Discussion:
THE DICTABELT DEBACLE
Add Reply
BOZ
2018-05-16 02:15:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
Steve Barber
2018-05-17 14:11:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).

After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
Thomas wrong with the 2003 Ramsey panel. You can read the report here:
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf

I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
can read here:
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html

To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
GKnoll
2018-05-18 00:18:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.

Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.

No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.

The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
W&A published in their report. This is obviously contradicts what Thomas
thought he found during the CourtTV. The tape that Thomas thought was
already tape speed corrected, was not.

The key problem for those who believe that shots do exist on the tape is
the W&A interpretation and the cliques refusal to follow the evidence
which contradicts that interpretation.

The evidence is there which points to the truth of what happened in this
case, but the acoustic experts have stopped listening.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-19 01:25:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GKnoll
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
   After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas
conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
  I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all.  Which
you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
   To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.
Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.
Not exactly. I did my own independent study.
Post by GKnoll
No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
I did.
Post by GKnoll
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
He's not an acoustical scientist. Neither is Steve Barber. He didn't
even go to college.
Post by GKnoll
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
W&A published in their report. This is obviously contradicts what Thomas
thought he found during the CourtTV. The tape that Thomas thought was
already tape speed corrected, was not.
Who? Is he the guy who invented "Going to the hospital"?
Post by GKnoll
The key problem for those who believe that shots do exist on the tape is
the W&A interpretation and the cliques refusal to follow the evidence
which contradicts that interpretation.
Such as? False information fed by the cover-up? Lies by the DPD to cover
up their mistakes?
Post by GKnoll
The evidence is there which points to the truth of what happened in this
case, but the acoustic experts have stopped listening.
They offered to do more work and the Justice department said they had no
more wmoney to do any more stories. Seems they had to spend that $50,000
on defending CIA agents accused of torturing babies.
OHLeeRedux
2018-05-19 20:14:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
6:25 PMAnthony Marsh
- show quoted text -
Not exactly. I did my own independent study.



I am literally LOL.

Was that before or after you left school teaching?

[Please respond and keep this going, Anthony, because this is the funniest
damned thing I've seen all year and it can only get better.]
g***@gmail.com
2018-05-19 20:18:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
   After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas
conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
  I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all.  Which
you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
   To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.
Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.
Not exactly. I did my own independent study.
Post by GKnoll
No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
I did.
No you did not. We have been through this a 100 times. You did not even
look at the knoll shot.

Lets see your results.

You did not publish any results because you could not confirm their work.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
He's not an acoustical scientist. Neither is Steve Barber. He didn't
even go to college.
Marsh, you are living in a dream world.

You are losing what little credibility you might have left...


Here is Robert Berkovitz's resume.

http://www.sens.com/resumes/berkovitz.htm

Education:

University of Illinois, Urbana 1952-1955
History of Art, Philosophy



Professional Experience:

1999 to present Chairman, Sensimetrics Corporation

1987-1998 President, Sensimetrics Corporation

1985-1987 Manager, Audiometer Development Group, Belmont, MA

1985-1987 Consultant, The Dietrich Group, Waltham, MA

1982-1987 Consultant, Bolt Beranek & Newman, Inc.

1974-1982 Director of Research, Teledyne Acoustic Research, Norwood, MA

1970-1974 Head, Advertising and Comm., Dolby Laboratories,
Inc. London, England

1967-1970 Director of Communications, Acoustic Research, Inc.
Cambridge, MA

1966-1967 Education Project Director, American Can Co., New
York, NY

1965-1966 Operations Manager, Mattes Electronics, Inc. Chicago,
IL

1963-1965 Manager, Consumer Product Development, Jensen Mfg.
Co., Chicago, IL

1962-1963 Product Development Manager, Dynaco, Inc. Santa
Monica, CA

1961-1962 Operations Manager, Transis-Tronics, Inc. Santa
Monica, CA

1958-1961 Manager, Product Development, Allied Radio
Corporation, Chicago, IL

1956-1957 Art Director, Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, IL

1954-1956 Illustration Editor, Spencer Press, Champion, IL

Publications:

Allison, R. and R. Berkovitz (1970) "The sound field in home listening
rooms." Journal Audio Eng. Soc., 20: 459-469.

Berkovitz, R. McIntosh, D. (1974) "A sixteen-channel digital time delay
system," presented at the 1974 AES Technical

Meeting, Los Angeles.

