Re: Dale Myers debunks his own work.

Pat give it a rest. You haven't proved a thing, and if you have, it's like 
proving that Captain Fritz had worn a blue ****rt on November 22, 1963, as 
opposed to some that say he had a white ****rt on.

All added up in the overall context of the Kennedy assassination and the 
Oswald-acted-alone LN findings, it equals zip.

James

"pjspeare@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <pjspeare@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:a4985ad5-75ee-4e45-8e89-09378c27e7f0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hidden within the recent attacks on my character by Dale Myers, posted
on
> the alt.assassination.jfk newsgroup by David Von Pein, are several
> acknowledgments by Myers that I was correct about some key issues.
>
> In Von Pein's May 1, 2008 post of an email by Myers, Myers writes "The
> movements of JBC and the jumpseat (as shown in the ABC/ History Channel
> program and the Discovery Channel program), demonstrating the
differences
> between prominent conspiracy-based illustrations and reality, were done
in
> unison for clarity. Any charges to the contrary are false."
>
> This is as good as a confession that Myers knew the jumpseat was not 6
> inches in from the door when he created animation showing it to be 6
> inches from the door. He now insists the center of Connally was 6 inches
> inboard of Kennedy, but that the jump seat on which he was riding was
only
> 2 1/2 inches in from the door. I wonder how many millions of people,
> seeing Myers animation, and seeing Connally sitting comfortably in the
> middle of his chair in a direct line of a bullet exiting Kennedy's neck,
> suspected Myers and ABC and the Discovery Channel knew Connally was not
> sitting comfortably in his chair in the direct line of fire, but was
> inexplicably scooted way to his left, hanging off the edge of his seat?
I
> wonder how many of them would have believed Myers' trajectories if it
> showed Connally in this position?  I wonder how many of them would feel
> deceived to find out that Connally's sitting comfortably in the middle
of
> his seat was merely a Myers invention designed to "clarify" things for
> them?
>
> Some might call this an out-and-out fraud perpetrated on the public.
>
> In both Von Pein's May 1, 2008 email denouncing my criticisms, and a May
> 8, 2008 post of a commentary by Myers from his website, Myers
acknowledges
> another mistake as well. In an effort to debunk my criticism of his
using
> distorted images in his overhead views of the single-bullet theory,
Myers
> has asserted:
>
> "(Speer) continues to claim that the Connally (JBC) figure was shrunk
(as
> was the jumpseat) to accomodate the SBT. He now uses images of my work
> culled from the Discovery Channel program "Beyond the Magic Bullet" to
> promote this nonsense. Even a cursory look at the images should tell
> anyone with a brain that the images used by Mr. Speer are at an angle to
> the viewer (i..e, the right side of the image is falling away from the
> viewer). This is due to the fact that the images are being filmed
directly
> off my computer monitor and that the camera filming these images is
> viewing the monitor at a considerable angle. This can be seen in any of
> the wide angle shots in which I am visible alongside the monitor (none
of
> which, BTW, are included in Speer's presentation). If Mr. Speer had
shown
> his viewers those wide angle views, it would be obvious that the reason
> JBC (and the jumpseat) appears smaller is because of the camera/monitor
> relation****p."
>
> While Myers attempted to insult my intelligence, he, in fact, overshot
and
> hit his sup****ters as well. I'd come forward with my complaints about
the
> distorted images years ago. No one to my knowledge, including Myers,
until
> this response, had ever suggested the images were distorted because the
> animation--the animation shown round the world to convince people the
> single-bullet trajectories worked, mind you--was shot at an angle from a
> computer monitor. David Von Pein, one of my Myers' biggest sup****ters,
> still has trouble believing it.
>
> Lost in the catcalls of Myers' sup****ters (ha ha ha--Myers called Pat
> stupid--ha ha ha) are the ramifications of his assertion. By admitting
the
> images used in the program were distorted, Myers is as much as admitting
> that his whole presentation in 2004's Beyond the Magic Bullet was
> irrelevant. No, it's actually much worse.  Since the program's creators
> added a trajectory angle onto Myers' distorted figures that lined up
> perfectly with their wounds, Myers is as much as admitting that the
> single-bullet theory--which he set out to prove some years ago--and
which
> he calls the "single-bullet fact," does not work on undistorted figures.
>
> While I've given Myers a hard time, and have received a substantial
amount
> of abuse in return, I believe Myers' acknowledgment of the failure of
his
> animation to demonstrate the single-bullet theory, was probably worth
it.
> Now we can all stop pretending the alignment of Kennedy and Connally,
and
> thus the likelihood of the single-bullet theory, has been "proven".
>
> Pat Speer, May 08, 2008
>