|
|
|
|
|
 July 31, 2011, 06:32:30 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
Mike I posted you a link to ear-witness accounts some time ago. You know that Z160,Z223 & Z313 was not what they heard. From Live Recordings’ of the Shots in Dealey Plaza: Reliability of Ear-Witness Evidence in the JFK Assassination by Andrew M. Mason As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginConclusions about the shot pattern
As seen from the above review of the evidence, there are at least 44 witnesses who
recalled a relatively long pause after the first shot and a much shorter separation between the last two. Only 6 thought the pattern was the reverse. Another 10 may have thought the shots were fairly equally spaced.
If one assumes that the likelihood of a witness recalling a simple pattern of three loud
noises correctly was at least as great the likelihood of recalling it incorrectly, there is only one rational conclusion to be drawn from this evidence: the last two shots were closer together than the first two. If the shot pattern was 1…2…….3 one would have to explain how it could be possible that only 6 out of 60 witnesses perceived the pattern correctly.
One would have to explain not only why the rest of the witnesses were mistaken, but why 44 of them randomly made the same mistake.Personally I don't care which of you has which theory about the timing of the shots. Each of you is entitled to your own theory of the shooting sequence. But WC defenders are not entitled to LIE about the evidence.
-------------------------
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 31, 2011, 07:49:38 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2201
|
Herb, Ive seen your website..which is very well done btw..you have knowledge and insite I will never have and quite honestly never understand completely... Do you have a theoretical explanation? You dont think the bullet tumbled before it hit Connally. With what you have learned about these wounds to Kennedy and Connally what do you believe happened? Im trying to learn what Cters who have all this evidence against the SBT believe really happened. Shouldnt there be a logical scenario collaborated by additional evidence in addition to the points you make?
The reports of President Kennedy’s and Governor Connally’s wounds are not credible. For example the location of the 15 mm elliptical wound between the right arm pit and the right shoulder blade of Connally is incompatible with the chest wound below and slightly to the left of the right nipple. Similarly the location of the 6 mm by 15 mm elliptical wound of Kennedy’s scalp is incompatible with any of the reported locations of the exit wound on the skull. Recognition of the reported wounds as incredible is sufficient grounds to reject to official explanations of the shootings. However, pivotal contradictions between the filmed evidence and the reports of eyewitnesses prevent us from logically deducing the shooting scenario. Herbert
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 19, 2011, 08:51:32 PM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 305
|
Although you most probably will not understand it: (it was explained long ago on the Education Forum)
Station "A" is a point marked on Elm St. by the Warren Commission, which is just as the Presidential Limousine completed the turn in front on the TSDB.
This location was not developed until after Shaneyflet had already had Mr. West establish positions for frames of the Zapruder film, in which Mr. West utilized as reference the known survey stationing along Elm St. that had been established during the SS assassinatiion of December 1963. (which is also the same stationing utilized during the FBI assassination re-enactment of 2/7/64).
Mr. West surveyed in several frames of the Z-film as identificed by Shaneyfelt, and with no other reference points, he utilized the previously established survey stationing.
Thereafter, the WC made attempt to confuse things by establishment of Station "A" as well as Station "C".
However, Mr. West, being a true surveyor, made all reference off of the known survey stationing and Station "A" came to mean nothing of relevance.
It did however make many persons think that the WC had drawn in the downward angle of fire for the first shot on their survey plat, as the reduced Warren Commission exibits make it appear that this is the case.
When, in reality, the downward angle on the WC Plat is the downward angle down to Station "A".------Not to any proposed bullet impact location which purportedly struck JFK.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 20, 2011, 06:24:45 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 570
|
Although you most probably will not understand it: (it was explained long ago on the Education Forum)
Station "A" is a point marked on Elm St. by the Warren Commission, which is just as the Presidential Limousine completed the turn in front on the TSDB.
This location was not developed until after Shaneyflet had already had Mr. West establish positions for frames of the Zapruder film, in which Mr. West utilized as reference the known survey stationing along Elm St. that had been established during the SS assassinatiion of December 1963. (which is also the same stationing utilized during the FBI assassination re-enactment of 2/7/64).
