So I guess John Corbett's new strategy is to ignore the scientific evidence that confirms the presence of gunfire on the dictabelt and to try to impugn the acoustical evidence on the unscientific basis that it disagrees with his theory of how the shooting occurred.

One more reason to doubt the HSCA acoustics team, perhaps the most compelling reason, is that their placement of the shots does not sync with the action in the Zapruder film as their own photographic panel recognized. The HSCA panel placed the shots that struck JFK at Z223-224. . . .

Man alive, you are just one never-ending clown show. The HSCA's Photographic Evidence Panel (PEP) did not say JFK was hit at Z223-224. They said he was hit at or slightly before Z190. How in the world can you not know this? How?

This is further proof that you really have no business posting in this forum under any pretense that you are competent to discuss the JFK case. You constantly blunder over basic, well-known facts, facts that have been known for decades. I'd bet that even some of your fellow WC apologists are wondering how in the world you could not know that the PEP determined that JFK was hit by Z190 and that he starts to react at Z200-202.

Your embarrassing ignorance on this point is especially baffling because the PEP's hit-by-Z190 finding has been discussed extensively in this forum, given the fact that the sixth-floor gunman's view of JFK would have been obstructed by the oak tree during this timeframe, strongly indicating that the shot must have come from somewhere else.

And, as I've told you before, the HSCA's acoustics team did not do their own analysis of the Zapruder film. Blakey simply told them which gunshot impulse patterns lined up with which Zapruder frames, as Barger later confirmed. Again, I've explained this to you before. Why you do keep saying things that you know are not true?

If there is one thing EVERYONE seems to be agreement on is the headshot striking at Z313, which is pretty obvious. I think the single bullet struck at Z222 but I'm not going to quibble over a frame or two because there is room for debate on precisely when that shot struck. The HSCA placement of the shots based on what their acoustic team's analysis is a first shot miss occurred at Z166. The single bullet struck at Z196. the GK shot missed at Z296, and the headshot of course struck at Z313. Based on the simultaneous reaction of JFK and JBC at Z226 when they simultaneously raised their arms in reaction to having been struck by the single bullet. It is a virtual certainty they were struck 89-91 frames before the head shot but there is no way to sync that to the acoustics team's conclusion which had the shots fired at 30, 100, and 17 frame intervals.

If the bullet struck at Z222, why does JFK start to react in Z200? Why does Jackie start to react to JFK's reaction by Z202?

As I've told you before but as you just keep ignoring, two of your side's own medical experts have acknowledged that it would have taken JFK at least 4 frames to begin to voluntarily react to his first wound, which is why Dr. Lattimer said JFK was already hit by Z221.

Of course, we both know that your Z222 hit is nonsense because Connally, the guy who actually experienced the wounding, insisted he was certain he was not hit before Z229. Starting in Z238, Connally's right shoulder is suddenly driven downward at the same time his cheeks puff and a pained expression appears on his face. Forensic science tells us that about four frames would elapse between the bullet's forceful impact and the start of involuntary body movement, cheek puffing, and the appearance of a pained expression.

And, gee, Connally said he was hit at Z234 and that the impact felt like he was hit hard with a doubled-up fist, and, four frames later, we see his right shoulder driven downward starting in Z238, in perfect accord with forensic science.

[quote author=John Corbett link=topic=5215.msg186707#msg186707 date=1790396Of course, if the proponents of the acoustics evidence disagree with the HSCA's placement of the shots they are free to offer their own placement, but it is pretty much a given that the headshot occurred at Z313. How would they sync the shots to the Zapruder film, given the acoustics teams determination of the intervals between the shots.[/quote]

One, again, the acoustical team did not do their own analysis of the Zapruder film. Two, I've already explained to you the reasons that any sync of the dictabelt shots with the Zapruder film is impossible given the scientific evidence that the film has been altered and is missing many frames that were in the original.

It is simply impossible that Oswald could have fired two shots 30 frames apart yet the HSCA determined that is what happened.

Oh my goodness. Another display of your blind bias. You again judge scientific fact by your lone-gunman theory, instead of the other way around.

We have also seen that you have no explanation for the fact that the ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the ammo that Oswald allegedly used, and that all experts who have commented on the subject have said that the skull damage must have been done by ammo moving at a high velocity, whereas the alleged murder weapon was a low-velocity rifle.

And no one those capitals will reveal anything, and most who might have known anything are dead by now.