Berkovitz, R. and B.E. Edvardsen (1976). "Listener sensitivity to phase
shift in music reproduction," presented at the

1976 AES Technical Meeting, New York (AES Preprint No. 1294).

Berkovitz, R. and T. Schultz (1977) "Use of computers in the study of
room acoustics." Journal of the Acoustical

Society of America, 64: 41(S)

Berkovitz, R. (1978) "Loudspeaker measurements weighted by psychoacoustic
modelling." Invited presentation at the

Joint Meeting of the Acoustical Society of Japan and the
Acoustical Society of America (96th Meeting), Journal
of the Acoustical Society of America, 64: I (S)

Berkovtiz, R. and G. Abbott (1981) "Loudspeaker evaluation by biophysical
modelling." Presented at 1981 AES

Technical Meeting, New York, (AES Preprint No. 1711).

Stevens, K.N., R. Berkovitz, G. Kidd, Jr. and D.M. Green (1987) "Calibration
of ear canals for audiometry at high
frequencies." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.
81, (2), 470-484.

Berkovitz, R. (1988) "Control of localization in music recording and
reproduction." Presented at CHABA symposium,

"Sound Localization by Human," National Academy of Sciences,
Washington D.C. October 1988.

Berkovitz, R. and K.N. Stevens (1988) "Experimental assessment of a method
for calibration of ear canals at high

frequencies." Presented by joint Meeting of the Acoustical
Society of America and the Acoustical Society of
Japan, Honolulu, 1988.



Patents

US 3,718,773 (1970) Four channel recording and reproducing
system. (Quadraphonics Corp.).

US 3,949,325 (1974) Audio Equalizer for large rooms (Dolby
Laboratories, Inc.)

US 4,039,755 (1976) Auditorium simulator economics on delay
bandwidth. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)

US 4,074,083 (1975) Stereophonic sound system particularly
useful in a cinema. (Dolby Laboratories, Inc.)

US 4,105,864 (1976) Stereo and spaciousness reverberation
system using random access memory. (Acoustic

Research, Inc.)

US 4,130,726 (1977) Loudspeaker system equalization. (Acoustic
Research, Inc.)

UK 1,546,122 (1976) Difference test equalizer based on subjective
spectral comparison. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)

US 4,458,362 (1982) Automatic time-domain equalization of
audio signals. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
W&A published in their report. This is obviously contradicts what Thomas
thought he found during the CourtTV. The tape that Thomas thought was
already tape speed corrected, was not.
Who? Is he the guy who invented "Going to the hospital"?
Post by GKnoll
The key problem for those who believe that shots do exist on the tape is
the W&A interpretation and the cliques refusal to follow the evidence
which contradicts that interpretation.
Such as? False information fed by the cover-up? Lies by the DPD to cover
up their mistakes?
How is what they did any different from what you are doing?

You said you confimed W&A's work, and you didn't.

You said Robert Berkovitz was not a acoustic's expert and he was.

And I am not really sure what you are trying to say about Michael ODell.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
The evidence is there which points to the truth of what happened in this
case, but the acoustic experts have stopped listening.
They offered to do more work and the Justice department said they had no
more wmoney to do any more stories. Seems they had to spend that $50,000
on defending CIA agents accused of torturing babies.
You are just proving my case Marsh.
g***@gmail.com
2018-05-19 20:19:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
   After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas
conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
  I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all.  Which
you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
   To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.
Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.
Not exactly. I did my own independent study.
Post by GKnoll
No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
I did.
Post by GKnoll
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
He's not an acoustical scientist. Neither is Steve Barber. He didn't
even go to college.
You do realize that Robert Berkovitz worked for BBN , don't you?

Resume of Robert Berkovitz

Education:

University of Illinois, Urbana 1952-1955 History of Art, Philosophy



Professional Experience:

1999 to present Chairman, Sensimetrics Corporation

1987-1998 President, Sensimetrics Corporation

1985-1987 Manager, Audiometer Development Group, Belmont, MA

1985-1987 Consultant, The Dietrich Group, Waltham, MA

1982-1987 Consultant, Bolt Beranek & Newman, Inc.

1974-1982 Director of Research, Teledyne Acoustic Research, Norwood, MA

1970-1974 Head, Advertising and Comm., Dolby Laboratories, Inc. London, England

1967-1970 Director of Communications, Acoustic Research, Inc. Cambridge, MA

1966-1967 Education Project Director, American Can Co., New York, NY

1965-1966 Operations Manager, Mattes Electronics, Inc. Chicago, IL

1963-1965 Manager, Consumer Product Development, Jensen Mfg. Co., Chicago, IL

1962-1963 Product Development Manager, Dynaco, Inc. Santa Monica, CA

1961-1962 Operations Manager, Transis-Tronics, Inc. Santa Monica, CA

1958-1961 Manager, Product Development, Allied Radio Corporation, Chicago, IL

1956-1957 Art Director, Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, IL

1954-1956 Illustration Editor, Spencer Press, Champion, IL



Publications:

Allison, R. and R. Berkovitz (1970) "The sound field in home listening rooms." Journal Audio Eng. Soc., 20: 459-469.

