Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

I found a page that goes back to 2002 in which the writer relates how even then John McAdams was activating his forces to contend with Oswald in the doorway.

http://surftofind.com/target

At the time, McAdams was lamenting this site, which was advocating Oswald in the doorway:

http://surftofind.com/witness

That site is still up, and I am familiar with it, although not with the person who runs it. It's good, but it includes a significant mistake: the author thinks that Oswald was Doorman, which is fine, but attributes Lovelady to being the figure we call Obfuscated Man.

That was a mistake. Lovelady wasn't wearing a dress shirt and tie. Black Hole Man was Lovelady, and we know that for multiple reasons. There is the discovery of the second arrow (Lovelady's arrow) in CE 369 which points to Black Hole Man. And I'll remind you that no opponent of mine has found any alternate arrow to claim as Lovelady's. Then, there is Lovelady's statement that he was standing "on your top level" which means he couldn't be Ob Man. Then, there is the fact that Black Hole Man's face was blackened out. Then, there is also the proper correlation in heights between Doorman and Black Hole Man, with Oswald the taller. And, Black Hole Man's clothes correspond to the clothes that Lovelady first said he wore: a short-sleeved shirt and blue jeans. Of course, we don't see the stripes on Black Hole Man, but that would have been very easy to get rid of.

Then, McAdams mentions the graphic that Jerry Organ sent him, which supposedly resolved the issue. 

  Of course, I added the image of Oswald, but that's something that Jerry Organ should have done. So, you can take your pick about who matches Doorman better: Oswald or Gorilla Man. And of course, Organ used the Groden scan which features that contrast and variation (though it isn't plaid or anything close to plaid)  though we know now from Robin Unger that it's not accurate. Here's what Unger favors:

You can see that there is much less contrast and variation above than what appears on the felonious Groden scan.

McAdams went on to make his anti-Oswald-in-the-Doorway page, and he's done plenty to promote it. Nevertheless, Oswald in the doorway is a much bigger issue today than it was in 2002.

I think the guy who made this http://surftofind.com/target has got a good handle on things. I'll cite something he said which I find very succinct and compelling:

"In many ways, John McAdams is a product of the times -- a symptom, not the disease. The disease is the corruption of the American educational system. It has become more and more difficult in recent times to tell the truth in America; nowhere is that more true than in America's schools, colleges and universities. There are many theories on when this began and why it happened. Whatever the cause, the point is it has happened, and the progress of a McAdams through the American educational system (both public and private) to a teaching position at a university is a cautionary tale of the new dark age we have entered in America."


"McAdams has neither the educational preparation nor the ability for such a position -- his language skills are abysmal; his analytical skills non-existent. Not only has he done no research whatsoever on the historical question he pretends to study, he has no knowledge of even the basics of a research methodology. Thus, McAdams himself argues against long established historical facts; on the other hand, he is incapable of doing the research necessary to either confirm or dispute such facts."

"In the academy, once a work is published in a fact-checked or peer-reviewed venue in any discipline, long established practice is this: Those who would challenge such published information must do a complete and thorough review -- whether the case involves historical research, scientific study, or a mathematical proof."

"On this newsgroup [alt.conspiracy.jfk] and on the website of Marquette University, McAdams commits daily academic fraud. He pretends that evidence for a corpus of facts drawn from HSCA records, most of which has been available in print for at least six years, has never been provided. Instead, he argues with knowing deceit that there are no documents to support a major story appearing in the heavily fact-checked Washington Post (and later, in the seminal book on the JFK assassination, Oswald Talked). An interesting charge, if true; but of course it's not. The professor at the distinguished university is an academic crackpot, and sadly, a fraud on the public -- a base propagandist in scholar's robes."