HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 23, 2012, 10:34:55 PM
News:

Pages: 1 [2]
Bye Bye Jacket Bulge  (Read 1299 times)
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


                                                 
For the web version of this article click the following link.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. During the early Z-220s the forward direction of the limousine would have made a 11-degree lateral angle with the trajectory of a bullet fired from the sniper's nest. This coincidence of the sagittal with the lateral angle requires that Connally was facing directly forward if transited by a bullet on a straight course. 


 
Figure 1 - Facing Forward

Viewing Connally's back and chest wounds from above show that their locations in the plane of view are consistent with a bullet fired from behind and slightly to the right of the victim. The following graphic shows this situation.

Point B represents the inshoot on Connally's back and point C marks the outshoot on his chest. The straight line BC denotes the wound track made by a bullet without deflection. Line segment AB shows the incoming trajectory and the outgoing trajectory is indicated by line segment CD. The straight line AD makes an angle h with the forward direction of the limousine shown as line segment OL. Line segment BF represents a parasagittal plane of the body and makes angle s with the direction of the transiting bullet.

The appearance of Facing Forward differs from the usual diagram showing Connally's torso wounds. Normally they align the vertical with the forward direction of the limousine and show the trajectory of the bullet as upward and slightly to the left. Instead of using the direction of the limousine as a reference, Facing Forward takes the direction of the incoming bullet as its reference. So the direction of the bullet is upward and the direction of the limousine is upward and slightly to the right. I invite readers who are uncomfortable with the appearance of Facing Forward to rotate the graphic so that OL becomes vertical and observe that the angular relationships do not change.

The advantages of using the direction of the incoming bullet as a reference direction and placing the origin of the coordinate system at Connally's center of rotation becomes obvious when considering the effect of the considerable right turn of the torso upon the trajectory of a bullet that connected the inshoot and the outshoot.



Figure 2 - Turned to his Right

If Connally were facing forward then the straight line joining his wounds, BC,   would have made a zero degree angle with the direction of the incoming bullet, AB. Rotation of his torso did not change the direction of the incoming bullet nor the locations of the inshoot and the outshoot. Hence the trajectory of the incoming bullet makes an angle b with the straight line joining his wounds. This angle b conveniently measures the rotation of Connally's torso from facing straight ahead since angle h equals angle s. 

Researchers disagree on the magnitude of Connally's rightward rotation on any given frame of the Zapruder film. So rather than invite quibbling by assigning a disputable value to the rotation angle b, I choose to use a variable that can have any value.

A rotated torso necessitates deflection of the transiting bullet by an angle larger than the rotation angle b. This situation arises since the bullet cannot follow the path of A to B, undergo an instantaneous deflection and continue toward the outshoot along the path of B to C. Instead the bullet gradually turns toward the exit and emerges at a deflection angle larger than the rotation angle.

The medical evidence documented an elliptical inshoot and a small tunneling wound track extending to at least the chest wall. Under these conditions the bullet would have continued along a straight path for some distance before the onset of deflection. This delayed deflection would have further increased the net deflection angle of the emerging bullet. So the model of a bullet that began deflecting upon entry gives the lower bound on the actual deflection angle.



Figure 3 - Curving Wound Track

Placing the origin of a new coordinate system at the inshoot simplifies analysis of the curved path of the deflecting bullet. The coordinates of the inshoot are both zero and the ordinate of the outshoot, y0, equals the abscissa of the outshoot, x0 divided by the tangent of the rotation angle b. In terms of symbols the equation y0 = x0 / tan (b) ensures that the curved trajectory passes through the outshoot.

Assuming that a constant force acting along the positive X' axis deflected the bullet gives a parabolic trajectory of the form x = ( y^2 / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). Taking the derivative of x with respect to y gives dx / dy = ( 2 y / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). This derivative vanishes at y = 0 and has the value of 2 tan ( b ) at y = y0. These derivatives give the trigonometric tangents of the angles between the Y axis and the geometric tangents to the curve. So the difference between these derivatives at the outshoot and the inshoot equals the tangent of the deflection angle d. Hence tan ( d ) = 2 tan ( b ).

If the trajectory had the form of a nth power law then the tangent of the deflection angle would equal n multiplied by the tangent of the rotation angle.

The deflecting component of the force upon the bullet decreases as deflection reduces the yaw angle. However, slowing of the bullet increases the time for a diminishing deflecting force to act. So these deviations from simple parabolic motion have opposite effects upon the shape of the trajectory. Although cancellation of these deviations does not occur, the opposition of their effects diminishes their importance.



Figure 4- Broad Maximum

The excess angle, e = invtan ( 2 tan b ) - b, representing the deflection of the bullet away from a thigh that rotated with Connally's torso through an angle b has an interesting property. This angle has a maximum when b equals the inverse tangent of one divided by the square root of two. So a rotation angle of b = 35.3 degree maximizes the excess angle as 19.5 degree.
 
This excess angle is weakly dependent upon the rotation angle b. For a 5-degree error in a 35-degree rotation angle, the error in the excess angle is 0.35 degree. Allowing an unreasonable 10-degree error for the 35-degree rotation angle produces a barely perceptible 1.3-degree error in the excess angle. When the error of the rotation angle becomes 15 degree the excess angle has an error of less than 3 degree.

A moderate right turn of Connally's torso is devastating for a single bullet event. Assuming that the deflection to the right is possible then the course toward the inner aspect of the thigh requires a leftward deflection of angle e to undo the effect of the rightward deflection and a further leftward deflection of about 20 degree to reach the inner aspect of the lower left thigh. The wrist was between the thigh and the chest wounds. This location would have directed any deflecting component of its force upon the bullet in an upward and rightward direction. So the bullet that exited the rotated torso had no obstacle to sharply defect it leftward. 

