I did was, superimpose him and the limo, over the HSCA DP map, and
aligned them with background objects, matching the positions in the photo.

Altgens was using a very wide angle lens that caused a great deal of
angular distortion on the sides of the photo. So, like Chaney, that
shadow appears much further forward that it really was.





Robert Harris

[Walt]

So the angle between vertical and the shadow of the flagpole is about
70 degrees, which means the opposite angle is 20 degrees, isn't that
correct Herbert? IOW the angle formed by the surface of the street
and the shadow of that flag pole is 20 degrees, Since elementary
geometry states that total of all angles in a right triangle must
equal 180 degrees then it's obvious that the opposite angle of the 70
degree angle has to be 20 degrees. The right angle formed by the
base and vertical lines is of course 90 degress.... so 70 + 20 +90 =
180.

Ok, so now we know that the object that is casting the shadow ( The
top of the flagpole) lies along a line that is 20 degrees up from the
pavement. Now then......Looking at the shadow on the pavement that
can be seen just to the left of the front bumper we can scribe a line
at 20 degrees from that shadow and see that that shadow is being cast
by the windshield of James Chaney's motorcycle.... Which
mathematically proves that James Chaney was alongside the Lincoln when
Ike Altgens snapped this photo. So this photo shows that the Z film
is a fraud .....because Chaney isn't seen alongside the Lincoln in the
Z film.

[Walt]

It's really very simple geometry Robert...... A line drawn at 20 degrees
up from the shadow of the flagpole tip intersects the top of that flagpole
that is creating the shadow. That's undeniable proof that the it is the
flag that is casting the shadow.... Then when you lay a compass on the
shadow on the surface of the street that is seen just to the left of the
car's front bumper, and draw a line upward you find that passes through
the right hand side of the windshield of James Chaney's Motorcycle.....
Which is mathenatical proof that Chaney was along side the Lincoln when
Altgens snapped the photo. I sincerely hope that you won't make a fool of
yourself by claiming that geometry is ancient ,outdated, and unreliable.
like Obama believes about senior citizens.

[Herbert Blenner]

On Mar 10, 12:51 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 10:37 am, Herbert Blenner <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 8, 11:21 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 8, 7:20 pm, Herbert Blenner <a1ea...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 6, 10:03 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > This is a link to the Altgen's that Ralph posted.
>
> > > > >http://tinypic.com/r/28slm9w/7
>
> > > > > Whose got a compass? Referring to the flag on the right front fender
> > > > > of the Lincoln.  I'd like to know the angle from the tip of that flag
> > > > > pole shadow up to the tip of the flagpole that is casting that shadow.
>
> > > > The tip of the flag pole shadow and the tip of the flagpole are two
> > > > points that give a line, not an angle.
>
> > > > Herbert
>
> > > Clever.....Most folks would understand that there is an ANGLE involved
> > > where that imaginary vertical line meets the surface of the
> > > street .....or where the imaginary line intersects the tip of the axis
> > > of the flag pole.
>
> > The angle between the shadow of the pole and an imaginary vertical is
> > closer to seventy than to twenty degrees.
>
> > Herbert
>
> So the angle between vertical and the shadow of the flagpole is about
> 70 degrees, which means the opposite angle is 20 degrees, isn't that
> correct Herbert?

Twenty degrees is the complement of seventy degrees.

>  IOW the angle formed by the surface of the street
> and the shadow of that flag pole is 20 degrees,  Since elementary
> geometry states that total of all angles in a right triangle must
> equal 180 degrees then it's obvious that the opposite angle of the 70
> degree angle has to be 20 degrees.   The right angle formed by the
> base and vertical lines is of course 90 degress.... so 70 + 20 +90 =
> 180.

You are mistaking angles in three-dimensional space for angles in
plane. For example the angles between the shadow of the flag pole and
vectors lying on the surface of the street vary between a given angle
and its supplementary angle.

>
> Ok, so now we know that the object that is casting the shadow ( The
> top of the flagpole) lies along a line that is 20 degrees up from the
> pavement.  Now then......Looking at the shadow on the pavement that
> can be seen just to the left of the front bumper we can scribe a line
> at 20 degrees from that shadow and see that that shadow is being cast
> by the windshield of James Chaney's motorcycle.... Which
> mathematically proves that James Chaney was alongside the Lincoln when
> Ike Altgens snapped this photo.    So this photo shows that the Z film
> is a fraud .....because Chaney isn't seen alongside the Lincoln in the

> Z film.- Hide quoted text -
>

When you learn how to discuss geometry then get back to us and explain
your argument.

