JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I challenge anyone to look at the Zapruder Film clip below a few times in a row and arrive at the following conclusion:
There's NO WAY that President Kennedy and Governor Connally were struck by the same bullet! No way!
Anyone who could utter the above words after watching this Z-Film segment must either be blind or closely related to Oliver Stone:
Plus, the following clip from the Zapruder Film is always worth posting several times a day. It's a moving two-frame picture of a man named John Connally who is IN DISTRESS at Z225.
Now, considering the fact that that same man (John B. Connally Jr.) was shot in the upper back by a bullet at just about this exact same time in Dealey Plaza, what are the odds of this reaction being displayed by Mr. Connally being the result of SOMETHING ELSE BESIDES THE RIFLE BULLET THAT HIT HIM IN THE UPPER BACK AT ALMOST THIS EXACT SAME INSTANT ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963?:
COLIN CROW SAID:
I would tend to agree with you, David. You make a reasonable case. The problem for you is that there is no way that Connally's [right] armpit is to the left of JFK's midline. Connally is not far enough to the left of the jumpseat or twisted to the right for alignment to occur. So a win for the single bullet. But it was not fired from the TSBD.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You're wrong, Colin:
The above image is based almost exclusively on THE SAME FILM that conspiracy theorist Colin Crow says is showing John Connally too far to JFK's right when the SBT occurred. Dale Myers has done computerized "key framing" in order to synchronize the Zapruder Film to his 3D computer animation.
In other words -- What we see in the above "From The Sniper's Nest" image is exactly what Abraham Zapruder would have seen and filmed with his Bell & Howell camera if he had been taking his movie from the Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor of the Book Depository.
Myers' entire computer model is LOCKED IN to the Zapruder Film, regardless of the particular angle we are looking at at any particular time. The 3D computer imagery allows us to leave Zapruder's pedestal and look at the limousine and the victims from any vantage point in Dealey Plaza--including the above POV through Oswald's rifle in the Sniper's Nest.
And Connally's right armpit area is perfectly in line to accept Bullet CE399 at Z-Frame 224 after that bullet exits John Kennedy's throat. Myers has the crosshairs aimed a little bit too low on JFK's back in the above image, however. The entry wound in Kennedy's back wasn't quite that low, as we can easily see here:
And for additional SBT confirmation (of a more "low tech" variety), we've got my all-time favorite Warren Commission exhibit--CE903--which is an exhibit that I never get tired of talking about, mainly due to the fact that this single photograph taken on May 24, 1964, by the FBI's Lyndal Shaneyfelt totally destroys the persistent myth spouted by conspiracy theorists that has the evil Warren boys deliberately misrepresenting the location of JFK's upper-back wound in order to support the SBT.
But such an allegation/myth is just simply not true, and it NEVER WAS, as CE903 clearly illustrates -- because Arlen's Specter pointer is NOT being placed in the "neck" of the JFK stand-in here. In fact, if Specter had moved the metal rod UP INTO THE NECK of the stand-in--and still maintained the 17.72-degree downward angle of the rod that was required in order to approximate the angle leading back to Oswald's window (subtracting the 3.15-degree street grade of Elm Street for this picture in CE903, since the car here wasn't sitting on a street with a 3.15-degree slope to it)--it would have meant that the exit point for the bullet would have been around JFK's chin, instead of the correct "tie knot" exit location....
COLIN CROW SAID:
Hi David, is Dale [Myers] able to show us this [SBT] frame from the Zapruder position? That would resolve the issue. I would be convinced then. If it's a true 3D model, it should be possible. Until then, I'll be convinced by the vision of Jackie's pink sleeve. You can see it quite clearly in the graphics you posted. I have used correctly scaled versions of JFK and JBC in their positions over the HSCA scale model [see the image below; click to enlarge it]. Both men had similar shoulder widths. That was the problem with Dale Myers' image overhead. JFK's shoulders were 25% wider than JBC. Grossly inaccurate.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, Colin, I would certainly think that such a view would be available via Dale Myers' computer animation.
Here's a freeze-frame screen capture taken from Dale Myers' DVD preview. This image would equal Z-Frame 225:
Myers was supposed to release his "Secrets Of A Homicide" animation on DVD. On his website, Dale still says it is "planned for the near future".
I'd very much like to see more of Dale's animation, with the interactive ability to be able to see the Z-Film frames from a variety of different perspectives in Dealey Plaza. Hopefully it will come out on DVD sometime down the road (maybe for the 50th anniversary).