The impossibility of a bullet having inflicted Connally's torso wounds during the early Z-220s disallows the prevalent explanation of the abrupt changes seen on ZC-223 and Z-224. During this one-eighteenth second interval, the right lapel of Connally's jacket flipped leftward purportedly in response to debris that exited from the large hole in his chest. Further some have attributed  the 20-degree leftward rotation and a lesser 7.5-degree forward rotation of Connally's torso to transferred momentum from the  bullet. Viewing frames ZC-223 through ZC-225 without clipping reveal an alternative and plausible cause of these abrupt changes.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
      
The brightness of the spot in line with the left breast of Governor Connally's jacket that increased between ZC-222 and ZC-223 abruptly decreased and became invisible on ZC-224.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

ZC-222 and ZC-223 show ghost images on the rear of the Stemmons sign. These images consisted of two nearly vertical bands with the band on the left being the wider of the pair. The minor changes of the ghost images on ZC-222 and ZC-223 suggest that the image on the following frame would have practically the same pattern and be displaced to the left. One numerical frame later, the ghost image on ZC-224 contained three nearly vertical bands with a wide spacing between the center and the band on the right.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

These abrupt changes of the spot in line with the breast and the ghost images are evidence of alteration that fall short of proofs since the sources of the bright spot and the ghost images are not recorded on these frames. The third strike against the jacket bulge does not have these limitations.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The arrows surrounding WC-224 direct our attention to the north peristyle where a person stood with a raised arm. One numerical frame earlier on WC-223 the arm of that person hung by their side.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Warren Commission published Time/Life frames of the Zapruder film that  reported  an arm rotated through an angle of sixty degrees in one-eighteenth of a second without leaving a motion blur. By contrast the clapping hands of a spectator on the north infield grass that moved a few inches as opposed to more than one foot show motion blurs on WC-223 and WC-224. The absence of a motion blur of the arm on WC-223 and WC-224 required that the arm accelerated after exposure of WC-223, reached a maximum angular speed and decelerated to near rest prior to exposure of WC-224. I contend that these motions in 1/36 second between exposures are humanly impossible and constitute proof of tampering with the Zapruder film.

Recognition of the sixty-degree rotation of the spectator’s arm as proof of alteration resolves the problems of an  impossible posture for a single bullet event, a change in momenta comparable to the back and to the left motion of President Kennedy and an immaculate ejection of debris from the chest that bulged the jacket without staining Connally’s white shirt.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 6711


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
                                                 
For the web version of this article click the following link.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. During the early Z-220s the forward direction of the limousine would have made a 11-degree lateral angle with the trajectory of a bullet fired from the sniper's nest. This coincidence of the sagittal with the lateral angle requires that Connally was facing directly forward if transited by a bullet on a straight course. 


 
Figure 1 - Facing Forward

Viewing Connally's back and chest wounds from above show that their locations in the plane of view are consistent with a bullet fired from behind and slightly to the right of the victim. The following graphic shows this situation.

Point B represents the inshoot on Connally's back and point C marks the outshoot on his chest. The straight line BC denotes the wound track made by a bullet without deflection. Line segment AB shows the incoming trajectory and the outgoing trajectory is indicated by line segment CD. The straight line AD makes an angle h with the forward direction of the limousine shown as line segment OL. Line segment BF represents a parasagittal plane of the body and makes angle s with the direction of the transiting bullet.

The appearance of Facing Forward differs from the usual diagram showing Connally's torso wounds. Normally they align the vertical with the forward direction of the limousine and show the trajectory of the bullet as upward and slightly to the left. Instead of using the direction of the limousine as a reference, Facing Forward takes the direction of the incoming bullet as its reference. So the direction of the bullet is upward and the direction of the limousine is upward and slightly to the right. I invite readers who are uncomfortable with the appearance of Facing Forward to rotate the graphic so that OL becomes vertical and observe that the angular relationships do not change.

The advantages of using the direction of the incoming bullet as a reference direction and placing the origin of the coordinate system at Connally's center of rotation becomes obvious when considering the effect of the considerable right turn of the torso upon the trajectory of a bullet that connected the inshoot and the outshoot.



Figure 2 - Turned to his Right

If Connally were facing forward then the straight line joining his wounds, BC,   would have made a zero degree angle with the direction of the incoming bullet, AB. Rotation of his torso did not change the direction of the incoming bullet nor the locations of the inshoot and the outshoot. Hence the trajectory of the incoming bullet makes an angle b with the straight line joining his wounds. This angle b conveniently measures the rotation of Connally's torso from facing straight ahead since angle h equals angle s. 

Researchers disagree on the magnitude of Connally's rightward rotation on any given frame of the Zapruder film. So rather than invite quibbling by assigning a disputable value to the rotation angle b, I choose to use a variable that can have any value.

A rotated torso necessitates deflection of the transiting bullet by an angle larger than the rotation angle b. This situation arises since the bullet cannot follow the path of A to B, undergo an instantaneous deflection and continue toward the outshoot along the path of B to C. Instead the bullet gradually turns toward the exit and emerges at a deflection angle larger than the rotation angle.

The medical evidence documented an elliptical inshoot and a small tunneling wound track extending to at least the chest wall. Under these conditions the bullet would have continued along a straight path for some distance before the onset of deflection. This delayed deflection would have further increased the net deflection angle of the emerging bullet. So the model of a bullet that began deflecting upon entry gives the lower bound on the actual deflection angle.



