It is really rather sleazy for you to question Dr. Mantik's integrity.
I am sleazy to the core, but you'll have to show me and the audience where I questioned Mantik's integrity. I know nothing about him except that shoplifting incident at Walmart and the animal abuse allegations.
What does any of this have to do with the subject of the thread: the fact that the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report does not appear on the extant autopsy skull x-rays?
It has nothing to do with it. Enquiring minds simply wonder why you ignored Mark's request if Mantik is now neck-deep in 9/11 studies.
I think you're being dishonest. I have never questioned Pat Speer's integrity or sincerity, and I have praised and cited some of his research on other issues.
Ah, the references to "college dropout Pat Speer" and his "blundering, amateurish and erroneous" attacks on Mantik were mere slips of the keyboard. Well, it happens.
Do you actually have a little home shrine to Mantik, replete with votive candles and whatnot? The cast of characters with whom Mantik has been associated does not exactly inspire confidence. Pat Speer's massive critique is still up, includes pretty recent references, and seems devastating to me ("Mantik's numerous and repeated mistakes form a pattern--a pattern in which he misrepresents evidence to support a dubious theory and then misrepresents more evidence to defend his theory against heretics like myself"). But others can judge for themselves:
https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-19d-stuck-in-the-middle-with-youI think it is rather dishonest for you to pretend that you agree with anything approaching a substantive portion of Pat Speer's research.
I am relentlessly dishonest in addition to being sleazy, but I pretend nothing. I respect all of Pat's efforts. I haven't done a quantitative analysis as to the percentage I agree with, but it's all worth a look.
Now, if you are truly "inclined" to agree with Speer's placement of the rear head entry wound, then you need to explain how in the world the bullet that made that wound could have come from the sixth-floor window. The only theory that Larry Sturdivan has offered to explain this problem is that after the bullet entered the skull it magically veered sharply upward and to the right, yet not a single bullet in the WC's wound ballistics tests performed such an impossible feat. That's just as bad as the WC experts' assumption that JFK's head was tilted nearly 60 degrees forward when the bullet struck.
I mean, it would be nice if you would finally take a stab at trying to explain the vanishing fragment trail, especially since you say you lean toward the EOP site.
I don't "need" to explain anything. When the autopsy doctors, WC and HSCA couldn't agree within 4" about the wound entry, and the Harper fragment has been fitted just about everywhere but JFK's crotch, and characters like Mantik see things that no one else sees, I merely watch in wonderment as the debate unfolds. I was quite impressed by Sturdivan's book, but your use of terms such as "magically" and "impossible" tells us you are simply a crank.
Recent Posts
