I don't think I have heard LNers talk about the white patch on JFKs lateral x-ray. I have not read the HSCA volume on this. Do LNers have an explanation for it, especially in light of Dr. Mantiks optical densitometry readings in which he found that the patch is so dense its as if JFK had solid bone going from one side of his head to the other right where that white patch is.
Is this white patch an artifact due to the "enhancement" process the HSCA did on the x-ray or is it something LNers genuinely have not come up with an explanation for?
'something LNers genuinely have not come up with an explanation for?'
_Harsh! HAHAHAHA
Here, let me join in the Sunday morning pleasentries: Can I hazard a guess and assume that you are one of those CTers/JAQers/TAEers/HighSchoolDropOut/OswaldArseKissers that automatically become an instant expert at practically everything they lay their hands on?
;)
Here, let me join in the Sunday morningpleasentriespleasantries;
There, fixed it for you...
I don't think I have heard LNers talk about the white patch on JFKs lateral x-ray. I have not read the HSCA volume on this. Do LNers have an explanation for it, especially in light of Dr. Mantiks optical densitometry readings in which he found that the patch is so dense its as if JFK had solid bone going from one side of his head to the other right where that white patch is.
Is this white patch an artifact due to the "enhancement" process the HSCA did on the x-ray or is it something LNers genuinely have not come up with an explanation for?
An equally serious problem with the x-rays is the large black area in the front, indicating that there's virtually nothing there--no brain, no nothing--which sharply contradicts the alleged photos and drawings of the brain and the autopsy photos of the face.
This is a prime example of an issue that WC apologists are simply unable to explain and that they therefore ignore. The white patch is over 1,000 times brighter than the same area in a normal skull x-ray. Equally suspicious is that the white patch's location covers most of the area of the right-rear part of the skull where dozens of witnesses reported seeing a large wound. Another suspicious aspect of the patch is its size and shape: it is relatively oval and about 3 inches in diameter at its widest point.
The brightness of the white patch means that the bone in that area is far, far thicker than the bone in the same area on human skulls, an obvious impossibility. Tellingly, no such patch appears on any of JFK's pre-mortem x-rays.
Of course, the white patch is clear evidence of alteration. But WC apologists will never admit this because they are not interested in facts but in defending the lone-gunman myth.
Could it be the rubber patch the autopsy doctors said was put on the right rear of JFK's skull because bone was missing in that area? I wonder how the type of rubber that was used shows up on x ray.
Does the overlapping bone (on the lateral X-ray) explain the “White Patch”?
No, it does not—nor could it even do so in principle. First, these are two distinctly different areas, as should be obvious from the right lateral X-ray—the White Patch is much more posterior than the overlap area. See my image of the White Patch in Assassination Science 1998, p. 160, or slide 5 in my Dallas lecture, or my Figure 5 just below. . . .
In my Figure 2, I have identified the external auditory canal, which Speer ignores; that structural feature clearly locates the external ear—without any ambiguity. Speer also ignores the evidence of the AP X-ray (my Figure 1). Notice there how the wing lies far out in space, quite detached from the skull. On the other hand, if the wing had extended far posteriorly (as Speer wants to believe), then some part of it would be seen much more medially in the AP X-ray, but it is not there. This argument is so powerful that little else need be said. But there is more.
Second, the ODs of these two areas are quite different: on the right lateral X-ray, the mean OD of the white patch (0.625 ±.055) is almost the same as the petrous bone (0.55), whereas a typical OD (1.33) for the overlap site is noticeably higher (than the White Patch), and it does not appear nearly so white to the eye. That visible difference is dramatically obvious in Figure 5 (especially on the right sided image). Speer claims that the White Patch was caused by three overlapping layers of bone. Despite his unrelenting caricature to the contrary, I have always accepted three layers of bone at the overlap site, although I have never emphasized this because no one (before Speer) had offered such a novel explanation for the White Patch.
Incidentally, the three layers of overlapping bone should be obvious to anyone after viewing the AP X-ray (an image that Speer overlooks). He also argues that, because the ARRB experts (p. 10 and also Chapter 19b, pp. 26-27) noticed such bone overlap, they therefore support his conclusion that the overlap explains the White Patch. But that is simply absurd. . . .
Third, the White Patch is so dense that whatever physical object it represents must appear somewhere on the AP X-ray film. I made this argument from the very beginning, even at our first press conference in New York City (1993). That transcript is reproduced in Assassination Science 1998 (p. 155) and warrants a quote here:
On the frontal [AP] X-ray, such an extremely dense [physical] object should have been as visible as a tyrannosaurus rex in downtown Manhattan at noon. However, when I looked at the frontal X-ray, there was no such beast to be seen.