Berkovitz, R. McIntosh, D. (1974) "A sixteen-channel digital time delay system," presented at the 1974 AES Technical

Meeting, Los Angeles.

Berkovitz, R. and B.E. Edvardsen (1976). "Listener sensitivity to phase shift in music reproduction," presented at the

1976 AES Technical Meeting, New York (AES Preprint No. 1294).

Berkovitz, R. and T. Schultz (1977) "Use of computers in the study of room acoustics." Journal of the Acoustical

Society of America, 64: 41(S)

Berkovitz, R. (1978) "Loudspeaker measurements weighted by psychoacoustic modelling." Invited presentation at the

Joint Meeting of the Acoustical Society of Japan and the Acoustical Society of America (96th Meeting), Journal

of the Acoustical Society of America, 64: I (S)

Berkovtiz, R. and G. Abbott (1981) "Loudspeaker evaluation by biophysical modelling." Presented at 1981 AES

Technical Meeting, New York, (AES Preprint No. 1711).

Stevens, K.N., R. Berkovitz, G. Kidd, Jr. and D.M. Green (1987) "Calibration of ear canals for audiometry at high

frequencies." Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 81, (2), 470-484.

Berkovitz, R. (1988) "Control of localization in music recording and reproduction." Presented at CHABA symposium,

"Sound Localization by Human," National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C. October 1988.

Berkovitz, R. and K.N. Stevens (1988) "Experimental assessment of a method for calibration of ear canals at high

frequencies." Presented by joint Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America and the Acoustical Society of

Japan, Honolulu, 1988.



Patents

US 3,718,773 (1970) Four channel recording and reproducing system. (Quadraphonics Corp.).

US 3,949,325 (1974) Audio Equalizer for large rooms (Dolby Laboratories, Inc.)

US 4,039,755 (1976) Auditorium simulator economics on delay bandwidth. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)

US 4,074,083 (1975) Stereophonic sound system particularly useful in a cinema. (Dolby Laboratories, Inc.)

US 4,105,864 (1976) Stereo and spaciousness reverberation system using random access memory. (Acoustic

Research, Inc.)

US 4,130,726 (1977) Loudspeaker system equalization. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)

UK 1,546,122 (1976) Difference test equalizer based on subjective spectral comparison. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)

US 4,458,362 (1982) Automatic time-domain equalization of audio signals. (Acoustic Research, Inc.)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by GKnoll
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
W&A published in their report. This is obviously contradicts what Thomas
thought he found during the CourtTV. The tape that Thomas thought was
already tape speed corrected, was not.
Who? Is he the guy who invented "Going to the hospital"?
Post by GKnoll
The key problem for those who believe that shots do exist on the tape is
the W&A interpretation and the cliques refusal to follow the evidence
which contradicts that interpretation.
Such as? False information fed by the cover-up? Lies by the DPD to cover
up their mistakes?
Post by GKnoll
The evidence is there which points to the truth of what happened in this
case, but the acoustic experts have stopped listening.
They offered to do more work and the Justice department said they had no
more wmoney to do any more stories. Seems they had to spend that $50,000
on defending CIA agents accused of torturing babies.
odellm
2018-05-20 01:38:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GKnoll
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
So who do you think is in this clique?
Post by GKnoll
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.
Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.
No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.
Why do you do this? You're writing as if you know about things you can't
possibly know. You don't know what private communications took place
there, or what was happening on Thomas' head. Naturally, it's not
correct.
Post by GKnoll
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
I did no such thing. There is no statement even close to that in my
article, and there's nothing in it that could be reasonably inferred to
mean it. Correction factor of at least 10%? You made that up, it didn't
come from me.

