[Mark Ulrik]

(08-02-2016, 02:11 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016, 09:32 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  Come on. You've realized, to your horror no doubt, that there's no objective support for your Chaney theory, so you're desperately trying to turn this into a discussion about pixels. How pathetic.

How silly... YOU and Patrick both admit that Chaney was closer to Altgens than the other cops. That's evidence for the fact that Chaney is right where you see him in the photo.

Not even close! I can't speak for Patrick, but I put him up to about 7-8% (about 4-5% based on difference in windshield sizes) closer, and you put him about 25% closer.

You've offered nothing more than your speculation that he wasn't.

The irony is thick on this one. You have so far offered nothing but "well, that's what it looks like to me." How about offering something that can be tested for a change?

Proven wrong on pixel issue, you're relegated to false complaints of a lack of "objective support" - even though YOU agree that the evidence shows him closer.

And when I invited you to show where Chaney spoke with Curry... dead silence.

Outside Dealey Plaza. Not on film. Irrelevant to this discussion. Another weak attempt to change the subject.

These two issues are only a couple of bits of evidence for alteration in the extant Z-film.

Let's not forget your "Lady in Yellow Pants" theory.

And you've been unable to refute it.

What is there to refute? Your hand waving?

And now that I've produced a photo DEMONSTRATING what I've been saying all along about the measurement of pixels in JPEGS - you've suddenly turned silent about the possibility of accurate measurement...

Embarrassing, isn't it?

[Ad Hominem Deleted...]

My comment in green above.