Figure 3 - Curving Wound Track

Placing the origin of a new coordinate system at the inshoot simplifies analysis of the curved path of the deflecting bullet. The coordinates of the inshoot are both zero and the ordinate of the outshoot, y0, equals the abscissa of the outshoot, x0 divided by the tangent of the rotation angle b. In terms of symbols the equation y0 = x0 / tan (b) ensures that the curved trajectory passes through the outshoot.

Assuming that a constant force acting along the positive X' axis deflected the bullet gives a parabolic trajectory of the form x = ( y^2 / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). Taking the derivative of x with respect to y gives dx / dy = ( 2 y / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). This derivative vanishes at y = 0 and has the value of 2 tan ( b ) at y = y0. These derivatives give the trigonometric tangents of the angles between the Y axis and the geometric tangents to the curve. So the difference between these derivatives at the outshoot and the inshoot equals the tangent of the deflection angle d. Hence tan ( d ) = 2 tan ( b ).

If the trajectory had the form of a nth power law then the tangent of the deflection angle would equal n multiplied by the tangent of the rotation angle.

The deflecting component of the force upon the bullet decreases as deflection reduces the yaw angle. However, slowing of the bullet increases the time for a diminishing deflecting force to act. So these deviations from simple parabolic motion have opposite effects upon the shape of the trajectory. Although cancellation of these deviations does not occur, the opposition of their effects diminishes their importance.



Figure 4- Broad Maximum

The excess angle, e = invtan ( 2 tan b ) - b, representing the deflection of the bullet away from a thigh that rotated with Connally's torso through an angle b has an interesting property. This angle has a maximum when b equals the inverse tangent of one divided by the square root of two. So a rotation angle of b = 35.3 degree maximizes the excess angle as 19.5 degree.
 
This excess angle is weakly dependent upon the rotation angle b. For a 5-degree error in a 35-degree rotation angle, the error in the excess angle is 0.35 degree. Allowing an unreasonable 10-degree error for the 35-degree rotation angle produces a barely perceptible 1.3-degree error in the excess angle. When the error of the rotation angle becomes 15 degree the excess angle has an error of less than 3 degree.

A moderate right turn of Connally's torso is devastating for a single bullet event. Assuming that the deflection to the right is possible then the course toward the inner aspect of the thigh requires a leftward deflection of angle e to undo the effect of the rightward deflection and a further leftward deflection of about 20 degree to reach the inner aspect of the lower left thigh. The wrist was between the thigh and the chest wounds. This location would have directed any deflecting component of its force upon the bullet in an upward and rightward direction. So the bullet that exited the rotated torso had no obstacle to sharply defect it leftward. 

The impossibility of a bullet having inflicted Connally's torso wounds during the early Z-220s disallows the prevalent explanation of the abrupt changes seen on ZC-223 and Z-224. During this one-eighteenth second interval, the right lapel of Connally's jacket flipped leftward purportedly in response to debris that exited from the large hole in his chest. Further some have attributed  the 20-degree leftward rotation and a lesser 7.5-degree forward rotation of Connally's torso to transferred momentum from the  bullet. Viewing frames ZC-223 through ZC-225 without clipping reveal an alternative and plausible cause of these abrupt changes.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
      
The brightness of the spot in line with the left breast of Governor Connally's jacket that increased between ZC-222 and ZC-223 abruptly decreased and became invisible on ZC-224.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

ZC-222 and ZC-223 show ghost images on the rear of the Stemmons sign. These images consisted of two nearly vertical bands with the band on the left being the wider of the pair. The minor changes of the ghost images on ZC-222 and ZC-223 suggest that the image on the following frame would have practically the same pattern and be displaced to the left. One numerical frame later, the ghost image on ZC-224 contained three nearly vertical bands with a wide spacing between the center and the band on the right.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

These abrupt changes of the spot in line with the breast and the ghost images are evidence of alteration that fall short of proofs since the sources of the bright spot and the ghost images are not recorded on these frames. The third strike against the jacket bulge does not have these limitations.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The arrows surrounding WC-224 direct our attention to the north peristyle where a person stood with a raised arm. One numerical frame earlier on WC-223 the arm of that person hung by their side.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Warren Commission published Time/Life frames of the Zapruder film that  reported  an arm rotated through an angle of sixty degrees in one-eighteenth of a second without leaving a motion blur. By contrast the clapping hands of a spectator on the north infield grass that moved a few inches as opposed to more than one foot show motion blurs on WC-223 and WC-224. The absence of a motion blur of the arm on WC-223 and WC-224 required that the arm accelerated after exposure of WC-223, reached a maximum angular speed and decelerated to near rest prior to exposure of WC-224. I contend that these motions in 1/36 second between exposures are humanly impossible and constitute proof of tampering with the Zapruder film.

Recognition of the sixty-degree rotation of the spectator’s arm as proof of alteration resolves the problems of an  impossible posture for a single bullet event, a change in momenta comparable to the back and to the left motion of President Kennedy and an immaculate ejection of debris from the chest that bulged the jacket without staining Connally’s white shirt.

