Re: Dale Myers debunks his own work.

On May 11, 9:30=A0pm, WhiskyJoe <jr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> David Von Pein wrote:
> > But Dale certainly is sliding
> > that seat more than 2.5 inches
> > inboard in the Discovery Channel
> > program. That's quite obvious
> > (IMO anyway). And Dale is even
> > SAYING, in effect, that he's
> > moving the seat 6 inches inboard.
>
> Yes, he does. But just as clearly, before moving, the seat overlaps the
> door.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D2kEh3Kgwhk0
>
> Is it not clear that in this video, at time 0:25, the seat overlaps the
> door. It is not flush with the door, but about 3.5 inches outside the
car
> door. The outline of the seat overlaps the heavy lines showing the car
> door. Then, after it moves 6 inches, the seat ends up 2.5 inches from
the
> door.
>
> This is not strange, because the purpose is to show the most common
> depiction of the Anti SBT drawings, as in the movie JFK, with Connally
> directly in front of JFK. To put Connally in this position, Myers has to
> have the seat impossibly too far to the right, where it overlaps the
door.=

>
> The net result is that when he moves Connally to the proper position,
the
> seat is where it is suppose to be, 2.5 inches from the car door.

WhiskyJoe, go back and look at the limousine model. The inside of the door

is less than an inch inboard of the far side of JFK's seat. This idea that

the jump seat, when directly in front of JFK, would be 3 1/2 inches 
outside the inside of the door is incorrect. Myers himself refuses to 
state this. Instead, he has retreated to the position that the jump seat 
position doesn't matter.  He says that Connally was shown sitting in 
middle of his seat, six inches inboard, when Myers knows he was not, for 
"clarity" purposes, and because it was "easier".

One can only imagine the OUTRAGE among LNers if some CT was broadcast 
around the world saying that a 10 year analysis of the limousine and 
Zapruder film shows that Connally WAS sitting directly in front of 
Kennedy, and then revealed animation showing Connally sitting on a chair 
directly in front of Kennedy, and then, when it was demonstrated that 
Connally's seat was not directly in front of Kennedy, saying "Oh yeah, I 
know, but Connally was sitting on the outside of his seat, and we thought 
it would be "easier" to move him in unison with his seat. I assure you 
this deception was done "for clarity."

So why is there no outrage about Myers behaving in this same manner?

For the purposes of this thread, I am a LNer. I love the SBT. I think it's

"neat". I think it's "true".  But I still am disgusted that Myers took 
this "shortcut", to give him the benefit of the doubt, and waited more 
than five years to tell anyone about it.

Who will be the first SBT devotee to man-up and acknowledge that Myers' 
putting Connally on the middle of a knowingly misplaced seat was 
deceptive?

If the answer is that no one will, then what does that say about SBT 
believers? Does it not follow that they are more like a cult than a group 
of logical men devoted to understanding the evidence?

How can one justify Myers' deception when a similar deception on the part 
of a CT would be considered outrageous, and further evidence that CTs are 
cognitively challenged and morally bankrupt?