Huh?

There are good arguments that the recording is not even from Dealey Plaza during the shooting. There is crosstalk from the other channel which suggests the recording was made about a minute after the shooting.

Are you kidding? Are you seriously repeating this bogus argument after all the information and sources I've presented to you on the subject? I devoted many paragraphs to explain to you how the crosstalk argument has been debunked and why the crosstalk argument was wrong from its inception because it was based on the scientifically impossible theory that Channel 2 stopped recording for 35-60 seconds.

It is unbelievable that you would repeat this false claim after all the information and sources you have been given on the subject. Why do you suppose that Linsker and his colleagues could offer no evidence that Channel 2 stopped recording for 35 seconds, and why they said nothing in response to Dr. Thomas's 53-page rebuttal to their 2005 article?

Are you going to continue to ignore the new research by BBN scientists that proves that the Decker transmission is not crosstalk but an overdub that wasn't even recorded at the same speed as the acknowledged crosstalk transmissions, and that proves that the Fisher transmission was crosstalk, proving that the impulse patterns were recording the during the assassination in Dealey Plaza? You might read Dr. Barger's and Dr. Mullen's appendices in Thompson's Last Second in Dallas.

Dale Myers has put together photographic evidence that shows the motorcycle believed to have had the stuck open microphone could not have been where BBN determined it was during the shooting which BBN's own analysis said it needed to be for their findings to be valid.

Huh? Did you miss the part in my reply where I noted that Dr. Thomas has refuted Myers' error-filled analysis? I even provided you with a link to Dr. Thomas's response to Myers' article and a lengthy extract from it. But you ignored the extract and obviously didn't bother to read the article.

This is another example of your habit of repeating false claims even after you have been given information and links to scholarly sources that document why they're false.

I ask again: If the dictabelt was not recorded in Dealey Plaza during the shooting, as Myers claims, then how does he explain (1) the fact that the dictabelt contains gunfire N-waves whose locations match two locations of gunfire from the HSCA test firing in Dealey Plaza, (2) the fact that the dictablet contains soundwaves that were slightly distorted by passing through a windshield and only at the precise times when the microphone was in position to record them in Dealey Plaza as established by the test firing, and (3) the fact that the HSCA's acoustical experts identified stunning timing-movement correlations between the microphone movement indicated by the dictabelt's impulse patterns and the microphone movement established by the impulse patterns from the test-firing recording, correlations that were so strong that even the NRC/NAS panel admitted there was a 93% probability they occurred because the dictablet recorded gunfire in Dealey Plaza?

In short, the preponderance of evidence clearly indicates to me the Dictabelt recording does not indicate gunshots fired in Dealey Plaza at the time JFK was assassinated.

In short, you should have stuck with your fallback line of "I'm just a layman and am not qualified to pass judgment on the acoustical evidence."

Kostikov was connected to Department 13 of the First Chief Directorate (today's SVR).

A Kremlin-loyal triple agent, Soviet Embassy Security Officer Ivan Obyedkov, "volunteered" the radioactive name "Kostikov" to a forgetful Lee Harvey Oswald or "Oswald" over a sure-to-be-tapped-by-CIA phone line on 10/01/63.

The only reason the CIA and the FBI believed on 23 November 1963 that KGB Colonel-diplomat Kostikov was Department 13 was because another Kremlin-loyal triple agent, KGB Major Aleksey Kulak (J. Edgar Hoover's shielded-from-CIA "Fedora" at the FBI's NYC field office), had told the FBI in 1962 that Kostikov's charge at the UN, Igor Brykin, was Department 13.

Kulak was the guy who tried to support false defector-in-place in Geneva in June 1962 / false (or perhaps rogue) physical defector to the US in February 1964 Yuri Nosnko's bona fides by "confirming" that he was a Lieutenant Colonel and that he had received a "return to KGB headquarters immediately" telegram in Geneva in late January or early February 1964, only to have to lamely retract those two "confirmations" when Nosenko later confessed during harsh (but non-tortuous) interrogation that he was only a "captain" and that he hadn't received said telegram.

Fun fact: Gerald Posner befriended Nosenko while writing "Case Closed" because Nosenko was telling him exactly what he wanted to hear -- that the KGB had absolutely nothing to do with "abnormal" former Marine sharpshooter and U-2 radar operator Oswald during the two-and-a-half years he lived in the USSR.

LOL!

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

I can relate.