WTF are you babbling about. You post a graphic without telling us the measurements and dimensions you used. Very deceiving.
And why are you trying to line up a trajectory from the sniper's nest with the wound through Connally's chest?
My first paragraph cited Gregory Exhibit 1 as the source for the sagittal angle through Governor Connally’s torso.
Quote
You don't know what frame it hit. So you don't know how he was seated. He said that he was hit at about Z-230 when he was facing forward.
The title of my post and the statement pertaining to a wounding during the early Z220s should have told you that I am not talking about Connally being hit about Z-230.
Quote
You need to justify your data points on the diagram by overlaying it on drawings of his body showing where the wounds were. I notice that you
didn't dare show the HSCA drawings because they would expose your foolishness.


I have news for you, Marsh. The HSCA never said that the jacket bulged around Z-190.

Herbert


Unresponsive. I said nothing at all about the jacket bulge.
I asked you tell us where you got your data from. The fact that you can't just proves that you made it up from your imagination.

Specify the data that you claim I have made up or shut up.

Herbert


The data for your drawing. Your 11 degrees. The location of the wounds. The angle through the wounds.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
                                                 
For the web version of this article click the following link.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. During the early Z-220s the forward direction of the limousine would have made a 11-degree lateral angle with the trajectory of a bullet fired from the sniper's nest. This coincidence of the sagittal with the lateral angle requires that Connally was facing directly forward if transited by a bullet on a straight course. 


 
Figure 1 - Facing Forward

Viewing Connally's back and chest wounds from above show that their locations in the plane of view are consistent with a bullet fired from behind and slightly to the right of the victim. The following graphic shows this situation.

Point B represents the inshoot on Connally's back and point C marks the outshoot on his chest. The straight line BC denotes the wound track made by a bullet without deflection. Line segment AB shows the incoming trajectory and the outgoing trajectory is indicated by line segment CD. The straight line AD makes an angle h with the forward direction of the limousine shown as line segment OL. Line segment BF represents a parasagittal plane of the body and makes angle s with the direction of the transiting bullet.

The appearance of Facing Forward differs from the usual diagram showing Connally's torso wounds. Normally they align the vertical with the forward direction of the limousine and show the trajectory of the bullet as upward and slightly to the left. Instead of using the direction of the limousine as a reference, Facing Forward takes the direction of the incoming bullet as its reference. So the direction of the bullet is upward and the direction of the limousine is upward and slightly to the right. I invite readers who are uncomfortable with the appearance of Facing Forward to rotate the graphic so that OL becomes vertical and observe that the angular relationships do not change.

The advantages of using the direction of the incoming bullet as a reference direction and placing the origin of the coordinate system at Connally's center of rotation becomes obvious when considering the effect of the considerable right turn of the torso upon the trajectory of a bullet that connected the inshoot and the outshoot.



Figure 2 - Turned to his Right

If Connally were facing forward then the straight line joining his wounds, BC,   would have made a zero degree angle with the direction of the incoming bullet, AB. Rotation of his torso did not change the direction of the incoming bullet nor the locations of the inshoot and the outshoot. Hence the trajectory of the incoming bullet makes an angle b with the straight line joining his wounds. This angle b conveniently measures the rotation of Connally's torso from facing straight ahead since angle h equals angle s. 

Researchers disagree on the magnitude of Connally's rightward rotation on any given frame of the Zapruder film. So rather than invite quibbling by assigning a disputable value to the rotation angle b, I choose to use a variable that can have any value.

A rotated torso necessitates deflection of the transiting bullet by an angle larger than the rotation angle b. This situation arises since the bullet cannot follow the path of A to B, undergo an instantaneous deflection and continue toward the outshoot along the path of B to C. Instead the bullet gradually turns toward the exit and emerges at a deflection angle larger than the rotation angle.

The medical evidence documented an elliptical inshoot and a small tunneling wound track extending to at least the chest wall. Under these conditions the bullet would have continued along a straight path for some distance before the onset of deflection. This delayed deflection would have further increased the net deflection angle of the emerging bullet. So the model of a bullet that began deflecting upon entry gives the lower bound on the actual deflection angle.



Figure 3 - Curving Wound Track

Placing the origin of a new coordinate system at the inshoot simplifies analysis of the curved path of the deflecting bullet. The coordinates of the inshoot are both zero and the ordinate of the outshoot, y0, equals the abscissa of the outshoot, x0 divided by the tangent of the rotation angle b. In terms of symbols the equation y0 = x0 / tan (b) ensures that the curved trajectory passes through the outshoot.

Assuming that a constant force acting along the positive X' axis deflected the bullet gives a parabolic trajectory of the form x = ( y^2 / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). Taking the derivative of x with respect to y gives dx / dy = ( 2 y / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). This derivative vanishes at y = 0 and has the value of 2 tan ( b ) at y = y0. These derivatives give the trigonometric tangents of the angles between the Y axis and the geometric tangents to the curve. So the difference between these derivatives at the outshoot and the inshoot equals the tangent of the deflection angle d. Hence tan ( d ) = 2 tan ( b ).

If the trajectory had the form of a nth power law then the tangent of the deflection angle would equal n multiplied by the tangent of the rotation angle.

The deflecting component of the force upon the bullet decreases as deflection reduces the yaw angle. However, slowing of the bullet increases the time for a diminishing deflecting force to act. So these deviations from simple parabolic motion have opposite effects upon the shape of the trajectory. Although cancellation of these deviations does not occur, the opposition of their effects diminishes their importance.



Figure 4- Broad Maximum

The excess angle, e = invtan ( 2 tan b ) - b, representing the deflection of the bullet away from a thigh that rotated with Connally's torso through an angle b has an interesting property. This angle has a maximum when b equals the inverse tangent of one divided by the square root of two. So a rotation angle of b = 35.3 degree maximizes the excess angle as 19.5 degree.
 
