Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
In researching regarding another issue, I stumbled across this contribution from MTG on Spartacus Educational.

"The lone-gunman shooting scenario now requires that the supposed single assassin completely missed, not just Kennedy, but the entire huge presidential limousine with his first and closest shot. This is the only way to expand the alleged lone gunman's firing tie to over 8 seconds, since there is now wide agreement that a shot was fired before the limousine passed beneath the oak tree. I can't imagine how even a mediocre rifleman could have missed the entire limousine from less than 140 feet away and from 60 feet up. Even the WC labeled the first-shot-miss scenario an "improbability." The limousine would have presented a target that was over 120 square feet in size. Can anyone fathom completely missing a target that size from less than 140 feet away, especially on the first and closest shot?"

Yes, that would have been a ridiculously bad miss if Oswald's intended target was the limousine. Does MTG think Oswald was trying to shoot the limousine? It makes about as much sense to point out that he also completely missed the press bus and he completely missed the overpass. Those were even bigger targets than the limousine.
2
I learned all I needed to know about AI when I turned to it to confirm a claim I had made on this forum. I found exactly what I was looking for and was getting ready to post it here as confirmation. Then on closer inspection I discovered that the source for this "confirmation" was the post I had made on this very forum. I'm glad I caught it before I posted it. That could have been really embarrassing.

I do find that AI is useful in completing sentences for me although I have to check to make sure it has filled in what I had intended. Once in a while, it actually makes the point better than I would have.

I suppose there are probably AI apps that could actually write a coherent post arguing for a point of view or refuting somebody else's. I wonder what it would do with some of MTG's posts.
3


I think it is less than honest to try to paint the more than obvious agenda of CIA with Israel as being dismissible as anti-semitism...
4
    Just the opposite...

    They are so desperate to avoid admitting the truth that they go to those extremes of corruption and dishonesty...

    The Education Forum represents a false image of the research community and JFK research because of it...

    Gordon was a bully...When Morissette posted the Owens Film showing Stanton in the Prayer Man spot, with the same dress neckline seen in Darnell, Gordon swooped in like he always did...Hijacked the thread...Changed the subject...And helped thread-slide the post to oblivion with the site members assisting him with non-participation...All achieved by the dirty means of banning and censorship where the victim can't defend himself...Iler is proud to be continuing that tradition at the forum...Only a moral reprobate would deny this...
5


    Artificial electronic information is the most corruptible...

    I often encounter AI data that has obviously been corrupted by pre-entered information designed to skew in favor of the government version...
6


   Your clumsy accusations against Garrison aren't working Graves...Shaw was the only American allowed in to British Intelligence during World War II...This background is what led him in to CIA and involvement in the main Kennedy Assassination underground in New Orleans...I have my battles with Jim DiEugenio, mostly because of DiEugenio's rank dishonesty, however Jim did expose Shaw's trip to California at the time of the assassination in his second book that I bought and read...That showed involvement and pre-knowledge...Permindex was basically the Italian World Trade Mart like the New Orleans one that was a front for Shaw's CIA activity...I believe you are using exaggerated accusations of KGB involvement as a cover to account for your denial of the good conspiracy evidence...Apologizing for CIA, with all the evidence out there for their involvement, is hubris in my opinion...
7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Deep Politics Forum
« Last post by Brian Doyle on Today at 04:15:55 PM »


   The Deep Politics Forum appears to be off-line...

    Can anyone else access it?

    Apparently they have let it lapse...

   
    https://deeppoliticsforum.com/
8
The Myers  computer graphics model somehow aligns the SBT trajectory. It looks good in that computer simulated reality, however in the real world of physics experiments the trajectory did not work out so well since no experiment so far has been able to replicate the bullet exiting the throat. They got it almost there in the 2003 experiment with the 2 torso models demonstrating the 6.5mm bullet fired from the MC rifle could go thru 2 bodies. However the straight line trajectory is clearly well below the throat wound location.

The experiment left  off the arms and hands and heads and the torsos were fixed and stationary. Thus experiment was doomed from the start to be an inaccurate representation, probably because they did. not wish to address the wrist wound problem and where exactly JCs right hand was positioned at Z224.

You give no specifics on how the straight line trajectory was determined so why we assume this experiment was more accurate than what Dale Myers did.

The best evidence of the SBT trajectory is what did happen on 11/22/1963. We know the bullet that entered JFK's back exited his throat. It is hard to believe that the bullet would not have struck JBC somewhere on his back. If the experiment you reference indicates the bullet would have hit JBC lower than it did, than obviously, the experiment was faulty.

In order for any recreation to refute the SBT, it would need to show how the bullet that exited from JFK's throat could have missed JBC and if it did, what it would have hit. Any experiment or recreation that shows the bullet would have hit JBC somewhere other than where it did has disproved itself, not the SBT.
9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 03:43:18 PM »
"Herb Huskr" posted this on 22 August 2024 at the JFK Truth Be Told FB page:


There is some active discussion on another forum where I’m not a member about James Tague being hit, a curb mark, and what happened there. This post is about some modeling and simulation results made awhile back evaluating a possibility to explain that Tague incident.