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
Allow me to take this opportunity to post a few important comments concerning Dale Myers' 3D computer model ("Secrets Of A Homicide: JFK Assassination"). The following comments come from Dale Myers himself in 2008, in response to criticism about various aspects of his computer animation, which was criticism that was coming from two conspiracy theorists in particular--Pat Speer and Robert Harris.
I'm quite sure that none of this information imparted by Mr. Myers is going to be believed by any hardline conspiracists of Planet Earth, but I felt the need to provide Mr. Myers with at least a little bit of "equal time" here in this thread at the JFKAssassinationForum, as some of these things being discussed by Myers below relate to the material in this forum thread:
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Con Job: Debunking the Debunkers
by DALE K. MYERS
"It’s been thirteen years since I released my preliminary computer-generated JFK assassination reconstruction and five years since an updated version was broadcast world-wide, although you’d never know it given the frequency with which the History and Discovery Channels re-broadcast the two programs my work appeared in.
And consequently it’s no wonder that conspiracy theorists continue to hammer at my work in the hopes of convincing mainstream America that my computer reconstruction is nothing more than a carefully constructed sham designed to further a supposed cover-up in the murder of President Kennedy.
The newest crop of debunkers push their warped ideas about my work with graphic illustrations and self-produced YouTube videos which purport to show the “obvious” lies and distortions these theorists have supposedly discovered among sequences of my work aired by the History and Discovery Channels.
One of the more vocal and equally off-base debunkers is Patrick J. Speer, a self-acknowledged wanna-be poet, turned wanna-be-musician, turned record buyer for the music industry who eventually became “obsessed with recent American history.”
Mr. Speer’s graphic intensive website promises “a new perspective on the Kennedy assassination” and while some newcomers to the subject may be impressed with the eye-candy, there’s nothing really there that rises above the same old, tired arguments and misinformation kicked around by conspiracy theorists for better than four decades.
It’s the same old shoe with new laces.
There are plenty of identical websites that offer up the same kind of misinformation for those who don’t know any better and if visitors to these kinds of websites are willing to get their facts about American history from wanna-be poets and the like, who am I to spoil the party?
In fact, I’ve largely avoided confronting this army of wackiness, outside of addressing a few of their more frequent allegations, because doing so proves time and again to represent a colossal waste of time.
It doesn’t take long to figure out that one could waste a lifetime attempting to hammer a little common sense into these people who for one obsessive reason or another find it their calling to opine about something they know very little about, or in the case of Mr. Speer, know absolutely nothing about.
I’m referring of course to the multitude of vile and reckless charges concerning my computer reconstruction of the Kennedy assassination which are featured as part of Mr. Speer’s “new perspective” on the case.
Utilizing screen grabs lifted from the two television programs I participated in, Mr. Speer pretends to debunk my work using graphic overlays that break every rule of photogrammetry accompanied by childish headlines like Dale Myers’ House of Mirrors; Murder by Cartoon; and Cutting the Crap.
I pointed out Mr. Speer’s photographic follies on my FAQ page over three years ago (without using his name in order to save him embarrassment), yet Speer continues to use the same deceptive photographic techniques to – get this – claim that he has evidence of my deception.
For instance, Speer uses overlays of images taken from two different angles and claims that because they don’t align I am being deceptive; or, Speer draws lines of trajectory on a two-dimensional image of a three-dimensional scene and claims that because the two-dimensional line doesn’t line up with the three-dimensional scene (an impossibility due to the basic rules of photogrammetry) that I am being deceptive.
Forget about convincing Mr. Speer that one cannot draw a rational conclusion from an irrational premise; I’ve tried. Suffice it to say that Mr. Speer prefers to live in a land of illusion where physical realities don’t hold a candle to obsessive conspiracy theories.
I’m not going to spend a lot of time here pointing out the ridiculous nature of each and every one of Mr. Speer’s goofy assertions. But here are just two to make the point, as well as the truth of the matter:
Charge: Myers shrunk the model of Governor Connally and his jumpseat 25% in order to get the single bullet theory to work.
Truth: Mr. Speer used a frame grab from the Discovery Channel’s “Beyond the Magic Bullet” to make his point, but failed to note that the image he used was taken from a portion of the program in which my computer work was being displayed on a computer monitor which was at a significant angle to the camera – the effect being that the computer images of Kennedy and Connally were compressed horizontally and consequently the Connally image appeared smaller than the actual model.
When Mr. Speer was informed that wide-angle sequences from the Discovery program showed the relationship of the computer monitor to the program camera (and therefore the fallacy of his argument), he wrote on his website, “I must admit I did not realize this footage was shot at an angle. I mean, why would they do that?” Believe it or not, Mr. Speer than proceeded to claim that the producers of the program and I conspired to deceive viewers (and presumably the hapless Mr. Speer) about the true alignment of the single bullet theory by purposely shooting the monitor on an angle!