No one has even tried to explain this paradox. Even worse, Speer seems oblivious to it. Let’s next focus on the OD issues for overlapping bone, a quantitative exercise that Speer totally neglects. For these JFK skull X-rays, here are the pertinent OD changes (∆ODs) across various layers of bone: one layer = 0.45; two layers = 0.90; three layers = 1.35. The difference for one layer is easily measured at fracture lines; amazingly enough, Speer believes that I ignore these fracture lines (p. 9). If an extra bone layer truly explained the White Patch, then sites just outside the White Patch should yield ODs that are higher by about 0.45 (one layer).
But that is not the case—on the contrary, the ODs suggest a difference of more than just one layer of bone. Of special interest is the OD over the occiput, at the very back of the skull (very close to the White Patch), where the bone is viewed tangentially: the data there suggest a ∆OD (compared to the White Patch) of not just more than one layer, but actually about two bone layers (i.e., it is much less white). In other words, the White Patch is truly an anomaly (much too white and with ODs that are far too low). It cannot possibly arise simply from overlapping bone. On the other hand, of course, a deliberate superposition of this area in the dark room could easily explain this paradox. That the ODs of the White Patch and the petrous bone are not nearly so identical (to one another) on the left lateral X-ray should also raise some doubt that not all is well in OD land.
Now recall that three layers of bone yield a ∆OD of 1.35. Since the measured OD (cited above) in the overlap area is already 1.33, the OD without the three layers of bone would be 1.35 + 1.33 = 2.68. The ODs in the maxillary sinuses (mostly air) are 2.89, so this value of 2.68 clearly suggests substantial missing brain in the overlap area. But the site in question (medial to the overlapping bone on the lateral X-ray) lies near the middle of the brain, where the autopsy photographs show no missing brain tissue! (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf))
Pat Speer points out that Mantik is all over the place. Here are some excerpts from Speer's website ( "Chapter 19a: Stuck in the Middle With You" Link (https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-19a-stuck-in-the-middle-with-you) )
"Mantik then discussed the optical density of the x-rays. He'd measured this
himself. He claimed that these measurements were clear proof of alteration,
as some areas on the x-rays were far too white, and others far too black, and
there was far more contrast on Kennedy's x-rays than on the other x-rays
he'd measured. While doing so, he pointed out the problematic white and
black areas to his audience... He did this, however, on photos of the computer-
enhanced x-rays published by the HSCA. He failed to tell his audience that
these were not the original x-rays, and that these images were computer-
enhanced to increase the contrast, and that this contrast was made even
greater through the reproduction of these images on paper."
[SNIPPER FOR BREVITY.]
Does the overlapping bone (on the lateral X-ray) explain the “White Patch”?
No, it does not—nor could it even do so in principle. First, these are two distinctly different areas, as should be obvious from the right lateral X-ray—the White Patch is much more posterior than the overlap area. See my image of the White Patch in Assassination Science 1998, p. 160, or slide 5 in my Dallas lecture, or my Figure 5 just below. . . .
In my Figure 2, I have identified the external auditory canal, which Speer ignores; that structural feature clearly locates the external ear—without any ambiguity. Speer also ignores the evidence of the AP X-ray (my Figure 1). Notice there how the wing lies far out in space, quite detached from the skull. On the other hand, if the wing had extended far posteriorly (as Speer wants to believe), then some part of it would be seen much more medially in the AP X-ray, but it is not there. This argument is so powerful that little else need be said. But there is more.
Second, the ODs of these two areas are quite different: on the right lateral X-ray, the mean OD of the white patch (0.625 ±.055) is almost the same as the petrous bone (0.55), whereas a typical OD (1.33) for the overlap site is noticeably higher (than the White Patch), and it does not appear nearly so white to the eye. That visible difference is dramatically obvious in Figure 5 (especially on the right sided image). Speer claims that the White Patch was caused by three overlapping layers of bone. Despite his unrelenting caricature to the contrary, I have always accepted three layers of bone at the overlap site, although I have never emphasized this because no one (before Speer) had offered such a novel explanation for the White Patch.
Incidentally, the three layers of overlapping bone should be obvious to anyone after viewing the AP X-ray (an image that Speer overlooks). He also argues that, because the ARRB experts (p. 10 and also Chapter 19b, pp. 26-27) noticed such bone overlap, they therefore support his conclusion that the overlap explains the White Patch. But that is simply absurd. . . .
Third, the White Patch is so dense that whatever physical object it represents must appear somewhere on the AP X-ray film. I made this argument from the very beginning, even at our first press conference in New York City (1993). That transcript is reproduced in Assassination Science 1998 (p. 155) and warrants a quote here:
On the frontal [AP] X-ray, such an extremely dense [physical] object should have been as visible as a tyrannosaurus rex in downtown Manhattan at noon. However, when I looked at the frontal X-ray, there was no such beast to be seen.