I’ve not routinely discussed these details before because there is a back story that suggests that the modeling indicated how wrong I may have been with my initial gut feeling, and who wants to embarrass themselves by admitting they may have been misled by an erroneous gut-feeling bias?

The modeling was done a few of years back to try and prove this initial assumption:

A missing fragment from the z313 head shot could not have made it to Tague and created a shallow curb divot sending mortar/sand shards up and out, with some striking Tague in the cheek while he was standing nearby.

The envisioned scenario (initial gut feeling scenario) looked something like the following:

A disfigured lead, or lead with residual copper, bullet fragment flying forward escaped the limo from the third shot, at maybe 400 ft/sec, continued on to strike the curb with a compressive strike from a mostly horizontal trajectory, hitting at a reduced velocity around 200 ft/sec or so. This possibility was expected to be proven untenable and therefore likely wouldn’t happen.

Results:

Embarrassingly enough, the modeling predicted I would be wrong on every single account!

A fragment could have made it to Tague

The initial exit velocity would be more than twice the 400 ft/sec I was thinking

The final velocity would be even less than half the 200 ft/sec I was thinking

The angle at striking would be opposite, nearly vertical, instead of more horizontal like I thought

The curb strike likely presented a shearing force rather than the head-on compression force I expected

Talk about being wrong!

A crude curb-strike simulation was subsequently conducted to look at this because the predictions seemed so unusual.

Overall, the modeling and simulation indicated the scenario looked to be a real possibility, with a limo-exiting fragment able to reach the curb by Tague and cause a spray of surface mortar that could hit him.

It is still possible the model is not accurate enough, or the fresh mark was not related to a bullet at all, but the modeling came up with numbers that were largely predictive of observations that others subsequently measured on such fragments, like what Lucian Haag found for fragment exit velocities in his simulated skull test shots experiments, and Carcano fragment ballistic coefficients.

Two options for base case trajectories for the incident are depicted on the attached graphs. [I couldn't copy-paste them here. -- T.G.]

Based on the modeling and simulation, I now favor that a rogue fragment from the head shot caused the Tague incident.

I will try to make a link to a summary with more details for those interested in ballistics, etc.

The study details can be found here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CcnCy17Hwqqw3zBCK7ls8peA3DxmVzhk/view?fbclid=IwY2xjawUJ9RtwZG9mAWV4dG4DYWVtAjEwAGJyaWQRMU9pYldIMmFVN1lEcWFHcVBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeAGcK-_z2CwDFyqPwaxNjySIe4271E_ylArwt4h0qfEuhMoRgvrWhDkoyXt4_aem_vfS9yrI0_vZnHC-27-PyIw

It sounds like the simulation framed the question correctly but it seems to me the figures are a bit arbitrary. How do you establish what the exit velocity of the fragments would have been. Did they just use a SWAG. I think somebody a lot smarter than me could calculate a reasonable exit velocity by determining what would have been required to pass over the windshield and still be moving slow enough that it would arc back down and strike the curb. Of course one would have to calculate the deceleration of the fragment as it passed through the air. The fact that they used round numbers indicates to me they just did a SWAG.

Another variable is how far above the windshield the fragment would have passed. If it passed just and inch or two over windshield it would need a different velocity than if it passed a foot over the windshield. All of this seems like so much guesswork. I'll stick to my gut feeling which leans toward the Tague injury being caused by a fragment from the first missed shot which struck the pavement to the right of the limo.
10
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 03:42:37 PM »
It would have exited over the top of the windshield and gone on to hit the curb. The two large fragments found in the limo had gone upward upon exiting Kennedy's head. And they went there separate ways laterally. The one that hit the chrome piece was not far off from exiting. If it was a fragment that struck Tague , it would have had to go between 5 and 10 degrees to the left in order to hit Tague. I can't remember the figure and I can't check it out now because I've just been updated to the most recent version of GIMP and I have don't feel like trying to figure out how to use the measuring tool tonight. I'll delete this version tomorrow and download a much older one.

On edit: I just used the measuring tool in the latest version of GIMP. The fragment would have had to "deflect" 6 degrees to the left in order to hit the curb near where Tague was standing
We cannot assume that the strike on the curb was the first point of impact of the fragment after leaving the car.  Since the fragment struck the side of the curb and bounced up about 5 feet to strike Tague’s cheek, that suggests that it had an upward trajectory when striking the curb.  Since striking the curb would naturally result from a very shallow angle impact with the hard road surface, we cannot rule out the very real possibility that the fragment struck the road first, then the curb and then Tague.  If that occurred, it could have changed direction slightly after striking the road and before hitting the curb.  After all, whole the road surface may be uniformly flat to a basketball, but to a fragment, which may be smaller than the stones in the asphalt surface, it may not.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10