56 years later and still the WC apologists deny the conspiracy.

[Jerry Organ]

When are you going to accept that you can't measure a 2D image this way? Your POV is never a perfect profile and all measurements are distorted. This is not how photogrammetry is done. Do the damn 2 laser challenge if you actually care about the truth and you want to advance your argument. Otherwise, your graphics are worse than misleading.

All the measurements apply to the mid-line and so are on the same plane. Practically no distortion.

Why can't one do photogrammetry and allow for perspective?

[Jerry Freeman]

You can sit around and let these clowns [who weren't there] tell you what happened if you want--- or you can hear what really happened from the doctors who attended President Kennedy at Parkland. 

[Jerry Organ]

You can sit around and let these clowns [who weren't there] tell you what happened if you want--- or you can hear what really happened from the doctors who attended President Kennedy at Parkland. 

I see Jones confirming the tracheotomy cut had been large to allow exploration and that the head wound was on the upper top right.

McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible. Jenkins is keeping Kennedy's head face-up.

[Martin Weidmann]

I see Jones confirming the tracheotomy cut had been large to allow exploration and that the head wound was on the upper top right.

McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible. Jenkins is keeping Kennedy's head face-up.

McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible.

Says the guy who wasn't there and who could not possibly know what McClellan saw.

[Walt Cakebread]

I see Jones confirming the tracheotomy cut had been large to allow exploration and that the head wound was on the upper top right.

McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible. Jenkins is keeping Kennedy's head face-up.

So you are saying that Doctor Mc Clelland is a liar......    Dr Mc Clelland said that he saw a huge hole in the lower right rear of JFK's head ..... His statement is verified by 18 witnesses who are shown in photos  on pages 86. 87. and 88 of Groden's,  TKOAP. (Incidentally one of those photos is of Doctor Ronald Jones, and in the photo Dr Jones is seen with his right hand with the fingers splayed depicting the large wound LOW on the rear of JFK's head  )   In the Video that was made 50 years later in 2013, Dr Jones contradicts his earlier photo and indicates that the wound on the rear of JFK's head was HIGH on the rear of JFK's head.   

Dr Mc Clelland comes across as much more credible than Dr Jones..... 

[Jack Trojan]

All the measurements apply to the mid-line and so are on the same plane. Practically no distortion.

Why can't one do photogrammetry and allow for perspective?

No, there is no POV from a 2D image that you can measure without ortho-recitfying it. You must "flatten" out the image to counteract the distortion created when you project a 3D object onto a 2D image. This is the only way to measure objects on a 2D image, which is what photogrammetry is all about; restoring the 3rd dimension from a 2D image. Since this is likely beyond your purview, your best bet is to create a digital 3D model of JFK, which you can manipulate graphically into the correct position to make the MB work, or not.  But you are relying on the CAD's physics engine to do all the work for you and in the end, who is going to buy it?

It's so much easier to skip the CGI and use 3D surrogates instead, which anyone can do even if you have no photo-analysis credentials. That is the beauty of a 3D re-enactment using lasers. It's cheap and deadly accurate and anyone can do it to convince themselves that the MB was either feasible or

[Jerry Organ]

So you are saying that Doctor Mc Clelland is a liar......    Dr Mc Clelland said that he saw a huge hole in the lower right rear of JFK's head ..... His statement is verified by 18 witnesses who are shown in photos  on pages 86. 87. and 88 of Groden's,  TKOAP. (Incidentally one of those photos is of Doctor Ronald Jones, and in the photo Dr Jones is seen with his right hand with the fingers splayed depicting the large wound LOW on the rear of JFK's head  )   In the Video that was made 50 years later in 2013, Dr Jones contradicts his earlier photo and indicates that the wound on the rear of JFK's head was HIGH on the rear of JFK's head.   

Dr Mc Clelland comes across as much more credible than Dr Jones.....

You mean the fellow who wrote on the day of the assassination: "The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple."? Even he got left wrong from right (as I do sometimes), he's describing a wound more parietal and top than some occipital blowout.

You ever consider McClelland might have become a full-fledged conspiracy buff after seeing the Zapruder film and after loons like Jones, Lifton and Thompson started asking questions "sharing" viewpoints with the Parkland doctors in the mid-60s?

How can he be at the head of the table if Perry said: "I don't think Bob McClelland was in the best place to see the head wound."?

[Jerry Organ]

No, there is no POV from a 2D image that you can measure without ortho-recitfying it. You must "flatten" out the image to counteract the distortion created when you project a 3D object onto a 2D image.

Show us one of those "flatten" out 2D images.

No reason you can't place a properly-scaled 3D model on an unaltered 2D photo and match the photo's field-of-view.

This is the only way to measure objects on a 2D image, which is what photogrammetry is all about; restoring the 3rd dimension from a 2D image.

You have a graphic example of that?



In the above image, the President's head is approximately in profile and its plane is similar to the film plane. We can add measurements at the head's midline that will be on the same plane as the head seen in the photo and the film plane. All three planes coincide. OK, I'll concede 2% "distortion (but that's a lot less distortion than your laser test).

Since this is likely beyond your purview, your best bet is to create a digital 3D model of JFK, which you can manipulate graphically into the correct position to make the MB work, or not.  But you are relying on the CAD's physics engine to do all the work for you and in the end, who is going to buy it?

"Manipulate graphically". What are you talking about? The 3D model exists as scaled (usually 1:1) and in its own file. It should come very close to matching the same subject and its position unique to the photo. Often-times, it will match close-to-perfect, depends on facet-count and so forth.

It's so much easier to skip the CGI and use 3D surrogates instead, which anyone can do even if you have no photo-analysis credentials. That is the beauty of a 3D re-enactment using lasers. It's cheap and deadly accurate and anyone can do it to convince themselves that the MB was either feasible or

Supposedly not having your photos from your own test allows everyone to "buy it". LOL.