No one has even tried to explain this paradox. Even worse, Speer seems oblivious to it. Let’s next focus on the OD issues for overlapping bone, a quantitative exercise that Speer totally neglects. For these JFK skull X-rays, here are the pertinent OD changes (∆ODs) across various layers of bone: one layer = 0.45; two layers = 0.90; three layers = 1.35. The difference for one layer is easily measured at fracture lines; amazingly enough, Speer believes that I ignore these fracture lines (p. 9). If an extra bone layer truly explained the White Patch, then sites just outside the White Patch should yield ODs that are higher by about 0.45 (one layer).
But that is not the case—on the contrary, the ODs suggest a difference of more than just one layer of bone. Of special interest is the OD over the occiput, at the very back of the skull (very close to the White Patch), where the bone is viewed tangentially: the data there suggest a ∆OD (compared to the White Patch) of not just more than one layer, but actually about two bone layers (i.e., it is much less white). In other words, the White Patch is truly an anomaly (much too white and with ODs that are far too low). It cannot possibly arise simply from overlapping bone. On the other hand, of course, a deliberate superposition of this area in the dark room could easily explain this paradox. That the ODs of the White Patch and the petrous bone are not nearly so identical (to one another) on the left lateral X-ray should also raise some doubt that not all is well in OD land.
Now recall that three layers of bone yield a ∆OD of 1.35. Since the measured OD (cited above) in the overlap area is already 1.33, the OD without the three layers of bone would be 1.35 + 1.33 = 2.68. The ODs in the maxillary sinuses (mostly air) are 2.89, so this value of 2.68 clearly suggests substantial missing brain in the overlap area. But the site in question (medial to the overlapping bone on the lateral X-ray) lies near the middle of the brain, where the autopsy photographs show no missing brain tissue! (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf (https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf))
"Well, this is more than interesting, IMO. It's damning. From his first visits to the archives in 1993 until the present day, Dr. Mantik has asserted that his OD measurements for the right lateral x-ray (only recently published by Horne as .53 petrous, .625 white patch) were impossible, and suggested Kennedy was a "bonehead".
And yet the whole damn time he knew his OD's for the pre-mortem x-ray were even more suggestive Kennedy was a "bonehead", with the petrous bone and "white patch" actually matching at .55!"
Maybe a bit of peer review would be in order for quacks like Mantik and Chesser. They would be destroyed if they took this junk science to an impartial scientific panel, government committee (with resources to evaluate their claims) or media giants like "The New York Times".
| (https://assassinationofjfk.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/A-Review-of-the-JFK-Cranial-x-Rays-and-Photographs-22.png) The original x-ray showed a fairly- even range of whiteness. | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/X_AUT_2.JPG) The HSCA enhancement unintentionally added some artificial contrast. |
Maybe a bit of peer review would be in order for quacks like Mantik and Chesser. They would be destroyed if they took this junk science to an impartial scientific panel, government committee (with resources to evaluate their claims) or media giants like "The New York Times".
Dr. Mantik graduated from the University of Michigan Medical School in 1976. He works in Green Bay, WI and 4 other locations and specializes in Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology.
Dr. Mantik’s optical density analysis is the single most important piece of scientific evidence in the JFK assassination. To reject alteration of the JFK skull x-rays is to reject basic physics and radiology.
Dr. Michael Z Chesser has a medical practice at 9601 Baptist Health Drive, Little Rock, AR. Dr. Michael Z Chesser specializes in neurology and has over 41 years of experience in the field of medicine. He is affiliated with numerous hospitals, including Baptist Health Medical Center-Little Rock (AR) and more. (https://www.topnpi.com/ar1942289293/dr-michael-chesser/ar-1 (https://www.topnpi.com/ar1942289293/dr-michael-chesser/ar-1))
This lateral skull x-ray was performed on President Kennedy in 1960, and it took me a while, but I located the original at the Presidential Library in Boston, where it was labeled as a sinus x-ray. This is shown here to show that the petrous portion of the temporal bone is the most dense, and brightest, region on a skull x-ray. The pattern of variable density throughout the skull is typical. The autopsy x-rays show an abnormally dense and homogeneous appearance in the occipital region of the skull. I viewed this original x-ray at the JFK Library in Boston on 7/23/15 and measured the optical density of various areas of the film, for comparison with the autopsy x-rays. The pituitary gland sits in the sella turcica — and the sella turcica appears relatively enlarged compared with the overall skull dimensions on this skull x-ray.