Mr. West surveyed in several frames of the Z-film as identificed by Shaneyfelt, and with no other reference points, he utilized the previously established survey stationing.
Thereafter, the WC made attempt to confuse things by establishment of Station "A" as well as Station "C".
However, Mr. West, being a true surveyor, made all reference off of the known survey stationing and Station "A" came to mean nothing of relevance.
It did however make many persons think that the WC had drawn in the downward angle of fire for the first shot on their survey plat, as the reduced Warren Commission exibits make it appear that this is the case.
When, in reality, the downward angle on the WC Plat is the downward angle down to Station "A".------Not to any proposed bullet impact location which purportedly struck JFK.
None of this explains why the Zap film shows that in no way could a head shot happen at Z350. Unless what we see on film is fake. Right? How does this theory not boil down to that Tom? How does the SS and the WC's apparent inept ability at surveying and collaborating amongst themselves about the task at hand change what is seen on film? If there were 2 head shots then all the medical evidence is a fraud also..right?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 20, 2011, 06:38:04 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2201
|
None of this explains why the Zap film shows that in no way could a head shot happen at Z350. Unless what we see on film is fake. Right? How does this theory not boil down to that Tom? How does the SS and the WC's apparent inept ability at surveying and collaborating amongst themselves about the task at hand change what is seen on film? If there were 2 head shots then all the medical evidence is a fraud also..right?
How do you reconcile the medical evidence that documented a 6 mm by 15 mm elliptical scalp wound that placed the bullet entering on a course of 2.3 unit toward the top for one unit directly into the head with the Zapruder film and the head shot eyewitnesses that did not place President Kennedy face down when fatally shot? Obviously some of the evidence is lying. Herbert
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 20, 2011, 07:27:16 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 570
|
...entering on a course of 2.3 unit toward the top for one unit directly into the head ...
Herbert
This is where you lost me Herb...
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 20, 2011, 07:31:37 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 570
|
Ken Rahn's drawing is not intended to be accurate. It is only diagrammatic to show which fragments went where.
Since there are no photos of Connally legs when he was shot, I was was using it as a diagrammatic as well, to show where Connallys legs may have been positioned. Eat your heart out Ken Rahn.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 20, 2011, 11:37:09 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2201
|
This is where you lost me Herb...
The head shot was tangential. This means that the bullet did not go straight into the head. Instead it tunneled along a shallow path with a slope of 2.3 unit toward the top for one unit directly into the head. Herbert
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 21, 2011, 11:09:15 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 623
|
Mike, have you noticed the amazing flexibility of the SBT? When the HSCA placed it at 190, they found out that the angles match perfectly!!And the WC discovered that at 210, the angles match perfectly!
And now the nutters are telling us that the shot was at 224, and the angles match perfectly!Anyone who made it through 7th grade geometry, knows the problem with this. The shot was actually fired at 223 Mike, and the angles to the alleged SN, don't match perfectly at all. The angle in the X axis is too sharp, as is the vertical angle. The only way that shot could have come from Oswald is if the bullet was diverted as it passed through JFK. But the biggest problem with the SBT is that for the bullet to have passed through both men would have required a high powered rifle. But no one heard the shot at 223, not even Connally. That's why the overwhelming majority of witnesses only heard one early shot, and why no one was startled by any of the shots prior to frame 285. Had Oswald fired the early shots, the people in the limo and in that vicinity would have been exposed to a sound level of 130 decibels - 16 times the level of 90 decibels which is where involuntary startle reactions will occur. They would have reacted as they did following 285, <![CDATA[As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
<a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=register">Register</a> or <a href="http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=login">Login</a>]]> The question of whether one bullet passed through both men is really not very important. What is infinitely more important is that Oswald could not have fired any of the early shots.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 21, 2011, 10:15:16 PM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 317
|
Iam confused.  ......didn"t one of the autopsy docters state that they could feel where the back wound ended end when they examined it ????......or was that just added by Hollywood ?
-------------------------
-------------------------
" What is past is prologue "
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
January 03, 2012, 09:13:47 PM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 305
|
"Failure to understand the evidence has no bearing on the validity of that evidence.
As a general rule, it merely means that one does not understand the evidence."
Tom Purvis
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
|
