Dallas Police Crime Lab

[John Iacoletti]

You already said in your first reply to me that my "morph" was the same lift,

That’s because you previously posted an “alternating gif” of two versions of the alleged Day lift, and I didn’t notice that this was a new one.

So getting back to your question as soon as you're matching three or more random points the chances of a coincidence happening becomes astronomical.

Making up statistics doesn’t really help your argument. Nor does claiming that dots are “matching flaws” just because you lined up two photographs and stuck arrows on them.

[John Mytton]

That’s because you previously posted an “alternating gif” of two versions of the alleged Day lift, and I didn’t notice that this was a new one.

Making up statistics doesn’t really help your argument. Nor does claiming that dots are “matching flaws” just because you lined up two photographs and stuck arrows on them.

That’s because you previously posted an “alternating gif” of two versions of the alleged Day lift, and I didn’t notice that this was a new one.

There's a lot of things you don't notice but thankfully I'm aware of what's going on, just stick with me and you'll go far.

Making up statistics doesn’t really help your argument.

I don't need to make up anything, the rifle imperfections are out of my control, anyway it's all just random points and the coincidental likeliness of consecutive events. It's similar to the chances that 5 random people win the lottery twice in a row, it simply doesn't happen.

Nor does claiming that dots are “matching flaws” just because you lined up two photographs and stuck arrows on them.

Once again you want to focus all your rage at me but all I'm doing is illustrating and pointing out what the FBI already determined over 50 years ago.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Make yourself useful for a change and create a definitive blinking GIF showing a match between the alleged print on the rifle and Oswald's hand print. Regurgitating anything created by Day and the FBI is a fool's errand. That's like claiming the WC report is true because Warren himself said so.

JTrojan

I'm always useful and I'm not going to make a GIF because a multitude of people have confirmed that the palm print was Oswald's.
It might be better to take the prints to a neutral expert and see what they say?
But even then you go on to dispute Day so what's the point?

JohnM

[Walt Cakebread]

I'm always useful and I'm not going to make a GIF because a multitude of people have confirmed that the palm print was Oswald's.
It might be better to take the prints to a neutral expert and see what they say?
But even then you go on to dispute Day so what's the point?

JohnM

 you go on to dispute Day so what's the point?

And you think that Detective Day is beyond criticism ......   His word is the gospel.... Is that what you think Mytton?

[John Mytton]

you go on to dispute Day so what's the point?

And you think that Detective Day is beyond criticism ......   His word is the gospel.... Is that what you think Mytton?

You promised you weren't going to reply to me and I respect a man who keeps his promises.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

I don't need to make up anything, the rifle imperfections are out of my control, anyway it's all just random points and the coincidental likeliness of consecutive events. It's similar to the chances that 5 random people win the lottery twice in a row, it simply doesn't happen.

In fact it’s not similar to that in any way.

Once again you want to focus all your rage at me but all I'm doing is illustrating and pointing out what the FBI already determined over 50 years ago.

What makes you think I’m rageful? What we have from 50 years ago is a claim from Hoover — nothing more. I know you have trouble differentiating claims from evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

I'm always useful

You misspelled “useless”.

and I'm not going to make a GIF because a multitude of people have confirmed that the palm print was Oswald's.

“A multitude of people”. LOL.

It might be better to take the prints to a neutral expert and see what they say?
But even then you go on to dispute Day so what's the point?

Agreed. Even if you could demonstrate that the print on the index card is Oswald’s (by whatever criteria), that tells you nothing about who shot Kennedy.

[Jack Trojan]

Agreed. Even if you could demonstrate that the print on the index card is Oswald’s (by whatever criteria), that tells you nothing about who shot Kennedy.

What would be useful is to see which of the "multitude" of people are FOS and part of the cover up. If the palm print matches Oswald's it doesn't tell us anything, but if it doesn't match or can't be resolved, especially by non-experts eye-balling the print and claiming a match, then the multitude has some splainin' to do. More rush to judgement grist for the CT mill.

It's no wonder Mytton doesn't want to go there.