These OD readings were taken with an X-Rite 341 portable optical densitometer. Calibration was performed. This shows that the most dense part of the skull is easily the petrous (latin “petrosus” – stone hard) portion of the temporal bone. This also shows that the optical densitometer can demonstrate differences in density which aren’t apparent to the human eye.
The optical density measurement is a logarithmic value, as shown, with a density of 1 for 10% of the light transmitted through the film, and a density of 2 is equivalent to 1% of light transmission through the film. Optical density readings were used for quality control of x-ray film. A lower optical density measurement indicates a more dense region of the skull. . . .
On the frontal view, the AP x-ray, the particle trail is located high in this image, which is probably in the scalp and meninges. There is a lot going on in this image, with multiple skull fractures, and much of the skull missing over the right frontal, parietal, occipital regions. The orbital rim is fractured on both sides. The vomer bone (nasal) is fractured. You can see that there is brain shadow on the left side, but you really can’t see any on the right side. The burn marks are located on the right side, lateral to the orbital wall. There is low density, or missing bone behind the nasal bones and at the lower edge of the left orbit – and I agree with Dr. Mantik that this suggests missing occipital bone, extending over to the left side. . . .
Dr. Mantik took many more optical density readings that I did, but I wanted to show that my readings agree with his – that the white patch appears much more dense than is possible. On the left lateral x-ray, the OD reading was much more dense than the petrous bone – and again, this is not possible. An optical density of .24 is equivalent to a much higher density of the skull in this region, compared with an optical density of .32, and this is not physiologic, even in the face of traumatic alteration of the skull.
This is a simulation of the left lateral skull x-ray. NARA never released an actual copy of the left lateral skull x-ray. As you see, the back part of the skull isn’t visible. I flipped the image of the right lateral x-ray, and then cut off the occipital region, to simulate the appearance of the left lateral image. I also took optical density measurements of this film, and the left posterior temporal/occipital skull was more dense than the petrous ridge. The skull at the level of the petrous ridge is almost all bone, and it is impossible to explain this finding except to consider that the evidence was altered. (https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/ (https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/))
I’m going to hammer you for a long time to come for making the sleezy, absurd claim that Dr. David Mantik and Dr. Michael Chesser are “quacks.” It just goes to show how far you will go to distort and mislead, rather than seriously consider hard scientific evidence that destroys your position on the JFK case.
Well, Cyril Wecht has a medical and a law degree. He contributed positive statements for scenes in the 1995 "Alien Autopsy" hoax film on Fox (Fox was misleading people then).What does Ben Carson or Cyril Wecht have to do with your claim that Mantik and Chesser are "quacks"? Ben Carson on COVID tells us what about Mantik?
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Th-s3dbboJQ/sddefault.jpg)
Wecht was also the consultant for the "JFK" movie courtroom scene in which he misrepresented the Single-Bullet Theory by placing "Kennedy" and "Connally" directly in front of each other and at the same elevation.
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1X2yb5u7l9CuouFDagDZdn4ytbyi3emDW)
If one is conspiracy-minded, credentials and education no longer matter. Seeing oneself as "smarter" than others might even solidify one's beliefs in their own faulty assessment. Ben Carson was a neurosurgeon and in Trump's Cabinet who's said crazy things, like Trump has a "celebral side".
"Are we sure political experience is what we need. Every signer
of the Declaration of Independence had no federal elected office
experience."
(Many had Town Hall and State legislature experience)
"My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain."
"I think poverty to a large extent is also a state of mind. You take
somebody that has the right mindset, you can take everything from
them and put them on the street, and I guarantee in a little while
they'll be right back up there."
"Obamacare is really I think the worst thing that has happened in this
nation since slavery." (He also said Obamacare was worst than 9-11)
In 2020, Carson contact COVID-19 and tried to treat himself with My-Pillow Guy's advice. When that failed, he resorted to a weatlhcare cure made available to him by Trump.
What does Ben Carson or Cyril Wecht have to do with your claim that Mantik and Chesser are "quacks"? Ben Carson on COVID tells us what about Mantik?
If you want to show that experts can be "nutty" or have odd views outside their expertise, I think we all recognize that. But that's now showing in any way that Mantik and Chesser are quacks here.
See Pat Speer's website ( "Chapter 19a: Stuck in the Middle With You" Link (https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-19a-stuck-in-the-middle-with-you) ) if you think Mantik isn't a quack. E-mail Speer if you wish. He's been at Mantik a long longer than I have.Ben Carson and/or Wecht have nothing to do with the credibility or lack of credibility of Mantik. It's a non sequitur.
Apparently no doctor or radiologist has bothered to take this Mantik on, so he's been dominating the discussion through books, websites and accommodating lackeys like Griffith.
If you want to buy into Mantik's claims, then fill your boots.
Ben Carson and/or Wecht have nothing to do with the credibility or lack of credibility of Mantik. It's a non sequitur.
