The JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate

Acoustic Evidence

<< < (2/18) > >>

John Corbett:

--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 07, 2026, 02:42:54 PM ---The sources I cite in my reply refute every single criticism presented in the article you cite, Dale Myers' article. You'd know this if you'd bothered to read the links I provided. If you had just read my article on the acoustical evidence, you'd know that Myers' article is woefully inadequate and misleading.
--- End quote ---

They disagree with Myers. They don't refute Myers. Myers got it right. Your sources got it wrong. Not surprising you gravitated toward them.
--- Quote ---
And for the benefit of other readers, be advised that Dale Myers' research has been proven to be erroneous, if not fraudulent. As just one example, to make his ridiculous SBT trajectory analysis work, Myers falsely assumes that Connally's back wound was 3.0 cm wide, when in fact it was only 1.5 cm wide, the same width as JFK's rear head entry wound.
--- End quote ---

MTG has a very strange idea of what constitutes proof. Repeating the same myths over and over again is not proof.
--- Quote ---
For a good critique of some of the problems with Myers' bogus research, see the uber-cautious Pat Speer's demotion of Myers' SBT nonsense:

https://www.patspeer.com/chapter12canimania
--- Quote ---
Not at all surprising that one knucklehead would cite another knucklehead.
--- Quote ---
Here is just a little bit of what Speers says about Myer's SBT simulation:

. . . his deception regarding the single-bullet theory is simply inexcusable. He would have to know that when people see computer simulations they believe the proportions are consistent from angle to angle—otherwise it’s just a cartoon. By changing the body shape of Kennedy to accommodate the bullet trajectory through his body, and by shrinking Connally 20% or more to accommodate the bullet trajectory in the car, Myers moved on up to the high rent neighborhood of Thomas Canning: deliberate deceptionville.
--- End quote ---

A claim without proof.
--- Quote ---
For a critique of Myers' error-riddled hatchet job on the Tippit shooting, see my article "Did Oswald Shoot Tippit?" 
--- End quote ---

If your critique is on par with all the other stuff I've read from you over the past 35 years, it's not worth the time it would take to read it.
--- Quote ---
It says much that you would rely on someone like Myers to get your information on the acoustical evidence. Have you even read the studies that the BBN and Queen's College acoustical scientists submitted to the HSCA on the acoustical evidence?

Myers obviously hasn't read them, because he doesn't say a word about any of the evidences they present, such as the windshield-distortion correlations, the timing-movement correlations, and the presence of N-waves and their echoes in the correct order and timing. Nor does Myers say a word about the NRC/NAS panel's admissions about the timing-movement correlations and their own finding of a high probability (77.7%) that the 144.9 impulse pattern is gunfire from the grassy knoll.

--- End quote ---

A lot of technobabble that proves nothing. There was no shooter on the GK. Anyone who believes that has been hoodwinked by junk science. The Dictabelt recording in question wasn't even made during the shooting. The acoustics "evidence" is all the CTs have going for them and they are going to cling to it no matter how much it has been debunked.
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---

Michael T. Griffith:

--- Quote from: Steve Barber on September 08, 2026, 01:02:08 AM ---Hello Mr. Sanders.

I hope to try to give you an understanding of Thompson's research for his acoustics chapter within the following. Thompson bases his conclusions of the acoustics on the careless research by Donald Thomas (R.I.P.), whom you no doubt read about in Thompson's book. 

I am sure that you're now familiar with a Don Thomas after reading the acoustics chapter in "Last second in Dallas".  It is his "analysis" of the acoustics and the 2 channels made by the Dallas police department 11/22/1963, channel 1, the Dictabelt recording and channel 2, the grey audograph disc.  Thomas, like everyone, analyzed the recordings after they were transferred onto magnetic tape in 1964 by Dallas police communications supervisor James C. Bowles.

I am attaching a piece that I wrote in 2007-part of what was published in Vincent Bugliosi' Reclaimng History book, and also a revised edition also in 2007, on the Dale Myers website titled "Secrets of a Homicide", regarding Don Thomas' attack on Vince Bugliosi and myself , claiming that we were both "Bamboozled". Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am attaching the link to my article, below.  The article will explain why Don Thomas' theory holds no water, based upon a transmission he heard on channel one 3 seconds before the so called first "gunshot" recorded on the Dictabelt, which I mentioned above

I hope this helps you in some way to get a better understanding the conclusions reached by Thompson in his book, and how they are completely wrong regarding the "gunshot evidence". 

https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
--- End quote ---

Mr. Sanders, I would actually encourage you to read the sources that Steve Barber cites, in addition to reading the sources that I've cited. If you do, you will see that Barber's sources do not even address the main points of evidence that support the findings of the HSCA's acoustical scientists.

One of the most frequently cited attacks on Dr. Thompson's 100-plus-page presentation on the acoustical evidence in his book Last Second in Dallas is a 14-page critique written by Louis Girdler, writing under the pseudonym "Premier Kissov." If you read it, you'll notice that Girdler says absolutely nothing about the new BBN research (such as Dr. Richard Mullen's PCC testing of the Decker transmission, which proves it is an overdub and not crosstalk), and says nothing about the impossible recording-pause theory, which was the crucial assumption of the debunked Decker-crosstalk argument ("'Your Lying Eyes'--Josiah Thompson's Lonely Labrinth: A Critical Review of 'Last Second in Dallas,'" pp. 27-40, published on the Kennedy Assassination Home Page, a pro-Warren Commission website).

