No. Where is the evidence of a shot from the GK?
The evidence are the 33 people (according to
John McAdams) testifying that they heard shots from the grassy knoll. According to your interpretation of witness testimony this means, that there was a shooter at the grassy knoll!
Experience and clinical trials show that witnesses are generally accurate in observing salient details of an event.
A salient detail is a detail that most witnesses of the event recalled. See: Loftus.
And the Warren Commission surely used multiple choice tests for their interrogations. You can't be serious, can you?
BTW, the book you quote actually supports my point of view on witness testimony, as it focusses on the fallability of such testimony. Quoting a part of the book and neglecting the rest is nothing else than quote mining!
Experts who provide opinions that do not fit with well corroborated witness accounts are invariably wrong. I can give you many examples.
No, it is indeed vice versa! Witness testimony is actually quite unreliable, I think the Wikipedia article on
eyewitness testimony is a good starting point for your own research on that topic.
Not really. He figured it out. He knew it was not the first shot and he knew that it was not the last shot. And he recalled hearing exactly three shots.
Really?
I would guess it was either the second or third. I wouldn?t say definitely on which one.
I believe that it was the second shot, so I heard the third shot afterwards.
That's not knowing to me, that's guessing!
Futhermore: Tague testified, that there was a fresh bullet mark on the curb.
About 12 to 15 feet right on the top of round of the curb, was the mark that very definitely was fresh, and I would say it was a mark of a bullet.This contradicts your hypothesis, that all bullets hit Kennedy and/or Connally. Why do you exclude this part of his testimony?
The problems occur when you fail to consider all the remaining possibilities or when you exclude something as impossible when it isn't.
Well, there is no evidence for your hypothesis of three shots that hit, but there is evidence for a shot that didn't hit. So your hypothesis seems quite impossible.
Who has excluded the impossible?
The Warren Commission (yes, they indeed got something right!).
I'm still waiting for a LNer to demonstrate the trajectory and body positions of JFK and Connally that makes it work.
And I am still waiting for a conspiracy buff to demonstrate that the single bullet is not possible.
Where is your evidence that this was even possible?
In contrast to conspiracy buffs, the "lone nutters" did experiments and proved, that the single bullet indeed was possible.
I can't prove it wasn't possible because that would be proving a negative. It's up to you to at least show that it was possible, so you can exclude the impossible, otherwise, you're stuck with improbable.
That's a very lousy attempt of shifting the burden of proof and actually wrong! You cannot prove, that something doesn't exist, but you can prove, that something didn't happen.
Example: I can prove easily, that the Las Vegas Knights didn't win the Stanley Cup in 2017, because they joined the NHL for the season 2017/18.
I could post frames of the fireball blasting out of JFK's right temple and the top right side of his head but I'm sure you have some obfuscation for it, so I won't bother.
It is new to me, that a fireball bursted out of Kennedy's head, I always thought it were brain tissue and blood.
So why did you think the magic bullet crashed thru bones and came out looking so pristine?
Which bones were hit by the bullet?
Go ahead and draw the red line on Z312 yourself. What angle do you get when you just clear the windshield, providing it did? My graphics weren't intended to be a photogrammetric analysis but don't let me stop you:
1) Using Google Maps, go to a satellite view of the overpass and measure the distance from the overpass to JFK's head at Z312.
2) Find out the height of the overpass at the point where the trajectory angle lines up with JFK's head orientation at Z312.
3) Assume the limo was tipped down 5 degrees on its path down Elm.
4) Use some geometry to see if the bullet cleared the windshield before striking JFK's head. (IMO the knoll shot was the frangible bullet)
5) Exclude the impossible and see what's left.
As I am well aware of the geometrical problems involved, I won't do that. Your analysis is doomed to fail, because your approach is flawed. A line drawn on a two dimensional picture does not reproduce the angle in the three dimensional environment.
I'm merely proposing that if the head shot came from the front, to have cleared the windshield, then it must have came from the overpass. Simple as that. Never claimed that's how it happened, only that it was possible. See the difference?
OT, but nevertheless totally impossible.
