Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film

[Michael T. Griffith]

I think that perhaps the most compelling physical impossibility in the Zapruder film is the split-second slowing of the limousine in Z294-304. This event is noteworthy because it has been detected, measured, and discussed by scientists, including Dr. Luis Alvarez. From Z295-304, the limousine slows from 12 mph to 8 mph, a deceleration of about 0.37 g, in the space of barely half a second. Said Alvarez,

"The heavy car decelerated suddenly for about 0.5 sec. (10 frames), centered at about frame 299, reducing its speed from about 12 mph to about 8 mph" (American Journal of Physics, 44:9, September 1976, p. 825).

But Alvarez did not grasp, or chose to ignore, the implications of this rapid slowdown for the film's authenticity. Going from 12 mph to 8 mph in 10 frames would have produced a deceleration of about 0.37 g. As other scientists have noted, a deceleration of 0.37 g would toss things around, especially the occupants. Most cars do not decelerate more than 0.4 g. Yet, in the current Zapruder film, we see no visible effect on the occupants in the limo from the deceleration. The fact that JFK is not moved by this deceleration is particularly interesting because he no longer had voluntary muscle control and should have been thrown forward. Yet for many frames before and after this event, he appears to be quite immobile.

I suspect that this split-second rapid slowdown is a remnant of the obvious, noticeable slowdown/stop that numerous witnesses described seeing. For various reasons, this event had to be removed from the film. Throughout the current film the limousine seems to move at a steady speed.  No stop or marked slowdown can be seen by viewing the film at normal speed, which of course is the speed at which the witnesses would have observed the limousine. Alvarez only detected the slowdown by making measurements based on a frame-by-frame analysis of the film. Until Alvarez discovered the split-second slowdown, nobody had noticed it. So surely this is not the slowdown event that the witnesses described.
 

[John Mytton]

Your GIF is showing the son's movements in slow motion. The problem is that in just 0.56 seconds, the son emerges from behind his dad to be standing beside him and clapping, which is an impossible movement in that amount of time. Get a kid close to Brehm's son's age, or get a teenager even, and do an experiment: See if the kid can carry out those same movements in just 0.56 seconds. Get a chair. Have the kid stand mostly behind the chair. Tell the kid to move from behind the chair to a position roughly beside the chair and to be clapping while he completes the last 0.10 seconds of the movements. I did this with one of my sons many times, and he was never able to even come close to duplicating Brehm's son's movements in 0.56 seconds.

Indeed, your GIF shows the problem. In slow motion, the son's movements should be much slower than they are in your GIF. In your GIF, the son's movements seem to occur at a natural speed precisely because the movements are much faster when the film is played at its regular speed.

Your GIF is showing the son's movements in slow motion.

You miss the point of the exercise, compare the distance travelled by the relatively slow moving Limo to the minuscule movement of Brehms kid. Anyway to make you happy I modified the Gif to play out at regular speed and in all cases all movements are completely harmonious. Btw exactly what do you think they were trying to hide by doing the alteration as you describe?

Get a kid close to Brehm's son's age, or get a teenager even, and do an experiment: See if the kid can carry out those same movements in just 0.56 seconds. Get a chair. Have the kid stand mostly behind the chair. Tell the kid to move from behind the chair to a position roughly beside the chair and to be clapping while he completes the last 0.10 seconds of the movements. I did this with one of my sons many times, and he was never able to even come close to duplicating Brehm's son's movements in 0.56 seconds.

Yawn, Michael it's up to you to prove your own claim, I'm frankly a bit tired of you amateur noobs saying "I see something, now you prove me wrong" how about you film your kid in the exact same circumstances and let's analyse that.

Indeed, your GIF shows the problem. In slow motion, the son's movements should be much slower than they are in your GIF. In your GIF, the son's movements seem to occur at a natural speed precisely because the movements are much faster when the film is played at its regular speed.

Here we go again, more speculation of what you think you see, claims are a dime a dozen around here, either back up your claims with photographic/video proof or don't but it's your credibility at risk not mine!

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Numerous elements in the Zapruder film still refute the lone-gunman theory, which is why the film was suppressed for so long. Those who edited the film simply were not able to remove enough of the problematic elements to make the film fully compatible with a lone-gunman scenario.

The following week the most important frames(besides the headshot) were published in LIFE magazine and allowing for production and distribution, the amount of time to alter these frames all of which can be perfectly slotted back into the original, was only a few days, and is simply was not enough time but don't believe me go and ask any older SFX specialist and ask them exactly what could be done with 8mm film or any film for that matter and then ask if your ideas are actually plausible.
Another problem for you is that all the individual elements that you think were edited all have their own specific properties as in lighting, motion blur and angles and etc, and if you cut something out and stick it somewhere else then it's a guarantee that the moved object will be out of place with the surroundings.