Michael
John McAdams
2018-05-20 01:57:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by odellm
Post by GKnoll
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
Why do you do this? You're writing as if you know about things you can't
possibly know. You don't know what private communications took place
there, or what was happening on Thomas' head. Naturally, it's not
correct.
Post by GKnoll
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
I did no such thing. There is no statement even close to that in my
article, and there's nothing in it that could be reasonably inferred to
mean it. Correction factor of at least 10%? You made that up, it didn't
come from me.
Your post reminds me of this (with Gknoll being the Columbia
professor):



.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
GKnoll
2018-05-21 01:52:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by odellm
Post by GKnoll
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
The so called "acoustic experts" have formed a clique. And it is very
So who do you think is in this clique?
Post by GKnoll
hard to penetrate this clique. They are a small group who are hell bent
on pushing through the false theory that the man behind the fence shown
in the Moorman photo (and I think first identified by Josiah Thompson in
his book "Six Seconds In Dallas") fired the shot that we all see
striking the Presdient on Zapruder frame 313. There is not a single
piece of evidence that supports that shot came from the knoll, quite the
contrary, every single piece of evidence we have shows that the shot at
frame 313 could not have been fired by that man at that time.
Their theory is 100% dependent upon the interpretation made by Weiss and
Aschkenasy.
No one has been able to confirm the interpretation of Weiss and
Aschkenasy. Robert Berkovitz was the first and he showed that their
interpretation could not be correct, Speaking of debacles, the CourtTV
experience was a debacle within a debacle. When Berkovitz could not
confirm the W&A result, Don Thomas thought that Robert Berkovitz made a
mistake. Berkovitz sent Thomas his program. Thomas concluded based on
his running of the Berkovitz's program that Berkovitz made a mistake
when he(Berkovitz) applied a correction factor to the tape. Because
Thomas got a better correlation (still much less than the .77
correlation W&A published) when he did not apply a correction factor, he
jumped to the (false) conclusion that the tape Berkovitz was working
with was one that had already been corrected for tape speed. To make
matters worse, Thomas contacted Michael O'Dell and O'Dell told Thomas
that, yes the tape that Berkovitz used was already tape speed corrected.
This feed Thomas's ego, and reinforced in Thomas that the W&A was right.
All of that is wrong. When one looks at the Thomas correlation(the one
he thinks confirms W&A) it is dead-nuts obvious that his correlation is
wrong.
Why do you do this? You're writing as if you know about things you can't
possibly know. You don't know what private communications took place
there, or what was happening on Thomas' head. Naturally, it's not
correct.
Here is what Don Thomas wrote about it....

https://photos.app.goo.gl/tMKpw4x7kUYvWxap8

[quote]

It turned out that the playback used by Sensimetrics was not the Dallas
police recording from 1963, but a playback made by the FBI and NRC panel
in 1982 with a 60 Hz speed correction built in. Without any correction for
speed, the Sensimetrics program demonstrated that the test shot and the
suspect pattern do match. Just to be sure, I notified my colleague Michael
O'Dell who confirmed that the recording was the 1982 NRC playback and that
the patterns do match. Anyone, can download the Sensimetrics program from
the Court-TV website and confirm the match for oneself. Just set the speed
adjustment to the zero setting.

[end quote]

That is what he wrote. But he was obviously wrong. All one has to do is
look at his correlation to see that. Anyone, who understood where the
pattern was and where the impulses were relative to that pattern would see
immediately that what Don Thomas was a match was not a match.
Post by odellm
Post by GKnoll
The second person who analyzed the W&A interpreation was Michael O'Dell
in his paper "Replicationg Weiss and Aschkenay". He did not confirm it,
far from it. O'Dell determined that one needed correction factors of at
least 10% on the tape that Berkovitz used get matches to the echoes that
I did no such thing. There is no statement even close to that in my
article, and there's nothing in it that could be reasonably inferred to
mean it. Correction factor of at least 10%? You made that up, it didn't
come from me.
Here is Figure 12 from your paper. In that table you show the correlation
from the db.wav file to the delay times for the echoes published by W&A in
Table 4 of their report. The % column in your Figure 12 shows the
percentage that you had to multiply the peaks in db.wav to match the
published values in W&A's table 4. A quick look at the percent column in
your Figure 12 shows that you had to apply a correction factor of a least
110 percent to db.wav to match the W&A published values. That corresponds
to a minimum correction factor of 1.10 and is applicable when one
recording is running 10% slow relative to a second recording. In this case
the second recording is the values published by W&A in their table 4. You
may not realize it, but you confirmed that the correlation that Don Thomas
got with zero correction factor during the CourtTV era could not have been
right.

Here is a link to your Figure 12.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/zwxU85ctSspdTD2F2


Here is a link to the correlation that Don Thomas got during the CourtTV
experience.