Herbert

[Walt]

Sorry Herb......All of us learned that we could determine dimensions, and
map coordinates, of objects like a flagpole's shadow. We all learned that
if we knew the height of a man standing near a flagpole we could determine
the height of the flagpole by comparing the shadows be cast in the photo.

>
>
>
> > Ok, so now we know that the object that is casting the shadow ( The
> > top of the flagpole) lies along a line that is 20 degrees up from the
> > pavement.  Now then......Looking at the shadow on the pavement that
> > can be seen just to the left of the front bumper we can scribe a line
> > at 20 degrees from that shadow and see that that shadow is being cast
> > by the windshield of James Chaney's motorcycle.... Which
> > mathematically proves that James Chaney was alongside the Lincoln when
> > Ike Altgens snapped this photo.    So this photo shows that the Z film
> > is a fraud .....because Chaney isn't seen alongside the Lincoln in the
> > Z film.- Hide quoted text -
>
> When you learn how to discuss geometry then get back to us and explain
> your argument.
>
> Herbert

Nice try Herb, regardless of the geometry rule that applies, the same rule
applies to BOTH shadows, because they are only inches apart. Your
attempted snow job won't fool anyone...... And it's so simple any average
4th grader can do it.

Anybody can lay a compass on a printout of the photo and find that the
shadow of the flag is 20 degrees relative to the street surface, and then
scribe a line from the other shadow at 20 degrees to find that the shadow
just to the left of the bumper is being cast by James Cheney's
motorcycle's windshield. You're gonna have to try harder Herb,....this
weak effort isn't going to fool anybody, although there are those who will
agree with you because they have the same agenda..

[Mark Ulrik]

I'm afraid Herb and Bob are correct, Walt.

Perhaps this rough sketch I made will help you understand the shadows
a little better.

http://i50.tinypic.com/34h8jsi.jpg

[Walt]

We don't need that silly sketch...... Anybody with the brain of an
average fourth grade student can lay a compass on an enlarged copy of the
Altgens photo and find that the object that is casting the shadow that's
visible just to the left of the bumper lies at a 20 degree angle up from
that shadow .........And the object that's casting that shadow is the
windshield of James Chaney's motorcycle.

[Robert Harris]

Walt, did you notice my statement about "angular distortion"? ALL two
dimensional photos contain it. That Altgens photo contained a LOT of it,
increasingly, toward the right and left edges.

If you were sitting here with me, I could show you by superimposing
things onto the HSCA DP diagram, and you would grudgingly be forced to
agree with me:-)

OK, look at this photo. Obviously, the distortion is much worse than in
the Altgens photo, but this exaggeration shows you the principle of what
I am saying.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/3105820062_1306a089a7.jpg

See how it pulls things at the edges, toward the viewer? If you
straightened that photo up to a more accurate perspective, the buildings
at the edges would recede and appear further away, wouldn't they?

That's what happened, albeit not as drastically, in the Altgens photo.
That's why Chaney appears closer than he really was and the angle of the
flag appears different than it really was.






Robert Harris

[Mark Ulrik]

Huh? That silly "20 degree angle" of yours proves nothing. Chaney, his
motorcycle AND the shadow of its windshield are still BEHIND the limo.

Tell me what it is about my sketch that you find so disagreeable, and
we might be able to have a meaningful discussion.

[Anthony Marsh]

Cute. Where did you find that map? Do you understand what the scale is?
Did you try to place the limo and the cycles correctly?
Do you accept that Altgens 1-6 was snapped during frame 255?
What was the angle of the sun at that moment?

[Walt]

If I couldn't believe my own eyes then I might listen to you....But
God gave me two good eyes and a fantastic computer, so I don't need
none of your stinkin diagrams....Hombre :).

[Walt]

Hey Robert......BS!

[Walt]

Mark Mark Would like us to continue to believe nonsense ( like the
WR) so he drew a pretty picture of what we should tell our eyes they
are seeing. I guess Mark's never heard of perspective in a
photo.....Perspective is the art of creating depth in a picture on a
flat surface. Two 4 inch square block appear to be different sizes
if one is place furter from the camera lens than the other. ( I
know this is elementary but Mark doesn't know it) At anyrate
putting things in their proper perspective in the Altgens photo......
If Chaney were to the rear of the Lincoln he would appear smaller and
behind JFK who can be seen reaching toward his throat . This is so
elementary that only someone with an agenda that's more important to
them their self image would attempt to fool someone into disbelieving
their own God given senses..... and then attempt to say that the
simple laws of geometry don't apply to this photo.

[Walt]

I told Blenner that there would be some who would agree with him
because they have an agenda..... So i'm not surprised that you would
agree with his BS.

[Herbert Blenner]

> windshield of James Chaney's motorcycle.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Many people with a grade school education know that a compass is used
to draw circles while a protractor is used to measure angles.

