Mark Ulrik wrote:
Ben Holmes wrote:Mark Ulrik wrote:The distances do not disappear. Open your eyes.
If you don't like my figures, then please feel free to post your own. Do some work for a change.
It's the same with analogue photographs. Does degradation make it completely meaningless to measure distances in n-generation copies? Should only original negatives (or trannies) be used for that purpose?
The fact that you keep running from answering the question shows that you know the truth.
You've been schooled.
I think my irony meter just burst.
Here's an example (originally a .tiff file) - but posted here as a jpg:
Now here's a closeup of the above jpg (on the left) with the original .tiff format on the right:
One doesn't have to be a graphics design artist to note the difference... you pretend that you can accurately measure pixels that no longer exist on the ear to the left...
But that's simply dishonesty on your part.
I noticed that you didn't say one word about the lack of photos & video for James Chaney's asserted conversation with Chief Curry...
Why is that, Mark?
I thought you weren't afraid of the topic of James Chaney?
Statistics: Posted by Ben Holmes — Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:21 pm
from ConspiracyJFKForum.com http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=95&p=1009#p1009
No comments:
Post a Comment