This excess angle is weakly dependent upon the rotation angle b. For a 5-degree error in a 35-degree rotation angle, the error in the excess angle is 0.35 degree. Allowing an unreasonable 10-degree error for the 35-degree rotation angle produces a barely perceptible 1.3-degree error in the excess angle. When the error of the rotation angle becomes 15 degree the excess angle has an error of less than 3 degree.

A moderate right turn of Connally's torso is devastating for a single bullet event. Assuming that the deflection to the right is possible then the course toward the inner aspect of the thigh requires a leftward deflection of angle e to undo the effect of the rightward deflection and a further leftward deflection of about 20 degree to reach the inner aspect of the lower left thigh. The wrist was between the thigh and the chest wounds. This location would have directed any deflecting component of its force upon the bullet in an upward and rightward direction. So the bullet that exited the rotated torso had no obstacle to sharply defect it leftward. 

The impossibility of a bullet having inflicted Connally's torso wounds during the early Z-220s disallows the prevalent explanation of the abrupt changes seen on ZC-223 and Z-224. During this one-eighteenth second interval, the right lapel of Connally's jacket flipped leftward purportedly in response to debris that exited from the large hole in his chest. Further some have attributed  the 20-degree leftward rotation and a lesser 7.5-degree forward rotation of Connally's torso to transferred momentum from the  bullet. Viewing frames ZC-223 through ZC-225 without clipping reveal an alternative and plausible cause of these abrupt changes.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
      
The brightness of the spot in line with the left breast of Governor Connally's jacket that increased between ZC-222 and ZC-223 abruptly decreased and became invisible on ZC-224.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

ZC-222 and ZC-223 show ghost images on the rear of the Stemmons sign. These images consisted of two nearly vertical bands with the band on the left being the wider of the pair. The minor changes of the ghost images on ZC-222 and ZC-223 suggest that the image on the following frame would have practically the same pattern and be displaced to the left. One numerical frame later, the ghost image on ZC-224 contained three nearly vertical bands with a wide spacing between the center and the band on the right.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

These abrupt changes of the spot in line with the breast and the ghost images are evidence of alteration that fall short of proofs since the sources of the bright spot and the ghost images are not recorded on these frames. The third strike against the jacket bulge does not have these limitations.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The arrows surrounding WC-224 direct our attention to the north peristyle where a person stood with a raised arm. One numerical frame earlier on WC-223 the arm of that person hung by their side.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Warren Commission published Time/Life frames of the Zapruder film that  reported  an arm rotated through an angle of sixty degrees in one-eighteenth of a second without leaving a motion blur. By contrast the clapping hands of a spectator on the north infield grass that moved a few inches as opposed to more than one foot show motion blurs on WC-223 and WC-224. The absence of a motion blur of the arm on WC-223 and WC-224 required that the arm accelerated after exposure of WC-223, reached a maximum angular speed and decelerated to near rest prior to exposure of WC-224. I contend that these motions in 1/36 second between exposures are humanly impossible and constitute proof of tampering with the Zapruder film.

Recognition of the sixty-degree rotation of the spectator’s arm as proof of alteration resolves the problems of an  impossible posture for a single bullet event, a change in momenta comparable to the back and to the left motion of President Kennedy and an immaculate ejection of debris from the chest that bulged the jacket without staining Connally’s white shirt.

WTF are you babbling about. You post a graphic without telling us the measurements and dimensions you used. Very deceiving.
And why are you trying to line up a trajectory from the sniper's nest with the wound through Connally's chest?
My first paragraph cited Gregory Exhibit 1 as the source for the sagittal angle through Governor Connally’s torso.
Quote
You don't know what frame it hit. So you don't know how he was seated. He said that he was hit at about Z-230 when he was facing forward.
The title of my post and the statement pertaining to a wounding during the early Z220s should have told you that I am not talking about Connally being hit about Z-230.
Quote
You need to justify your data points on the diagram by overlaying it on drawings of his body showing where the wounds were. I notice that you
didn't dare show the HSCA drawings because they would expose your foolishness.


I have news for you, Marsh. The HSCA never said that the jacket bulged around Z-190.

Herbert


Unresponsive. I said nothing at all about the jacket bulge.
I asked you tell us where you got your data from. The fact that you can't just proves that you made it up from your imagination.

Specify the data that you claim I have made up or shut up.

Herbert


The data for your drawing. Your 11 degrees. The location of the wounds. The angle through the wounds.


The first sentence of my article stated, "Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. "

Herbert


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2338


Why would they alter something in a blurred out background Herbert? Don't you think they should have altered the people in the car instead? Something that has something to do with the shooting? 

Its comical, those of you who believe this film is altered, not one of you ever mentions anything going on in the limo as so called evidence of film alteration. Instead you point out stuff in the background, or on the periphery of the frames, as your evidence. Its psychotic, just as the idea of film alteration is. With only 8mm of surface area available to alter, anything they did in 1963 should stick out like the zipper in a Godzilla movie, but none of you can show any real evidence of film alteration. Not even you Herbert.


-------------------------

-------------------------
"you're the cop, you figure it out"
-Lee H. Oswald to Dallas Police detectives, weekend
of 11-22-63.

"Part of the reason why we avoided talking about this thing, because every time you say something, somebody misinterprets what you say."
-James. J. Humes, excerpt of ARRB statement, 2-13-96

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 3791

Well, somebody did it.


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The white object in the background of the guy with the moving arm is in the foreground of the two spectators immediately to our left of that guy.


