1+1+1=6

[Steve Howsley]

It doesn't matter what the exact number was. The important part, the part that you want to obscure, is that it was more than three.

Your lack of understanding of the evidence speaks volumes to me.

So basically you have said 'I don't know'. I suppose that's how you CTers can come up with so many crazy theories based on rubbery evidence. That approach leads nowhere but I guess it gives you the flexibility to argue any point you like using dodgy material contradicting yourself as you stumble along.

[Ross Lidell]

Again having a handle of evidence that form the the premises for any conclusions is the primary test for credibility Drawing exact conclusions is a secondary consideration and by definition a more speculative and inferential activity

Apart from a lack of punctuation: your statement makes no sense and is of no value in this debate.

[Matt Grantham]

Apart from a lack of punctuation: your statement makes no sense and is of no value in this debate.

 Do you have any background in philosophy and logic? You understand the idea that premises lead to conclusions don't you? Do you further understand the logical fallacy of begging the question? It basically says that the format of premises leading to a conclusion is a one way street Premises lead to conclusions and not the other way around

[Steve Howsley]

Would you include the one from the stretcher or was that just a plant?   I guess it does get confusing if you want to include the pristine bullet that rolled off the stretcher!  I mean that "magic" bullet entered and exited 7 times and pretty much looks like it was pried off the end of a shell and left lying there as evidence to add to the sniper's nest cartridges found at that scene. 
It looks like pretty convincing evidence if you want to steer your case in a particular direction and convicts someone in absentia.



 

It was not pristine. Check it for yourself if you want to be enlightened.

[Bill Chapman]

Don't you love how the LNers claim that three shots came from a very specific location with NO supporting evidence, but then demand actual supporting evidence or proof from the CTers for a particular number of shots?

They do this all the time. They offer nothing but demand that you offer evidence in triplicate. A waste of time.

How's this for triplicate:

"Boom, click-click, Boom, click-click, Boom, click-click" -- Harold Norman
 

[Zeon Mason]

It was not pristine. Check it for yourself if you want to be enlightened.

2003 Discovery Channel experiment results of replica human torso the MC bullet was extremely distorted when it came out and that WITHOUT even having to go then thru wrist bone BACKWARDs.


Experiment firing bullet at 900 ft/sec directly into human cadavier wrist bone, proves nothing, since it was nose 1st entry not backwards and had no prior force applied which is the force of going thru 2 bodies and rib bones. So a totally useless and irrelevant experiment.


Experiment proving MC bullet can be slowed from 2000 ft/sec to 0 ft/sec over 3 ft, and remain undeformed, was via firing a bullet thru 36 small cross cut pieces of pine board glued together   YEA THAT PROVES SOMETHING I GUESS


And the bullet didnt exit the throat of the1st torso, so they did not prove a straight line trajectory from JFK back thru the throat aligned with the entrance point in Gov Connallys back.

[Walt Cakebread]

How's this for triplicate:

"Boom, click-click, Boom, click-click, Boom, click-click" -- Harold Norman

Hmmmm....   Didn't Mr Norman say he heard the spent shells hitting the floor?

If Mr Norman wasn't prevaricating......then the noises he heard should have been...."Boom, click  PLINK-click, Boom, click, PLINK-click, Boom, click PLINK-click" -- Harold Norman

The BOOM of course would be the muzzle blast.... the first CLICK would be the bolt being retracted ...the PLINK would be the brass shell hitting the floor....and the last CLICK would be the bolt being closed....

Me thinks Mr Norman was not an intelligent liar....