It is obvious to anyone looking at this correlation that it is not
correct. The impulses inside the black ellipse should be under the black
dots to the right of that ellipse. Don used a zero time correction factor.
You have to apply a correction factor of about 1.10 to get those impulses
inside the ellipse to move to the right far enough so they line up under
the black dots. When you did what you did in your "Replicating ...."
article, you found you had to use 110% to correlate the db.wav to the W&A
published echoes.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/ul3tN2oPDNPwFFbx2
Post by odellm
Michael
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-18 00:27:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
You have that reversed. It was the NAS panel who LIED about the channel
two timing to falsely claim that the "shots" were one minute after the
assassination. They and you think that it took a fill minute for Decker to
realize what had happened and tell everyone to go to the hospital. Was
Greer listening to channel one or channel two?
Post by Steve Barber
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
But did he quote your essay about the "bell" sound?
Post by Steve Barber
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Then why do YOU keep calling it crosstalk? Are you trying to cave in?
Post by Steve Barber
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
OMG, do you realize that you just admitted that I am not the only one who
thinks there were 5 shots on the tape? Can't the cover-up do a better job
of corralling you in? Next week you'll admit that you KNOW it was a
conspiracy and you knew the grassy knoll shooter. Somebody stop him before
he ruins your perfect little cover-up.

He might even admit that Trump paid back Cohen after he lied about it
1,000 times.
Steve Barber
2018-05-19 01:41:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
You have that reversed. It was the NAS panel who LIED about the channel
two timing to falsely claim that the "shots" were one minute after the
assassination. They and you think that it took a fill minute for Decker to
realize what had happened and tell everyone to go to the hospital. Was
Greer listening to channel one or channel two?
Congratulations! You win the Stupid Post Of The Day award, Marsh!

FYI, Curry held the mic and was on the radio talking to the motorcade
officers and the dispatcher, therefore, Decker couldn't use the radio
until after Curry was finished with the mic. There was only one mic
because Decker didn't have a direct line to his office so had to use
Curry's radio and tell the dispatcher at DPD headquarters to contact his
department.

Furthermore, none of us knows exactly how long it was after the shooting
before Curry made the transmission "Go to the hospital, officers!"

Furthermore, you'd better get your stopwatch out! On the channel 2
recording, the dispatcher had announced the time "12:30 KKB 364, Dallas".
Nine seconds pass then Curry announces "Triple Underpass". It is a known
fact that After 4 seconds of silence, the grey audograph recorder stopped
recording until the next transmission reactivated it. Since the voice
traffic was constant from the moment that Curry opened his mic and gave
the first transmission following the shooting, which is "Go to the
hospital, officers!" timing is accurate and possible because from that
point on, radio activity was heavy and constant and the recorder did not
stop because there was never a 4 second gap between transmissions --
therefore giving us a clock from the time Curry breaks in and says "Go to
the hospital, officers!" until Decker completes saying the words "hold
everything until the homicide and other investigators can get there". Over
a minute elapsed. Therefore, you are full of poop and the Ramsey panel
did no such thing as "lie" about the timing on channel 2! You, on the
other hand, made up something ridiculously false. Are you still using an
inferior copy a channel two, relying on the copy you purchased from Dave
Hawkins, Marsh? Shame on you.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
But did he quote your essay about the "bell" sound?
Post by Steve Barber
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Then why do YOU keep calling it crosstalk? Are you trying to cave in?
I am quoting, Thomas because *he* calls the N.T. Fisher ch. 2
transmission "crosstalk". Your poor reading comprehension skills get the
best of you.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
OMG, do you realize that you just admitted that I am not the only one who
thinks there were 5 shots on the tape? Can't the cover-up do a better job
of corralling you in? Next week you'll admit that you KNOW it was a
conspiracy and you knew the grassy knoll shooter. Somebody stop him before
he ruins your perfect little cover-up.
"OMG", do you realize that I admitted nothing of the kind and that you
poor reading skills have gotten the best of you again? Read that
paragraph again, old man.


"Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots--and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA."