In a recent post on the UK’s Education Forum, Mr. Speer writes, “No one to my knowledge, including Myers, until this response, had ever suggested the images were distorted because the animation – the animation shown round the world to convince people the single-bullet trajectories worked, mind you – was shot at an angle from a computer monitor.”
Mr. Speer doesn’t seem to understand that in the real world there is no need to acknowledge something that is self evident – namely, that Discovery Channel viewers were watching a presentation being given from a vantage point that was not perpendicular to the presentation screen. This is obvious from the Discovery program sequences that show a wide-angle view of the studio in which the presentation was being given. Mr. Speer failed to note that fact and now claims that the Discovery Channel and yours truly conspired to deceive everyone about the single bullet theory.
Can it get any sillier? I’m afraid it can.
According to Mr. Speer, “By admitting the images used in the program were distorted, Myers is as much as admitting that his whole presentation in 2004's Beyond the Magic Bullet was irrelevant. No, it's actually much worse. Since the program's creators added a trajectory angle onto Myers' distorted figures that lined up perfectly with their wounds, Myers is as much as admitting that the single-bullet theory--which he set out to prove some years ago--and which he calls the 'single-bullet fact,' does not work on undistorted figures.”
The so-called distortions Mr. Speer refers to are of course the unintended result of the Discovery Channel photographing the presentation monitor at an angle and have nothing to do with the alignments depicted in the actual images appearing on the monitor. And the trajectory path superimposed over the videotaped sequence by Discovery editors after the fact has no more relevance or accuracy to the images below it (other than to illustrate, in very broad terms, the path of the bullet) than Mr. Speer’s own attempts to project two-dimensional lines into three-dimensional space.
It’s unfathomable to me that anyone could swallow Mr. Speer’s illogical rationale for dismissing the breadth of my work on the single bullet theory, but in the world of conspiracy theorists bent on embracing anyone and anything critical of the single bullet theory, such idiocy is common place. (The UK’s Education Forum’s administrator, John Simkin, applauded Speer writing, “Congratulations. I am sure all members have been very impressed with your work in this area.”)
Charge: Myers misplaces Connally’s jumpseat in order to ensure the alignment of the single bullet theory.
Truth: The location of the jumpseat has no bearing on the alignment of any trajectory plotted in my computer reconstruction. The figures of JFK and JBC were matched to the Zapruder film perspective, not to the location of the jumpseat. Frankly, you could eliminate the entire limousine from the reconstruction and the alignments of JFK and JBC would still be valid since their position in space is based on Zapruder's view of the scene and the relationship of JFK to JBC, and their combined relationship to the TSBD and the surrounding buildings. In short, the position and size of the jumpseat has no bearing on the single bullet theory.
All of this means little to Mr. Speers who now writes, “As he is now asserting that the limousine model had nothing to do with his positioning of Connally, only measurements taken from the Zapruder film, I decided to put the seat in the correct location on Myers' undistorted over-view, and see how it matched up with Connally….”
Does it matter that Mr. Speer cannot really move the jumpseat to the “correct” location within my computer rendering (i.e., move a two-dimensional image in three-dimensional space)? Apparently not, because Mr. Speer then proceeds to once again break the Cardinal Rule of photogrammetry (i.e., draw two-dimensional lines on a three-dimensional image) to “demonstrate” that Connally doesn’t align with the single bullet trajectory, concluding, “Myers undoubtedly knows this. Which fuels my suspicion that the distorted animation used in ‘Beyond the Magic Bullet’ was no ‘mistake’.”
Mr. Speer further complains that the animated sequence I produced in which Connally is shown sitting inboard of Kennedy by six inches is equally deceptively because it shows Connally and the jumpseat moving in unison. I explained in a recent email that Connally and the jumpseat were moved as one for clarity.
According to Mr. Speer, “This is as good as a confession that Myers knew the jumpseat was not 6 inches in from the door when he created animation showing it to be 6 inches from the door… I wonder how many [millions of viewers] would feel deceived to find out that Connally's sitting comfortably in the middle of his seat was merely a Myers invention designed to ‘clarify’ things for them? Some might call this an out-and-out fraud perpetrated on the public.”
I don’t know how many ways to say it, but Connally was situated six inches inboard of Kennedy at the time they were both hit. Connally’s jumpseat, however, was fixed to a track in the floor of the limousine, the outside edge of the jumpseat cushion measured at 2.5 inches from the inside door panel, according to body drafts produced by Hess & Eisenhardt Company.
