JFK Limo, 4 not 6. I found irrefutable proof. How I beat the Mandela effect / D Wave / CERN

a reply to: Jonjonj

that's what i was thinking, the screenshots are from different angles.
if you look at the rear fender flare at the top left of the wheel well of the two shots that is different. it appears shorter in the bottom.

it has to do with the perspective from the angle the screen shots come from.
plus the bottom screen shot is closer than the top that will also change the appearance.

a reply to: imd12c4funn

you keep using that word :

" proof "

when you have no idea what it actually means

all you offer here is your delusional confirmation bias

actually, didn't Jackie lunge to 7 o'clock ...quartering halfway an angle across the trunk lid, maybe on a line to the tail light. .and make two grabs at the matter that chunked onto the aforesaid......then try to return to re-apply the bit back....God love her...this vid has her dilly-dallyin'

you need the same exact frame for even a discussion

I remember her actions as I was catching all or any pertinent details, but this vid is off....like maybe cgi couldn't or didn't have the ability to show her turn her back more.

a reply to: Jonjonj

yes! i would also say that the bottom pic looks like it has been stretched in the middle if you now what i mean, just looking at it it looks like it has been enlarged or stretched in the middle..

a reply to: tetra50

I'm always blown away when I find pics like these.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: GoShredAK

No way she shot him. NO way, no how. She was so brave, she jumped on top of him. She woiuld not remove her bloody clothing, she wanted people to see what had been done to him. She was so strong. I believe this with all of my being.

Other than Jackie, we can discuss who killed him, I still have no idea. But not her.

While I agree she didn't shoot him, arguing strictly based on your emotions tied to how she acted afterwards is irrational and only serves to make you look incapable of being objective. How she stands and whether or not she took her bloody clothes off is 100% unrelated. You can't tell people they can't discuss it just because you won't consider it.

Know what I am saying?

a reply to: imd12c4funn

So where does CERN fit into all of this...as it is in the title but nothing to show it's connected?

Or did you do that because you thought it would get more views?

Was CERN being used back then and what effect did it have over an ocean away?

Seems people now are just blaming CERN for everything...my cable is out blame CERN, my coffee isn't hot enough blame CERN, as you see you can blame CERN for anything that doesn't make it true.

a reply to: imd12c4funn

I have no idea what you are trying to prove here. I found a video that shows the moment JFK was shot and took a screenshot. Guess what? It matches your 2011 pic that you say it's of a 4 seaters limo, which is clearly not.

Here is my screenshot, which matches yours exactly:



Here is a comparison of your screenshot and mine:



If it is too small click here: files.abovetopsecret.com...

And here is the video for everybody to see that your screenshot is of a 6 seaters limo (6:12 minutes):



You are showing a 6 seater limo and I am showing the same....

this is called paralax effect nothing to do with mandela effect

a reply to: humanoidlord

oh dear :

sits back and waits for someine to claim that " parralax " is infact the different views from 2 dimmensions

hey - its as " credible " as the core claims of the " mandela delusion "

a reply to: imd12c4funn

If you count the grid squares you can see the bottom limo is a few feet longer then the limo on top.