If you want to withdraw the argument, then fine; if you want to double down you'll lose again. It's completely illogical.
Steve Galbraith: Ben Carson and/or Wecht have nothing to do with the credibility or lack of credibility of Mantik. It's a non sequitur.
If you want to withdraw the argument, then fine; if you want to double down you'll lose again. It's completely illogical.
Jerry Organ: If you don't think Mantik is a quack, then you're endorsing his JFK x-ray claims because you believe he's competent.
A large white area (especially obvious in prints) appears on JFK’s two lateral X-rays, as shown in Figure 8. The paradox is that no other patient (in my 46 years since entering medical school) has ever shown anything like this. Furthermore, a pre-mortem X-ray of JFK does not display anything like this either. Dr. Michael Chesser’s optical density measurements, made directly from the pre-mortem X-ray at the JFK library in Boston, likewise conclusively confirm just how bizarre this feature is.
My optical density values for this White Patch are almost the same as for the petrous bone, which encircles the ear canal (Figure 8A), and which is the densest bone in the body. The conclusion is that a large area over JFK’s posterior skull is almost solid bone—from side to side, i.e., a “bonehead” skull. This is, of course, ridiculous. More likely, someone merely performed another double exposure in the darkroom.
It should also be emphasized that, although this White Patch is obvious on both lateral skull X-rays, it is nowhere to be seen on the AP (frontal) skull X-ray. In the physical universe that we know, this is impossible. As I stated during my first public comments on this issue (at a New York press conference in 1993), it would be like missing a tyrannosaurus rex in downtown Manhattan. (p. 9)
Ah!!!! Well, well! So here we have it! The whole reason that Organ is making the sleazy, absurd claim that Dr. Mantik is a quack is that Organ cannot accept the hard scientific evidence that Dr. Mantik has discovered that shows that the JFK autopsy x-rays have been altered. He can't or won't consider the hard scientific evidence on its own merits, even though Dr. Michael Chesser has confirmed it with his own multiple OD measurements on a JFK pre-mortem skull x-ray and on the autopsy skull x-rays.
Rather than allow the evidence to determine his conclusions, Organ judges all evidence solely on the basis of whether or not it supports his conclusions, and if it does not, he reaches, grasps, and strains to come up with any excuse, no matter how silly or irrelevant, to reject that evidence.
(We see this in Organ's strange attack on renowned neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson for expressing certain political views that Organ views as extreme, even though tens of millions of Americans find those views perfectly valid. Needless to say, Dr. Carson's political views have nothing to do with Dr. Mantik's OD measurements and high-magnification analysis of the autopsy skull x-rays.)
| (https://assassinationofjfk.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/A-Review-of-the-JFK-Cranial-x-Rays-and-Photographs-22.png) The original x-ray showed a fairly- even range of whiteness. | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/X_AUT_2.JPG) The HSCA enhancement unintentionally added some artificial contrast. |
And why is no such white patch seen on JFK's 1960 skull x-ray?
Answer: The impossible white patch does not show up on the 1960 JFK skull x-ray and on the AP autopsy skull x-ray because it was added to the lateral autopsy skull x-ray after the autopsy. Dr. Mantik has even been able to duplicate how it was added.
| (https://i.ibb.co/gZfJrjb/Nova-3-D-Skull-2013.gif) | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/X_AUT_2.JPG) |
Right. The "hard scientific evidence" is hardly that. No doubt Mantik is obtaining honest OD readings, not the issue. Speer questions his use of enhanced x-ray prints and how such readings would compare to original x-rays taken on a machine similar to that at Bethesda, and how such an older machine would show features on a similarly-damaged skull. Not asking for the moon, just normal scientific protocol.
The hospital had a better-quality x-ray machine on another floor, but the portable one was faster to use and showed metal fragments, which they doctors were most interested in. We can see quality differences, for example, in the 8mm film and camera used by Zapruder as compared to that used by Nix.
"I would like to explain one thing. These films, these x-rays were taken solely for the purpose of finding what at that time was thought to be a bullet that had entered the body and had not exited. If we were looking for fine bone detail, the type of diagnostic exquisite detail we want in life, we could have taken the x-rays in the x-ray department, made the films there, but we felt that the portable x ray equipment was adequate for the purpose; i.e., locating a metallic fragment."
-- Dr. John Ebersole, the autopsy radiologist to the HSCA
Fitting things to a predetermined conclusion is what you do at your website. What Speer is asking of Mantik doesn't seem "silly or irrelevant".
Which of these had the most appeal to you: Joseph created the pyramids to store grain, that poverty is "a state of mind" and that the My-Pillow Guy has medical cures? Horne, Mantik and you believe FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen.