Where within the paragraph have I "admitted" anything? I have always
known and acknowledged that Thomas believes there are 5--not 4 --gunshots
on the Dictabelt recording!
Post by Anthony Marsh
He might even admit that Trump paid back Cohen after he lied about it
1,000 times.
We all know that you suffer with Trump derangement syndrome, old man.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-19 20:20:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
You have that reversed. It was the NAS panel who LIED about the channel
two timing to falsely claim that the "shots" were one minute after the
assassination. They and you think that it took a fill minute for Decker to
realize what had happened and tell everyone to go to the hospital. Was
Greer listening to channel one or channel two?
Congratulations! You win the Stupid Post Of The Day award, Marsh!
This is not an honest and open debate. McAdams allows YOU to call me
stupid because you are one of his minions, but I am not even allowed to
point out when you are wrong.
Post by Steve Barber
FYI, Curry held the mic and was on the radio talking to the motorcade
officers and the dispatcher, therefore, Decker couldn't use the radio
until after Curry was finished with the mic. There was only one mic
because Decker didn't have a direct line to his office so had to use
Curry's radio and tell the dispatcher at DPD headquarters to contact his
department.
That is why I asked you which message you were talking about.
Again, do your really think it took Decker a full minute before he made
that call? Yes or no?
Post by Steve Barber
Furthermore, none of us knows exactly how long it was after the shooting
before Curry made the transmission "Go to the hospital, officers!"
Well, again, do you think it took a full minute? Yes or no?
And WHo first claimed to hear the message, "Going to the hospital"?
Who is going to take credit for this orphan? Do we need a paternity test?
Post by Steve Barber
Furthermore, you'd better get your stopwatch out! On the channel 2
recording, the dispatcher had announced the time "12:30 KKB 364, Dallas".
Nine seconds pass then Curry announces "Triple Underpass". It is a known
fact that After 4 seconds of silence, the grey audograph recorder stopped
recording until the next transmission reactivated it. Since the voice
It is not a fact. It is an ASSuMPTION.
Post by Steve Barber
traffic was constant from the moment that Curry opened his mic and gave
You can't prove that the voice traffic was constant. If you try, that
gives you problems for the silence on channel 2.
Post by Steve Barber
the first transmission following the shooting, which is "Go to the
hospital, officers!" timing is accurate and possible because from that
point on, radio activity was heavy and constant and the recorder did not
stop because there was never a 4 second gap between transmissions --
therefore giving us a clock from the time Curry breaks in and says "Go to
the hospital, officers!" until Decker completes saying the words "hold
BOZ said it was, "Going to the hospital." Was BOZ lying? Are you allowed
to call a fewllow minion a liar?
Post by Steve Barber
everything until the homicide and other investigators can get there". Over
a minute elapsed. Therefore, you are full of poop and the Ramsey panel
did no such thing as "lie" about the timing on channel 2! You, on the
The magical one minute of silence.
Post by Steve Barber
other hand, made up something ridiculously false. Are you still using an
inferior copy a channel two, relying on the copy you purchased from Dave
Hawkins, Marsh? Shame on you.
Bulderdash. YOU gave me a copy. And I have your Gallery record too.
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
No.
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
Are you saying that Bowles was part of a hoax to put shots on the tape?
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
But did he quote your essay about the "bell" sound?
Post by Steve Barber
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Then why do YOU keep calling it crosstalk? Are you trying to cave in?
I am quoting, Thomas because *he* calls the N.T. Fisher ch. 2
transmission "crosstalk". Your poor reading comprehension skills get the
best of you.
Do you always put it in air quotes?
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
OMG, do you realize that you just admitted that I am not the only one who
thinks there were 5 shots on the tape? Can't the cover-up do a better job
of corralling you in? Next week you'll admit that you KNOW it was a
conspiracy and you knew the grassy knoll shooter. Somebody stop him before
he ruins your perfect little cover-up.
"OMG", do you realize that I admitted nothing of the kind and that you
poor reading skills have gotten the best of you again? Read that
paragraph again, old man.
You just said that someone else believes there are 5 shots on the tape.
Post by Steve Barber
"Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots--and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA."
There, you did it again. Stop incriminating yourself.
Post by Steve Barber
Where within the paragraph have I "admitted" anything? I have always
known and acknowledged that Thomas believes there are 5--not 4 --gunshots
on the Dictabelt recording!
Then I am not the only one claiming 5 gunshots.
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
He might even admit that Trump paid back Cohen after he lied about it
1,000 times.
We all know that you suffer with Trump derangement syndrome, old man.
I am just rubbing it in because almost all WC defenders here are also
Trump defenders.
OHLeeRedux
2018-05-20 18:36:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
You have that reversed. It was the NAS panel who LIED about the channel
two timing to falsely claim that the "shots" were one minute after the
assassination. They and you think that it took a fill minute for Decker to
realize what had happened and tell everyone to go to the hospital. Was
Greer listening to channel one or channel two?
Congratulations! You win the Stupid Post Of The Day award, Marsh!
This is not an honest and open debate. McAdams allows YOU to call me
stupid because you are one of his minions, but I am not even allowed to
point out when you are wrong.



WITCH HUNT. THEY'RE OUT TO GET ME.



