JFK: Danish ophthalmologist finds the two shooters

Danish ophthalmologist, Jens Mohr Thygesen, finds the two shooters, with advanced medical equipment:

He explains it in the video:

want the booby prize ?

Themaninwhite
Danish ophthalmologist, Jens Mohr Thygesen, finds the two shooters, with advanced medical equipment:

He explains it in the video:

ok I'll watch.. I took out the v= part.

The video's not working
its a conspiracy i tells ya....

reply to post by Themaninwhite


Interesting.
I wish he explained more what the equipment was supposed to be used for. I don't understand why an eye doctor is examining photos to find problems with patients eyes. Was he saying that a picture of the jfk shooting got mixed into pictures of eyes?? That's a bit strange to happen...

It actually does look quite interesting though. I believe it for now.

reply to post by Themaninwhite


Good! One more theory backed up with hard evidence. There's a nillion of 'em, most of them with enough evidence to indict someone or a group of someones. What a wonderful world we live in where anything goes, and usually does!

reply to post by Dustytoad


Whether the eye story is correct or not we know he was wacked by guy on grassy kn. Other people saw the gunman. And I saw the the video of the shorting and he took a shot from the front.

Clever guy, but doesn't he realize that when you write a book about research you've done or discoveries you've made it automatically means that you're a con artist and nothing you say could possibly be true?

reply to post by Dustytoad


Most of what retina ophthalmologists do is treat diabetic retinopathy which is mainly areas of swelling or blood in the retina where its not supposed to be. The software is designed to analyze/detect these areas so the surgeon has an idea of the size and shape of the spot to be treated (usually with laser). I'm not sure how photos of the assassination got mixed in with his patient photos though.

reply to post by Dustytoad



Thanks. i have have corrected it now.

RP2SticksOfDynamite
reply to post by Dustytoad

 

Whether the eye story is correct or not we know he was wacked by guy on grassy kn. Other people saw the gunman. And I saw the the video of the shorting and he took a shot from the front.

Of course, but I was only commenting on this particular story that turned into an infomercial.
Back and to the left and there is nothing else you need to know.

reply to post by Urantia1111


I saw that in the video... And then you repeated what I said.
I want to know more about how the technology actually works.
For instance what functions does the computer use to isolate or highlight parts of the eye? Why would that help in a picture of a landscape? Is it a contrast thing?

I mean I don't think the grass or trees have any blood build up.

I also think he did it on purpose, but for some reason wants to hide his deep interest in the case.

Dustytoad
reply to post by Urantia1111

 

I also think he did it on purpose, but for some reason wants to hide his deep interest in the case.

edit on 11/22/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

I think he didn`t want his employers to know, that he used this equipment for his hobby.

reply to post by Dustytoad


I believe it is. The computer doesn't know what blood is, only that it produces a measurable change in contrast on an image.

reply to post by Themaninwhite


I have another question. Is that the actual windshield from the car? I remember hearing stories about them switching it out all quick like.

That's a lot of extra bullets coming at the front of the car.

This brings to mind something people often say. "the government can't cover it up." Well they don't need to hide the entire thing with no loose ends, just look at this case where it is glaringly obvious their story is wrong. Still nothing has happened. Still it is looked at as a conspiracy and not official history..

All you have to do is muddy the waters for a certain amount of time. 9/11 is very similar to this. As long as you can keep people talking about it in different ways you just have to sit back and watch.

I know this from watching liars. As long as you never admit anything the satisfaction of the truth will never come.

If he has something to contribute to making the case against JFK's killers then fantastic.
Writing a book to sell about it cheapens it for me though it doesn't make the evidence any less relevant.
If it was true that Oswald did not shoot JFK you can be sure there were more than 1 shooter that day.
An operation of that importance would not be left in the hands of any single shooter.
So much evidence and eyewitness testimony points to the grassy knoll but where was the other shooter(s)?
Many would love to know the answer to that.

Urantia1111
reply to post by Dustytoad

 

Most of what retina ophthalmologists do is treat diabetic retinopathy which is mainly areas of swelling or blood in the retina where its not supposed to be. The software is designed to analyze/detect these areas so the surgeon has an idea of the size and shape of the spot to be treated (usually with laser). I'm not sure how photos of the assassination got mixed in with his patient photos though.

Just saw him on Danish television.
He was proudly showing all the published conspiracy books sitting in his book cabinet. Most of them seemed well used. He pulled out a couple and called them great fact sources.

He then explained that he just happened to take one of the pictures through his machine and HEY PRESTO! There it was.
I got the impression that he used a picture from one of the books - hence it ws a printed copy of a picture. NOT a copy of the negative or even a picture derived directly from the negative.

My conclusion is that copies are subject to changes from the original and therefore NOT reliable.

But what do I know. I'm not an eye doctor - just a mere IT Specialist.

The problem I have with this is that many,many people who don't have books to promote have spent countless hours analysing the photos with every single piece of image analysing software available,and haven't been able to find these hidden shooters in any of them.
The problem here is that this is a digitised version of a very low quality copy of a copy of the original film,and all we MIGHT be seeing here are digitisation artefacts.He has a book about the JFK assasination to sell,so of course he can see shooters on the grassy knoll where we all want them to be.I'm sure we could also make out a map of Boston,an Alsatian dog,a ballerina or even a recipe for Tiramisu if we looked hard enough.

The problem I have with Grassy Knoll / Behind the Fence man is this. I live near and visit Dallas frequently. I have been to Dealey Plaza countless times. What I don't think some people realize is that the "knoll" is not a small hill going up and over. Immediately behind the fence / wall at the top, is a parking lot and railroad track area that is flat as a tabletop and extends for hundreds of yards in all directions exactly the same as it did in 1963. Where did the shooter go? I know there are about a billion theories. Guy next to a pick-up, hobos, etc. But, seriously, how was the guy not noticed by the LEOs positioned in the area for the express purpose of keeping it clear?

reply to post by SonofaSkunk

From memory didn't a cop stop a man and/or a woman in that car park immediately after the shooting,but then let them go?