Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The First Shot  (Read 122087 times)

Offline John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #128 on: October 23, 2020, 03:32:02 AM »
Advertisement
I have read it John but I don't know what you're talking about. As usual.
The chances are, judging by your past record, that this is going to be a massive waste of time. More irrelevance.
So, if you know how to, cut and paste what you're talking about and explain, without any cryptic remarks, how this relates to the timing of the first shot.
The chances of you being able to do this are minimal but I would love to be surprised.
More ad hominem.
In lieu of answers.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #128 on: October 23, 2020, 03:32:02 AM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #129 on: October 23, 2020, 02:12:36 PM »
More ad hominem.
In lieu of answers.

As I expected, you've got nothing. Another worthless contribution. Another waste of time.

"The misdirection and obfuscation created by the WC in regards to the first shot had the purpose of saving John Connally's political future. If the public knew that Connaly was aware by Z223 that the President had been hit (Z207), and did nothing but burrow himself into the jump seats, Connally's persona - 6'4" Tough Guy Texan - would have been shattered. At the end of his WC testimony, he apologizes for his inaction, after lying profusely about ..everything. Please read Connally's testimony, if you haven't already. Thx."

You don't seem to realise that you're just making this stuff up. Worse than that, it doesn't make any sense. The only testable thing is your comment about Connally's WC testimony, something you've mentioned before, you seem to put great importance on it as if it explains something. I've read the testimony and I don't know what you're talking about (which has become a familiar feeling).
I've asked you to explain what you mean but you won't.
Why can't you explain what you mean?
Why don't you contribute?
Why don't you critique the arguments I've presented in this thread rather than make cryptic, meaningless, snide comments?
If you disagree with one of my arguments why don't you present a counter-argument?
You've got nothing and your contribution is worthless. This may seem harsh but it is accurate.

Offline John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #130 on: October 23, 2020, 04:20:25 PM »
As I expected, you've got nothing. Another worthless contribution. Another waste of time.

"The misdirection and obfuscation created by the WC in regards to the first shot had the purpose of saving John Connally's political future. If the public knew that Connaly was aware by Z223 that the President had been hit (Z207), and did nothing but burrow himself into the jump seats, Connally's persona - 6'4" Tough Guy Texan - would have been shattered. At the end of his WC testimony, he apologizes for his inaction, after lying profusely about ..everything. Please read Connally's testimony, if you haven't already. Thx."

You don't seem to realise that you're just making this stuff up. Worse than that, it doesn't make any sense. The only testable thing is your comment about Connally's WC testimony, something you've mentioned before, you seem to put great importance on it as if it explains something. I've read the testimony and I don't know what you're talking about (which has become a familiar feeling).
I've asked you to explain what you mean but you won't.
Why can't you explain what you mean?
Why don't you contribute?
Why don't you critique the arguments I've presented in this thread rather than make cryptic, meaningless, snide comments?
If you disagree with one of my arguments why don't you present a counter-argument?
You've got nothing and your contribution is worthless. This may seem harsh but it is accurate.
Z207. First hit. SS, FBI, Time-Life surveys.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #130 on: October 23, 2020, 04:20:25 PM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #131 on: October 23, 2020, 04:40:11 PM »
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?

Offline John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #132 on: October 24, 2020, 06:52:46 PM »
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. :)

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #132 on: October 24, 2020, 06:52:46 PM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #133 on: October 24, 2020, 08:13:58 PM »
You don't know what goes on behind the sign.

I totally agree

Quote
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.

Quote
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?

Quote
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.

Offline John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #134 on: October 27, 2020, 11:03:33 PM »
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?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The First Shot
« Reply #134 on: October 27, 2020, 11:03:33 PM »


Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3038
Re: The First Shot
« Reply #135 on: October 27, 2020, 11:21:16 PM »
And it's my fault you are clueless?

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