I swear, Anthony, it's getting more and more difficult to tell the
difference between your posts and President Trump's tweets. You two must
think a lot alike.
Steve Barber
2018-05-20 18:40:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
You have that reversed. It was the NAS panel who LIED about the channel
two timing to falsely claim that the "shots" were one minute after the
assassination. They and you think that it took a fill minute for Decker to
realize what had happened and tell everyone to go to the hospital. Was
Greer listening to channel one or channel two?
Congratulations! You win the Stupid Post Of The Day award, Marsh!
This is not an honest and open debate. McAdams allows YOU to call me
stupid because you are one of his minions, but I am not even allowed to
point out when you are wrong.
Stop whining, Marsh and grow a pair.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
FYI, Curry held the mic and was on the radio talking to the motorcade
officers and the dispatcher, therefore, Decker couldn't use the radio
until after Curry was finished with the mic. There was only one mic
because Decker didn't have a direct line to his office so had to use
Curry's radio and tell the dispatcher at DPD headquarters to contact his
department.
That is why I asked you which message you were talking about.
Again, do your really think it took Decker a full minute before he made
that call? Yes or no?
This is a loaded question coming from you, of course. I gave you my
answer above. You cannot be taken seriously.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Furthermore, none of us knows exactly how long it was after the shooting
before Curry made the transmission "Go to the hospital, officers!"
Well, again, do you think it took a full minute? Yes or no?
And WHo first claimed to hear the message, "Going to the hospital"?
Who is going to take credit for this orphan? Do we need a paternity test?
The "Going to the hospital words are *NOT* "a message", Marsh, and you
know it. Stop playing your insane games! What we "need" is for you to
get off this kick about a typo BOZ made and move on. You look totally
ridiculous harping about something that was an accident.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Furthermore, you'd better get your stopwatch out! On the channel 2
recording, the dispatcher had announced the time "12:30 KKB 364, Dallas".
Nine seconds pass then Curry announces "Triple Underpass". It is a known
fact that After 4 seconds of silence, the grey audograph recorder stopped
recording until the next transmission reactivated it. Since the voice
It is not a fact. It is an ASSuMPTION.
No, it's not an assumption. You want it to be, but it isn't. It *IS* a
fact and you have to live with it. Otherwise, post your prrof that it is
an "assumption"!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
traffic was constant from the moment that Curry opened his mic and gave
You can't prove that the voice traffic was constant. If you try, that
gives you problems for the silence on channel 2.
ATTENTION PLEASE! LISTEN TO THE RECORDING, MARSH! LISTEN TO THE
RECORDING! And do not use your recording that you purchased from Hawkins
back in the 70's that contains skips and was recorded at the wrong speed!
THE VOICE TRAFFIC WAS CONSTANT AND HEAVY FOLLOWING "GO TO THE HOSPITAL,
OFFICERS!" Stop living in denial and get with the program!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
the first transmission following the shooting, which is "Go to the
hospital, officers!" timing is accurate and possible because from that
point on, radio activity was heavy and constant and the recorder did not
stop because there was never a 4 second gap between transmissions --
therefore giving us a clock from the time Curry breaks in and says "Go to
the hospital, officers!" until Decker completes saying the words "hold
BOZ said it was, "Going to the hospital." Was BOZ lying? Are you allowed
to call a fewllow minion a liar?
Post by Steve Barber
everything until the homicide and other investigators can get there". Over
a minute elapsed. Therefore, you are full of poop and the Ramsey panel
did no such thing as "lie" about the timing on channel 2! You, on the
The magical one minute of silence.
"Magical" only in your twisted thinking, because there was no "One
minute of silence"!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
other hand, made up something ridiculously false. Are you still using an
inferior copy a channel two, relying on the copy you purchased from Dave
Hawkins, Marsh? Shame on you.
Bulderdash. YOU gave me a copy. And I have your Gallery record too.
GREAT! Then get busy and put it to use, old man!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
After Michael O'Dell convinced Don Thomas he was wrong, Thomas conceded.
No.
Don't tell me "No"! I know for a fact!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Apparently, Thomas couldn't admit complete defeat, so, he invented his
"crosstalk" theory, based primarily on the transcript written by James C.
Bowles) DPD Communications Supervisor at the time of the assassination
(See the transcript in Larry Sneed's excellent book "No More Silence").
Thomas was/is wrong, again, and several members of the Ramsey panel
regrouped performed a study on Thomas' conclusions, wrote a detailed
report regarding Thomas' theory, and Micheal O'Dell aided in proving
http://jfk-records.com/ScienceAndJustice_45%284%29_207-226%282005%29.pdf
Are you saying that Bowles was part of a hoax to put shots on the tape?
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
I also wrote an article(which was featured in Bugliosi's Reclaiming
History) which you can read here, regarding heterodyne tones (beep tones)
that accompany the speech which Thomas claims is crosstalk on channel 1.
The fact that there are heterodyne tones accompanying the speech that
Thomas says is crosstalk proves that it isn't crosstalk at all. Which you
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
But did he quote your essay about the "bell" sound?
Post by Steve Barber
To this day, Thomas speaks at JFK conspiracy conferences spreading his
untruth regarding the speech on channel 1 which he claims is crosstalk.
Then why do YOU keep calling it crosstalk? Are you trying to cave in?
I am quoting, Thomas because *he* calls the N.T. Fisher ch. 2
transmission "crosstalk". Your poor reading comprehension skills get the
best of you.
Do you always put it in air quotes?
No. Only when I have to point something out to you!!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots-- and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA.
OMG, do you realize that you just admitted that I am not the only one who
thinks there were 5 shots on the tape? Can't the cover-up do a better job
of corralling you in? Next week you'll admit that you KNOW it was a
conspiracy and you knew the grassy knoll shooter. Somebody stop him before
he ruins your perfect little cover-up.
"OMG", do you realize that I admitted nothing of the kind and that you
poor reading skills have gotten the best of you again? Read that
paragraph again, old man.
You just said that someone else believes there are 5 shots on the tape.
Post by Steve Barber
"Thomas believes that the "gunshots" are on the channel 1 Dictabelt, but
that there are five--not four gunshots--and he supports the conclusions
reached by the acoustics experts for the HSCA."
There, you did it again. Stop incriminating yourself.
You are filled with poop, Old Man!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Where within the paragraph have I "admitted" anything? I have always
known and acknowledged that Thomas believes there are 5--not 4 --gunshots
on the Dictabelt recording!
Then I am not the only one claiming 5 gunshots.
No, you aren't. You and Thomas are the only two that I am aware of who do
believe in 5 shots! I believe there are NONE on the Dictabelt!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Steve Barber
Post by Anthony Marsh
He might even admit that Trump paid back Cohen after he lied about it
1,000 times.
We all know that you suffer with Trump derangement syndrome, old man.
I am just rubbing it in because almost all WC defenders here are also
Trump defenders.
And I like getting your goat and rubbing your nose in it because you
suffer from Trump derangement syndrome.
claviger
2018-05-21 01:53:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
So this is what the CT Movement has come down to after 54 years
of trying on a hundred pair of shoes that don't fit. Now it's all about
a Dictabelt to try and hold their CT pants up.