JohnM

[John Mytton]

Looks like the boy is just taking a step. The same rate of speed that the boy travels is seen in both films.


Left: Muchmore frame (later than Z-frame to right); Right: Z276 appears to show boy's head and both legs on Brehm's right side.

Thanks Jerry, so not only did the evil conspirators alter Zapruder but they also altered every other film from virtually opposite angles and perspectives to perfectly match Zapruderm obviously by using some sort of advanced alien FBI technology, it's absolutely hilarious what these Kooks clever CT's think is possible.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Another physically impossible movement in the current Zapruder film is the head turn of the driver, William Greer, from Z315-321. Greer turns his head about 165 degrees in six frames, or in only 1/3rd of a second. Mike Pincher and Roy Schaeffer observe that Greer's head turn should create blurring in the film because the human eye can't remain focused when following such a rapid movement, but no blurring is seen:

Geez it's a never ending list of "observations", when "observing" Greer's rapid head turn did you take into account that Zapruder was panning his camera in the same direction because any motion blur must take into account all relative movements and that includes Zapruder's camera.
The following GIF is focused on Greer and his whole upper torso was turned dramatically to the right and all he did was turn back towards the front.



In this stabilized GIF which includes more of the overall surroundings, gives a more accurate representation of the Limo slowdown.

JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

Looks like the boy is just taking a step. The same rate of speed that the boy travels is seen in both films. Left: Muchmore frame (later than Z-frame to right); Right: Z276 appears to show boy's head and both legs on Brehm's right side.

Your comments leave me scratching my head. Unless one's eyesight is severely degraded, no one can deny that the son's position in relation to Brehm changes markedly from Z277 to Z287. If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge that plainly visible fact, then there's no basis for rational, genuine discussion.

Your comments about the Muchmore film are likewise baffling. In the Muchmore film the son does not just take one step but takes several steps, and his movement seems to me to take noticeably longer than it does in the Zapruder film.

You still have not addressed the issue of how anyone could have carried out the son's movements in 0.56 seconds. Denying those plainly visible movements is not an answer. John Mytton's claim that there is nothing unusual or unnatural about the speed of the son's movements is almost as untenable, as if taking only 0.56 seconds to move from behind the father to beside the father and standing calmly and clapping at the end of the movement is not at all unusual. Basic common sense should tell anyone that the son's movements occur far too quickly to be believable.

How about if we turn to another indication of tampering in the Zapruder film: the fact that in the Zapruder film, Jackie goes only just beyond the middle point of the trunk before retreating, but that in the Nix film she clearly goes much farther out on the trunk. Z380 is the frame before Jackie begins to retreat from the trunk. She is barely halfway past the middle of the trunk, and only her right hand is just beyond the middle point--the rest of her body is clearly behind the middle point. Moreover, she is nowhere near Agent Hill--her right hand is at least a foot from Hill. In stark contrast, the Nix film shows Jackie much farther on the truck and very close to Agent Hill.

https://whowhatwhy.org/2018/07/12/jfk-assassination-film-proof-of-tampering/

[John Mytton]

How about if we turn to another indication of tampering in the Zapruder film: the fact that in the Zapruder film, Jackie goes only just beyond the middle point of the trunk before retreating, but that in the Nix film she clearly goes much farther out on the trunk. Z380 is the frame before Jackie begins to retreat from the trunk. She is barely halfway past the middle of the trunk, and only her right hand is just beyond the middle point--the rest of her body is clearly behind the middle point. Moreover, she is nowhere near Agent Hill--her right hand is at least a foot from Hill. In stark contrast, the Nix film shows Jackie much farther on the truck and very close to Agent Hill.

It's a simple matter of perspective, Jackie is virtually centered on the rear trunk of the Limo and Hill is on the left rear of the Limo.



Here is the sight lines from Nix's and Zapruder's position.



And finally these are the corresponding Zapruder and Nix frames and as can be seen we are looking over Hills shoulder from Nix's position which makes Jackie relatively close to Hill, but from Zapruder's  position we see the larger gap because Jackie is further to the right, close to the center of the trunk and Hill is at the rear left of the limo.



JohnM

[Chris Davidson]

If you use the assumption that Nix/Z have the same basic frame rate, then stabilize both films, it's much easier to decipher common actions among both films within the same frame/s.
For instance, there should be a confirmation of Jackie's elbow moving downward toward the trunk lid in Z as there is in Nix at Z411.
If confirmed, then you have to ask yourself how Jackie is able to slide back down into her seat in 6 zframes which is less than one third of a second.
She also has to contend with JFK's head/body encroaching/falling back into her sitting space after she had pushed his upper body/head out of the way to move out onto the trunk lid in the first place.
The comparison frame span would have Clint holding her elbow from z405 to where it moves downward at z411.
In that six frame span, he is only able to drop her arm/elbow down to where we see it in z411.
As luck??? would have it, that's where that segment of Nix ends.