To demonstrate the difference between a rather common (and inaccurate) drawing purporting to show Connally seated directly in front of Kennedy at the time of the single bullet shot and their actual positions as deduced from the Zapruder film and other photographs, the models of Connally and the jumpseat were moved as a single unit during presentations for ABC News and the Discovery Channel.
The relationship between Connally and the jumpseat are identical in both positions. Moving Connally and the jumpseat in unison was simply easier than moving the two separately given the television time available – especially given the fact that the position of the jumpseat had absolutely no bearing on the single bullet theory.
But for Mr. Speer, focusing on inconsequential minutia is better than acknowledging his own obvious mistakes in photographic analysis and logic. It also allows him to play the marytyr for his fellow conspiracy theorists and pretend he has actually proven something, writing, “While I've given Myers a hard time, and have received a substantial amount of abuse in return, I believe Myers' acknowledgment of the failure of his animation to demonstrate the single-bullet theory, was probably worth it. Now we can all stop pretending the alignment of Kennedy and Connally, and thus the likelihood of the single-bullet theory, has been ‘proven’.”
One can only feel sorry for Mr. Speer after reading such nonsense. The only one being conned by such addled thinking is Mr. Speer himself who despite all efforts is determined to prove just how thick-headed conspiracy theorists can truly be.
Anyone who wants to pretend my reconstruction work is false or doesn't matter is free to do so. As I’ve said before, in the final analysis, the truth doesn't require anyone's belief.
I don't respond to posts on the many Internet newsgroups because of the sophomoric nature of the vast majority of the postings (and I know many respected experts on the assassination who feel the same way). It is the insipid name-calling and disrespect for honest research and work that I (and others) find the most appalling. It is worse than a kindergarten sandbox.
Too bad. The Internet promised to bring people of common interests together. Instead, it gives a global soap box and a megaphone to those who have the least amount to say.
On occasion, I feel the need to defend my work against these childish armchair detectives if only to plant a little sanity in a field of nonsense. Unfortunately, whenever I speak up, it only seems to bring more nuts out of the woodwork for yet another round.
It's a never ending cycle of lunacy; one ridiculous argument after another to see who can be the top fool.
Congratulations, Mr. Speer! You’re tops with me."
Posted by Dale K. Myers at 4:05 PM [05/08/2008]
Monday, August 18, 2008
YouTube Pied Pipers
by DALE K. MYERS
"I’ve gotten more than one email in the last few days asking about a video posted on YouTube over the weekend claiming to debunk my computer animation work on the validity of the single bullet theory.
This latest video posting, entitled “Dale Myers or Voodoo Geometry 101,” arrives courtesy of conspiracy advocate Robert Harris who manages to prove how little he knows about my computer work, photography and geometric relations, and the Kennedy assassination in general in less than six minutes.
The crux of Mr. Harris’ argument is that yours truly (that’s me) falsified the geometric positions of Kennedy and Connally in order to make it appear that the single bullet theory was valid and that the single bullet shot traced back to Lee Harvey Oswald’s firing position on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. In short, according to Mr. Harris, my computer work is a transparent lie.
Never mind that Mr. Harris’ charges have been made numerous times in the past by equally ignorant detractors and rebutted in detail on my own website (see, FAQ: Computer Reconstruction of the JFK Assassination) and here in this forum (see, Con Job: Debunking the Debunkers).
The modern day pied pipers of the YouTube generation count on the short attention spans and general ignorance of their audience to sell their own brand of snake-oil and promote themselves as reliable purveyors of truth via video on the Internet.
Of course, anyone can point a webcam at their own mug a pretend to be someone of knowledge and responsibility. Hence, the wisdom of the ancient axiom, “You get what you pay for.”
In this case, those who buy Mr. Harris’ free offerings are getting a pig in a poke.
For instance, Mr. Harris makes the foolish claim that he can measure a two dimensional still frame of a computer rendering of the presidential limousine and its occupants (as culled from the Discovery Channel program, “Beyond the Magic Bullet”) and determine the angle of a three-dimensional trajectory from the sniper’s nest.
Apparently Mr. Harris never heard of (or understands) the underlying principle of photogrammetry, which in essence shows that it is impossible to project three dimensional lines in space onto two dimensional photographs without taking into account the location and angle of both known vantage points. By some wizardry unknown to human science, Mr. Harris is able to do both.
Conspiracy guru Jack White found out the lessons of photogrammetry the hard way when he took a beating in 1978 while trying to convince the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that multiple press photographs of Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano rifle depicted multiple rifles of differing lengths. The “proof” Mr. White offered of the multiple rifle cover-up were measurements he made on two-dimensional press photographs.
