[Ben Holmes]

Ben Holmes Wrote:If a first-time viewer of the film CANNOT see a slowdown - and you're apparently admitting that - THEN ANY SLOWDOWN SEEN IN THE FILM ONLY WITH A FRAME BY FRAME ANALYSIS CANNOT BE USED TO VALIDATE THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE FILM.

Henry Sienzant Wrote:Huh? Sorry, you don't get to just make unproven statements and we have to assume they are true. Show how you determined that. Cite a source.

Since you are clearly a tad illiterate, I'm going to go into more detail, just in case Dale & Patrick are having problems following this as well.

One way to 'authenticate' the film is quite simple - if it matches what eyewitnesses saw.

Simple... logical... and requires no citation for any honest person.

But if the film does NOT match up with what eyewitnesses saw, then this is evidence for alteration. PARTICULARLY when you have dozens of witnesses saying what they saw that corroborate each other.

Simply stating that the film shows a limo slowdown will NOT corroborate the eyewitnesses... there's that minor problem of believability here... dozens of witnesses seeing the limo for the first time were able to note OBVIOUSLY ENOUGH a slowdown of the limo.

But no-one can do this of the extant Z-film.

Yet the film captures largely the same thing seen by the human eye.

You CANNOT give an example of such a dichotomy between what a film captures, and what people report, as you're trying to pass off in this case.

Yet you think that a citation is needed.