The estimates of the time frame varied widely which is an indication everyone who offered an opinion was guessing. A few of the guesses seem to have been close and some were off by quite a bit.

A guess implies the absence of a memory. But people recalling a distinct tempo of the shots were not guessing. Here is Harold Norman relating the tempo of the shots (at the 0:24 sec mark)

His recreation is 5 seconds. If it had been 10 seconds, it would be noticeably slower. You don’t think Norman would have known the difference?

A good article that encapsulates it:


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2026/09/gary-d-barnett/anti-conspiracy-fanatics-psychologically-brainwashed-wards-of-the-state/

The autopsy pathologists observed a bullet entrance wound on the back of the neck. They noted a contusion on the apex of the right lung, indicating to them that the bullet had passed over the top of that lung. They learned that there was a bullet wound in the throat that had been obliterated by the tracheotomy. X-Rays of the body revealed that no bullets remained inside it.

If the bullet that entered the back of the neck did not exit the throat, what happened to it? If the throat wound was a bullet entrance wound, what happened to that bullet?

As I noted earlier, I could never convince you that the Single Bullet theory should be known as the Single Bullet Fact. If you are unwillingly to address the two questions above, why should I even bother discussing this with you?

How would an explanation, no matter how speculative, of where a bullet went or could have gone prove the SBT?

The autopsy pathologists observed a bullet entrance wound on the back of the neck. They noted a contusion on the apex of the right lung, indicating to them that the bullet had passed over the top of that lung. They learned that there was a bullet wound in the throat that had been obliterated by the tracheotomy. X-Rays of the body revealed that no bullets remained inside it.

Which led them to the assumption that the bullet that entered in the back must have exited through the throat. They never verified the assumption.

As I noted earlier, I could never convince you that the Single Bullet theory should be known as the Single Bullet Fact.

The problem is that something you believe is not automatically a fact.

A fact can be proven. I have never seen conclusive proof for the SBT.

If you are unwillingly to address the two questions above, why should I even bother discussing this with you?

You are not discussing it with me. You are asking questions. If you only wish to "discuss" this topic with people who either agree with you or are willing to accept your opinions at face value, then you perhaps shouldn't bother.

The No Posting For Proxies rule that Andrew Iler is enforcing was made specifically to prevent my correct Prayer Man evidence from being posted on The Education Forum...When Gordon banned me I went to Jim Hargrove and asked him to post some of my evidence that proved Prayer Man was Sarah Stanton...Hargrove obliged and Gordon once again employed his rottenly dishonest type of moderation and made up that no posting for proxies rule specifically to prevent my correct evidence from being posted...Gordon was moderating backwards, in other words, and encouraging false, disproven evidence over correct evidence...The exact opposite of what his job description as moderator was...Gordon knew he was doing this so he went on The Education Forum and posted that his job description was whatever he decided it would be and if any member didn't like it they could leave...The member sycophants later praised Gordon after he nearly destroyed the site after his unchecked arrogance played-out to the near destruction of the forum - all due to their lack of challenging Gordon and his arrogance...Dishonest moderators like Gordon take advantage of censorship and disappear the true context that the problem is THEM and their dishonesty...Therefore the fact that the source of the proxy posting was a need to use a proxy to get around Gordon's filtering of correct evidence was successfully hidden and an innocent member was falsely made to look like a ill-intended rule breaker...No honest discussion is ever had on the true source of the problem...Nor is the correct evidence ever sought...Kathy Beckett knew all this and decided to falsely report me to The Education Forum as attacking her on the McAdams site...I had asked Kathy on that fair playing field how she justified with-holding the correct Prayer Man evidence from her members as moderator...Instead of honestly answering Beckett went back to The Education Forum and falsely reported that I was attacking her - knowing the whole time the predictable result it would get...Especially from Gordon who was looking for justification for his wrongful banning of myself...In my application for re-admission to the forum 3 years ago clique crony Mark Knight cited that false claim as the reason for my denial for re-admission...All decided, of course, without any ability for me to fairly defend myself...The motive here was not enforcement of rules against a violator...The motive was dishonest abuse of moderator authority to keep a ridiculed researcher from handing the people who mocked him their butts with the best arguments of evidence on the subject...The Invision website rules give the site "Owner" Andrew Iler the power to serve as the clique's servant boy pretending to be motivated by the best interests of reform...

To add insult to injury Hargrove turned on me and threw me under the bus telling me in an e-mail that he too would ban me seeing what I post...Once again giving credibility to the dishonest disappearing of context regarding Gordon and his abuse of moderation in order to keep the site's pet Prayer Man theory un-refuted...

I have read the testimony.  What I wanted to test was how two large fragments (567 and 569) deflected upwards off a an approximate 15 degree downward vertical angle to hit the windshield and the windshield frame.  They didn’t document fragment trajectory.  Generally speaking (and bullets do crazy things) when the jacket shears off an FMJ the core will continue on the same vector.  Their test skulls were filled with ballistic gel to simulate brain tissue and covered with an additional layer of gel and goat skin. I don’t know how they attached the skin to the gel but it’s a reasonable set up.  The one skull they published however had significant damage to the face and more apparent overall bone loss (possibly due to there being more brittleness to the dried skulls).  Regardless the face damage on the test skull would indicate the bullet (or at least the core didn’t deviate significantly off path).  So I wanted to see if a fragmenting Carcano would deflect upwards through actual skull and brain tissue.  I only shot three pig’s heads but there was no deviation of trajectory and the jacket’s didn’t separate.  I was actually expecting the (and hoping) the jacket would separate because the purpose was to see how much the core would come apart.  We did fire one of the Carcano’s straight into the ground because we were having trouble recovering the test bullets from the berm we were shooting into.  The bullet went 23 inches into the round. The jacket and core separated but the core stayed intact (it was deformed but no fragments broke off from it. Im not surprised the Edgewood testing shattered the skulls.  But actual scalp is way tougher than a layer of ballistic gel. Thats why I used the pig’s heads.  But I couldn’t get the jackets to separate.

The fragments didn't deflect upwards. The deformed bullet curved upward as it passed through the head, fragmenting as it went. The curvature of the path was considerable, considering that the bullet entered just above the EOP at a downward angle of 12 degrees.