I wonder, Walt, are you posturing yourself to be the new poster boy
for the upcoming “Stay in School” campaign?

Herbert

[Mark Ulrik]

How about Hargis and Martin? Not to mention the SS agents in the
follow-up car. When you consider how big they appear, shouldn't they
be alongside the limo as well?

Hint: Your "size" argument goes nowhere. Good to see that you have
abandoned your silly argument about the shadow angles, though.

[Walt]

Abandon my argument?..... That's your fondest hope..... But don't be
silly....I'm a firm believer in the old axiom,... when you got em by the
balls and they don't want to cooperate....squeeze.....

So I'll remind you again that the shadow on the pavement that is just to
the left of the front bumper is being cast by the windshield of Chaney's
motorcycle. Simply lay a compass on that shadow and find that a line
drawn upward along the 20 degree mark of the compass passes right through
the left side (camera left) of that windshield.

[Walt]

Hey Herb.......In what way does this change the 20 degree angle from the
shadow of the flag to the flag that is casting the shadow? Twenty degrees
is 29 degrees with out regard to the nominclature of the instrument.....
Some people call the hood of an automobile a "bonnet".....That doesn't
change the fact that the hood / bonnet covers the engine of the car.

A couple of days ago you attempted to introduce this same kind of BS into
the discussion as a way of discrediting the information. You've been
succeedful in displaying your desperation......and that's GGGGGRRRREAT!

[Mark Ulrik]

That shadow is cast by Chaney's motorcycle all right. You're just
clueless about where on the pavement it falls.

There's a piece of curb in the background of the photo that also
appears "just to the left of the front bumper" of the limo. But how
close are these objects in the real world?

Hint: see http://i50.tinypic.com/35k5s85.jpg

[Walt]

Robert, I know that you've studied the Z film so perhaps you can
answer the questions which I'll ask after you read what Roy Truly
observered......

Mr. TRULY. That is right. And the President's car following close
behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It
wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the
driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he
came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here,
between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled
back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not
being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he
made his turn. Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made
his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston
onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north
curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost
stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little
section here.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Now, what is your best estimate of the speed as he started to go down
the street here marked Parkway?
Mr. TRULY. He picked up a little speed along here, and then seemed to
have fallen back into line, and I would say 10 or 12 miles an hour in
this area.
Mr. BELIN. All right.


Of course I've seen the Z film and did some work on plotting the
position of the Lincoln at various times by using photos that were
taken at the time. After I completed the plot I was startled to
realize that the Lincoln had slowed to nearly a complete stop at the
time the fatal shot was fired. I hadn't realized that I'd see this
until after I completed the plot.

At anyrate Roy Truly said that the lincoln nearly hit the curb and
slowed considerably to avoid hitting the curb....

Question..... I believe the Z film shows the Lincoln swing smoothly
through the left turn without any noticable change in speed.......
Is that right?

[Walt]

On Mar 14, 10:53 am, Mark Ulrik <m...@xml.dk> wrote:
> On 13 Mar., 20:59, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 12, 8:04 pm, Mark Ulrik <m...@xml.dk> wrote:
>
> > > On 12 Mar., 19:03, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 11, 11:34 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>

Ok, so now that you can see and comprehend what any 10 year old can
understand, you now want to establish a new rule?? OK by me ...... The
rule is: On a plat of Dealey Plaza, (inside cover of Picturess Of The
Pain) simply scribe a line from Ike Altgens position through the shadow
of Cheney's windshield and continue the line to the middle of the fourth
set of windows of the TSBD (4th from the east end of the building.) And
Presto...... you'll find that the front wheel of James Chaney's motorcycle
was nearly abreast of the Stemmons freeway sign and alongside the Lincoln
when Altgen's took the photo.

Mere child's play, even you should be able to draw a straight
line.........

[Anthony Marsh]

That map is not even close to being accurate. It came from Bob Cutler
who based his map on the Robert West survey done for the Warren
Commission which we now know was high inaccurate.
And you don't know where Altgens was located. And you don't know where
the limo was. And you don't know where the cycles were.

[Mark Ulrik]

Quit the posturing and show us your diagram with Altgens, limo, and
Chaney/motorcycle/shadow in their right locations.

Please also take us through the steps you took to determine those
locations.

It's mere child's play, right?

> > There's a piece of curb in the background of the photo that also
> > appears "just to the left of the front bumper" of the limo. But how
> > close are these objects in the real world?
>
> > Hint: seehttp://i50.tinypic.com/35k5s85.jpg

No comment?

