Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Try Again Raff* you insufferable moron

Raff* is not only a dumbass when it comes to research, but he reading comprehension skills are severely lacking as well...

This morning he posted this....

No where on this blog or any blog, will you see me endorsing any statement of Judyth Baker's save when she calls you an idiot. Because you are.

This post ....

was in direct response to your half-assed attempt to prove you knew something about film emulsions. You don't know squat. You know nothing about film, photography, parallax, lighting, shade, the effects of lens length, focal point or anything related to JFK, Oswald, Ruby or Oswald's mamma.

You're a complete and utter dolt.

Let me remind you again of your half-assed attempt to sound smart....

Brownian motion affects how particles move in the development of the film which is why some photographers claim that additional agitation is needed when stand developing because the Brownian motion is insufficient on it's own. Developing solutions are time sensitive in their effect on the film you nimrod.

But you wouldn't know a damn thing about that because you read an 11 page article on the chemistry of photography from the University of Houston.

For once why don't you just shut the fuck up.

1 comment:

  1. The point that Ralph is trying to evade is that it was Jim Fetzer who endorsed Judyth Baker's article, publishing it on his blog under the title "Judyth Vary Baker Cements Oswald in the Doorway":

    In fact, Baker’s article does the exact opposite when she discusses the effects of emulsion in photo reproduction.

    I recall a time when Ralph was performing an analysis of a photo of the limousine as the shooting was in progress in Dealey Plaza. I pointed out to him that he was looking at a still photo of the recreation of the assassination from Oliver Stone’s film “JFK”!

    As Ralph is incapable any responsible photo analysis, I would endorse that he take an elementary course in photography. At the present time, he is clueless!