Physical Impossibilities in the Zapruder Film

[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.

 

[Michael T. Griffith]

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.

Well, I can't make you see what you don't want to see. As many other scholars have noted, the movement of the limo is problematic, and the limo's movement does not alter the fact that in 0.56 seconds Brehm's son goes from being mostly behind him to being beside him and calmly clapping. 

Btw exactly what do you think they were trying to hide by doing the alteration as you describe?

The speeding up of the son's movements was a byproduct of the editing, not the reason for it.

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.

Uh, well, we can't even get to that point because you won't admit that the son's movements are the least bit problematic.

And just on a point of logic and critical thinking, why do I have to prove what I see but you don't have to prove what you see? You see nothing unnatural about the speed of the son's movements, but, apparently, you feel no obligation to cite any evidence that those movements can be carried out in the allotted time.

I've mentioned the several experiments that I did with my son and the times they produced. I didn't record them, but I have discussed their results. Why don't you do some experiments and see if you can get a kid of about Brehm's son's age to perform those movements in 0.56 seconds?

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!

"Speculation of what you think you see"?  If you want to talk about credibility, you might start by making logical, credible statements. 

Again, I can't make you see what you don't want to see. When you won't admit something that the film clearly shows because you can't explain it, it is hard to have a genuine discussion. The same goes for casually indiscernible but documented movements in the film.

The marked, split-second slowing of the limousine has been documented by Luis Alvarez, who was hardly a conspiracy theorist. It doesn't take advanced math skills to understand that a 3-4-mph reduction in barely half a second would produce quite a jolt to the occupants, but we see no indication of this among them.

Here's another problem: the split-second substantial forward movement of Kennedy's head and right shoulder in Z312-313. With regard to these frames, Itek noted, "the President's head is subjected to a large acceleration forward." Itek calculated that Kennedy's head is knocked forward 2.3 inches and his right shoulder about 1.1 inches from Z312-313. This is 1/18th of a second. But, amazingly, by Z314 the head is suddenly moving backward. Are you going to tell me that you see no problem with these violent split-second opposite-direction movements? Neuro spasms and "jet effects" won't cut it, since, for one thing, such phenomena cannot produce changes in direction that quickly.

[Thomas Graves]

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?



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.

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

Excellent rebuttals, all, John.

Paranoiac, Deep-State-believing amateur sleuths dabbling in "photo analysis" wear me out, too.

Mike would probably feel more at home at the so-called EF with the likes of John Butler (unless, of course, he IS John Butler).

--  MWT 

[John Mytton]

Excellent rebuttals, all, John.

Paranoiac, Deep-State-believing amateur sleuths dabbling in "photo analysis" wear me out, too.

Mike would probably feel more at home at the so-called The pellet with the poison's in the flagon with the dragon, the vessel with the pestle has the brew that is true. with the likes of John Butler (unless, of course, he IS John Butler).

--  MWT 

Thanks Thomas, I've been doing this for a long time and it's just nonsense claim after nonsense claim and these latest supposed anomalies from Griffith of action x not being able to be completed in time y are just absurd, yet every time I prove each and every one of my re-futations with graphic after graphic it's just ignored for another problem that he thinks he sees, there is no way to argue with these people mostly because they lack the expertise to analyse images/videos and thus cannot illustrate their alternative ideas as a response, so until they're blue in the face they just keep repeating the same unsubstantiated claims. -sigh-

JohnM