You offer this quote from Mantik's "JFK Assassination Paradoxes": "A large white area (especially obvious in prints). ..." At least Mantik admits he's using compromised x-ray prints that increasingly exhibit higher degrees of artificial contrast. I pointed this out earlier.
You can see (the "White Patch" inset, above) how much more artificial contrast Mantik gets from using prints of the x-ray.
Why is there no glowing "white patch" on JFK's original unenhanced autopsy x-ray?
Where are Mantik's OD measurements for that?
You're the gift that keeps on giving. Here's Mantik's "duplication".
There is a hinged bone flap that was modeled for the 2013 NOVA program "Cold Case JFK":
If the flap didn't re-seat fully but partly overlapped the intact bone, it would explain the bright V-shape in the center of the autopsy x-ray.
So again, Griffith's still not taking Mantik's "historic developments" and "monumental" disclosures to mainstream media (surely Fox would oblige him) or his Congressman. If anyone vets their claims, they're dumb, have a bias or are part of the cover-up.
11. Did I employ contrast enhanced X-rays for the OD measurements?
( p. 8 )
No—definitely not. This is an eccentric charge by Speer, and it reflects badly on his approach to this subject. At NARA, I used only the extant X-ray films, not prints and not enhanced X-rays. In fact, while at NARA I never even viewed prints of X-rays or any enhanced X-rays.
It is true, though, that the published prints of the JFK skull X-rays have been enhanced, but that is because the prints of the unenhanced X-rays do not accurately portray the extant X-rays. In print format, the enhanced X-rays are closer in image content to the extant X-rays.
Since Speer had been exchanging e-mails with Fetzer (he quotes Fetzer), he could easily have asked Fetzer (about whether I had used the extant X-rays), but he forgot to ask. Of course, Steve Tilley (and Gary Aguilar, too) can also verify exactly what I used.
Why is there no glowing "white patch" on JFK's original unenhanced autopsy x-ray? Where are Mantik's OD measurements for that?
Oh my goodness. More comical blunders from you. Are you just going to keep copying and pasting from Speer's critique and ignoring Dr. Mantik's response to Speer's critique? So far, that's all you've done. Dr. Mantik has answered every one of the amateurish and invalid Speer arguments that you keep quoting. When are you going to deal with Dr. Mantik's responses?
For now, let's just deal with Speer's erroneous argument that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the unenhanced x-rays but only on the enhanced x-rays/prints of the enhanced x-rays. Dr. Mantik refutes this in his reply to Speer, and I've given the link to his reply twice in this thread, but you just keep repeating Speer's erroneous claim. Let's read what Dr. Mantik says regarding the claim:
Okay, are we clear now? How many more times am I going to have to embarrass you over your repetition of debunked arguments? Speer is out to lunch and way out of his depth on the autopsy x-rays and photos, and his criticisms of Dr. Mantik's OD research are erroneous and often downright silly.
So now let me answer your silly, ignorant questions, which were based on your acceptance of Speer's erroneous claim that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the original unenhanced autopsy x-rays:
The white patch does appear on the original unenhanced lateral autopsy skull x-rays, and Dr. Mantik's OD measurements for it are in several of his articles and in his new book.
Yes, Dr. Mantik's OD findings are indeed hard scientific evidence, and his findings have been confirmed by Dr. Chesser, and several forensic and/or radiology experts have reviewed and endorsed those findings. But, you just keep quoting the erroneous arguments of someone who has no training in radiology or physics and keep ignoring Dr. Mantik's refutation of those arguments, since you have no interest in actually considering the findings on their own merits but are determined to distort, lie, and mislead people about them.
And I notice you the ignored the fact that the white patch does not appear on the AP skull x-ray, which is a physical impossibility if the lateral skull x-rays are unaltered, and the fact that the autopsy photos of the brain and the autopsy skull x-rays severely contradict each other on the amount of missing brain.
Folks, since Organ keeps quoting Speer's critique of Dr. Mantik's research and keeps ignoring Dr. Mantik's reply to Speer, allow me to once again provide the link to Dr. Mantik's reply:
https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf
Oh my goodness. More comical blunders from you. Are you just going to keep copying and pasting from Speer's critique and ignoring Dr. Mantik's response to Speer's critique? So far, that's all you've done. Dr. Mantik has answered every one of the amateurish and invalid Speer arguments that you keep quoting. When are you going to deal with Dr. Mantik's responses?
For now, let's just deal with Speer's erroneous argument that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the unenhanced x-rays but only on the enhanced x-rays/prints of the enhanced x-rays. Dr. Mantik refutes this in his reply to Speer, and I've given the link to his reply twice in this thread, but you just keep repeating Speer's erroneous claim. Let's read what Dr. Mantik says regarding the claim:
Okay, are we clear now? How many more times am I going to have to embarrass you over your repetition of debunked arguments? Speer is out to lunch and way out of his depth on the autopsy x-rays and photos, and his criticisms of Dr. Mantik's OD research are erroneous and often downright silly.
