JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Richard Rubio on April 27, 2018, 04:47:19 AM
-
Excerpt:
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
-
It may well be that the head shot that moved JFK's head forward was from the rear, but that doesn't rule out another almost simultaneous shot from the front which blew the back of his head off.
-
It may well be that the head shot that moved JFK's head forward was from the rear, but that doesn't rule out another almost simultaneous shot from the front which blew the back of his head off.
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
-
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
So you don't believe the doctors at Parkland, Walt?
-
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
Read forum rules, please leave out the ad homs.
-
So you don't believe the doctors at Parkland, Walt?
Bump for Walt.
-
When will these CIA disinformation pieces cease? Goodness, I'm so tired of the media perpetuating this delusion. Newsweek has been one of the worst offenders and this piece is extremely weak. I don't have all day to recite the multiple errors in this piece. But let's look at just one aspect: If the Newsweek piece is accurate, all the witnesses at Parkland Hospital and Bethesda were lying about witnessing a massive wound in the lower rear of the president's skull. By the time the president is examined a few hours later at Bethesda, there's no photographic corroboration of the Dallas and Bethesda witnesses. Logic dictates that a shot fired from above and behind would exit somewhere on the front of JFK's body, right? There is no evidence of a bullet exit on the front of the president's body nor is there any witness testimony of this. Conversely, all the witnesses report a massive wound in the lower right REAR of JFK's head, clearly indicating at least one shot from the front. How do we explain this anomaly? Were the photographs and X rays faked? What other explanation could there be for all this confusion about the head wounds?
I understand that it's very hard to believe that there was post-mortem surgery on the president's head in an apparent attempt to frame Oswald. But David Lifton and Douglas Horne did the research to ascertain the truth and their research has been corroborated by highly qualified witnesses. What's the alternative explanation?
We know that anyone with any intellectual honesty will swear the SBT is impossible and that the fatal head shot came from the front. Unfortunately, it appears that virtually every piece of evidence in this case has been tampered with in some way, so that makes finding the truth much harder. I applaud those who have fought through the disinformation all these years to keep fighting for answers.
-
It may well be that the head shot that moved JFK's head forward was from the rear, but that doesn't rule out another almost simultaneous shot from the front which blew the back of his head off.
There were witnesses that had stated they heard simultaneous shots like ba-bam]
If Oswald were the only shooter there would have to be at least 2.3 seconds between shots, assuming he used the telescopic sight found on the Mannlicher Carcano. The three shots that the Warren Commission claimed were fired from Oswald?s rifle could not have been shot faster than 6.9 seconds, including the minimum of 2.3 seconds to set for the first shot. Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman described the shots as a ?flurry.? Two of the shots were often described by witnesses as so closely spaced that they seemed ?simultaneous? and had ?practically no time element between them.? Additionally, there is a substantial amount of testimony, presented in this article, that describes the later shots as sounding different from the first shot. Governor Connally?s initial reaction to the gunfire was ?that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle.? [65]
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/02/08/jfk-math-analysis-witness-testimony-of-time-interval-between-shots/
Why did the Warren Commission ignore any hint that there was a conspiracy there?
Because truth was not their only client but Lyndon Johnson certainly was.
The Warren Commission...look at them...a group of old, conservative, ultra right wing white guys....hand picked by Johnson and Hoover.
Could we think that this would ever fly in today's political environment?
-
So you don't believe the doctors at Parkland, Walt?
2nd bump for Walt.Seems he doesn't want to answer.
-
We know that anyone with any intellectual honesty will swear the SBT is impossible and that the fatal head shot came from the front.
We do? How so? Explain it in detail if you can. If not, then shut yer yap.
-
A lot of Parkland personnel and Bethesda personnel saw the damage to the back of JFK's head which was quite obvious a wound of exit. Newsweek comes out with their final statement like they are going to put this shooter from the front " To Rest " like they just closed the case. Thomas Robinson from Gawlers Funeral home who was asked about the" pre-autopsy surgery to the head " making of a huge hole in the top of the head" , "Oh that's what the Drs. did." . Clint Hill said that the right rear portion of his head was missing and that it was laying in the back seat. Sorry Newsweek , but you need to pedal this fabrication to someone else . I feel that the FBI & CIA thought they could just bull-rush us into just believing whatever they told us was the truth and for us just to go , Okay we believe you. Holding the JFK Records for so long was to make sure that most of us would be dead by the time all of the records were released. So Trump wants to hold the last of the records another 3 1/2 years. We will wait you out !
-
So you don't believe the doctors at Parkland, Walt?
The Parkland Doctors were unanimous .....The back of JFK's head es blown out and there was brain tissue hanging out of the hole in the back of JFK's head. Any middle school student knows simple physics.... and would recognize the the bullet that caused that wound was fired from the front....
