JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Reasonable Doubts?
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Andrew Mason on June 14, 2026, 08:54:05 PM ---Ok. So in what non-Newtonian universe does an object impact something hard, not penetrate it, and continue around it rather than deflecting away from it?
--- End quote ---
I love strawman arguments, When did I say the bullet didn't deflect?
Royell Storing:
--- Quote from: John Corbett on June 14, 2026, 05:41:52 PM ---The Haag team used sophisticated experiments to show that a Carcano bullet will tumble when exiting soft tissue. You can ignore that if you choose but that doesn't change the fact.
Landis' statement is highly dubious given that there is no record of him saying that during the first six decades following the assassination. Picking up such an important piece of evidence and then just casually setting it down would have been an incredibly stupid thing for him to have done. This screams "false memory" which is a documented phenomenon
--- End quote ---
Knott Lab put the SBT to bed with FORENSIC SCIENCE that is routinely admitted in courts across this country. "Hagg team" and "experiments"? :D
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Benjamin Cole on June 07, 2026, 03:44:10 AM ---[...]
--- End quote ---
There are oodles and gobs of doubts, but there are no rational doubts for the simple reason that they all have plausible explanations.
To think otherwise is to accept the ludicrous idea that oodles and gobs of evil, evil, bad guys planned the assassination, "patsied" the "patsy," planted the evidence, did the shooting, pulled off the getaway, and are STILL covering it all up after 60-plus years.
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: John Corbett on June 14, 2026, 05:26:03 PM ---Or a bullet that had tumbled 180 degrees.
--- End quote ---
:D :D
Royell has hit the nail on the head about your Looney Tunes grasp of reality.
You are clearly unaware that you are suggesting the bullet tumbled 180 degrees, straightened up while it passed through his jacket, then resumed a-tumbling.
It is physically impossible for a bullet rotating at such an incredible speed to make such a small hole in his jacket.
In your cartoonish view of the world the bullet exits JBC's chest backwards.
It must then tumble a further 360 degrees in order to enter his wrist (and leg) backwards.
The distance it has to travel is around 12 inches/1 foot.
Let's say the bullet exiting Connally's chest is travelling around 1000 feet per second [Sturdivan estimated "somewhere between 1,100 and 1,300 feet per second, roughly."]
This means the bullet is spinning 1000 times per second!!!
1] Where does this incredible rotational energy come from?
2] How can a 3 cm object spinning 1000 times per second leave such a small hole?
3] What nonsense are you going to come up with next?
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Royell Storing on June 14, 2026, 10:02:57 PM --- Knott Lab put the SBT to bed with FORENSIC SCIENCE that is routinely admitted in courts across this country. "Hagg team" and "experiments"? :D
--- End quote ---
Whether it comes from Knott Laboratory or you average CT, every time I see somebody saying the SBT is an impossibility, I almost never see an explanation of why it is impossible. It's as if the CTs think it suffices to say it's impossible. I tried to google Knott Laboratory's explanation and this is all I could find:
“The shooting position, bullet exit point on President Kennedy, and entry point on Governor Connally should all be reasonably in line. When drawing this line from the sixth floor perch of the Texas Book Depository to the positions of the two men and their entry/exit points, we found a significant angle difference. This case is ongoing, but evidence strongly suggests there is more to the story in this historic event. Modern science refutes the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.”
It seems to me if they really did a detailed analysis on par with what Dale Myers has done, they should have been able to come up with something a little better than the wounds didn't line up. Myers computer animation showed the wounds lining up perfectly. In the later 1980s another company, Failure Analysis using less sophisticated technology than what would become available in the coming decades. also showed the wounds line up.
Knott Laboratory's work was paid for by dedicated CT John Orr. Could it be they had a vested interrest in coming up with the conclusion they did? Just asking.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version