Frazier's rifle length estimate.

[Ross Lidell]

Buell Frazier's estimate of the length of the package Oswald carried on 22 November 1963 is just that: An estimate!

It's not a measurement with a tape measure or ruler: It's a guess. Therefore, by definition, an estimate cannot be absolutely accurate. It just a matter of "how" inaccurate is Frazier's estimate.

[Ray Mitcham]

What's to argue, even in your horrible photocopy quality photo we can see through the slats.

JohnM

What can you see on the other side of the slats, John?

[John Mytton]

What can you see on the other side of the slats, John?

Even in the poor photocopy quality exhibit, it's clear if someone was passing behind those slats you would see someone moving behind those slats and you would see them approach the rear of the car then you would hear the rear car door opening, it's not rocket science.

Btw you do realize that the garage wall at the Frazier residence wasn't a solid wall, and that along the length of the wall there were huge openings, you know holes that you can see through.



JohnM

[Ray Mitcham]

Even in the poor photocopy quality exhibit, it's clear if someone was passing behind those slats you would see someone moving behind those slats and you would see them approach the rear of the car then you would hear the rear car door opening, it's not rocket science.

Btw you do realize that the garage wall at the Frazier residence wasn't a solid wall, and that along the length of the wall there were huge openings, you know holes that you can see through.



JohnM

Interesting your reply to what could you see is you would "hear the door opening." 

But not what you can see.

[John Mytton]

Interesting your reply to what could you see is you would "hear the door opening." 

But not what you can see.

Huh? Another Kook who edits and misrepresents what I say.

Anyway Ray, stop running and answer the question.

I proved that the wall was not solid but was made up of slats, between the slats was not glass, not polycarbonate but cool clean clear air, what stopped Linnie Mae Randle from seeing through the air between the slats?



JohnM

[Ray Mitcham]

Huh? Another Kook who edits and misrepresents what I say.

No not editing just emphasising what you said in reply to what can you see "you would "hear the door opening." as if that had anything to do with what you could see.

Anyway Ray, stop running and answer the question.

Now why don't you stop running and answer my question. What can you see beyond the slats in the photo, John?

I proved that the wall was not solid but was made up of slats, between the slats was not glass, not polycarbonate but cool clean clear air, what stopped Linnie Mae Randle from seeing through the air between the slats?



JohnM

According to the photo, tell us what you think she could see between the slats, John, not what you want her to have seen.

[John Mytton]

According to the photo, tell us what you think she could see between the slats, John, not what you want her to have seen.

First of all it's not a photo but a poor multi generational, black and white, overly saturated, photocopy quality image, strike 1.
Secondly the original photo was taken with a flash and at a different time of day than what Linnie Mae saw. strike 2.
Thirdly even the best camera can't emulate the contrast range of the human eye. Strike 3 and you're out!

Btw my question is valid and still stands, what stopped Linnie Mae from seeing through the open slats?



JohnM

[Thomas Graves]

"specular highlights"

Iacoletti,

You have a "problem" with an example of technical visual terminology in the context of the JFK assassination, especially when it's used to build a case against your boy, Oswald?

Kinda like your unwillingness to understand why your putative, temporary "Glasses Woman" in Betzner-3 (Gloria Calvery) appears to you NOT to be wearing glasses, after all, especially after you enlarge the heck out of her face and ignore the fact that her face is turned to her right, directly into the low, late-November noontime sun, and that the glass in her right lens is refracting and reflecting said light in such a way as to "obliterate," in the photo, the black plastic frame on that side of her face?

And you conclude, therefore, that that horizontal black thing in the area of her eyes couldn't possibly be glasses, but is obviously a dragonfly, or a tree branch, or a floating shadow, or way too much mascara, instead?

LOL

-- MWT