Well the white object is a car Herb and it's moving, and that is the source of what you are seeing there, it's nothing really.

Do you really believe that a car drove between two spectators standing next to one another?

Herbert


It's a car Herb, I don't think anyone will argue that.


-------------------------

-------------------------
LN; So how did it happen then ?

CT; I don't know, I only know that it didn't happen the way the evidence says.

LN;  We should not use evidence in this case ?

CT; Correct.

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would they alter something in a blurred out background Herbert? Don't you think they should have altered the people in the car instead? Something that has something to do with the shooting? 
By altering the motion of people in the car editors would have unintentionally changed the motions of all other background objects that appeared with the passengers.
Quote
Its comical, those of you who believe this film is altered, not one of you ever mentions anything going on in the limo as so called evidence of film alteration.
Our copies of the Zapruder film report that Governor Connally underwent an extraordinary motion as the spectator’s arm rotated by sixty degrees. In particular frames ZC-222 and ZC-223 show Connally nearly stationary with respect to the limousine while facing Zapruder. However, ZC-224 shows that Connally rotated about twenty degrees leftward. This change represents an angular acceleration of 13,400 degree per second squared. The required torque being far in excess of human capabilities.

Are you going to take Myers’ cop out and say that a bullet caused the considerable change in Connally’s posture between ZC-223 and ZC-224? I quote Myers.

“In the 1/18th of a second between Zapruder frames 223-224, a number of measurable events occur. JBC's torso pitches forward 7.5 degrees and begins a sharp rotation to the left, while his head pitches rearward 3.2 degrees. The right side of his suit coat also bulges outward, obscuring part of his shirt. These sudden movements are consistent with a bullet striking JBC in the upper-right back and exiting from his right-chest.”
Quote
Instead you point out stuff in the background, or on the periphery of the frames, as your evidence. Its psychotic, just as the idea of film alteration is. With only 8mm of surface area available to alter, anything they did in 1963 should stick out like the zipper in a Godzilla movie, but none of you can show any real evidence of film alteration. Not even you Herbert.

Now is the time to get to the crux of the matter. A MC style bullet has insufficient momentum to been the mechanical cause of President Kennedy’s back and to the left motion or the mechanical cause of Connally’s forward and to the left rotations.

So what caused the filmed rotations of Connally’s torso on ZC-223 and ZC-224, if not a bullet? You already have my answer.

Herbert


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 6711


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would they alter something in a blurred out background Herbert? Don't you think they should have altered the people in the car instead? Something that has something to do with the shooting? 
By altering the motion of people in the car editors would have unintentionally changed the motions of all other background objects that appeared with the passengers.
Quote
Its comical, those of you who believe this film is altered, not one of you ever mentions anything going on in the limo as so called evidence of film alteration.
Our copies of the Zapruder film report that Governor Connally underwent an extraordinary motion as the spectator’s arm rotated by sixty degrees. In particular frames ZC-222 and ZC-223 show Connally nearly stationary with respect to the limousine while facing Zapruder. However, ZC-224 shows that Connally rotated about twenty degrees leftward. This change represents an angular acceleration of 13,400 degree per second squared. The required torque being far in excess of human capabilities.

Are you going to take Myers’ cop out and say that a bullet caused the considerable change in Connally’s posture between ZC-223 and ZC-224? I quote Myers.

“In the 1/18th of a second between Zapruder frames 223-224, a number of measurable events occur. JBC's torso pitches forward 7.5 degrees and begins a sharp rotation to the left, while his head pitches rearward 3.2 degrees. The right side of his suit coat also bulges outward, obscuring part of his shirt. These sudden movements are consistent with a bullet striking JBC in the upper-right back and exiting from his right-chest.”
Quote
Instead you point out stuff in the background, or on the periphery of the frames, as your evidence. Its psychotic, just as the idea of film alteration is. With only 8mm of surface area available to alter, anything they did in 1963 should stick out like the zipper in a Godzilla movie, but none of you can show any real evidence of film alteration. Not even you Herbert.

Now is the time to get to the crux of the matter. A MC style bullet has insufficient momentum to been the mechanical cause of President Kennedy’s back and to the left motion or the mechanical cause of Connally’s forward and to the left rotations.

So what caused the filmed rotations of Connally’s torso on ZC-223 and ZC-224, if not a bullet? You already have my answer.

Herbert


Connally testified that he was in the process of turning back to his left to try to see the President and then was hit when he was facing
nearly forward. He said it hit at about Z-230.
He could see that he was not yet hit at Z-224 when he emerged from behind the sign.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 6711


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would they alter something in a blurred out background Herbert? Don't you think they should have altered the people in the car instead? Something that has something to do with the shooting? 

Its comical, those of you who believe this film is altered, not one of you ever mentions anything going on in the limo as so called evidence of film alteration. Instead you point out stuff in the background, or on the periphery of the frames, as your evidence. Its psychotic, just as the idea of film alteration is. With only 8mm of surface area available to alter, anything they did in 1963 should stick out like the zipper in a Godzilla movie, but none of you can show any real evidence of film alteration. Not even you Herbert.


There is one guy I met at a conference who did have such a theory. His theory was that Kennedy was shot in the head while the limo was hidden by the sign. All the Secret Service agents ran up from the Queen Mary and shot him in the head.
Then Walt Disney painted in the rest of the film to make JFK look normal until Z-313 to frame Oswald. Because Oswald's rifle could not have shot quickly enough.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2201


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
                                                 
For the web version of this article click the following link.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. During the early Z-220s the forward direction of the limousine would have made a 11-degree lateral angle with the trajectory of a bullet fired from the sniper's nest. This coincidence of the sagittal with the lateral angle requires that Connally was facing directly forward if transited by a bullet on a straight course.  


