Monday, May 14, 2012

WOW, IS THAT STUPID: Jim Fetzer and Ralph Cinque think there are two Billy Loveladys


        On the Education Forum we once again have an obsessed idiot who thinks he has proved something, something with a methodology and conclusion that is so stupid it takes your breath away. 

Enter Ralph Cinque.  He thinks he has proved, PROVED, that there are two, yes, two Billy Loveladys.  He reaches this conclusion from comparing two photographic sources.  

He is being supported in his methodology and his conclusion by Jim “Everything I See is Fake” Fetzer.  Fetzer thinks this is a “discovery,” of some caliber. 

There has been a thread topic started by Fetzer, and there is also a website promoting this.  The thread topic started by Fetzer is, “What’s the EF [Education Forum] all About? Doesn’t Anyone Care About Truth?” And the Cinque website is called “Photographic Fakery in the JFK Assassination.

There have been 194 replies in the thread as I write this, I’m sure there will be more and I’m not going to give a synopsis of that whole thread.  I will cover the initial idea of the thread, and the website, in the hopes of showing rational people what RESEARCH FAKERY is, what a total lack of any educational, intellectual, or academic standards will lead to.  This man and his theory are deliberately so stupid as to undermine all JFK researchers and all of their work.  

The item under discussion is a comparison of two different photographic sources of Lovelady sitting inside a room in Dallas police headquarters as Oswald is escorted past him and into another office by several men. Both show Billy Lovelady.  Both show Billy Lovelady sitting in a chair with his back to the front of the desk as some men escorting Oswald walk past him.  




Fetzer and Cinque, based solely on these two images, think this is actual proof of there being TWO, yes, TWO, Billy Loveladys. One photographic image is from the video where Roger Craig tells his story.  We know this because superimposed in a small box is an image of Craig.  In both images the photographer is not in the room with Lovelady but rather looking through a glass door, or a door that has a top half that is transparent glass into the outer office of Captain Will Fritz.   

What we REALLY have are two different photographic sources of pretty much the exact same event.  There were many cameramen and photographers trying to get a picture, any picture of Oswald.  And that’s what this is, it’s Oswald being brought into Capt. Will Fritz's office to be questioned.  Every news outlet in the world would want a film or photograph of this.  

But, that’s not what this is for Fetzer and Cinque. The different way Lovelady looks from the two different photographic sources is proof, to them, of two Loveladys. 

        This begs the question if more film or photos show up of this event will that increase the number of Loveladys? 

But, wait, it gets goofier. They think the two filmed sequences were faked.  They think they do take one, with Oswald being escorted past Lovelady with one Billy Lovelady, and then a take two with a different person playing the part of Billy Lovelady.

My God, this is stupid.

The alleged differences can be accounted for by there being two different photographic sources, two different types of film, different lighting, different skill sets of the photographers, different lenses of the camera, differences in how close the photographer is to the subject, whether a lense allowed one to zero in on the subject, etc.  Fetzer and Cinque cannot comprehend any of that.

Cinque thinks one Billy Lovelady is 30 pounds heavier than the other based solely on one photographic source.  Cinque calls this “heavier” Lovelady the “DeNiro Lovelady,” because “he’s playing the role of Billy Lovelady.”  The other one Cinque calls the Dallas PD Lovelady

Cinque thinks one Lovelady has different hair than the other.

Um, no. Lovelady has turned his head following Oswald being brought into an interior office room and therefore we can see the back of Lovelady’s head where he has a bald spot.    

Cinque does not identify the source of the photographic image.  He does not name the photographer, or give us any information about the camera or person who took the image.  There is no effort to track the provenance of the film source, for example he never says this is the Zapruder film as seen in the MPI DVD, or this is a sequence from the Zapruder film as can be seen in the individual frames published in X edition of LIFE magazine.  

He provides a link to a video on Youtube.com, and that’s all he does.  Cinque gives no information on the second image.  This is not acceptable.  This is lazy crap.  

I consider this to be a deliberate slap in the face to all JFK researchers.  A fatal flaw in his methodology that any conclusion he wants to make cannot be substantiated based solely on the fact that he doesn’t even know what he’s looking at or where it came from.  He even admits this fundamental error.  “Where did the other image come from? I don’t know, and I’m not sure anyone else does. But, it is one of the standard pictures you see of Billy Lovelady from the day of the assassination.”

This is ridiculous.  You have to cite your sources.  

Cinque cannot be bothered and plods along.  

Cinque not only wants you to think that there were two takes, but in one they forgot how many people are supposed to be escorting Oswald past Lovelady.  He comes to this conclusion by seeing a tall Dallas police officer in one photographic source but not in the other.  

Cinque knows nothing about the internal schematic, or the floor plan of the Dallas Police Department building, the differing floors, or the differing internal departments, etc. and it shows when he writes that he thinks it is strange that Lovelady is where he is when Oswald and company walk by.  Cinque spends a whole paragraph in thinking Lovelady is in the way, in other words blocking access to Capt Fritz's inner office, and should stand up and get out of the way of Oswald and his escorting police detail.  Well, first of all, Lovelady isn’t in the way of anyone.   

Let’s add some facts.  The images Fetzer and Cinque are comparing were taken out in the hallway outside of the third floor of the Dallas Police Department building looking through a glass door, or the top part of the door that was glass.  The room number was 317, the Homicide and Robbery Bureau.  Inside the door is a small office area, probably for the secretaries.  Beyond this office is Capt. Will Fritz’s office and that is where Oswald was being taken to.  Lovelady is waiting outside Fritz’s office.
  
These two photographic sources are in black and white. Sometimes as a mass of cameras focuses on a person there is an initial kind of flare from the lights, even off of the skin and faces of people.  But, to Cinque one of his Lovelady’s appears “ghost-like.”  

Cinque thinks one of the photographic sources of Oswald being escorted past two different Loveladys is to support the idea of Lovelady wearing the proper shirt.  And I’m not going to go into the whole Altgens photo - Is it Oswald on the doorsteps of the TSBD, and exactly what kind of shirt was Lovelady wearing.

This quackery of Cinque’s destroys itself because of his total ignorance of the source of what he’s looking at.

John Newman had a good methodology model, namely, if you have two documents, and a POW, or two POWs and a document, then it’s real.  

Cinque has only two photographic sources he is comparing to each another.  None of his conclusions can be substantiated.   
Cinque does not know the source of the images.
Cinque does not know the room where the images were taken
Cinque does not know the names of the other men escorting Oswald
Cinque does not know the images were behind a transparent glass door.
Cinque might want to take a look at Robert Groden’s book, “The Search for Lee Harvey Oswald.”  On page 159 are two photos relevant to Cinque’s conclusions.  The top right photo seems to me to be exactly the same as the photo on the left in the initial post of the thread started by Fetzer and the same as the first photo shown (the one with the Roger Craig insert.) This photo on p. 159 of Groden’s book is mostly the back of a man’s suit, and the back of his neck.  This person is closest to the camera and his suit is reflecting back a lot of light from some, or perhaps from several cameras.  In it we clearly see Lovelady’s bald spot. 

        There was only one Billy Lovelady.

        Cinque is a whacko.


1 comment:

  1. Wow--that is demented LOL. Thanks for posting, Joe. Great blog site here :O) P.S. I think there are FOUR Billy Loveladys...just kidding :)

    ReplyDelete