[Walt]

Can't read?.... First off draw a vertical line ( that means up and down)
the lamp post is vertical.....so draw a line parallel to the lamp post up
from the Windshield's shadow and notice that the vertical line falls in
the middle of the fourth set of windows ( from the east end) of the TSBD.
You've drawn several plats of the scene with all them pretty colored lines
so I know that you know where Altgens was standing when he took the
photo.......So on your pretty plat simply scribe a line from Ike Altgens
position to the middle of the fourth set of windows of the TSBD (4th from

the east end of the building.) And Presto...... you'll find that the

shadow of Chaney's windshield lies on that line, and the front wheel of

James Chaney's motorcycle was nearly abreast of the Stemmons freeway sign
and alongside the Lincoln when Altgen's took the photo.

Very simply....... Even a fourth grader can do it...........

[Robert Harris]

I have no idea what "Blenner" said. And I find it shameful that anyone
would accuse someone of having an "agenda", because they proved them wrong.

Call the nearest University and speak to their sharpest photographics or
optics people. Read exactly what I said and ask them if I am right?

But hey!! Maybe they'll have an "agenda" too. Damn, this is a BIG
conspiracy!




Robert Harris

[Walt]

Why don't you prove me wrong by using the information I've presented
in this thread? Why are you so bent on leading people away from the
truth?

[Walt]

The map is accurate enough for this exaecize........

[Mark Ulrik]

Why don't you pick up your crayons and do it yourself? Fame and
fortune awaits.

[Anthony Marsh]

No it isn't. As usual you rely on inaccurate material.
You don't even have the Altgens negative.
Do you agree with where Cutler shows Altgens? A simple yes or no.

[Walt]

Fame and fortune?.....Don't be silly. Anybody who has presented
evidence that's contrary to the official government approved story is
rewarded with ridicule and derision....fame and fortune?? Mark,
I've used YOUR diagram .......Are you now going to claim that the
diagram that you've been using isn't accurate enough to prove that
Chaney was alongside the lincoln it the Altgens photo?

[Robert Harris]

Walt, I made a very simple request which should take minimal effort and
time. Let me repeat.

"Call the nearest University and speak to their sharpest photographics or
optics people. Read exactly what I said and ask them if I am right?"

Why won't you do that Walt? Or did you already do it:-)





Robert Harris

[Robert Harris]

I'm afraid not, Walt. When a witness contradicts the visual evidence, it
doesn't necessarily mean that the visual evidence is bogus. It might
also mean that the witness was wrong. This is a frame from the Towner
film, taken just before Tina turned her camera off and Zapruder turned
his back on. Look at it closely:

http://jfkhistory.com/townerlanemarker.jpg

Notice that the tires on the left side are just a few inches from the
leftmost lane marker in the center lane. Now look at frame 133 in the
Zapruder film - a perfect match.

I don't see it in the Towner film, but if the limo did slow down as
Truly suggested, that had to have happened prior to the Zapruder film at
frame 133.



Robert Harris

[Walt]

I'll see If I can explain this to you...... I have ZERO doubt that
2+2=4...... But you want me to call the neighborhood elementary
school and ask them to verify my solution to this very elementary
equation?? Are you serious??

It's very clear to me Bob, that your whole life hangs on whether the
Zapruder film is authentic. There's a lot at stake for you isn't
there, Bob? You've bet the farm and the simple exercise reveals
you should have been more prudent......You're losin it, Bob .....
Sorry




>
> Robert Harris

[Walt]

I agree.....I think Roy Truly imagined something that didn't occur, or he
may have thought that LBJ's car was JFK's. It's hard to know ..... Just
wanted your opinion......

[Anthony Marsh]

Eyewitnesses are unreliable.

[Walt]

Hmmmmm..... If eyewitnesses are unreliable, then I'd ask you why they are
routinely used at trials?

That's a really broad brush yer using Mr Marsh.......I believe that Truly
did see a vehicle almost hit the north curb of Elm street, but I believe
the vechicle saw do that was the "Queen Mary" the long wheel base
Cadillac that carried the Secret Service agents. At anyrate I'm 99%
certain that it was not the Lincoln that he was referring to. End of
story.....

[Anthony Marsh]

Silly question. If that's all you have then you are stuck using it.
Ever hear of the Innocence Project? How many people have they freed
because the physical evidence proved that the eyewitness was wrong?

> That's a really broad brush yer using Mr Marsh.......I believe that Truly
> did see a vehicle almost hit the north curb of Elm street, but I believe
> the vechicle saw do that was the "Queen Mary" the long wheel base
> Cadillac that carried the Secret Service agents. At anyrate I'm 99%
> certain that it was not the Lincoln that he was referring to. End of
> story.....
>

Ridiculous. We have the films and no motorcade vehicle "almost hit the
north curb."
So you admit that Truly was wrong. That doesn't make him a bad person,
just a bad witness.