Uninterrupted TSBD rooftop Hertz sign time display = no power failure

[Richard Smith]

Tom saves your lazy ass from having to do your own research and this is how you repay him.

Tut-tut with the language Johnny.  I'm simply pointing out that you erroneously conflated the information in the article with Tom's commentary.  Either out of pure stupidity or intentional dishonesty.  It does not say what you claimed.  Tom did nothing wrong.  He simply expressed his interpretation of the information contained in article.  A substantive opinion that may or may not be true.  You, however, stated that information as being a fact when it is not.  Perhaps in your childish desire to be right about something after being wrong about everything in this discussion so far.

[John Iacoletti]

I'm sure Tom will be along shortly to set you straight.  Tom has a track record of honest and thorough research.  You have a track record of making unsupported claims, strawman arguments, and insulting people.  Figuring out who is more reliable is not a difficult proposition.  But anything to distract from your silly argument about the Hertz sign, right?

[Tim Nickerson]

The following images prove the 1953 installation of the TSBD rooftop sign predating the Hertz sign
required installation of separate electric utility meter and power supply to the roof. Uhler & Co. outdoor sign
built and erected the 1953 Ford sign and the 1962 Pearl Beer waterfall billboard visible from Stemmons Freeway.
If, as some assert, there was a power interruption inside TSBD as the presidential motorcade approached and passed,
it was not related to an external electric utility power supply interruption.






I posted about the similar power requirements and description of the Hertz sign at this link.:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,269.msg7590.html#msg7590

"The following images prove the 1953 installation of the TSBD rooftop sign predating the Hertz sign
required installation of separate electric utility meter and power supply to the roof."

Tom,

As Richard has noted , your commentary does not seem to be supported by the images that you've posted. How have you determined that the 1953 installation of the TSBD rooftop sign predating the Hertz sign required installation of separate electric utility meter and power supply to the roof?

[Jerry Organ]

Worth noting that Richard's claim that Mooney didn't known how to work the controls of the elevator remains unsupported.

And vice versa.

[Richard Smith]

I'm sure Tom will be along shortly to set you straight.  Tom has a track record of honest and thorough research.  You have a track record of making unsupported claims, strawman arguments, and insulting people.  Figuring out who is more reliable is not a difficult proposition.  But anything to distract from your silly argument about the Hertz sign, right?

Says the guy who just dishonestly quoted the language contained in the article even after it was pointed out to him that this information was not contained in the article cited.  My understanding is that Tom does not believe there was a power outage and that it couldn't have been an external power outage.  Something you - not me - takes issue with.  In terms of insulting remarks, if you want to whine about that then I would encourage anyone to look at your posts in this thread.

[Richard Smith]

Worth noting that Richard's claim that Mooney didn't known how to work the controls of the elevator remains unsupported.

It is a plausible inference drawn from the facts.  This elevator is working fine.  It comes down to the first floor where Mooney and his passengers get on.  Mooney and his passengers take it to the second floor (thus the power must be working fine).  Once his passengers - the folks who work in the building and know how the elevator works get off - he suddenly can't get it to work.  It is an freight elevator in a warehouse.  It's entirely plausible that he couldn't operate it.  He honestly but erroneously assumed this was because the power was out because he didn't know what didn't know about operating the elevator.  I can't prove that to your subjective satisfaction but it is a plausible premise given the facts.  What you are alleging is not plausible.  In fact it is absurd.  That a conspirator hung around for some unknown reason cutting the power to this elevator with the DPD pouring into the building.  Risky with no apparent reason to do so. 

[Tim Nickerson]

Mooney testified, under oath as the nutters love to emphasize, as follows:

Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we had no more power on the elevator. [...]

How long will you continue making a fool of yourself?

(not that it bothers me)

Suck it up and move on.

Have you ever operated one of those old freight elevators?

[Richard Smith]

Mooney testified, under oath as the nutters love to emphasize, as follows:

Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we had no more power on the elevator. [...]

How long will you continue making a fool of yourself?

(not that it bothers me)

Suck it up and move on.

Just because you are as equally ignorant of how the freight elevators operated as Mooney is not very compelling for your argument.  It is humorous though.  The blind leading the blind.  I don't have any doubt that Mooney honestly but erroneously thought the elevator didn't work due to a power loss.  He didn't know what he didn't know.  Much like yourself.