Instead, Girdler simply rehashes some of the arguments made (1) by the NRC/NAS panel, (2) by Anthony Pellicano (who actually accidentally provided strong evidence against the recording-pause theory and provided evidence that the bell sound on the dictabelt does not prove it was not recorded in Dealey Plaza during the shooting), (3) by the FBI's Technical Services Division (who employed no acoustical scientists and proved they didn't even understand how N-waves can be identified in audio recordings), (4) by some Sonalyst analysts (who didn't even understand how AGC works), and (5) by amateurs such as Jim Bowles and Michael O'Dell.

The foundational assumption of the argument that the Decker transmission proved the impulse patterns on the dictablet were recorded after the assassination was the specious (and now debunked) assumption that Channel 2 on the dictabelt stopped recording for 31 to 60 seconds.

As several scientists pointed out years ago, for this recording-pause theory to even be theoretically possible, there would have to be an offset in the dispatcher time notations on the dictabelt after that point, but there is none. The 12:35 and 12:36 time notations occur exactly five and six minutes respectively after the 12:30 time notation. The NRC/NAS failed to explain this fact, as did Linsker, Garwin, Chernoff, Horowitz, and Ramsey in their 2005 rebuttal to Dr. Don Thomas's 2001 article on the acoustical evidence.

You would think that any critical review of Thompson's book would deal with the historic new BBN research on the acoustical evidence, especially the two appendices written by Dr. Barger and Dr. Mullen, but Girdler says nothing about any of this. Girdler also says nothing about the NRC/NAS panel's admissions about the high probabilities of the timing-movement correlations and the grassy knoll shot, nor about the windshield-distortion correlations.

John Corbett:
"Premier Kissov."? <chuckle> Of Dr. Strangelove fame? <chuckle>

Was he assisted by Boris and Natasha Badanov?

Royell Storing:

  Thompson is now 91 yrs old. He wrote his final book 5 yrs ago. Do the math. The man is and has been incapable of coherently defending his long held JFK Assassination positions for a while now. He more than merits being left alone at this point in his life.

Steve Barber:

--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 08, 2026, 02:56:42 PM ---Mr. Sanders, I would actually encourage you to read the sources that Steve Barber cites, in addition to reading the sources that I've cited. If you do, you will see that Barber's sources do not even address the main points of evidence that support the findings of the HSCA's acoustical scientists.

One of the most frequently cited attacks on Dr. Thompson's 100-plus-page presentation on the acoustical evidence in his book Last Second in Dallas is a 14-page critique written by Louis Girdler, writing under the pseudonym "Premier Kissov." If you read it, you'll notice that Girdler says absolutely nothing about the new BBN research (such as Dr. Richard Mullen's PCC testing of the Decker transmission, which proves it is an overdub and not crosstalk), and says nothing about the impossible recording-pause theory, which was the crucial assumption of the debunked Decker-crosstalk argument ("'Your Lying Eyes'--Josiah Thompson's Lonely Labrinth: A Critical Review of 'Last Second in Dallas,'" pp. 27-40, published on the Kennedy Assassination Home Page, a pro-Warren Commission website).

Instead, Girdler simply rehashes some of the arguments made (1) by the NRC/NAS panel, (2) by Anthony Pellicano (who actually accidentally provided strong evidence against the recording-pause theory and provided evidence that the bell sound on the dictabelt does not prove it was not recorded in Dealey Plaza during the shooting), (3) by the FBI's Technical Services Division (who employed no acoustical scientists and proved they didn't even understand how N-waves can be identified in audio recordings), (4) by some Sonalyst analysts (who didn't even understand how AGC works), and (5) by amateurs such as Jim Bowles and Michael O'Dell.

The foundational assumption of the argument that the Decker transmission proved the impulse patterns on the dictablet were recorded after the assassination was the specious (and now debunked) assumption that Channel 2 on the dictabelt stopped recording for 31 to 60 seconds.

As several scientists pointed out years ago, for this recording-pause theory to even be theoretically possible, there would have to be an offset in the dispatcher time notations on the dictabelt after that point, but there is none. The 12:35 and 12:36 time notations occur exactly five and six minutes respectively after the 12:30 time notation. The NRC/NAS failed to explain this fact, as did Linsker, Garwin, Chernoff, Horowitz, and Ramsey in their 2005 rebuttal to Dr. Don Thomas's 2001 article on the acoustical evidence.

You would think that any critical review of Thompson's book would deal with the historic new BBN research on the acoustical evidence, especially the two appendices written by Dr. Barger and Dr. Mullen, but Girdler says nothing about any of this. Girdler also says nothing about the NRC/NAS panel's admissions about the high probabilities of the timing-movement correlations and the grassy knoll shot, nor about the windshield-distortion correlations.

--- End quote ---

 Mr. Sanders,

 In response to what M. Griffith is saying, I am merely pointing out to you one simple fact regarding your question about the contents in the acoustics chapter in Tink Thompson's book:  The fact that there are heterodyne tones surrounding the transmission about 3 seconds before the first  "shot" sound that was said to have been recorded on the Dictabelt, proves that the speech on the Dictabelt that Don Thomas claims is crosstalk is not and can not be crosstalk for the reasons I stated in my article.  I don't have to get into a lot of mumbo-jumbo to try to prove my point, as it is a fact that disproves the conclusions by Don Thomas.

 Here is the link to my appearance during an interview with Fred Litwin earlier this year on his YouTube "On The Trail of Delusion" .  Move to 38:40 into the video where I am discussing-and Fred is playing-the two separate recordings, comparing the channel 1 transmission which Thomas claimed contains "crosstalk" and the channel two transmission itself, made by police officer N.T. Fisher.

 //www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rdad0vCFE

 I hope this will be of some help .

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page