 
Figure 1 - Facing Forward

Viewing Connally's back and chest wounds from above show that their locations in the plane of view are consistent with a bullet fired from behind and slightly to the right of the victim. The following graphic shows this situation.

Point B represents the inshoot on Connally's back and point C marks the outshoot on his chest. The straight line BC denotes the wound track made by a bullet without deflection. Line segment AB shows the incoming trajectory and the outgoing trajectory is indicated by line segment CD. The straight line AD makes an angle h with the forward direction of the limousine shown as line segment OL. Line segment BF represents a parasagittal plane of the body and makes angle s with the direction of the transiting bullet.

The appearance of Facing Forward differs from the usual diagram showing Connally's torso wounds. Normally they align the vertical with the forward direction of the limousine and show the trajectory of the bullet as upward and slightly to the left. Instead of using the direction of the limousine as a reference, Facing Forward takes the direction of the incoming bullet as its reference. So the direction of the bullet is upward and the direction of the limousine is upward and slightly to the right. I invite readers who are uncomfortable with the appearance of Facing Forward to rotate the graphic so that OL becomes vertical and observe that the angular relationships do not change.

The advantages of using the direction of the incoming bullet as a reference direction and placing the origin of the coordinate system at Connally's center of rotation becomes obvious when considering the effect of the considerable right turn of the torso upon the trajectory of a bullet that connected the inshoot and the outshoot.



Figure 2 - Turned to his Right

If Connally were facing forward then the straight line joining his wounds, BC,   would have made a zero degree angle with the direction of the incoming bullet, AB. Rotation of his torso did not change the direction of the incoming bullet nor the locations of the inshoot and the outshoot. Hence the trajectory of the incoming bullet makes an angle b with the straight line joining his wounds. This angle b conveniently measures the rotation of Connally's torso from facing straight ahead since angle h equals angle s.  

Researchers disagree on the magnitude of Connally's rightward rotation on any given frame of the Zapruder film. So rather than invite quibbling by assigning a disputable value to the rotation angle b, I choose to use a variable that can have any value.

A rotated torso necessitates deflection of the transiting bullet by an angle larger than the rotation angle b. This situation arises since the bullet cannot follow the path of A to B, undergo an instantaneous deflection and continue toward the outshoot along the path of B to C. Instead the bullet gradually turns toward the exit and emerges at a deflection angle larger than the rotation angle.

The medical evidence documented an elliptical inshoot and a small tunneling wound track extending to at least the chest wall. Under these conditions the bullet would have continued along a straight path for some distance before the onset of deflection. This delayed deflection would have further increased the net deflection angle of the emerging bullet. So the model of a bullet that began deflecting upon entry gives the lower bound on the actual deflection angle.



Figure 3 - Curving Wound Track

Placing the origin of a new coordinate system at the inshoot simplifies analysis of the curved path of the deflecting bullet. The coordinates of the inshoot are both zero and the ordinate of the outshoot, y0, equals the abscissa of the outshoot, x0 divided by the tangent of the rotation angle b. In terms of symbols the equation y0 = x0 / tan (b) ensures that the curved trajectory passes through the outshoot.

Assuming that a constant force acting along the positive X' axis deflected the bullet gives a parabolic trajectory of the form x = ( y^2 / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). Taking the derivative of x with respect to y gives dx / dy = ( 2 y / x0 ) tan ^2 ( b ). This derivative vanishes at y = 0 and has the value of 2 tan ( b ) at y = y0. These derivatives give the trigonometric tangents of the angles between the Y axis and the geometric tangents to the curve. So the difference between these derivatives at the outshoot and the inshoot equals the tangent of the deflection angle d. Hence tan ( d ) = 2 tan ( b ).

If the trajectory had the form of a nth power law then the tangent of the deflection angle would equal n multiplied by the tangent of the rotation angle.

The deflecting component of the force upon the bullet decreases as deflection reduces the yaw angle. However, slowing of the bullet increases the time for a diminishing deflecting force to act. So these deviations from simple parabolic motion have opposite effects upon the shape of the trajectory. Although cancellation of these deviations does not occur, the opposition of their effects diminishes their importance.



Figure 4- Broad Maximum

The excess angle, e = invtan ( 2 tan b ) - b, representing the deflection of the bullet away from a thigh that rotated with Connally's torso through an angle b has an interesting property. This angle has a maximum when b equals the inverse tangent of one divided by the square root of two. So a rotation angle of b = 35.3 degree maximizes the excess angle as 19.5 degree.
 
This excess angle is weakly dependent upon the rotation angle b. For a 5-degree error in a 35-degree rotation angle, the error in the excess angle is 0.35 degree. Allowing an unreasonable 10-degree error for the 35-degree rotation angle produces a barely perceptible 1.3-degree error in the excess angle. When the error of the rotation angle becomes 15 degree the excess angle has an error of less than 3 degree.

A moderate right turn of Connally's torso is devastating for a single bullet event. Assuming that the deflection to the right is possible then the course toward the inner aspect of the thigh requires a leftward deflection of angle e to undo the effect of the rightward deflection and a further leftward deflection of about 20 degree to reach the inner aspect of the lower left thigh. The wrist was between the thigh and the chest wounds. This location would have directed any deflecting component of its force upon the bullet in an upward and rightward direction. So the bullet that exited the rotated torso had no obstacle to sharply defect it leftward.  

