Newsweek: A new study has debunked a long-held JFK assassination conspiracy theo

[Walt Cakebread]

Why did you post this when I said the same thing?
"Anybody who believes this violation of the laws of physics, needs the help of a middle school student or ..... a psychiatrist"

Sorry Ray.....I didn't mean to offend you....I meant to reinforce what you said, but using different words.

I believe that you'll agree that elementary physics rules out any theory that a bullet from the rear blew out the back of JFK's head.

[Ray Mitcham]

Sorry Ray.....I didn't mean to offend you....I meant to reinforce what you said, but using different words.

I believe that you'll agree that elementary physics rules out any theory that a bullet from the rear blew out the back of JFK's head.

No problem, Walt. Just wondered.

[Jack Trojan]

A new study has debunked a long-held JFK assassination conspiracy theory
By Aristos Georgiou On 4/26/18 at 10:33 AM

...

One long-held and famous conspiracy theory holds that JFK was shot by a second gunman from a grassy knoll. While the flaws of this theory have already been pointed out by some, a new study published in the journal Heliyon may finally put the idea to rest.

Supporters of this theory tend to use the infamous Zapruder film?which captured the killing?to bolster their claim, pointing to the fact that Kennedy's head moves in a backward and leftward motion after the bullet's impact, apparent proof that he was shot from the front as well as from behind (by Oswald).

But new analysis of the Zapruder footage conducted by Nicholas Nalli from I.M. Systems Group shows that JFK?s reactions after being shot are physically consistent with the results of the official autopsy findings: that he was killed by a gunshot to the back of the head, fired from a high-energy Carcano rifle (the one used by Oswald) located in the vicinity of the Texas School Book Depository.

Full article: http://www.newsweek.com/jfk-assassination-conspiracy-theory-debunked-new-gunshot-study-902292

So, I guess Oswald must have done it after all. This article is a waste of time. We have all examined the Z film frame by frame from Z313 on and no one can claim anything definitive based on JFK's motion after the head shot(s). No peer review would conclude this was a slam dunk study debunking a 2nd gunman. There were so many other factors not considered in this study that the author was either incompetent or worse.

Multiple shots at the Turkey-shoot point included a frangible bullet which made JFK's head do exactly what it did based on the blow-out at the back and right side of his head. Hell, JFK's head exploded from a FMJ bullet! The pristine Magic Bullet is dubious.

Here's an overhead of how the head-shot bullet must have entered the back of JFK's head and out his right temple if it came from the TSBD. Also shown is frame Z312 where the bullet is about to explode in JFK's head. Note how Zapruder would not have filmed any of JFK's profile if the bullet exited his right temple. Yet he did?



So how does this article debunk any of this?

[Matt Grantham]

 Quite the article First it stats he based his conclusions with the autopsy Then later it is about physics. Physics equations are not related to autopsy reports Where is the physics?

[Joe Elliott]

 blew the back of his head off.

Anybody who believes this violation of the laws of physics, needs the help of a middle school student or ..... a psychiatrist

Like Nobel Prize winner in Physics, Dr. Luis Walter Alvarez? I assume you would include him in the group that needed the help of a middle school student?



I believe that over 90% of the people who assert that a shot from the back causing the movement of JFK?s head backwards would ?Violate the Laws of Physics?, never took a high school physics course.



The Newsweek article does not go into too many details, it seems Nicholas Nalli goes with the ?Jet Effect? Theory. While this theory was created by Dr. Alvarez, and does not, no matter what anyone tells you ?Violates the Laws of Physics?. However, it is not the best explanation of what happens because:

** It does not explain why JFK?s head did not start moving backwards within 5 to 10 milliseconds of the shot. Instead the backwards movement does not start until about 55 milliseconds after the shot.

** It does not explain why the momentum backwards builds up slowly. At first the head moves slowly backwards, so slowly that it does not reach the z312 position until between z315 and z316.


The best explanation is that the ?Jet Effect? had little or no effect. That the backwards movement was caused by a ?Neurological Spasm?.

As far as I know, no medical doctor, who has seen the 1947 army pictures of the goat being shot in the head, has argued against the ?Neurological Spasm? Theory. Or if one has done so, explain the movement of the goat in the film.

[Matt Grantham]

** It does not explain why JFK?s head did not start moving backwards within 5 to 10 milliseconds of the shot. Instead the backwards movement does not start until about 55 milliseconds after the shot.

** It does not explain why the momentum backwards builds up slowly. At first the head moves slowly backwards, so slowly that it does not reach the z312 position until between z315 and z316.


The best explanation is that the ?Jet Effect? had little or no effect. That the backwards movement was caused by a ?Neurological Spasm?.

As far as I know, no medical doctor, who has seen the 1947 army pictures of the goat being shot in the head, has argued against the ?Neurological Spasm? Theory. Or if one has done so, explain the movement of the goat in the film.

 So you are not actually arguing physics if you are arguing for a spasm

[Joe Elliott]

 So you are not actually arguing physics if you are arguing for a spasm

Correct. I am arguing biology, not physics.

That is not to say that physics is an impossible explanation for something like this. There are too many films of melons and even skulls being propelled backwards, toward the rifle. But none of them show this backwards motion starting 55 milliseconds after the bullet struck. None of them show the melon starting to move backwards slowly and then gradually build up speed over the next 200 milliseconds.

So, despite what many CTers say, who never took a high school course in physics, an object being propelled back toward the rifle would not be a ?Violation of the Laws of Physics?. But in the JFK case, it is not the true explanation.