-
That latest study does not discredit several additional key locations (besides the, so-called, "lone nut snipers lair") that were also behind and above JFK during the shots.
Some/several of the lame-stream media who are trying to regurgitate that latest study have even misinterpreted and misrepresented (a.k.a. the lame-stream media LIED, again) that study as only claiming that the, so-called, "lone nut snipers lair" could have been the only firing location.
Then there is the issue that the HSCA determined, that the grassy knoll picket fence assassin's shot missed hitting anyone and missed hitting anything (other than that GK fence fired shot bullet buried itself into the grass to the far-left of the limousine)
-
The Parkland Doctors were unanimous .....The back of JFK's head es blown out and there was brain tissue hanging out of the hole in the back of JFK's head. Any middle school student knows simple physics.... and would recognize the the bullet that caused that wound was fired from the front....
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"
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
(http://www.readclip.com/images/JFK_headshot.png)
So how does this article debunk any of this?
-
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?
-
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.
-
** 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
-
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.
-
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.
In case you become interested in physics here is something from Tony Szamboti in regard to the fanciful jet effect
Dr. Alvarez claims that President Kennedy?s head recoiled the way a rocket recoils when its
jet exhaust is ejected. However, he does not explain any mechanism for putting an opposite
force on the head when the jet was expelled forward. He simply makes the case for the
potential of the jet taking out more momentum than that brought in by the bullet. In order for
a jet effect to have occurred a pressure would have to be built up inside the head, acting at
least rearward as well as forward, which was then relieved on the forward side allowing the
rearward pressure to dominate and create an unbalanced force in that direction. This is usually
done with either a combustion process or having a pressure on tap in a sealed volume. The
thrust in a jet or rocket engine can be computed based on the change in momentum of the
exhaust gases with respect to time. However, this change in momentum is directly related to
the forward acting pressure opposite that of the exhaust gases, since their initial pressure
values are the same but one is allowed to escape.
As far as melons an goats post something and I will gladly reply Magicians with melons are laughingly easy to dismiss from what I have seen so far
-
In case you become interested in physics here is something from Tony Szamboti in regard to the fanciful jet effect
Dr. Alvarez claims that President Kennedy?s head recoiled the way a rocket recoils when its
jet exhaust is ejected. However, he does not explain any mechanism for putting an opposite
force on the head when the jet was expelled forward. He simply makes the case for the
potential of the jet taking out more momentum than that brought in by the bullet. In order for
a jet effect to have occurred a pressure would have to be built up inside the head, acting at
least rearward as well as forward, which was then relieved on the forward side allowing the
rearward pressure to dominate and create an unbalanced force in that direction. This is usually
done with either a combustion process or having a pressure on tap in a sealed volume. The
thrust in a jet or rocket engine can be computed based on the change in momentum of the
exhaust gases with respect to time. However, this change in momentum is directly related to
the forward acting pressure opposite that of the exhaust gases, since their initial pressure
values are the same but one is allowed to escape.
It appears to me you have never taken a high school course in Physics. Or if you did, you have forgotten the basics. Is this correct?
Don?t you think it?s possible that the problem is not with Dr. Alvarez?s understanding of Physics but your understanding of Physics?
It?s not a question of ?building up enough pressure?. It?s a question of the amount of momentum carried by the debris we see being propelled forward from JFK?s head.
If this debris contains more momentum than the amount of momentum deposited by the bullet, then JFK?s head must be propelled backwards, back toward the rifle, to allow momentum to be conserved. If it does not, then the head is not propelled backwards.
Clearly melons, at least in some cases, sends enough melon juice downrange, to cause the melon to be propelled backwards, to allow momentum to be conserved. We have proof of this on film. You can?t dismiss this with clever phrases like ?This would violate the laws of physics?. Particularly when you do not understand the basic laws of physics.
This does not appear to happen with JFK?s head, because there is a delay in the movement backwards of his head. The debris has not propelled forward with enough momentum for this to happen.
-
It appears to me you have never taken a high school course in Physics. Or if you did, you have forgotten the basics. Is this correct?
Don?t you think it?s possible that the problem is not with Dr. Alvarez?s understanding of Physics but your understanding of Physics?
It?s not a question of ?building up enough pressure?. It?s a question of the amount of momentum carried by the debris we see being propelled forward from JFK?s head.
If this debris contains more momentum than the amount of momentum deposited by the bullet, then JFK?s head must be propelled backwards, back toward the rifle, to allow momentum to be conserved. If it does not, then the head is not propelled backwards.
Clearly melons, at least in some cases, sends enough melon juice downrange, to cause the melon to be propelled backwards, to allow momentum to be conserved. We have proof of this on film. You can?t dismiss this with clever phrases like ?This would violate the laws of physics?. Particularly when you do not understand the basic laws of physics.