As the HSCA photograph experts called to rebut Mr. White rightly pointed out, the former advertising photographer failed to take into account the relationship between the camera making the photograph and the tilt of the rifle in three dimensional space. In fact, White had never heard of the principle of photogrammetry.
Apparently, Mr. Harris never heard of Jack White’s boo-boo, because he makes the same error. And he makes it more than once.
For instance, Mr. Harris claims that a comparison of a photograph of the presidential limousine made early in the parade route with a computer rendering of my limousine model shows that “Myers has jammed the two men much more closely together than they really were.” Mr. Harris claims that the distance between the back seat where the president was seated and Governor Connally’s jumpseat were compressed in my computer model by “a little over fifty percent.”
What is the evidence for the charge that I manipulated the dimensions of the limousine to better serve the single bullet theory?
Mr. Harris offers nothing more that his own self-proclaimed expertise at visually aligning two different photographs made from two completely different angles in three dimensional space – a virtual impossibility – along with an unsupported declarative statement: “There is no way JFK’s legs could have been up against the back of Connally’s car seat.”
In fact, Mr. Harris’ credibility on this last point is effectively destroyed by the existence of numerous photographs taken throughout the motorcade (a photograph on the back dust jacket of Bill Sloan’s JFK: Breaking the Silence to name one) which shows exactly the opposite to be true – Kennedy’s knees were comparatively tight to the back of Connally’s jump seat.
In addition, Mr. Harris’ claim that “when the House Select Committee on Assassinations depicted the victims they had to move Connally considerably [more] to his left” than he appeared to be in other photographs suggests that Mr. Harris doesn’t know that the HSCA Photographic Panel mistakenly based Connally’s position on a line of sight as seen in a photograph made by Hugh Betzner and that the HSCA analysis failed to take into account the fact that Connally’s right shoulder was below Betzner’s line of sight (as proven by the Altgens’ photograph) and hence Connally might have been seated further right than the HSCA believed. My three dimensional analysis of the Zapruder film bears this fact out.
Most importantly, Mr. Harris states, “The next scene from [Mr. Myers’] presentation includes an amazing sleight of hand or pixels or whatever. Watch closely folks, as Mr. Myers tries to hide the evidence of his deception by slipping the victims back into a proper position.”
Here, Mr. Harris shows a clip from the Discovery program which features my computer work in which the moment of the single bullet is shown in wireframe and in solid form as the camera circles the limousine and its occupants.
Mr. Harris then adds this, “Okay, notice two things here. First the car and the background are all wireframes. Also, he still has Kennedy and Connally close together, so that 18 degree bullet trajectory looks pretty reasonable. But as the car rotates, notice that something happens. The wireframes disappear and right in the middle of the rotation, Mr. Myers switches to a totally different video. In this video he positions President Kennedy and Governor Connally correctly.”
What Mr. Harris doesn’t know is that the two renderings (wireframe and solid form) depict the same model.
That’s right folks, the wireframe model that he claims has been “jammed together” in order to mislead the American public and perpetuate the cover-up, is the exact same model (and in the same position) as the solid form model which Mr. Harris says depicts Kennedy and Connally correctly.
For you tech junkies, the model of the single bullet moment was simply rendered in a 360 degree rotational view multiple times with a variety of surface settings (wireframe, solids, etc.), and then combined with simple dissolves pulled between the various layers.
At the end of his presentation, Mr. Harris proudly boasts, “People like Myers have been playing this same game for years, misconstruing the positions of the President and Governor Connally to make it appear that the shot was fired from the sixth floor of the depository. But the angles from there just don’t work.”
Of course, the only game players in this case are the conspiracy diehards like Mr. Harris who refuse to accept the reality of what happened in Dealey Plaza and prefer instead to prey on the young and naïve who are more than happy to follow any video pied piper willing to tell them whatever they want to hear about the Kennedy assassination – truth be damned."
Posted by Dale K. Myers at 3:37 PM [08/18/2008]
DALE MYERS ADDED THIS RELATED COMMENT TO HIS BLOG ON
AUGUST 25, 2008:
"Part of the process of aligning the model with the film involved creating a frame-by-frame match of the wireframe models to the Zapruder film. This alignment sequence has been seen by a number of individuals including the team from Z-Axis Corporation who vetted the process.
Other points of view matching other films and still images were also created during the reconstruction process.
I have not made these sequences available on the Internet due to copyright restrictions.
While making these sequences available would certainly aid those having a tough time visualizing in three dimensions, I don't believe the die hard conspiracy crowd would be among them."
Posted by Dale K. Myers at 12:19 AM [08/25/2008]
David Von Pein
April 26, 2010
Posted By: David Von Pein