A few seconds of noise on a Dictabelt that is so indistinct no one is
sure what it is. They can't even prove it was the right motorcycle, in
the right area, at the right time. DPD Motorcycle Officers who were
there and should know, claim the recording sounds like a 3-wheeler.
The specific DPD Officer they identify told them from the beginning
it was NOT his motorcycle.

As usual CTs desperate for something to get traction, try to discredit
the foremost Science Institute in the USA that found several mistakes
with this dubious theory. Other scientists have found mistakes as well.

There is no corroboration whatsoever from eyewitness or earwitnesses
around the GK or the Parking Lot behind the wooden fence that anyone
with a rifle fired a shot at the Motorcade. So the Dictabelt Theory is just
one more Nothing Burger by desperate CTs trying to find something to
argue about. The problem is the Scientific Community took an interest
and found mistakes not proof. So bye-bye Dictabelt, hello Real Science.
odellm
2018-05-20 01:37:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Barber
Post by BOZ
https://jfk007.com/1053-2/
The last section re: Don Thomas, is spot on. Thomas, to this day, spreads
his absolute lies regarding what he claims is "crosstalk", knowing fully
well that it isn't crosstalk. It was Micheal o'Dell who convinced Thomas
that he was using inferior copies of the police recordings when Thomas
wrote his peer reviewed paper in 2001. After Michael presented Thomas with
the facts--that the channel two recording was useless as a timing tool to
prove the HSCA's claim that H.B. McLain had the open mic was correct.
(This was nearly twenty years after the Ramsey panel Report in 1982).
Just a bit of clarification needed here. This is very similar to the bit
in Bugliosi's book, except I'm removed from the story there.

Thomas did a timing analysis of crosstalks in which he was pointing out a
conflict that would require at least one crosstalk to be in the wrong
place. His timing data was taken from the Ramsey panel. That data was
incorrect. Nobody up to then had established a correct timing. Once I
did, it showed that his argument didn't work, and he acknowledged that.
It wasn't a matter of using inferior copies, it was a matter of me having
developed a correct timeline of events.

Michael
Loading...