This does not appear to happen with JFK?s head, because there is a delay in the movement backwards of his head. The debris has not propelled forward with enough momentum for this to happen.
Try to be accurate please I cited Szamboti refuting Alvarez so lets not couch in terms that I know better than Alvarez
I is kind of funny that you in a sense ave hit the nail on the head with your claim that the material being blown out of Kennedy's head is greater to that of the bullet since that is what Szamboti is basically saying Certainly you understand that the collision of projectile striking an object cannot release more energy than the force imparted from the original impact unless an additional energetic reaction occurs within JFKs head So that seems to be to be the bottom line JFK had some kind of explosive material in his head
As for the melon heads On one the melon rolls up to the lip of the tray hits the beveled upward edge of the tray and then roils back in the direction of the shot because of the lip Another the melon is balanced on the table and when the gunshot removes more material from the far side of the melon from the direction of the shot than the remaining portion nearer the incoming shot and its fulcrum is changed and it rolls back in the direction of the shot
Next
-
Try to be accurate please I cited Szamboti refuting Alvarez so lets not couch in terms that I know better than Alvarez
So, you are not claiming that you know Physics better than Alvarez did. You are only claiming that Szamboti understand Physics better than Alvarez did. Both are equally invalid claims.
And this same Zamboti claims the ?Jet Effect? is impossible and the collapse of the towers of the World Trade Center from fires is also impossible.
Basically, despite your claims about what really causes the ?Jet Effect? for melons, the jet effect has been demonstrated on film and Dr. Alvarez, who understood Physics better than you or Szamboti, said that the ?Jet Effect? was the true explanation. And I believe him. As far as melons are concerned.
-
So, you are not claiming that you know Physics better than Alvarez did. You are only claiming that Szamboti understand Physics better than Alvarez did. Both are equally invalid claims.
And this same Zamboti claims the ?Jet Effect? is impossible and the collapse of the towers of the World Trade Center from fires is also impossible.
Basically, despite your claims about what really causes the ?Jet Effect? for melons, the jet effect has been demonstrated on film and Dr. Alvarez, who understood Physics better than you or Szamboti, said that the ?Jet Effect? was the true explanation. And I believe him. As far as melons are concerned.
Way to continue with your false ad hominem frame of me against the experts The jets effect occurs with jets which is an independent additive force of a potential energy within the object being struck You do have common sense against you eh Or are you just going to deny the standard of physics and forensics Are you really suggesting forensic scientists do not first assume blood splatter and tissue move in the direction of the shot?
Alarez's nbel is is in elementary particles by the way
-
Way to continue with your false ad hominem frame of me against the experts The jets effect occurs with jets which is an independent additive force of a potential energy within the object being struck You do have common sense against you eh
So far, you have refused to deal with a point I made earlier. That most CTers who make the argue ?The head motion explained by a shot from the back defies the laws of physics?, had never taken even a high school course in physics.
Question:
Does this apply to you? Did you take a high school course in physics?
I suspect you didn?t because your teacher, if he was a good one, would have told you that common sense is a poor predictor of what will happen in the real world. ?Common Sense? will tell you that a taped melon shot by a rifle won?t move back toward the shooter. Only real-world experiments will show that actually can happen and reveal that melons can and do fly back toward the rifle. In any case my high school teacher told me specifically not to rely on common sense to figure out what will happen in certain cases.
Or are you just going to deny the standard of physics and forensics Are you really suggesting forensic scientists do not first assume blood splatter and tissue move in the direction of the shot?
I do not suggest that forensic scientists do not assume that blood splatter and tissue move in the direction of the shot. It?s only you and other CTers who ignore this.
Take another look at z313:
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z313.jpg)
The blood mess is ahead of JFK?s head, correct? It is clearly being propelled forward.
Question: This clearly shows a shot from the back. Correct?
If this is showing material being propelled backwards, why doesn?t it appear behind JFK?s head?
Alarez's nbel is is in elementary particles by the way
Yes, but unlike you, he also had a firm understanding of Newtonian Physics. And he also knew how to spell ?Nobel?. And ?Alvarez?.
-
Well since you are apparently well versed in Newtonian physics why not offer some insight into your take on the law of conservation of momentum Do objects struck by projectile react in accord with the force of the projectile If you want to add some proviso of how the jet theory can effect the law at a given circumstance then explain the nature of those exceptions
313 offers very little in determining where the majority of tissue is heading He has a large blob virtually at his head and two streams coming off at a diagonal fashion slightly forward. Those two streams seem like a likely deflection from the skull from a bullet in either direction. I have never said the Z film shows definitive evidence in regard to the tissue blown out moving backwards I brought up the tissue question because if one is to say the conservation of momentum plays a role then it needs to be applied in a consistent manner