Ralph, as Professor Jim Fetzer has repeatedly said, when you have a hypothesis which has been tested with valid scientific procedure and protocol, and this hypothesis continues to receive independent analysis confirming its conclusions with overwhelming verification, then logic dictates that its results and conclusions should be considered decisive, as per accepted and validated scientific convention.
Richard Sprague predicted many years ago that the JFK case would be solved in the future with "computers and automation" - and that future is now. For those members of the OIC, (and our predecessors Garrison, Weisberg, Martin, Brunson, etc,) who put their reputations on the line because they trusted their visual ability to distinguish between the obvious physical (and other) characteristics of Lee Oswald and Billy Lovelady, this is indeed vindication. That the opposition can only resort to ridicule and ad hominim attacks goes a long way in exposing their inability to counter this solid body of research. Would they not have run their own set of tests if they were truly interested in proving Billy Lovelady as Doorman? Of course not. We are only left with their illogical and unproven "assurances" that it is Lovelady, and we must take their word for it. Your excellent new work, using different facial recognition software on both subjects, further cements the conclusions of the earlier overlays, and proves what we have been saying all along, that it was, indeed, Lee Harvey Oswald in the doorway.