JFK's Head Snap and the Implausible Jet-Effect and Neurospasm Theories

[Tim Nickerson]

One, you realize that Milicent Cranor says the neuromuscular-reaction theory is ridiculous, right?

Two, the response times you're citing are auditory startle reflex times, not muscle response times to the impact of a bullet. There's no damage to any tissue from an auditory stimulus, unlike when you have a bullet strike and damage a skull.

I don't care what Milicent Cranor says.

We are talking about involuntary response times. The involuntary reaction is a nerve response The cause of the nerve response is irrelevant.

[John Mytton]

The head moved forward between frames Z312 and Z313 in 1967. And it still moves forward today..

Thanks Jerry, of course Kennedy's head moves forwards and the same event was captured by Nix from the other side of Dealey Plaza and both films explicitly show the same expulsion of matter moving forward and away from Oswald's rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD.


Credit Chris Davidson

Some Autopsy photos were taken in stereo pairs and by using computer power undreamed of in the 60's and 70's we can stitch the thousands of pixels in the two images together to create a rotating morph which visually demonstrates that they share the exact same depth mapped details and conclusively proves their authenticity, and that's in addition to the detailed HSCA's photo analysis.
The following GIF shows only a single bullet hole and no large gaping wound on the rear of Kennedy's head.



The wound on the side of Kennedy's head in the autopsy photos is reinforced by the authentic Zapruder film.



And also by a stack of eyewitnesses and ALL the physical evidence.



Btw have you noticed Griffith in the photo section made a thread which he thinks shows impossible movements in the Zapruder film and therefore it must be altered, yet here he and his "experts" rely on precise measurements in the very film Griffith believes is faked? You can't make this stuff up, but it is hilarious.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

More proof of a shot from behind is the pieces of brain/skull from Kennedy's head that is violently blasted out the front and can be seen in later Limo photos.





JohnM

[Dan O'meara]

An example of the speed of a neuromuscular reflex (not reaction) is highlighted in the below animation. Focus on Kennedy's right hand, he is shot through in Z224 and by Z225 his hand is beginning to clench shut. By Z226 his hand has snapped shut into a fist.

[Michael T. Griffith]

The most important evidence we have is video of an animal showing the neuromuscular spasm. We only have the one video, because it’s the only video I know that shows an animal being shot by a rifle bullet through the head.

If you’re going to get me to listen to an expert, that expert had better know the best pieces of evidence that both sides have. He better know all about the best piece of evidence that our side has. He doesn’t have to accept it, but he damm well better know about it. Otherwise, I’m not listening.

I don’t want you to decide what evidence is relevant or not. I want the “expert” to decide. And to hear the “expert’s” reasons on why they feel this evidence is relevant or not.

And as far as that not being relevant, the U. S. Army took film of, as memory serves me, 10,000 goats (who were drugged unconscious) being shot in various parts of the body. This was not done because some general in the Pentagon believed that the wars of the future were going to be fought by goats. These tests were commissioned to get insight into what happens at the moment a human soldier was wounded. It might give insight on how to better treat the wounded. Or develop better bullets. Somebody thought these tests were relevant.

The army figured accurately that animals can be used for this purpose. Afterall, the military had lots of experience, not in World War II but in previous wars, were animals, mostly horses, were exposed to enemy fire and observed that the effects of bullets on animals did not seem to be vastly different than the effects on humans.

Perhaps humans and animals would react greatly differently to rifle bullets to the head but, up until 1963, no one thought so.

Questions:
Can you quote an expert who before 1963 said that humans and animals would react differently to a rifle bullet through the brain or was this an argument first developed after 1963 to bolster certain arguments on the Kennedy assassination?

Was this something that was well known before then or was it something that was first “discovered” afterwards.

Yeah. I have the same problem. A lot of us LNers have that. Trusting what my eyes tell me and not what you or Art Snyder or Thompson tell me. I’ll have to get my eyes checked out by an optometrist.

The head seemed quite still from z304 up through z312, according to Hoffman’s careful measurements. I don’t see why these “distortions” would kick in right at z313, and cause JFK’s head to appear to move forward, while causing Jackie’s head to appear to stay still, as did JFK’s up until z313.

Does Snyder explain that?

No, you wouldn’t. You hope that there is no 2.3-inch forward movement, indicating a shot from the rear. You would wish the film would show itself to be a fake in some other way, any other way than that. That is why you argue there is no 2.3-inch forward movement.

Not unless he explains why this “distorted-apparent” movement is not there during z304-z312, but only kicks in at z313.

Not unless he explains why this “distorted-apparent” movement only effect JFK’s head but not Jackie’s?

You want me to except that Dr. Thompson’s arguments that the forward movement is not real. But to not accept his arguments that the film is real.

If Thompson can’t tell that the Zapruder film is an obvious fake, why are you interested on his opinion on if the head appears to move forward at z313? I would have thought that, for that reason alone, you wouldn’t be interested in what else Thompson thought of the film.

But I have some questions for you that don’t require any research. You can answer them within 5 minutes just using reasoning.

Questions:

Why should Dr. Chambers, Dr. Mantik and you claim that the fast-neuromuscular spasm in a human has been established as being impossible, or highly unlikely, when this can only be established as impossible or unlikely by running tests on human subjects?

Wouldn’t one have to run these experiments first, before making these claims?

If these tests cannot be run, shouldn’t we withhold judgment?

Or is it more scientific to just guess?

You have once again responded with a long reply that does not lay a finger on any of the facts that refute the neuromuscular-reaction theory. You did not address a single fact that Martin Hay raised, and you are claiming, without any credible evidence, that Dr. Chambers is simply wrong about human neuromuscular reaction times.

Just exactly who are your neuroscientists/physicists who say the neuromuscular-reaction theory is plausible? I can name numerous such scholars who say the theory is implausible/bizarre/nonsensical, including Dr. Zacharko, Dr. Mantik, Dr. Riley, Dr. Chambers, and Dr. Snyder.

Even Dr. Luis Alvarez, who falsified his ballistics tests data and did all he could to avoid the obvious conclusion that the backward head movement was caused by a frontal shot--even he did not buy the idea that a bullet to JFK's head could have caused a neuromuscular reaction. Instead, Alvarez relied on the jet-effect theory to explain the backward head movement--and, as we've seen, Alvarez's jet-effect theory has been demolished.

[Joe Elliott]

You have once again responded with a long reply that does not lay a finger on any of the facts that refute the neuromuscular-reaction theory. You did not address a single fact that Martin Hay raised, and you are claiming, without any credible evidence, that Dr. Chambers is simply wrong about human neuromuscular reaction times.

Just exactly who are your neuroscientists/physicists who say the neuromuscular-reaction theory is plausible? I can name numerous such scholars who say the theory is implausible/bizarre/nonsensical, including Dr. Zacharko, Dr. Mantik, Dr. Riley, Dr. Chambers, and Dr. Snyder.

No. I didn’t say Dr. Chambers is simply wrong about normal human reaction times. I’m saying he is wrong about a neuromuscular spasm reaction time, which we can observe in the goat.


Which of your fine experts:

•   Explains why a neuromuscular spasm would happen in a goat but not in a human. And explains why that is.

Or:

•   Explains why a neuromuscular spasm in a goat would commence after about 40 milliseconds, but in a human, it would take much longer.

Since I am used to you providing no answers, I will provide your answer for you:

None.


Which physicists would say the neuromuscular spasm hypothesis is true?

Asking a physicist is illogical because they don’t deal with biology.

Which neuroscientists say the neuromuscular spasm for a human hypothesis is true?

None that I know of. Because no proper scientist will give an opinion on something that has not been tested yet. They would have to observe a film of a person being shot through the brain to give an opinion. If they are a proper medical doctor. Medical doctors don’t like to give opinions unless their opinion can be backed by evident. Since an experiment of shooting a person through the brain with a rifle bullet is not allowed, its impossible to get an opinion either way, from a proper medical doctor.

100 trillion neutrinos pass through a human body every second. What would happen to a human a billion, trillion neutrinos were to pass through a human brain each second over the course of an entire year. A proper medical doctor should not give an opinion.

How many neuroscientists do you have? One. Dr. Zacharko. A proper scientist would first ask “What evidence, like films of humans do we have?”. The answer, none, and impossible to get this evidence. So, the second question such a scientist should ask “What evidence, like films of animals, do we have?”. And would look at it an evaluate it. He may decide the support is good enough to tentatively say that this hypothesis is plausible. Or might equally likely prefer to withhold any opinion, since no proper test with a human can be run.

You have one neuroscientist, who does not know anything about the basic evidence of this case. Who never checked to see what films of animals being shot were available. For all he knew, you could have been keeping a film of a human being shot through the brain.

So, on the basis of one neuroscientist, who never bothered to learn the most basic facts of this case, I should conclude the neuromuscular spasm is implausible.

I need more than that. I need the neuroscientist to tell me he is aware of what happens when an animal, like a goat is shot through the brain. He needs to tell me why a neuromuscular spasm would happen in a goat but not in a human. Or he needs to tell that a neuromuscular spasm would happen in both a goat and a human, but it would start super-fast in a goat, in 40 milliseconds, but would take much longer in a human. And why he believes this to be true.

No expert of yours has addressed any of my major questions. I won’t accept their opinions until one of them does. And it better not be the opinion of a non-doctor of medicine.


I have answered your questions.


Once again, I will present to you a few questions that you dare not answer, since any answer will not look foolish or destroy your arguments. None of these questions require any research:

Why should Dr. Chambers, Dr. Mantik and you claim that the fast-neuromuscular spasm in a human has been established as being impossible, or highly unlikely, when this can only be established as impossible or unlikely by running tests on human subjects?

Wouldn’t one have to run these experiments first, before making these claims?

If these tests cannot be run, shouldn’t we withhold judgment?

Or is it more scientific to just guess?

[Dan O'meara]

Hi Joe,

I'm trying to find the scientific data on the goat reflex time but can't, can you tell me where to find it. Thanks