The First Shot

[Dan O'meara]

Z207. First hit. SS, FBI, Time-Life surveys.

As argued elsewhere in this thread, the first genuine reaction by JFK to being hit by the first shot occurs around z225. This is roughly one whole second after your proposed first shot. I would argue that such a long reaction to being shot is completely unrealistic. A reflex reaction would be in the order of 100 milliseconds (approximately). You are proposing a reaction time many times longer than this (approximately 1000 milliseconds).
How can you justify such a long reaction time to being shot?

[John Tonkovich]

As argued elsewhere in this thread, the first genuine reaction by JFK to being hit by the first shot occurs around z225. This is roughly one whole second after your proposed first shot. I would argue that such a long reaction to being shot is completely unrealistic. A reflex reaction would be in the order of 100 milliseconds (approximately). You are proposing a reaction time many times longer than this (approximately 1000 milliseconds).
How can you justify such a long reaction time to being shot?

You don't know what goes on behind the sign.
Therefore, you cant posit Z225 as "first reaction:
Note I said "first hit" at Z207. 18 frames - about one full second - pass before JFK emerges from behind the sign.
For the record, you post that you are "just asking questions ", and then go with the WC solution. That was fast.

[Dan O'meara]

You don't know what goes on behind the sign.

I totally agree

Therefore, you cant posit Z225 as "first reaction:

I disagree with this.
I have made a detailed argument about the first reaction with reference to JFK's left hand and arm which are in the same position before and after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign, and an examination of the rapid 'hand snap' of JFK's right hand just after he emerges from behind the sign. From this I believe it is possible to determine JFK's first reaction to being hit.

Note I said "first hit" at Z207. 18 frames - about one full second - pass before JFK emerges from behind the sign.

Fair enough, you are saying first hit and not first shot (obviously I'm arguing that the first hit is from the first audible shot)
If my arguments about when JFK first reacts to being hit are acceptable it still leaves you with the problem of JFK not reacting to such a traumatic event for one whole second.
The point about not knowing what goes on behind the sign applies to you too. If you are arguing that JFK reacts to being shot but we can't see it, how do these 'hidden' reactions correspond to JFK's demeanour as he emerges from behind the sign?

For the record, you post that you are "just asking questions ", and then go with the WC solution. That was fast.

I don't know what this means.
As far as I'm concerned the WC is too incompetent to be just incompetent. If anything I propose is similar to the WC that's just coincidence. I'm not taking my lead from the WC in anyway.
I don't know what the "WC solution" you mention is and the phrase "That was fast" I find utterly baffling.
It's obviously meant to be some sort of criticism but not having a clue what you're talking about takes the sting out of it.

[John Tonkovich]

I totally agree

I disagree with this.
I have made a detailed argument about the first reaction with reference to JFK's left hand and arm which are in the same position before and after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign, and an examination of the rapid 'hand snap' of JFK's right hand just after he emerges from behind the sign. From this I believe it is possible to determine JFK's first reaction to being hit.

Fair enough, you are saying first hit and not first shot (obviously I'm arguing that the first hit is from the first audible shot)
If my arguments about when JFK first reacts to being hit are acceptable it still leaves you with the problem of JFK not reacting to such a traumatic event for one whole second.
The point about not knowing what goes on behind the sign applies to you too. If you are arguing that JFK reacts to being shot but we can't see it, how do these 'hidden' reactions correspond to JFK's demeanour as he emerges from behind the sign?

I don't know what this means.
As far as I'm concerned the WC is too incompetent to be just incompetent. If anything I propose is similar to the WC that's just coincidence. I'm not taking my lead from the WC in anyway.
I don't know what the "WC solution" you mention is and the phrase "That was fast" I find utterly baffling.
It's obviously meant to be some sort of criticism but not having a clue what you're talking about takes the sting out of it.

And it's my fault you are clueless?

[Dan O'meara]

And it's my fault you are clueless?

Go to the Nix Illusion thread to find out how clueless you are.

[John Tonkovich]

Go to the Nix Illusion thread to find out how clueless you are.

I don't take orders from you.
Now that we have that out of the way, I'll stay here.
I'll keep it simple.
You, Dan O'meara, have no idea what went on behind the sign.
You can only guess. Not know. Guess. A "guess" is proof of nothing.

[Dan O'meara]

I don't take orders from you.
Now that we have that out of the way, I'll stay here.
I'll keep it simple.
You, Dan O'meara, have no idea what went on behind the sign.
You can only guess. Not know. Guess. A "guess" is proof of nothing.

Three posts ago - THREE - you stated that I can't know what goes on behind the sign and I agreed!
Yet here you are ranting on about me making guesses about what's going on behind it.
You seem to have problems of some kind.
I was hoping to get some kind of debate going about an important issue - when the first shot occurred of the three audible shots the vast majority of ear-witnesses heard. Many researchers, yourself included, believe the first shot occurred before z223, it also has implications for the dictabelt findings.
Instead I got you and your incessant trolling.
I have presented argument after argument which lead me to the opinion that the first shot occurred at z223.
You have presented nothing to support your belief of a shot at z207 other than your wholesale, swallow-it-down, acceptance that the FBI knew when the first shot occurred.
You have not presented one grain of evidence to support this view.
And nor will you.

I'm not giving you orders about anything but I can't express how unwelcome your non-contribution is to both threads I've started recently.
I seem to hold some kind of fascination for you.

Why don't you contribute John?
Hold up your evidence for a first shot at z207 and see how it stacks up to what I've presented (I know that won't happen though as you it's not your style. It's a bit too 'upright')