So now let me answer your silly, ignorant questions, which were based on your acceptance of Speer's erroneous claim that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the original unenhanced autopsy x-rays:
The white patch does appear on the original unenhanced lateral autopsy skull x-rays, and Dr. Mantik's OD measurements for it are in several of his articles and in his new book.
| (https://assassinationofjfk.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/A-Review-of-the-JFK-Cranial-x-Rays-and-Photographs-22.png) The original x-ray showed a fairly- even range of whiteness. | (https://images2.imgbox.com/5c/ac/2JyAmWLB_o.jpg) The HSCA enhancement unintentionally added some artificial contrast. |
Yes, Dr. Mantik's OD findings are indeed hard scientific evidence, and his findings have been confirmed by Dr. Chesser, and several forensic and/or radiology experts have reviewed and endorsed those findings. But, you just keep quoting the erroneous arguments of someone who has no training in radiology or physics and keep ignoring Dr. Mantik's refutation of those arguments, since you have no interest in actually considering the findings on their own merits but are determined to distort, lie, and mislead people about them.
And I notice you the ignored the fact that the white patch does not appear on the AP skull x-ray, which is a physical impossibility if the lateral skull x-rays are unaltered, and the fact that the autopsy photos of the brain and the autopsy skull x-rays severely contradict each other on the amount of missing brain.
Folks, since Organ keeps quoting Speer's critique of Dr. Mantik's research and keeps ignoring Dr. Mantik's reply to Speer, allow me to once again provide the link to Dr. Mantik's reply:
https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf
Oh my goodness. More comical blunders from you. Are you just going to keep copying and pasting from Speer's critique and ignoring Dr. Mantik's response to Speer's critique? So far, that's all you've done. Dr. Mantik has answered every one of the amateurish and invalid Speer arguments that you keep quoting. When are you going to deal with Dr. Mantik's responses?
For now, let's just deal with Speer's erroneous argument that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the unenhanced x-rays but only on the enhanced x-rays/prints of the enhanced x-rays. Dr. Mantik refutes this in his reply to Speer, and I've given the link to his reply twice in this thread, but you just keep repeating Speer's erroneous claim. Let's read what Dr. Mantik says regarding the claim:
Okay, are we clear now? How many more times am I going to have to embarrass you over your repetition of debunked arguments? Speer is out to lunch and way out of his depth on the autopsy x-rays and photos, and his criticisms of Dr. Mantik's OD research are erroneous and often downright silly.
So now let me answer your silly, ignorant questions, which were based on your acceptance of Speer's erroneous claim that Dr. Mantik did not do OD measurements on the original unenhanced autopsy x-rays:
The white patch does appear on the original unenhanced lateral autopsy skull x-rays, and Dr. Mantik's OD measurements for it are in several of his articles and in his new book.
Yes, Dr. Mantik's OD findings are indeed hard scientific evidence, and his findings have been confirmed by Dr. Chesser, and several forensic and/or radiology experts have reviewed and endorsed those findings. But, you just keep quoting the erroneous arguments of someone who has no training in radiology or physics and keep ignoring Dr. Mantik's refutation of those arguments, since you have no interest in actually considering the findings on their own merits but are determined to distort, lie, and mislead people about them.
And I notice you the ignored the fact that the white patch does not appear on the AP skull x-ray, which is a physical impossibility if the lateral skull x-rays are unaltered, and the fact that the autopsy photos of the brain and the autopsy skull x-rays severely contradict each other on the amount of missing brain.
Folks, since Organ keeps quoting Speer's critique of Dr. Mantik's research and keeps ignoring Dr. Mantik's reply to Speer, allow me to once again provide the link to Dr. Mantik's reply:
https://themantikview.org/pdf/Speer_Critique.pdf
"Dr. David Mantik's newly released book JFK Assassination Paradoxes, in which he proves with hard scientific evidence--optical density measurements and radiological analysis--that the JFK autopsy skull x-rays have been altered. As Dr. Greg Henkelmann says in his endorsement of this book, "to reject alteration of the JFK skull x-rays
is to reject basic physics and radiology."
"Lone-gunman theorists seem to be caught in a time warp and act like we're living in the early 1990s, seemingly oblivious to the historic evidence that has come to light via the ARRB releases and new scientific research."
"For example, we now know from ARRB-released files that the autopsy doctors determined for an absolute fact during the autopsy that JFK's back wound had no exit point, and that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat."