The impossibility of a bullet having inflicted Connally's torso wounds during the early Z-220s disallows the prevalent explanation of the abrupt changes seen on ZC-223 and Z-224. During this one-eighteenth second interval, the right lapel of Connally's jacket flipped leftward purportedly in response to debris that exited from the large hole in his chest. Further some have attributed  the 20-degree leftward rotation and a lesser 7.5-degree forward rotation of Connally's torso to transferred momentum from the  bullet. Viewing frames ZC-223 through ZC-225 without clipping reveal an alternative and plausible cause of these abrupt changes.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
      
The brightness of the spot in line with the left breast of Governor Connally's jacket that increased between ZC-222 and ZC-223 abruptly decreased and became invisible on ZC-224.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

ZC-222 and ZC-223 show ghost images on the rear of the Stemmons sign. These images consisted of two nearly vertical bands with the band on the left being the wider of the pair. The minor changes of the ghost images on ZC-222 and ZC-223 suggest that the image on the following frame would have practically the same pattern and be displaced to the left. One numerical frame later, the ghost image on ZC-224 contained three nearly vertical bands with a wide spacing between the center and the band on the right.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

These abrupt changes of the spot in line with the breast and the ghost images are evidence of alteration that fall short of proofs since the sources of the bright spot and the ghost images are not recorded on these frames. The third strike against the jacket bulge does not have these limitations.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The arrows surrounding WC-224 direct our attention to the north peristyle where a person stood with a raised arm. One numerical frame earlier on WC-223 the arm of that person hung by their side.

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The Warren Commission published Time/Life frames of the Zapruder film that  reported  an arm rotated through an angle of sixty degrees in one-eighteenth of a second without leaving a motion blur. By contrast the clapping hands of a spectator on the north infield grass that moved a few inches as opposed to more than one foot show motion blurs on WC-223 and WC-224. The absence of a motion blur of the arm on WC-223 and WC-224 required that the arm accelerated after exposure of WC-223, reached a maximum angular speed and decelerated to near rest prior to exposure of WC-224. I contend that these motions in 1/36 second between exposures are humanly impossible and constitute proof of tampering with the Zapruder film.

Recognition of the sixty-degree rotation of the spectator’s arm as proof of alteration resolves the problems of an  impossible posture for a single bullet event, a change in momenta comparable to the back and to the left motion of President Kennedy and an immaculate ejection of debris from the chest that bulged the jacket without staining Connally’s white shirt.

WTF are you babbling about. You post a graphic without telling us the measurements and dimensions you used. Very deceiving.
And why are you trying to line up a trajectory from the sniper's nest with the wound through Connally's chest?
My first paragraph cited Gregory Exhibit 1 as the source for the sagittal angle through Governor Connally’s torso.
Quote
You don't know what frame it hit. So you don't know how he was seated. He said that he was hit at about Z-230 when he was facing forward.
The title of my post and the statement pertaining to a wounding during the early Z220s should have told you that I am not talking about Connally being hit about Z-230.
Quote
You need to justify your data points on the diagram by overlaying it on drawings of his body showing where the wounds were. I notice that you
didn't dare show the HSCA drawings because they would expose your foolishness.


I have news for you, Marsh. The HSCA never said that the jacket bulged around Z-190.

Herbert


Unresponsive. I said nothing at all about the jacket bulge.
I asked you tell us where you got your data from. The fact that you can't just proves that you made it up from your imagination.

Specify the data that you claim I have made up or shut up.

Herbert


The data for your drawing. Your 11 degrees. The location of the wounds. The angle through the wounds.


The first sentence of my article stated, "Gregory Exhibit 1 enables calculation of the sagittal angle between a straight line joining Governor Connally's torso wounds and the sagittal plane of his body as a brow raising eleven degrees. "

Herbert

I knew you'd run away again. Because you can't back up your assertions. Because you made up the data from your imagination.

The eleven degree transverse angle is the only data I need for considering the effect of Connally’s torso rotation upon the trajectory of the transiting bullet.

I repeat my analysis.



“Placing the origin of a new coordinate system at the inshoot simplifies analysis of the curved path of the deflecting bullet. The coordinates of the inshoot are both zero and the ordinate of the outshoot, y0, equals the abscissa of the outshoot, x0 divided by the tangent of the rotation angle b. In terms of symbols the equation y0 = x0 / tan (b) ensures that the curved trajectory passes through the outshoot.”

“Assuming that a constant force acting along the positive X' axis deflected the bullet gives a parabolic trajectory of the form x = ( y2 / x0 ) tan 2 ( b ). Taking the derivative of x with respect to y gives dx / dy = ( 2 y / x0 ) tan 2 ( b ). This derivative vanishes at y = 0 and has the value of 2 tan ( b ) at y = y0. These derivatives give the trigonometric tangents of the angles between the Y axis and the geometric tangents to the curve. So the difference between these derivatives at the outshoot and the inshoot equals the tangent of the deflection angle d. Hence tan ( d ) = 2 tan ( b ).”

Ignorance of math is no excuse, Marsh. My finding that the trigonometric tangent of the deflection angle equals twice the trigonometric tangent of the torso rotation angle does not involve the locations of the wounds. Further, I am not liable for your failure to understand that the 11-degree transverse angle is the relevant “angle through the wounds."  

If you have a problem with this Marsh then show us your math.

Herbert










-------------------------
« Last Edit: May 06, 2011, 02:11:38 AM by Herbert Blenner »

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Gallery

JFKForum.com

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines