Nobody who thinks Anthony Summers is a "scholar" is somebody who should be taken seriously.
Yikes, "is our children learning?" You really should learn to speak English at a high-school level before you try to question anyone's credibility.
If MTG considers somebody a scholar, it's a good bet that person is a bozo.
If you can't even speak English at a high-school level, it's a good bet you have no business passing judgment on who qualifies as a scholar.
No, I didn't bother to read through most of the thread. Why? Did you backpedal?
No, I documented the fact that FMJ bullets will never, ever shatter into dozens of tiny fragments after striking bone.
The bottom line is that you stated that "FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever fragment in this manner" as you were describing a specific manner in which the bullet which struck Kennedy in the head fragmented. I am telling you that what you are saying is simply not true.
Is this some kind of joke? You said this in response to my quoting of world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio's observation that if an x-ray shows dozens of tiny fragments, a "lead snowstorm," this rules out FMJ ammo, and that on the "rare" occasions when FMJ bullets do fragment after striking bone, the fragments will be "few" in number. Did you miss that? Let's read it again:
An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318, emphasis added)You should now understand (1) in the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments, and (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.
Full metal jacketed bullets can indeed fragment in ANY specific manner when traveling at full velocity and striking a skull.
Uh, no, they cannot. Go back and re-read DiMaio's statements quoted above. I'll wait. . . . Still waiting. . . . Okay, that's long enough. Are we clear now?
For your additional education, I quote Dr. Cyril Wecht, a famous forensic pathologist and a former president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences:
It is my experience, including bullets that are not as powerful and fully jacketed ammunition like this [the 6.5 mm Carcano bullet], that they do not explode into dozens of pieces. They may break into two or three fragments or pieces, but they don't just disintegrate like that. And so when you say it behaved much more like a soft or hollow-point or so on, I agree with you. I've been saying that for a long time. (Mortal Error, p. 231)I defy you to cite a single forensic source that says that FMJ bullets will ever shatter into dozens of tiny pieces after striking bone, regardless of their velocity. I'll save you some time: there aren't any such sources.
Never mind that your alleged FMJ bullet not only supposedly shattered into dozens of tiny fragments but also allegedly did this while supposedly "shearing off" a fragment on the outer table of the skull upon entry and while also supposedly depositing two isolated fragments at the opposite end of the skull. Never mind that. Just find me one forensic source that says an FMJ bullet will ever shatter into dozens of tiny fragments after striking skull bone. Again, I'll save you some time: no such sources exist.
"Full velocity"? What is that? There's no such thing as a "full-velocity" rifle or "full velocity" ammo. Is "full velocity" your evasive synonym for "high velocity," since I proved to you that the alleged murder weapon was not a high-velocity rifle? Because you seem to need things repeated, let's read once again what FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier told the WC's about the rifle's velocity:
Mr. EISENBERG. How does the recoil of this weapon compare with the recoil of the average military rifle?
Mr. FRAZIER. Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight. . . .
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges—the killing power of the rifles you have named?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much difference is there?
Mr. FRAZIER. The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity, . . . (3 H 414, emphasis added)Yet, a whole bunch of experts who have examined the JFK autopsy skull x-rays, including the Clark Panel, have concluded they show damage caused by ammo that was moving at a high velocity. The Clark Panel said, "These findings indicate that the back of the head was struck by a single bullet traveling at high velocity" (Clark Panel report, p. 8 ).
The Rockefeller Commission's medical panel concurred with the Clark Panel's conclusion about the velocity of the ammo that hit the head (see the medical panel's report in Rockefeller Commission Report, pp. 258-261). BTW, just FYI, the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel consisted of Drs. Werner Spitz, Fred Hodges, Alfred Olivier, and Richard Lindenberg, and LTC Robert R. McMeekin, chief of aerospace pathology at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.
Dr. Gerald McDonnel, one of the radiology experts consulted by the HSCA FPP, concluded that the bullet that hit the back of JFK's skull was "a low mass, high velocity projectile" (7 HSCA 218). Low-mass bullets range from 90 grains to 120 grains. Oswald's alleged bullets weighed 158.6 to 159 grains, far too heavy.
So you have your alleged lone gunman firing the wrong kind of rifle (a low-velocity rifle, not a high-velocity rifle), using the wrong kind of ammo (FMJ ammo), and using the wrong kind of ammo that was also too heavy (ammo that was at least 38.6 grains too heavy to qualify as low-mass ammo, or at least 31% heavier than the heaviest low-mass ammo). Trifecta!