"The fact that the back wound had no exit point, of course, debunks the single-bullet theory, and without the single-bullet theory there can be no lone-gunman theory. Since the SBT is false, there must have been at least two gunmen firing at JFK."
"Only one explanation is possible--this left, lateral skull X ray is a copy.
The reason, of course, is that the emulsion of a copy film would be fully
intact, yet at the same time it would faithfully record any areas of
increased transmission (i.e., missing emulsion) from the original.
A simple or more straightforward proof of film copying is unimaginable.
After my visit, I sent a specific letter of inquiry on this point to Steven Tilley.
His letter of response is makes it clear that NARA considers all of the
extant X-rays to be originals. None are copies."
-- David Mantik
So why does he say he was given a copy? And why not use the original unenhanced x-ray to demonstrate how much more white the "white patch" is?
Both the original x-ray and the enhanced version show the petrous bone brighter than the "white patch".
I also took optical density measurements of this film, and the left posterior temporal/occipital skull was more dense than the petrous ridge. The skull at the level of the petrous ridge is almost all bone, and it is impossible to explain this finding except to consider that the evidence was altered.
The JFK x-rays are not of comparable quality to modern x-rays. The Bethesda x-rays were taken using a 1940s portable machine. [SNIP]
The A-P x-ray shows the hinged flap (camera-left) but without the brain and bone that it overlaps in the lateral view.
Of course, another key fact about the white patch is that it covers a good part of the area that over 40 witnesses said was missing.
The white patch may also have been put there to conceal the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report. The autopsy doctors described a trail of fragments that went from the EOP entry site to a point just above the right eye. No such fragment trail appears on the extant x-rays.
The only fragment trail visible on the x-rays is the one several inches higher near the top of the skull. We are asked to believe that the autopsy doctors not only mislocated the rear head entry wound by a staggering 4 inches but mistook a fragment trail at the top of the head for a trail that began at the EOP and went to the right eye.
Of course, also asked to believe that the autopsy doctors did not notice the most obvious apparent bullet fragment on the skull x-rays: the 6.5 mm object. Or, we are asked to believe that they saw it but for some reason did not remove it and omitted it from the autopsy report. As most here know, the 6.5 mm object has now been determined by optical density measurements to be a forged image ghosted over a much smaller actual fragment. Dr. Mantik has even be able to duplicate how the forgery was done.
Would there be a "fragment trail" from a full metal copper jacket?
This lateral skull x-ray was performed on President Kennedy in 1960, and it took me a while, but I located the original at the Presidential Library in Boston, where it was labeled as a sinus x-ray. This is shown here to show that the petrous portion of the temporal bone is the most dense, and brightest, region on a skull x-ray. The pattern of variable density throughout the skull is typical. . . .
These OD readings were taken with an X-Rite 341 portable optical densitometer. Calibration was performed. This shows that the most dense part of the skull is easily the petrous (latin “petrosus” – stone hard) portion of the temporal bone. This also shows that the optical densitometer can demonstrate differences in density which aren’t apparent to the human eye. . . .
In the HSCA report you’ll find this very blurred image of the original right lateral skull x-ray (actually the inventory lists two left lateral skull x-rays). Looking at this image in the report would make you think that this x-ray is in horrible condition, and that the anterior half of the skull was so dim that no useful information could be obtained. That couldn’t be further from the truth. The actual original x-rays are in excellent condition, showing only minor aging, and this blurred copy doesn’t represent the original film well. . . .
This is a comparison of the original films, the HSCA computer enhanced images, and then the copies of the HSCA images released to the public.
Now I want to go back to the right lateral view, and to focus on the white patch, which Dr. Mantik has written so much about. I agree completely with him, that this points toward tampering.
This is to highlight the “white patch." Notice on the left this same area on the 1960 skull x-ray, and how it is much less white, or dense, compared to the base of the skull, the petrous portion of the temporal bone.
Dr. Mantik took many more optical density readings that I did, but I wanted to show that my readings agree with his – that the white patch appears much more dense than is possible. On the left lateral x-ray, the OD reading was much more dense than the petrous bone – and again, this is not possible. An optical density of .24 is equivalent to a much higher density of the skull in this region, compared with an optical density of .32, and this is not physiologic, even in the face of traumatic alteration of the skull. . . .
This is a simulation of the left lateral skull x-ray. NARA never released an actual copy of the left lateral skull x-ray. As you see, the back part of the skull isn’t visible. I flipped the image of the right lateral x-ray, and then cut off the occipital region, to simulate the appearance of the left lateral image. I also took optical density measurements of this film, and the left posterior temporal/occipital skull was more dense than the petrous ridge. The skull at the level of the petrous ridge is almost all bone, and it is impossible to explain this finding except to consider that the evidence was altered. (https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/)